Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
MJ Wigan  
#1 Posted : 16 February 2025 17:54:15(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
MJ Wigan

one of our  schemes has a fire door with a vision panel that is almost like frosted glass. The FRA action for this is 'Vision panel in office Fire Door is obstructed, should not be obstructed' i understand the H&S concern in potentially not seeing somebody on the other side but this has been raised as a fire safety action to be remediated within 3 months , do we really need to replace the vision panel that is fire rated to a clear version ? there have been no issues in terms of H&S and people getting 'bashed' by the door . The scheme describe the glass has having some sort of 'cover' that they cant remove , i have an image but not exactly sure how to share it here

Roundtuit  
#2 Posted : 16 February 2025 22:05:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Is the door as it currently stands "as supplied" (i.e. as certified at time of fitting) or has someone after installation fitted a device to the glass?

If "as supplied" then the FRA is incorrect to assert the panel must be clear.

If a retrofit film this should be removable.

Worst case you may need a replacement door to resolve the issue (or a replacement assessor).

Frosted glass would not obscure the appearance of flame and smoke on the other side of the door unlike a solid panel with no glass.

Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 16 February 2025 22:05:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Is the door as it currently stands "as supplied" (i.e. as certified at time of fitting) or has someone after installation fitted a device to the glass?

If "as supplied" then the FRA is incorrect to assert the panel must be clear.

If a retrofit film this should be removable.

Worst case you may need a replacement door to resolve the issue (or a replacement assessor).

Frosted glass would not obscure the appearance of flame and smoke on the other side of the door unlike a solid panel with no glass.

MJ Wigan  
#4 Posted : 17 February 2025 08:54:04(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
MJ Wigan

thankyou ! i havent been out to see this yet but could it be possible that something was left on the glass when installed ? i would have thought that being the case , the staff on site would have been able to remove it. They decsribe it as a 'cover' on the glass 

Kate  
#5 Posted : 17 February 2025 09:15:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

The trouble with having an unidentified "cover" on it is that for all you know it may affect the fire properties of the door surface.  I imagine that may be the reason the assessor wants it to be removed.

Roundtuit  
#6 Posted : 17 February 2025 10:54:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: MJ Wigan Go to Quoted Post
could it be possible that something was left on the glass when installed ?

It may be protective film but you would expect a competent installer to remove shipping materials.

Conversley the door could have been ordered with frosted/obscured glass.

Roundtuit  
#7 Posted : 17 February 2025 10:54:46(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Originally Posted by: MJ Wigan Go to Quoted Post
could it be possible that something was left on the glass when installed ?

It may be protective film but you would expect a competent installer to remove shipping materials.

Conversley the door could have been ordered with frosted/obscured glass.

firesafety101  
#8 Posted : 19 February 2025 10:56:12(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
firesafety101

For information, fire rated glazing must have proof of assessment and testing, be CE Marked according to EN1279-5, must be installed right way round i.e.one side withstand exposure to fire the other side preventing flames and hot gases penetratingthe unprotected side.

A permanent stamp on the glass indicating name of the manufacturer/supplier, the name of the glass product, performance rating.  The stamp must be visible after installing.

More can be found on IFSEC INSIDER.

thanks 1 user thanked firesafety101 for this useful post.
Kate on 19/02/2025(UTC)
Messey  
#9 Posted : 20 February 2025 19:36:16(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Messey

Frankly, this is all about a FRA - where it's all about risk. So forgive me, I am surprised everyone seems to be jumping on the standards bandwagon without considering risks such as the occupancy type. 

The devil is in the detail here and that detail (which is missing from the OP) must include the risk

If this is an office building with plenty of MoE and the door is in a low risk location -ie not on a single staircase or on a boiler room- frankly I would'nt be that concerned about a cover on the VP.

If there is sleeping risk involved, and especially for vulnerable persons - then yes, lets get a bit tighter on ensuring standards are met

Surely a FRA is not just about applying standards? - its about lowering risk to a tolerable level. Standards can help in doing so, but are not always necessary or we will find ourselves back in the bad old days of the prescriptive FPA and certificates 

antbruce001  
#10 Posted : 21 February 2025 07:47:07(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
antbruce001

Although I agree with Messay in principle, all the previous comments appear to be based on the door actually being required to be a fire door to meet the requirements of the fire strategy / achieve maximum travel distances and not just a door that has been installed as a fire door and signed as such but is not required to be such..

Clearly, if the door doesn't need to be a fire door, just take the sign off it and leave it as it is. But, if it is required to be a fire door (and therefore true risk is present) then it should meet all the requirements for a fire door. If you are unsure if it needs to be a fire door, get competent advice to make that determination.

thanks 1 user thanked antbruce001 for this useful post.
Kate on 21/02/2025(UTC)
Kate  
#11 Posted : 21 February 2025 10:31:45(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Kate

We've already been told that the proposed action arises from a fire risk assessment, so we can hardly complain that the fire risk needs to be assessed instead of blindly applying standards.

Of course it is possible that the fire risk assessor is in error, but we don't have any reason to assume they haven't assessed the fire risk.

antbruce001  
#12 Posted : 21 February 2025 11:07:25(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
antbruce001

Kate,

It’s not quite that simple. Many fire risk assessors operate on the principle that if a door is marked as a fire door, it must meet the required fire door standards—even if it does not actually need to be a fire door. This is also a common approach taken by the Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) during their inspections.

In practice, it is quite common to see doors labelled as fire doors when, in reality, they may not be required to be. During most refurbishments involving door replacements or re-installations, fire door sets are often used by default. When fire doors are required, they are fully installed with the necessary fire safety components (e.g. cold smoke seals and intumescent strips). However, when they are not required to be fire doors, they are installed without these components. Despite this, they frequently end up with ‘Fire Door’ signage affixed to them.

Fire risk assessors tend to focus on identifying doors that should be fire doors but are not, rather than questioning whether doors marked as fire doors actually need to be.

Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.