Title: The Fire Resistance Performance of EI60, Side and Centre-Opening Lift Landing Doorsets. WF Assessment Report No: /A.

Transcription

1 Title: The Fire Resistance Performance of EI60, Side and Centre-Opening Lift Landing Doorsets WF Assessment Report No: /A Prepared for: Klefer A.E. Kilkis Industrial Area Stavroxori. Grecia Date: 25 th September 2007

2 Page 2 of 57 SECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Executive Summary...3 Introduction...4 Assumptions...4 Proposals...4 Basic Test Evidence...6 Assessed Performance...6 Conclusions...11 Validity...12 Summary of Primary Supporting Data...12 Declaration by Klefer A.E...14 Signatories...15

3 Page 3 of 57 Executive Summary Objective Report Sponsor Address This report provides an appraisal of the fire resistance performance of insulated, side and centre-opening lift landing doorsets, which are similar to previously fire tested assemblies. Klefer A.E. Kilkis Industrial Area Stavroxori. Grecia Summary of Conclusions It can be concluded that the proposed doorsets would be expected to provide 60 minutes integrity and insulation performance (and therefore the required EI60 classification) if subjected to fire resistance tests in accordance with BS EN 81-58: Valid until 1 st October 2012 This report may only be reproduced in full. Extracts or abridgements of reports shall not be published without permission of Bodycote warringtonfire.

4 Page 4 of 57 Introduction This report provides an appraisal of the fire resistance performance of insulated, side and centre-opening lift landing doorsets. FTSG The data referred to in the supporting data section has been considered for the purpose of this appraisal which has been prepared in accordance with the Fire Test Study Group Resolution No. 82: Assumptions It is assumed that the wall constructions to which the doorsets will be mounted will be of reinforced concrete or masonry, capable of providing effective structural support for the required period. It is also assumed that the general construction of the doorsets and the materials used in the construction will, unless specifically detailed in this report, be identical to those of the tested assemblies. It is further assumed that the doorsets will be required to provide fire resistance when the landing side only is exposed to the heating conditions of a fire resistance test. It is assumed that the doorsets will be installed by competent installers in a similar manner to that used when installing the fire tested assembly. Proposals The construction of the proposed doorsets shall be closely based upon the assembly previously fire tested under the reference FR AUNE. It is, however, proposed that the doorset may incorporate various changes which are summarised as follows: a) The doorset may be constructed in one, two, three and four panel, sideopening configurations and two, four, six and eight panel, centre-opening configurations. b) The doorset may incorporate various side-panel, control box and frame post arrangements, shown on the drawings appended to this report. c) The door panels shall be insulated Liftbifire panels of 18 mm thickness rather than the tested Microtherm panels of 20 mm thickness.

5 Page 5 of 57 d) The maximum clear opening dimensions shall be in accordance with the following parameters: Configuration Height (mm) Width (mm) Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum One Panel (T1) Two-Panel (T2) Three-Panel (T3) Four-Panel (T4) Two-Panel (C2) Four-Panel (C4) Six-Panel (C6) Eight-Panel (C8) C = Centre-Opening T = Telescopic (Side-Opening) e) The door frame may be installed in any of the following three ways: Inside the reveal of the opening with an adjustable steel profile surrounding the perimeter Inside the reveal of the opening with the perimeter of the doorset infilled with concrete. Face fixed to the shaft face of the wall

6 Page 6 of 57 Basic Test Evidence FR AUNE A fire resistance test in accordance with EN on a specimen of an insulated, three-panel, side-opening lift landing doorset. The door panels comprised 1.2 mm thick profiled mild steel which were insulated on the unexposed face with 20 mm thick Microtherm panels. The doorset had overall clear opening dimensions of 2300 mm high by 1600 mm wide. The specimen satisfied the integrity and insulation criteria for a period of 181 minutes after which time the test was discontinued. WF Report No A fire resistance test in accordance with EN on a specimen of a six-panel, centre-opening lift landing doorset. Assessed Performance The door panels comprised 1.2 mm thick profiled mild steel which, in order to enhance the radiation performance, were clad on the unexposed face with a 1 mm thick foil faced material referenced Advin Bifire. The doorset had a clear opening size of 2300 mm high by 2400 mm wide. The specimen satisfied the integrity criteria for a period of 122 minutes after which time the test was discontinued. Side-Opening Doorsets The fire test referenced FR AUNE has demonstrated the ability of a specimen of a three-panel, side-opening lift landing doorset to satisfy the integrity and insulation criteria for a significant period in excess of the 60 minutes required. The proposal requires a change in the number of panels from the tested three to one, two or four. Separate fire test evidence to support the fire performance of a four-panel, side-opening doorset is available by means of WF Report No This doorset was of identical construction to those being considered for the purposes of this assessment, except that an alternative insulation material was incorporated on the unexposed face. This alternative insulation material contributed to only 39 minutes integrity performance after which time sustained flaming was visible from the edge of the material. This material also failed to contribute to the required 60 minutes insulation performance.

7 Page 7 of 57 Despite these failures, confidence can be gained from this test by the proven ability of the four-panel doorset to satisfy the leakage performance criteria for the required period of 60 minutes. All other proposed side-opening doorsets shall be constructed in a similar manner to these tested three and four-panel doorsets, the only differences being a reduction in the number of door panels. It is therefore expected that all side-opening configurations proposed should, subject to consideration to the clear opening size range (provided separately in this report), be capable of providing 60 minutes integrity and insulation performance. Centre-Opening Doorsets A separate fire test has been conducted on a similarly constructed centreopening doorset under the reference WF Report No This tested doorset was uninsulated so did not incorporate insulation boards on the unexposed face of the door panels or frame. The panels and frame did, however, incorporate a thin foil material to enhance the radiation performance. The general construction of the doorset was otherwise the same as the tested insulated side-opening doorset. This test was performed on a doorset having a clear opening size of 2300 mm high by 2400 mm wide. The specimen satisfied the integrity criteria for a period of 120 minutes. This specimen was subject to minimal leakage during the required 60 minute period, the maximum being 0.6 m 3 /(min.m), significantly less than the maximum permitted of 3 m 3 /(min.m). Although the only centre-opening test evidence therefore relates to the fire performance of an uninsulated doorset, sufficient confidence in the proposal may be gained from the minimal leakage recorded during the test. Furthermore, the centre-opening construction is essentially a combination of two side-opening doorsets. The proven performance of the side-opening doorsets therefore provides confidence in the ability of the centre-opening doorsets to provide the required level of stability for periods in excess of 60 minutes Based upon the proven fire performance of the insulated, side-opening doorset, along with additional test evidence to support the fire performance of a similarly constructed, uninsulated, centre-opening doorset, it is expected that the proposed insulated centre-opening doorsets should be capable of providing the required 60 minute integrity and insulation performance.

8 Page 8 of 57 Control Box, Side- Panels and Frame Posts The proposal requires the use of different side-panel, control box and frame post configurations adjacent to the doorsets, as shown in the drawings appended to this report. The proposed doorsets may not necessarily incorporate all of the proposed options simultaneously, but various combinations of these items are instead proposed. A 600 mm wide side-panel was included on the doorset previously tested under the reference without detriment to the integrity or insulation performance. The control box has not been previously fire tested in conjunction with the proposed type of doorset. Fire test evidence is, however, available to demonstrate the ability of the control box to contribute to the fire performance of an alternative range of doorsets referenced Compact. The tests referenced and have demonstrated the ability of the control box to contribute to 120 minutes integrity performance of an uninsulated centreopening and an insulated side-opening doorset, respectively. The tested sideopening doorset provided 61 minutes insulation performance. However, the temperatures recorded on the unexposed face of the control box remained within the maximum permitted by the Standard for a period of 120 minute period. These supplementary fire tests therefore provide confidence that the incorporation of the proposed control box should not be detrimental to the required 60 minutes integrity and insulation performance. The control box shall be insulated in a similar manner to the assembly tested under the reference , using Firesil board. The drawings appended to this report show some slight variations on the tested frame or side-panel construction, an analysis of the differences has been undertaken and the influence on the fire performance is expected to be negligible. In all cases, the alternative frame or side-panel construction is insulated to at least the same specification as tested, providing little concern with regard to the ability of the modified elements to contribute to the required insulation performance of 60 minutes. One alternative to the frame options tested under the reference FR AUNE is for applications where the frame is between 120 and 300 mm wide. The Standard requires that the unexposed surface temperature rise on a frame of such a size must not exceed 360 o C during the required period. The proposed arrangement requires the frame to be insulated on the unexposed face with 6 mm Firesil board and internally with Rockwool.

9 Page 9 of 57 A similar arrangement was tested under the reference This tested 200 mm wide frame post was, however, only insulated on the unexposed face (using Firesil board) and no internal insulation was incorporated. For the purposes of this test, two thermocouples were fixed to the unexposed face of this frame post. The temperature requirements were satisfied by the lower thermocouple but exceeded by the upper thermocouple. The reason for this is that the upper thermocouple was positioned directly above a horizontal joint in the insulation board which permitted the radiation and convection of heat from the frame post behind the board, through the joint and onto the surface of the upper board. In order to ensure that the temperature requirements are satisfied, it is therefore proposed that the posts shall be insulated using a single board section, i.e. without joints. As a further precaution, the frame shall be insulated internally with Rockwool. Such precautions should be sufficient to ensure the required 60 minutes insulation performance. Liftbifire Insulation The door panels of the doorset fire tested under the reference FR AUNE were insulated on the unexposed face with Microtherm panels of 20 mm thickness. It is proposed that these may be substituted for 18 mm thick Liftbifire panels. The proposed insulation material has been the subject of an indicative fire test, referenced The purpose of this test was to provide a comparison between the proposed Liftbifire material of 18 mm thickness and a slightly different composition of Liftbifire of 24 mm thickness. These two materials were therefore fitted on the unexposed face of a two-panel, centre-opening doorset (different material types being fitted to each panel), having reduced clearopening dimensions of 908 mm high by 926 mm wide. The test indicated that the two materials provide a comparable level of insulation performance, the mean temperature of the 24 mm thick panel being only marginally less at than the mean temperature of the 18 mm thick panel (96 o C and 102 o C respectively) after the required period of 60 minutes. It is not, however, possible to appraise the use of this material based upon the temperatures recorded on a small scale test alone. The size of the doorset and the extent of the thermally induced distortion can also be influential to the insulation performance. Furthermore, a full scale test would also introduce a canopy around the doorset from the purposes of measuring CO 2 leakage. The presence of this canopy can prevent the dissipation of heat from the unexposed face and influence unexposed surface temperatures. The test referenced was performed on a specimen of a two-panel, sideopening doorset having clear opening dimensions of 2000 mm high by 900 mm wide. The door panels of this doorset were insulated with the same 24 mm thick Liftbifire insulation that was incorporated in the aforementioned indicative fire test. The performance of the 24 mm thick material under formal test conditions is therefore not in question.

10 Page 10 of 57 The purpose of the indicative fire test was therefore to provide a comparison between the formally tested 24 mm thick Liftbifire and the 18 mm thick Liftbifire of slightly different composition. Although the full test conditions were not necessarily replicated, the test has demonstrated a comparable level performance between the two types of insulation when subjected to identical conditions. Based upon these additional two fire tests, it is therefore expected that the 18 mm thick Liftbifire should be more than capable of contributing to the required 60 minutes insulation performance. Clear Opening Size The tested insulated, three-panel, side-opening doorset had a clear opening size of 2300 mm high by 1600 mm wide. According to the Direct Field of Application provided within BS EN 81-58: 2003, the doorset may be increased in height by up to 15% and the width of the doorset may be increased or reduced by up to 30%. The proposed clear opening height range of between 2000 mm and 2600 mm therefore falls within the sizes permitted by the Direct Field of Application. The maximum proposed width of 2000 mm (a 25% increase in width) for this configuration also falls within the permissible size variation, although the maximum reduction in width of 63% to 600 mm, exceeds that permissible by the Standard. It is, however, expected that, considering the exceptional performance of the tested doorset, the maximum leakage recorded during the required 60 minutes being only 0.36 m 3 /(min.m), the additional reduction in size should not detract from the required performance. In terms of the other side-opening configurations, the leakage may be approximated using a simplistic method of comparing the total length of vertical gaps incorporated in the tested doorset (per metre width of clear opening) and comparing this with the assembly that shall incorporate the largest total length of vertical gap per metre width. Of the side-opening configurations proposed, the four-panel, side-opening doorset has the largest total vertical gap width per metre width, this being at a clear opening size of 2600 mm high by 600 mm wide. The total vertical gap length per metre width of doorset for this assembly is 22 metres. Although this far exceeds the tested 6 metres of vertical gap/metre width, based upon the maximum recorded leakage of only 0.36 m 3 /(min.m) during this test, the adjusted leakage for the most onerous of the proposed doorsets would be only 1.38 m 3 /(min.m), still significantly less than the maximum permitted leakage of 3 m 3 /(min.m). Using a similar logic for the centre-opening doorsets, the maximum total vertical gap length per metre width of doorset would again be 22 metres and a similar adjusted leakage would therefore be expected. Although it is recognised that this is a somewhat crude method of approximating the leakage, since it does not take into account different levels of thermally induced distortion for different configurations and alternative panel sizes, the exceptionally low levels of leakage predicted provide sufficient confidence to offset any slight variation in the level of deformation.

11 Page 11 of 57 Installation The doorset successfully tested under the reference FR AUNE was mounted to the shaft face of the wall construction. All frame and side-panel elements were, however, fully exposed to the heating conditions and only the fixing brackets were protected by the wall construction This proposed method of installation has therefore proven to be suitable for use. It is also proposed that the doorsets may instead be installed as per the doorset tested under the reference This requires the doorset to be installed inside the clear opening with an adjustable steel profile incorporated between the frame sections and the wall to prevent leakage during the test and the formation of through gaps. Since this method of installation is also of proven performance, its use may be positively appraised. A variation on this method of installation is where the doorsets are installed in a similar manner but without the adjustable steel profile and the interface between the frame and the wall is then infilled with concrete or mortar. The nominal gap between the frame and the wall shall be 10 mm and the concrete/mortar infill shall be applied through the full thickness of the frame. The sealing of the perimeter of the doorset in this manner should provide an improved performance with respect to leakage. Although the tested adjustable profile shall abut the wall construction there may still be some small through gaps between the profile and the wall. The use of a concrete or mortar backfill should, however, ensure a tight seal between the wall and the doorset which can only enhance the integrity performance of the doorset. Conclusions It is expected that the insulated, side and centre-opening lift landing doorsets discussed within this report, should be capable of providing 60 minutes integrity and insulation performance, if subjected to a fire resistance test in accordance with BS EN 81-58: 2003.

12 Page 12 of 57 Validity This assessment is issued on the basis of test data and information available at the time of issue. If contradictory evidence becomes available to Bodycote warringtonfire the assessment will be unconditionally withdrawn and Klefer A.E. will be notified in writing. Similarly the assessment is invalidated if the assessed construction is subsequently tested because actual test data is deemed to take precedence over an expressed opinion. The assessment is valid initially for a period of five years i.e. until 1 st October 2012, after which time it is recommended that it be returned for re-appraisal. The appraisal is only valid provided that no other modifications are made to the tested construction other than those described in this report. Summary of Primary Supporting Data FR AUNE A fire resistance test in accordance with EN on a specimen of an insulated, three-panel, side-opening lift landing doorset. The door panels comprised 1.2 mm thick profiled mild steel which were insulated on the unexposed face with 20 mm thick Microtherm panels. The doorset had overall clear opening dimensions of 2300 mm high by 1600 mm wide. The specimen satisfied the integrity and insulation criteria for a period of 181 minutes after which time the test was discontinued. Test Date : 18 th January 2007 Test Sponsor : Tecnolama SA WF Report No A fire resistance test in accordance with EN on a specimen of a six-panel, centre-opening lift landing doorset. The door panels comprised 1.2 mm thick profiled mild steel which, in order to enhance the radiation performance, were clad on the unexposed face with a 1 mm thick foil faced material referenced Advin Bifire. The doorset had a clear opening size of 2300 mm high by 2400 mm wide. The specimen satisfied the integrity criteria for a period of 122 minutes after which time the test was discontinued. Test Date : 4 th November 2005 Test Sponsor : Tecnolama SA

13 Page 13 of 57 WF Report No A fire resistance test in accordance with EN on a specimen of an insulated, four-panel, side-opening lift landing doorset. The doorset had a clear opening size of 2300 mm high by 2000 mm wide. The door panels comprised 1.2 mm thick profiled mild steel which were insulated on the unexposed face with 20 mm thick LIFTBIFIRE panels The specimen satisfied the integrity and insulation criteria for a period of 39 minutes. Test Date : 23 rd March 2006 Test Sponsor : Tecnolama SA WF Report No A report on a fire resistance test performed in accordance with BS EN 81-58: 2003, on a two panel, centre opening, lift landing doorset. The doorset, which incorporated two mild steel door panels, was installed over an aperture within a brickwork wall of overall nominal dimensions 2190 mm high by 2200 mm wide to give a clear opening size of 2000 mm high by 900 mm wide. The specimen incorporated a fixed infill panel adjacent to each of the door panels and a control box was incorporated on one side of the doorset only, behind the infill panel. The doorset was faced fixed to the unexposed surface of the wall such that the landing side was exposed to the heating conditions of the test. The specimen satisfied the integrity performance requirements for a period of 120 minutes Test Date : 27 th June 2005 Test Sponsor : Tecnolama SA WF Test Report No An indicative fire test utilising the heating conditions of EN to provide a comparison between the insulation performance of two different types of Liftbifire material, one of 24 mm thickness and the other of 18 mm thickness. Test Date : 25 th July 2006 Test Sponsor : Tecnolama SA

14 Page 14 of 57 WF Report No A report on a fire resistance test performed in accordance with BS EN 81-58: 2003, on a two panel, side opening, lift landing doorset. The doorset, which incorporated two mild steel door panels, was installed over an aperture within a brickwork wall of overall nominal dimensions 2190 mm high by 2200 mm wide to give a clear opening size of 2000 mm high by 900 mm wide. The specimen incorporated a fixed infill panel adjacent to each of the door panels and a control box was incorporated on one side of the doorset only, behind the infill panel. The doorset was faced fixed to the unexposed surface of the wall such that the landing side was exposed to the heating conditions of the test. The specimen satisfied the integrity performance requirements for a period of 120 minutes and the insulation performance requirements for a period of 61 minutes. Test Date : 1 st July 2005 Test Sponsor : Tecnolama SA Declaration by Klefer A.E. We the undersigned confirm that we have read and complied with the obligations placed on us by the UK Fire Test Study Group Resolution No. 82: We confirm that the component or element of structure, which is the subject of this assessment, has not to our knowledge been subjected to a fire test to the Standard against which the assessment is being made. We agree to withdraw this assessment from circulation should the component or element of structure be the subject of a fire test to the Standard against which this assessment is being made. We are not aware of any information that could adversely affect the conclusions of this assessment. If we subsequently become aware of any such information we agree to cease using the assessment and ask Bodycote warringtonfire to withdraw the assessment. Signed: For and on behalf of:

15 Page 15 of 57 Signatories Responsible Officer D Hankinson* - Technical Consultant Approved A Kearns* - Technical Manager * For and on behalf of Bodycote warringtonfire Report Issued: 25 th September 2007 The assessment report is not valid unless it incorporates the declaration duly signed by the applicant. This copy has been produced from a.pdf format electronic file that has been provided by Bodycote warringtonfire to the sponsor of the report and must only be reproduced in full. Extracts or abridgements of reports must not be published without permission of Bodycote warringtonfire. The original signed paper version of this report is the sole authentic version. Only original paper versions of this report bear authentic signatures of the responsible Bodycote warringtonfire staff.

16 Page 16 of 57

17 Page 17 of 57

18 Page 18 of 57

19 Page 19 of 57

20 Page 20 of 57

21 Page 21 of 57

22 Page 22 of 57

23 Page 23 of 57

24 Page 24 of 57

25 Page 25 of 57

26 Page 26 of 57

27 Page 27 of 57

28 Page 28 of 57

29 Page 29 of 57

30 Page 30 of 57

31 Page 31 of 57

32 Page 32 of 57

33 Page 33 of 57

34 Page 34 of 57

35 Page 35 of 57

36 Page 36 of 57

37 Page 37 of 57

38 Page 38 of 57

39 Page 39 of 57

40 Page 40 of 57

41 Page 41 of 57

42 Page 42 of 57

43 Page 43 of 57

44 Page 44 of 57

45 Page 45 of 57

46 Page 46 of 57

47 Page 47 of 57

48 Page 48 of 57

49 Page 49 of 57

50 Page 50 of 57

51 Page 51 of 57

52 Page 52 of 57

53 Page 53 of 57

54 Page 54 of 57

55 Page 55 of 57

56 Page 56 of 57

57 Page 57 of 57

58 Bodycote warringtonfire Head Office Holmesfield Road Warrington Cheshire WA1 2DS United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) Website: