If not all involved parties (manufacturers, buyers, fire consultants, architects and builders) take their share of the responsibility for this, it will lead to confusion in the industry by replacing the certification body, which is to guarantee a product's properties and performance, with so-called <<experts>> without relevant knowledge of the current regulations, or who consciously works according to their personal agenda.
Today, there is great interest in replacing non-renewable, energy-intensive building materials with carbon dioxide-binding wood-based products. In light of this, we see increased use of wood products. Due to increased fire risk, this must be compensated for either by the use of sprinklers or by treating the wood products with passive fire protection. Passive fire protection may be, for example, an insulating fire paint / varnish or, most often, a fire-retardant chemical, which is usually applied to the wood by pressure impregnation. The latter method of fire impregnation has been around since the 1960s and has been well tested using various techniques that have been further developed and refined over the decades. This has resulted in a variety of wood products with well-documented fire protection.
In recent years, it has been an increased use as well as demand for such wood products. This entices new players and new products into the market. In order for these new products to replace old proven products, the new entrants must be able to prove that their products meet the same requirements as the products they wish to replace. This is not easy! It is quite extensive to familiarize yourself with the regulations governing the building materials market, and for that reason it is not particularly surprising that there are occasional mistakes and misunderstandings. For the same reason, one cannot expect that every buyer of a fire rated building material should have sufficient competence to decide whether or not a product being offered can be used. We must therefore help everyone in the industry to present factual and relevant information about the products. In this way, buyers of the products will be able to make the right decision. An extremely important contributor in this context is the independent third-party agencies that are to impartially control and strengthen the documentation presented by each player in the market.
If all involved parties (manufacturers, buyers, fire consultants, architects and builders) take their share of the responsibility for this, this will lead to confusion in the industry by replacing the certification body that guarantees a product's properties and performance with a so-called <<expert>> without relevant knowledge of the current regulations, or who consciously works according to their personal agenda.
Today we have an everyday life with many ambiguities about fire classified building materials. There are products that are marketed by manufacturers and / or accepted by buyers / fire consultants on erroneous grounds. The risk of relying on inaccurate information is not primarily that it weakens confidence in the entire industry, but that in the worst case, combustible products are used where there are increased fire requirements. This can be fatal. We do not want a new Grenfell Tower in Scandinavia!
Choice of method
|Area of Method||
|Author||Thomas Bengtsson Andreas Sveningsson|
© Copyright 2019 | All Rights Reserved.