Our course creator, Jonny Millard, explores the impact of the proposal to remove BS 476 from the updated Approved Document B and replace it with its European counterpart, BS EN 1634. This could have far-reaching implications for numerous supply chains. The proposal comes from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

BS 476 and EN 1634 Standards

The British Standard 476 (BS 476) is a set of rules for testing the fire resistance of building materials and structures. Part 22 of the standard focuses on testing fire doors. It’s been around for a while, but it’s been criticized for not reflecting real-world fire conditions.

The European Standard 1634 (EN 1634) is another set of rules for testing fire doors and shutters. It’s considered a more modern and rigorous standard than BS 476, and it’s becoming more popular globally.

Here are the main differences between the two standards:

• Fire conditions: EN 1634 simulates a tougher fire than BS 476, which makes it a better reflection of real-world situations.
• Testing methods: EN 1634 uses different testing methods than BS 476, such as a higher heat load and more strict measurement criteria.
• Testing equipment: EN 1634 requires more advanced testing equipment than BS 476, like a radiant heat source.
• Test duration: The testing takes longer in EN 1634 than in BS 476, with tests lasting from 30 minutes to 120 minutes.
• Test temperatures: EN 1634 uses a higher temperature than BS 476, up to 1000°C compared to BS 476’s 950°C.

In short, EN 1634 is a better standard than BS 476 because it creates more realistic fire conditions and uses more advanced testing methods and equipment. It’s being adopted by more building codes and regulations worldwide, and some countries are thinking of ditching BS 476 in favour of EN 1634.

BS 476 is a set of rules for testing the fire resistance of various building elements, including doors and doorsets in the UK. EN 1634 is a set of rules for testing the fire resistance of doors and doorsets in Europe.

BS 476 and EN 1634 have different ways of testing and measuring fire resistance. EN 1634 is considered more demanding than BS 476, and some countries have developed their own versions of BS 476 based on it.

Implications for Property Developers and Contractors

The potential removal of BS 476 from building codes and regulations in favour of EN 1634 could have far-reaching implications for various industries and stakeholders involved in fire safety, including property developers, contractors, fire door manufacturers, and end-users such as property owners. While EN 1634 is a more modern and rigorous standard than BS 476, the removal of the latter could result in increased costs, longer testing times, and a tendency to value engineer fire doors, potentially compromising their quality and safety.

As such, it is important for all stakeholders to remain vigilant to the changes and assess their potential impact on their operations, budgets, and fire safety plans. Property developers and contractors need to consider the costs of fire safety products and the potential impact on long-term fixed-price contracts. Fire door manufacturers need to account for the retesting and certification costs and the potential impact on their product quality and safety. End-users such as property owners need to review their fire safety plans and budgets and assess the potential impact of the removal of BS 476.

Moreover, stakeholders are encouraged to provide feedback in the consultation responses and voice their concerns and suggestions. This will help ensure that any changes to the fire safety standards are made with the best interests of all stakeholders in mind.

Implications for Fire Door Manufacturers

The proposal to remove BS 476 and replace it with EN 1634 as the standard for fire resistance tests for doors and doorsets has significant implications for fire door manufacturers. While EN 1634 is a more rigorous and modern standard, the removal of BS 476 could result in increased retesting and certification costs for manufacturers, as well as a potential impact on the quality and safety of fire doors.

Fire door manufacturers will need to account for the costs of retesting their fire doors to meet the EN 1634 standard. This could potentially lead to increased costs for manufacturers and ultimately for end-users such as property owners. The cost of retesting may depend on the number of fire doors a manufacturer produces and the availability of the necessary testing equipment and facilities.

In addition to the potential costs, the removal of BS 476 may impact the quality and safety of fire doors. With the increased pressure to meet the more rigorous EN 1634 standard, fire door manufacturers may resort to value engineering, where they use cheaper or less effective materials and designs to reduce costs. This could compromise the quality and safety of fire doors, which could have serious consequences in the event of a fire.

Moreover, obtaining the necessary funding and completing the required testing to meet the EN 1634 standard may take time, which could result in delays and disruptions to the fire door supply chain. The fire door manufacturers will need to assess the time scales and funding required for retesting their fire doors to meet the new standard and ensure that they are able to meet the demand for EN 1634 compliant fire doors in a timely and efficient manner.

To mitigate these potential issues, fire door manufacturers should consider their options carefully and plan ahead. They should assess the time scales and funding required for retesting their fire doors, and feel the potential impact of the removal of BS 476 on their operations, budgets, and product quality and safety. Fire door manufacturers are encouraged to provide feedback in the consultation responses and voice their concerns and suggestions to help ensure that any changes to the fire safety standards are made with the best interests of all stakeholders in mind.

Implications for end-users

The potential removal of BS 476 from building codes and regulations in favour of EN 1634 could have far-reaching implications for various industries and stakeholders involved in fire safety, including property developers, contractors, fire door manufacturers, and end-users such as property owners. While EN 1634 is a more modern and rigorous standard than BS 476, the removal of the latter could result in increased costs, longer testing times, and a tendency to value engineer fire doors, potentially compromising their quality and safety.

As such, it is important for all stakeholders to remain vigilant to the changes and assess their potential impact on their operations, budgets, and fire safety plans. Property developers and contractors need to consider the costs of fire safety products and the possible effects on long-term fixed-price contracts. Fire door manufacturers need to account for the retesting and certification costs and the potential impact on their product quality and safety. End-users such as property owners need to review their fire safety plans and budgets and assess the potential impact of the removal of BS 476.

Again, stakeholders are encouraged to provide feedback in the consultation responses and voice their concerns and suggestions. This will help ensure that any changes to the fire safety standards are made with the best interests of all stakeholders in mind.

Conclusions

The potential removal of BS 476 from building codes and regulations in favour of EN 1634 could have far-reaching implications for various industries and stakeholders involved in fire safety, including property developers, contractors, fire door manufacturers, and end-users such as property owners. While EN 1634 is a more modern and rigorous standard than BS 476, the removal of the latter could result in increased costs, longer testing times, and a tendency to value engineer fire doors, potentially compromising their quality and safety.

As such, it is essential for all stakeholders to remain vigilant to the changes and assess their potential impact on their operations, budgets, and fire safety plans. Property developers and contractors need to consider the costs of fire safety products and the potential impact on long-term fixed-price contracts. Fire door manufacturers need to account for the retesting and certification costs and the potential impact on their product quality and safety. End-users such as property owners need to review their fire safety plans and budgets and assess the potential impact of the removal of BS 476.

In summary, the potential removal of BS 476 and the adoption of EN 1634 could have significant implications for the construction industry and fire safety. It is, therefore, important for all stakeholders to remain vigilant, assess the potential impact of the changes on their operations and budgets, and provide feedback in the consultation responses. By working together, we can help ensure that the fire safety standards meet the needs and expectations of all stakeholders and contribute to a safer built environment for all.