Presentation on theme: "Practical experience with new European fire testing standards and European technical approval U. Wörsdörfer + H. Haselmair Hilti Corporation, Schaan, FL."— Presentation transcript:
Practical experience with new European fire testing standards and European technical approval U. Wörsdörfer + H. Haselmair Hilti Corporation, Schaan, FL
This presentation is given in commemoration of my dear colleague Udo Wörsdörfer who should have given the presentation but died unexpectedly some weeks ago
Limited practical experience: – ETAG 018 (FPP) published in 2006 (part 4) and 2007 (part 2 and 3) – ENV : 2002 EN (intumescent coatings): Formal Vote EN revised (boards, renderings): Inquiry – ETAG 026 (FSSP) published early 2008 – EN (penetration seals): 09/2004, revision 03/2009 – EN (linear joint seals): 08/2006 – EN (curtain wall, part configuration): 06/2007 Introduction FPP = Fire Protective Products, FSSP = Fire Stopping and Fire Sealing Products
How to show compliance for FPP and FSSP in Europe? FPP = Fire Protective Products, FSSP = Fire Stopping and Fire Sealing Products European route National route Depending on national rules: Fire test report (UK, IRL, …) + national approval of fire test report (ES, FR, PL, …) Approval (DE) Approval testing + AoC procedure ETA Certificate of Conformity Declaration of Conformity CE Marking
What is the difference? European route National route Only resistance to fire is assessed *) No 3 rd party control *) Accepted in other countries only when mutual agreement in place All regulated properties related to the Essential Requirements (CPD) to be assessed Durability, Serviceability 3 rd party control Must be accepted throughout Europe *) Apart from DE
European classification – Possible in all Member States – EN Testing in many Member States obligatory for new tests – Deadline for validity of national test reports between 2010 and 2012 – First complete obligation in AT (05/2010) EN + national in parallel EN testing mandatory not yet decided tbc 2006 / / ? 2004 / / / unlimited 2007 / 2011 unlimited Status of introduction of European Fire Classification
Status of obligation - ETA’s ETA voluntary ETA mandatory by law Product with ETA must be accepted in all Member States ETA at present voluntary in most Member States Only with ETA a fire test result must be accepted all over Europe ETA includes all regulatory requirements not only fire / PS JS Draft!
– ETA’s perceived voluntary – No driving force for ETA’s from legal side – Only a few ETA’s issued so far – Harmonisation de facto stopped!! Impact of legal situation for ETA’s European Level: CPD From November 2006 on no coexistence period defined for ETAG’s by EC anymore National Level: Building Regulations Only minimum performance (fire resistance, noise protection etc.) defined
Market distortion because of Differences between European and national test results Less effort when using only fire test/classification report compared to a full ETA assessment What is the reason for reluctance of industry to use ETA’s?
Safety margins unrealistic high for reactive coatings => not competitive => Revision of EN and separation in 2 parts Hollow sections not covered Difference EN – National testing: Steel protection
Fire test at joint extension equal to 100% movement capability: movement not considered in national standards => disadvantage when EN testing Test equipment for fire tests including movement not available before spring 2009 – Difference EN – National testing: Linear joint seals Only 1 laboratory in Europe equipped so far Detailed classification: e.g. EI 30 – H – M25 – B – W 30 to 90 = Linear joint seal with 30 minutes fire resistance, horizontal orientation, movement capability of 25%, with pre-fabricated and on-site made splices for joint widths of 30 to 90 mm Special test for curtain wall perimeter seals (EN )
Special test standard for curtain wall perimeter joint (EN ) To be tested together with façade element *) Minimum 3 m joint length Strict field of application rules related to use of standard configurations ETAG requires cycling before fire test (no equipment available in Europe so far) *) DIN standard similar to EN
More severe test conditions (e.g. furnace pressure) Strict field of application rules related to use of standard configurations (e.g. maximum cable diameter of 80 mm – although more severe cable configuration) Pipe end configuration as part of classification: Difference EN – National testing: Penetration seals e.g. EI 120 U/C: Penetration seal with 90 minutes fire resistance for closed piping systems (test condition: capped outside the furnace)
Difference EN :2004 and revised version 2009 Furnace Pressure – Specimen location (5.2): simpler approach Distances: no obligation for 200 mm between pipes (6.1) Strut system as modern alternative for standard service support construction introduced, also for pipes ( , Fig. A.8 and E.10) Blank penetration seal necessary for definition of maximum seal size; definition of thermocouple location added (Fig. 3) New definition of standard supporting constructions (7.2) New insulation pad for thermocouples ( ): simpler to install
EN :2009: Furnace pressure – Specimen location old: new:
New Cables New Grouping Split depending on Seal Size Special Seal Types A1A3 B C1 C2 C3 D1 D2 D3 E G2 F EN :2009: Cable penetration seals – What is new?
EN :2009: Cables The new selection of cables for the standard configuration considers all known influencing parameters and is thought to be representative for all cables used in buildings in Europe. Des.TypeSizeMaterial *)Ø A1S5 x 1,5PVC/PVC14 A2S5 x 1,5EPR / PO14 A3S5 x 1,5XLPE / EVA14 BS1 x 95PVC / PVC21 C1S4 x 95PVC / PVC47 C2S4 x 95EPR / PO61 C3S4 x 95XLPE / EVA46 ES1 x 185PVC/PVC27 D1S4 x 185PVC/PVC52 D2S4 x 185EPR / PO80 D3S4 x 185XLPE / EVA63 FT20x2x0,618 G1W1 x 95PVC / -17 G2W1 x 185PVC / -23 S = Sheathed *) Insulation / Sheath c Small Sheathed Large Sheathed Telecommunication Cable Wires W = Wire T = Telecommuni- cation cable Medium Sheathed
EN :2009: Standard configuration – Large seals "Small" "Large" Options "Cable bundle" „Wires" "Conduits" "Medium"
EN :2009: Field of application – Cable seals Small Cables (A1, A2, A3, B) all Sheathed Cables (including Telecommunication / Data Cables) ≤ 21 mm Ø Small Cables (A1, A2, A3, B) + Medium Cables (C1, C2, C3, E) all Sheathed Cables (including Telecommunication / Data Cables) ≤ 50 mm Ø) "Small""Medium" "Large" Small Cables (A1, A2, A3, B) + Medium Cables (C1, C2, C3, E) + Large Cables (D1, D2, D3) all Sheathed Cables (including Telecommunication / Data Cables) ≤ 80 mm Ø)
EN :2009: Standard configuration – Small seals Proposal for Standard configuration to cover all sheathed cables: maximum seal size minimum seal size ++ or + B- or E-cable, depending on seal size
EN : Pipe penetration seals - New definition of "Insulation" sustainedinterrupted local continued Case CS Case CI Case LSCase LI
EN :2009: Pipe penetration seals Maximum seal size to be determined by testing a blank seal (b or h x l), except for mortar seals and seals made from rigid boards or mineral wool boards with a density of ≥ 150 kg/m 3 l b or h Pipe end configuration U/C (capped outside!) covers all situations => different to pipe end configuration commonly used in the past!
EN :2009: Plastic pipes - Selection of specimens Determination of “Length Groups" and "Design Groups" (thickness and length of the active component of the pipe closure device is equal for varying device sizes / pipe diameters) The maximum device size per design group is tested in combination with maximum and minimum pipe wall thickness Design groups in the middle of the size range may be omitted, if the relevant parameters are located above the connection line (see diagram)
EN :2009: Plastic pipes - Selection of specimens
EN :2009: Rules for plastic pipes – Pipe wall thickness The range between the wall thicknesses tested is covered for a particular device size The maximum wall thickness, tested with the largest device, covers all smaller sizes within a "Design-Group" Interpolation allowed for "Design-Groups" not tested (see diagram) Length-Group 1
EN :2009: Rules for plastic pipes – Pipe end configuration All field of application rules valid for the pipe end configuration tested Application of test results: see Table. test using U/UC/UU/CC/C coversU/UYNNN C/UYYNN U/CYYYN C/CYYYY Y = covered; N = not covered Different to rules in the past!! Capped outside (U/C) normally used in the past! Considerable difference in test results!
EN :2009: Rules for plastic pipes – Pipe material Similar approach like German “Stellvertreterprüfung” but only very limited number of materials covered when PVC-U or PE-HD pipes are tested Pipe standard to be considered and recorded! Reaction to fire behaviour of pipes may be different in Germany and other Member States (minimum requirements in DE) => different behaviour in fire test? More experience necessary to extend the rules => common research project?
EN :2009: New - Mixed Penetration Seals Combination of cables, metal pipes and plastic pipes or other services Test goal: are there interactions between cables/cable trays and pipes? Standard Mixed Module
Option 1 (no test results available for the product): Standard cable configuration + Standard Mixed Module + Pipes depending on intended field of application cables of the Standard Mixed Module: A1, B, C1, D3, E G2 EN :2009: Mixed Penetration Seals - Options
EN :2009: The "Critical Pipe" Approach May save considerable test effort on pipe variations Critical pipes are: – Pipes with integrity failure within 5 minutes after the intended classification time – Pipes that are closest to the 180K threshold
EN :2009: Standard flexible wall Error in table of 2004 version corrected Smaller width possible, restrained only top and bottom New approach developed – Varying stud widths considered – Insulation of wall related to aperture framing: “one stop shop” test situation possible to cover both insulated and non-insulated walls – Number and thickness of boards only relevant when no aperture framing is used Sandwich panel constructions are not covered! Constructions with uncovered studs are not covered (e.g. shaft walls) Applications in rigid walls (≥ thickness, ≥ density) are covered (exception pipe closure devices within the wall)
EN :2009: What to do with old test results? 2009 version offers more options (e.g. mixed penetration seals) but is more detailed and restrictive in standard configurations and field of application rules The difference has to be considered when test results from 2004 version are planned to be used: – e.g. only rubber cables of 2004 version may be considered => tests to be repeated to get full cable coverage! – Classical max/min size approach for collars/wraps not sufficient: more tests necessary Tests laboratories have to make sure that a common approach is used throughout Europe: training necessary also for lab staff!
First reading in Parliament passed with considerable number of amendments Discussion in Council Working Group not yet finished Current draft not consistent in itself Obligation for products with European Approvals under discussion: high number of Member States in favour but no qualified majority so far The Future? - CPR (Construction Products Regulation)
The bizarre situation that harmonisation for highly safety relevant construction products for applications with a special European classification system should be voluntary must be changed!! Highly safety relevant products excluded from harmonisation? hENETA (ETAG, CUAP, EAD) , 5 CE Marking: mandatory - voluntary Safety relevance low - high (AoC system)