1. Hilti Corporation, Schaan, FL
Practical experience with new European fire testing standards and European technical approval
U. Wörsdörfer +
H. Haselmair
Hilti Corporation, Schaan, FL

2. This presentation is given in commemoration of my dear colleague Udo Wörsdörfer who should have given the presentation but died unexpectedly some weeks ago

3. Introduction Limited practical experience:
ETAG 018 (FPP) published in 2006 (part 4) and 2007 (part 2 and 3)
ENV : 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
FPP = Fire Protective Products, FSSP = Fire Stopping and Fire Sealing Products

4. How to show compliance for FPP and FSSP in Europe?
European route
National route
Approval testing + AoC procedure
ETA
Certificate of Conformity
Declaration of Conformity
CE Marking
Depending on national rules:
Fire test report (UK, IRL, …)
+ national approval of fire test report
(ES, FR, PL, …)
Approval (DE)
FPP = Fire Protective Products, FSSP = Fire Stopping and Fire Sealing Products

5. What is the difference? All regulated properties related
European route
National route
All regulated properties related
to the Essential Requirements
(CPD) to be assessed
Durability, Serviceability
3rd party control
Must be accepted throughout
Europe
Only resistance to fire is assessed *)
No 3rd party control *)
Accepted in other countries only
when mutual agreement in place
*) Apart from DE

6. Status of introduction of European Fire Classification
2006 /
2010
2008 / ?
2004 /
2012
2007 /
2011
2007
unlimited
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

7. Status of obligation - ETA’s/ PS JS
Draft!
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
ETA voluntary
ETA mandatory by law

8. 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
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!!

9. What is the reason for reluctance of industry to use ETA’s?
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

10. Difference EN – National testing: Steel protection
Safety margins unrealistic high for reactive coatings
=> not competitive
=> Revision of EN and separation in 2 parts
Hollow sections not covered

11. Difference EN – National testing: Linear joint seals
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 –
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 )

12. Special test standard for curtain wall perimeter joint (EN 1364-4)
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

13. Difference EN – National testing: Penetration seals
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:
e.g. EI 120 U/C: Penetration seal with 90 minutes fire resistance for closed piping systems (test condition: capped outside the furnace)

14. Difference EN 1366-3:2004 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

15. EN 1366-3:2009: Furnace pressure – Specimen location
old:
new:

16. EN 1366-3:2009: Cable penetration seals – What is new?
New Cables
New Grouping
Split depending on Seal Size
Special Seal Types G2 C1 D2 F E B A3 A1 C2 D1 C3 D3

17. Telecommunication Cable
EN :2009: Cables
Des.
Type
Size
Material *) Ø A1 S
5 x 1,5
PVC/PVC 14 A2
EPR / PO A3
XLPE / EVA B
1 x 95
PVC / PVC 21 C1
4 x 95 47 C2 61 C3 46 E
1 x 185 27 D1
4 x 185 52 D2 80 D3 63 F T
20x2x0,6 18 G1 W
PVC / - 17 G2 23
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. c
Small Sheathed
S = Sheathed
Medium Sheathed
W = Wire
Large Sheathed
Telecommunication Cable
T = Telecommuni-
cation cable
Wires
*) Insulation / Sheath

18. EN 1366-3:2009: Standard configuration – Large seals
Options
"Small"
"Medium"
"Large"
"Cable bundle"
„Wires"
"Conduits"

19. EN 1366-3:2009: Field of application – Cable seals
"Small"
"Medium"
"Large"
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 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)

20. B- or E-cable, depending on seal size
EN :2009: Standard configuration – Small seals
Proposal for Standard configuration to cover all sheathed cables: + or
B- or E-cable, depending on seal size
maximum seal size minimum seal size

21. EN 1366-3: Pipe penetration seals - New definition of "Insulation"
sustained
interrupted
continued
Case CS
Case CI
local
Case LS
Case LI

22. EN 1366-3:2009: 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/m3 l
b or h
Pipe end configuration U/C (capped outside!) covers all situations => different to pipe end configuration commonly used in the past!

23. EN 1366-3:2009: 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)

24. EN 1366-3:2009: Plastic pipes - Selection of specimens

25. EN 1366-3:2009: 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

26. EN 1366-3:2009: 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/U
C/U
U/C
C/C
covers Y N
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!

27. EN 1366-3:2009: 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?

28. EN 1366-3:2009: 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

29. EN 1366-3:2009: Mixed Penetration Seals - Options
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

30. EN 1366-3:2009: 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

31. EN 1366-3:2009: 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)

32. EN 1366-3:2009: 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!

33. The Future? - CPR (Construction Products Regulation)
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

34. Highly safety relevant products excluded from harmonisation?
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!!
CE Marking: mandatory voluntary
hEN
ETA (ETAG, CUAP, EAD)
1 - 3
4, 5
Safety relevance
low high
(AoC system)

35. Many thanks for your attention