FOCUS FIRE SAFETY
LESSONS FROM
ABROAD
Conor Logan, Colt’s Technical Director looks at
how U. fi re safety design regulations compare
to those of other countries in the (U. Could we
learn from their example?
Responding to the tragic loss of
life following a fire at Grenfell
Tower in June 2017, the Government
commissioned an independent review
of building regulations and fire safety.
This was led by Dame Judith Hackitt,
who in the final report, Building a
Safer Future, Independent Review of
Building Regulations and Fire Safety
concluded that the current legislation
regarding fire safety equipment in the
UK is not fit for purpose and that it
needs to improve. Learning the best
that we can from other countries (such
as those in the European Union) while
avoiding their shortcomings would be
a good start.
But while well-considered fire safety
regulation is essential, it is equally
important for all those involved in the
design and construction of buildings
and construction products to have an
understanding of what fire can do to a
building and how damage and danger
caused by a fire can be minimised.
36 AUGUST 2021
FIRE SAFETY DESIGN IN THE EU
When we look at our European neighbours,
we can see that while not all of them
follow the same rules, there are some
diƒ erent approaches to design than the
UK, particularly in relation to fire safety
and smoke control. In the UK, we currently
follow a performance-based code where
the regulation only mandates five basic
requirements of means of warning and
escape, internal fire spread – linings and
structure, external fire spread and access
and facilities for the fire service.
The method used to meet these
requirements is down to the designer and
can be derived from a number of sources –
government guidance (each of the devolved
nations has its own version with slightly
diƒ erent approaches), a risk-based approach
from British Standards or a fire engineered
solution using specialist knowledge and
resources.
Whereas, in Germany, for example there
are entirely prescriptive regulations and
standards which tell building designers what
they should and should not do. The national
model building code (Musterbauordnung)
sets out what standards designers should
meet. While each of the federal states has its
own detailed rules, these in fact vary only
slightly. The benefit is that life safety systems
should not be traded oƒ under the pretext
of ‘value engineering’. The trend of a ‘race
to the bottom’ as referred to by Hackitt, in
terms of providing the minimum protection
for the lowest cost needs to be halted.
Prescriptive requirements are more likely to
prevent this as compliance is the only sure
way of demonstrating the standard is met.
In other European countries, Sweden, for
example, also allows performance-based
design, but has strict rules about considering
the possibility of fires in adjacent buildings.
Italy has an older approach of prescription
and a newer approach that allows for a more
‘creative’ design, similar to the UK’s. This
newer approach is not, however, proving
popular because it passes responsibility
from the authorities to the design team.
Designers in Italy, it seems, prefer to tick