Fire Door Test

[eb0nics]

there is a few things that are essentially wrong with the test that you demonstrated.

a. the fact that you have a duct on top of the building to let out the smoke - essentially this stopped your fire from having a flash off point, this stablised the pressure of the room at all times, in normal circumstances, this would not be the case.

b. the size of the fire, in a completely empty room, would vary quite dramatically from a room full of furniture.

this does not simulate a fire test.

[jssupplies]

The vent on the top was there in the interests of safety of those viewing the demonstration. The products have all been tested independently to BS476, and achieved at least 30 minutes or more. BS tests place the door under the full heat of a real fire, and are far more stringent than that shown in the video. This demonstration was intended to give a graphic demonstration of the effects of a fire on a treated door, rather than as a true scientific test.

[mhirata]

It's a good thing that fire is contained in only one section of the house, but what if someone was trapped in that concealed room with a fire alarm that failed?

[jssupplies]

They'd still have a far better chance of a surviving the fire than if the door itself wasn't treated. Passive fire protection is by itself not a guarantee, but taken has part of overall preventitive, and detection measures, it greatly increases the chances of survival in a fire. In any situation fire and safety risk management requires the fitting and maintainance of a suitable, and capable, fire alarm detection system.