• No results found

RoBound – Ro-ro space boundary fire protection – Smoke spread through in A class divisions

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "RoBound – Ro-ro space boundary fire protection – Smoke spread through in A class divisions"

Copied!
70
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Contact person RISE Date Reference Pierrick Mindykowski 2021-06-16 2P01122 Division Safety and Transport

+46 10 516 59 87 pierrick.mindykowski@ri.se

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Postal address Office location Phone / Fax / E-mail This document may not be reproduced other than in full, except with the prior written approval of RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB.

Box 857 501 15 BORÅS SWEDEN Brinellgatan 4 504 62 Borås SWEDEN +46 10-516 50 00 +46 33-13 55 02 info@ri.se

RoBound – Ro-ro space boundary fire

protection – Smoke spread through in A class

divisions

Pierrick Mindykowski, Anna Olofsson, Torben

Ronstad

RISE Report 2021:70 ISBN 978-91-89385-60-3

(2)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 1 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Contents

Contents ... 1

Summary ... 2

1 Introduction ... 3

1.1 Background ... 3

1.2 Purpose of the study ... 3

2 Experimental tests ... 5

2.1 Test procedure ... 5

2.1.1 Test specimen ... 5

2.1.2 Test setup ... 6

2.1.3 Deviations from FTP Code Part 3 ... 6

2.1.4 Leakage test procedure ... 6

2.1.5 Criteria of performance ... 7

2.2 Results ... 7

2.2.1 Observations during tests ... 7

2.2.2 Observations after the test ... 9

2.2.3 Leakage rate ... 10

2.2.4 Heat radiation ... 11

2.2.5 Temperature ... 11

3 Analysis of the experimental tests ... 14

4 Conclusion ... 16

Acknowledgments ... 17

References ... 18

(3)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 2 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Summary

The International Maritime Organization, through its correspondence group on fire safety of ro-pax ships, has underlined the need for more scientific studies regarding the performance of boundaries in case of a ro-ro space fire, especially to prevent fire and smoke spread to

accommodation spaces. Following these discussions, Swedish Flag State has underlined the issue of the smoke tightness of doors in A class divisions. While smoke tightness is a requirement for A class divisions, the fire resistance test method in the FTP Code is not designed to evaluate hazards associated with smoke spread.

RISE has carried out the RoBound project to meet this need.

To increase the understanding of this weakness in the FTP Code, RISE has performed experimental tests of two almost identical doors. The only difference between the two doors was the presence or not of an intumescent joint between the leaf and the frame of the door, intended to prevent the passage of smoke. The doors were exposed to the test for fire boundaries in Part 3 of the FTP Code, which exposes specimens to a simulated fire by a temperature increase according to the standard fire curve ISO 834.

A modification of the standard experimental rig was added and consisted of the addition of a canopy above the tested doors to gather and measure the rate of carbon dioxide to quantify the amount of smoke leaking from the doors. This set up of canopy and measurement rig was taken from the standard EN 81-58 which is applied for elevator doors acting as fire barriers. The results of the tests showed that both doors marginally failed the A-60 integrity criteria since there was presence of a sustained flame at the unexposed side before 60 minutes of test. However, both doors satisfied to the insulation criteria by maintaining a rise of temperature lower than 140 °C in average at the unexposed side. The main difference between the doors was that the door with the intumescent joints presented a rate of smoke leakage which was almost half of that of the fire door without intumescent joints.

This result clearly shows the importance of evaluating the smoke tightness of A class doors during testing and the need to set up an experimental procedure and performance criterion for this in the FTP Code.

(4)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 3 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

1 Introduction

A ro-ro ship is a vessel onto which cargo, generally trucks and personal vehicles, can be rolled on and rolled off, and it is the most common type of vessel in Swedish waters. In the past decades, there have been many fires on ro-ro ships and a major challenge is smoke and fire spread. RoBound was a research project which aimed to clarify how "state-of-the-art" passive fire protection between ro-ro spaces and adjacent spaces affects fire and smoke spread, and on this basis make recommendations on appropriate improvements. This was achieved through fire experiments, simulations, literature study of incident reports and regulations, and a

workshop for identification of weaknesses in collaboration with vessel operators, industry, and authorities.

Proposals for measures that contribute to a satisfactory and harmonized level of safety

regarding the spread of smoke and fire was prepared and will be communicated to the Swedish Transport Agency, for consideration to be forwarded to the IMO (International Maritime Organization).

1.1 Background

Ro-ro ships have been an important component of the commercial maritime industry since their introduction in the 1940’s. The ships have a large longitudinal space where cars, trucks and other cargo can be rolled on and rolled off. Despite improved fire protection regulations, many fire accidents have occurred on ro-ro ships and there are no signs of them diminishing in number or magnitude. This was a conclusion at the IMO in 2012 [1] based on a statistical study of ship fires, which has led to an ongoing update of the international fire safety

regulations for ro-ro ships in SOLAS Chapter II-2 [2] and associated codes. During the review of the fire safety regulations [1], the IMO correspondence group has particularly pinpointed the need for additional experimental data or results of scientific studies regarding:

- The performance of A-60 boundaries in case of a ro-ro space fire, especially to prevent fire spread to accommodation spaces; and

- The performance of A-0 boundaries in case of a ro-ro space fire, especially to prevent fire spread between ro-ro spaces.

In this process, the Swedish Flag State has moreover underlined the issue of the smoke tightness of doors in A class divisions. While smoke tightness is a requirement for A class divisions, the fire resistance test method (for doors same as for bulkheads and decks) in the Fire Test Procedures (FTP) Code [3] (in Annex 1, part 3 – “Test for “A”, “B” and “F” class divisions) is not designed to evaluate hazards associated with smoke spread. At the same time, prevention of smoke spread from a ro-ro space fire to the accommodation part of the ship is a significant and difficult problem on ro-ro ships.

1.2 Purpose of the study

The purpose of the RoBound project was to clarify the performance of “state-of-the-art” fire boundaries between ro-ro spaces and accommodation spaces or other ro-ro spaces, and to give recommendations on how sufficient fire containment is ensured. The technical basis provided supported the revision of international IMO regulations and thus also the overall purpose to improve the independent management of fires on ro-ro ships.

(5)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 4 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

RoBound aims to strengthen competence, and influence regulation development regarding fire divisions of ro-ro ships.

The RoBound study covered two weaknesses that had been identified regarding the fire integrity of ro-ro spaces. The first weakness concerns the fire integrity between ro-ro spaces and accommodation. It has been questioned whether A class fire integrity is sufficient when approved by using the standard time-temperature curve, which might not represent a real fire in a ro-ro space.

The second weakness, which is the one studied in this report, concerns a gap between the regulations and the test method to approve doors in A class divisions. Doors in A class divisions are required to be smoke tight, according to the definition in SOLAS II-2/3, but this is not represented in the approval fire test, as per the FTP Code.

A literature study precedes this report and includes a review of regulations concerning fire integrity of ro-ro spaces and a review of accident investigations as basis to identify weaknesses in fire integrity [4]. The study documented in this reports aimed to evaluate the importance of the smoke tightness of an A class fire door by experimental tests. Two identical fire doors were tested which differed only by the addition of an intumescent joint between the frame and the door leaf. The testing rig consisted of the standard furnace used in agreement with the FTP Code. A small modification was made by addition a canopy above the tested door to gather the smoke leaking from the door, and to measure the rate of carbon dioxide (CO2). This allowed to

(6)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 5 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

2 Experimental tests

This chapter presents the two experimental tests performed in the project at RISE facilities in Borås, Sweden. As explained previously in the literature study of the RoBound project [4], while smoke tightness is a requirement for A-class divisions, the fire resistance test method in the FTP Code [3] is not designed to evaluate hazards associated with smoke spread. In that case, the smoke tightness could be evaluate using a land based standard i.e. EN 13501-2. Unfortunately this standard uses a maximum temperature of 200℃ which is not high enough because smoke tightness solutions in marine application are usually based on the use of an intumescent sealing joint requiring high temperature to be activated. The solution adopted in this study is the use of a mix between the standard EN 81-58:2018 [5] and the fire resistance test method according to the FTP Code [3].

The tests were performed according to the FTP Code 2010 (2012 Edition) Annex 1, Part 3 [3] (hereafter referred to as “FTP Code Part 3”) with a modification to evaluate smoke tightness based on the EN 81-58:2018 “Safety rules for the construction and installation of lifts - Examination and tests - Part 58: Landing doors fire resistance test” [5], used for lift doors acting as barriers of fire spread through the lift well. The modification was made to measure leakage of smoke exiting the doors by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator. The amount of

smoke coming out during the fire test was measured in accordance with the descriptions in section 2.1.4 of this report. The test procedure is presented in section 2.1.

Two identical fire doors were tested, one with and one without an intumescent joint between the frame and the door leaf. The test with intumescent joint was performed on October 30, 2020 and the test without intumescent joint was performed on November 17, 2020, anthe test report is found in Appendix . Both tests lasted for 62 minutes.

It should be noted that the tests were not carried out with the intention to classify the specimens for fire resistance.

2.1 Test procedure

The fire doors were subjected to a heat exposure according to the standard time–temperature curve defined in ISO 834, also referred to as the cellulosic fire curve. In accordance with the test procedure, the exposure is made from one side (fire exposed side) and measurements and visual judgments are performed at the opposite side (unexposed side).

2.1.1 Test specimen

The test specimens consisted of two single leaf hinged metal door assemblies. The doors were built as A-60 doors but not certified or type approved. The doors were ordered from Hellbergs Dörrar i Mellerud AB specifically for the project. One specimen was constructed with an intumescent joint around the outer edge of the door leaf and one was constructed without intumescent joint.

The outer dimensions of the test specimens were (width x height x thickness) 1290 mm x 2240 mm x 54 mm. The dimensions of the door leaf were (width x height x thickness) 1123 mm x 2146 mm x 54 mm. The construction of the test specimen can be seen in the full test report attached in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2.

(7)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 6 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB 2.1.2 Test setup

The test specimen was mounted in a supporting construction mounted in RISE’s concrete frame dedicated for IMO fire tests according to the FTP Code, Part 3. The mounting of both doors was performed on October 8, 2020 at RISE, by the producer of the door.

The door frame was attached with steel screws on each side of the door. The gap between the frame and the bulkhead was sealed with rock wool insulation. After the mounting of the test specimen in the supporting construction, the concrete frame with the supporting construction and test specimen were installed on RISE's vertical furnace.

The bulkhead was insulated with 60 mm glass wool on the fire exposed side. The insulation was of the type Isover Ultimate Marine slab U Seaprotect Slab 36 with the nominal density 100 kg/m3.

2.1.3 Deviations from FTP Code Part 3

The test was carried out with the following deviations from the test method according to the FTP Code Part 3:

• Measurement of the smoke exiting the doors by using the amount of CO2 as an

indicator in accordance with EN 81-58:2018.

• The specimen design, properties of included components and assembly were verified in accordance with the requirements of the test method.

• No test reports regarding the non-combustibility of the included materials were established.

• Positive pressure over the entire test specimen was used in accordance with EN 81-58:2018 [5], instead of a pressure of zero at a height of 500 mm above the floor level to the test specimen as required in the FTP Code Part 3.

2.1.4 Leakage test procedure

Leakage test was performed according to Annex A, Annex C and Annex D in EN 81-58:2018 [5]. The leakage rate of the test specimen was measured with equipment and measuring instruments as described in the test method [5]. In general, the equipment and measurements were:

• A canopy with curtains placed over and in front of the test specimen, on the unexposed side to continuously collect the leaked gases.

• The canopy was connected to a duct (according to ISO 5167-4:2003) which was connected to a suction fan designated to draw the leaked gases.

• The concentration of CO2 was measured in the furnace and in the duct connected to

the canopy.

• The volume of the air flow through the duct was measured.

• The ambient air temperature and the temperature of the air flowing through the duct were measured.

The leakage rate of leaked gases through the door were calculated by using the measuring of the gas flow rate and its temperature.

Prior to the fire test, the leakage rate measurement system was verified and a correction factor was calculated in accordance with Annex D of the test method [5]. The correction factor

(8)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 7 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

derived from the verification of the leakage rate measurement system was 0.968 for the test without intumescent joint and 0.893 with intumescent joint.

The total leakage during the fire test was calculated as the reference volume of air (with reference temperature 20 °C) multiplied by the concentration of CO2 in the air flowing through

the duct divided by the concentration of CO2 in the furnace air. The leakage rate was

calculated as the total leakage divided by the width of the door opening. The leakage rate was then multiplied by two correction factors, one derived from the verification of the leakage rate measurement system and one derived from measuring the pressure gradient in the furnace.

2.1.5 Criteria of performance

In the FTP Code Part 3 two performance criteria are listed: • Insulation (I)

• Integrity (E)

Those two criteria are also present in the EN 81-58:2018 with the addition of a third one: • Radiation (W): criterion is satisfied until the measured radiation exceeds the value of

15.0 kW/m2.

Concerning the criteria I, both test methods indicate that the criterion is no longer satisfied when the average temperature rise exceeds 140°C or when one individual unexposed face thermocouple shall not be more than 180°C.

For the EN 81-58:2018, integrity shall be considered to have been lost by the occurrence of sustained flaming (flaming for more than 10 s) at any time during the test period. This definition of the criterion I is also mentioned in the FTP Code Part 3 with the addition of the cotton-wool pad and the gap gauges criteria (for more information please revert to the literature study of the RoBound project [4]).

The main difference regarding integrity criterion between the FTP Code Part 3 and the EN 81-58:2018 is the presence of the smoke leakage measurement in the EN 81-81-58:2018 where this criterion is satisfied as long as the leakage rate per meter width of the door opening does not exceed 3.0 m3/(min.m), not taking into account the first 14 minutes of the test.

2.2 Results

The results regarding leakage rate, temperature, fire resistance and observations are presented in the following sections. Pictures taken in connection with the test can be seen in the full test report attached in Appendix.

2.2.1 Observations during tests

Observations during the tests are noted in Table 1. The observations refer to the unexposed side if nothing else is stated.

Table 1. Observations during the two tests

Time (min:sec) Fire door without intumescent joint Fire door with intumescent joint

(9)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 8 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

02:25 The silicone* joint is visible between the door leaf and the sill. 02:45 The silicone joint at 02:25 came

loose and fell out in the middle.

03:30 Smoke emits from the right lower

corner at the sill. 03:40 Smoke emits from between the door

leaf and the sill.

05:10 Smoke emits on the right side at the upper hinge.

06:40 Smoke emits from the left lower

corner at the sill. 06.50 Smoke emits along the front edge of

the door leaf.

07:00 Smoke emits from the right side at

the upper hinge. 09:50 Liquid is visible om the right side of

the door between the frame and the bulkhead.

12:00 Smoke emits between the frame and

the door leaf in hight with the lock. 12:30 Smoke emits at the lock.

14:20 The silicone that is visible between the door leaf and the sill seems to be on fire.

22:10 Smoke emits at lock and liquid is

visible under the lock. 26:10 The sill is glowing red hot.

28:00 Observation on the exposed side:

Pyrolytic are visible on both sides of the door, the lock and handle is still in place.

30:20 Integrity failure: A small flame is visible at the top left corner of the door leaf with durability more than 10 seconds.

34:00 Glowing red at the right top corner at the upper hinge of the door leaf. 44:15 The deformation is so big at the

lower left edge that it is possible to see into the furnace.

46:00 The intumescent joint is visible al

(10)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 9 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

53:40 A gap is visible at the hinge side between the door leaf and the frame of approximately 8-10 mm.

53:50 Red glow can be seen in the

intumescent joint at the sill. 55:00 Red glowing along the door frame

at the upper part.

56:50 Smoke is once more visible at the

sill.

58:30 Integrity failure: A small flame is

visible in the intumescent joint at the lower left corner between the door leaf and the sill with durability more than 10 seconds.

62:00 Test terminated Test terminated

* The silicone joint is not the same as the intumescent joint.

Integrity tests with cotton wool pads were not performed during the tests since no leakage of hot gases was observed.

No integrity tests with gap gauges were performed since no through gaps were observed.

2.2.2 Observations after the test

Observations of the test specimens after the test are presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Observations of the test specimens after the test

Fire door without intumescent joint Fire door with intumescent joint Unexposed side: Exposed side: Unexposed side: Exposed side: Door leaf is buckled. The door leaf is

deformed but intact.

Door leaf is buckled. The door leaf is deformed but intact Discolouration can be

seen in the steel.

There are visible gaps between door and frame.

Discolouration can be seen in the steel.

There are visible gaps between door and frame.

Gaps are visible between door leaf and frame.

The handle has melted.

Gaps are visible in the corners on the right side between door leaf and frame.

The handle has melted.

The handle is in place The frame is intact towards the profile in the bulkhead.

The handle is in place.

The frame is intact towards the profile in the bulkhead.

(11)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 10 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB 2.2.3 Leakage rate

The maximum corrected leakage rate during the fire test was 0.27 m3/(min x m width of the

door opening) for the door without intumescent joint while the rate was 0.11 m3/(min x m

width of the door opening) for the door with intumescent joint.

The results of the leakage rate when tested according to EN 81-58:2018 [5] for the door without intumescent joint is shown in Figure 1 and for the door with intumescent joint is shown in Figure 2.

(12)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 11 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Figure 2. Leakage rate during the test, for the fire door with intumescent joint.

2.2.4 Heat radiation

The maximum heat radiation 1.0 m away from door is shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Summary of radiation measurement

Radiation Fire door without intumescent

joint

Fire door with intumescent joint

Maximum radiation during the test

1.61 kW/m2, after 60 minutes 1.19 kW/m2, after 60

minutes

2.2.5 Temperature

Results of the measured surface temperature for the test concerning the fire door without intumescent joint is shown in Figure 3 and for the fire door with intumescent joint in Figure 4.

(13)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 12 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

(14)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 13 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

(15)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 14 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

3 Analysis of the experimental tests

Concerning the analysis of the experimental tests, the performance criteria for integrity (E) and insulation (I) are presented in Table 4 and Table 5 respectively.

Table 4. Summary measurements and associated performance for integrity

Integrity Fire door without

intumescent joint

Fire door with intumescent joint

Presence of Sustained flaming 30 minutes 58 minutes

Gap gauges diameter 6 mm

and 25 mm 60 minutes, no failure* 60 minutes, no failure*

Cotton wool pad test 60 minutes, no failure* 60 minutes, no failure* Corrected leakage rate per

meter width of the door opening, 3.0 m3/min.

60 minutes, no failure* 0.27 m3/min, after 60 minutes

60 minutes, no failure* 0.11 m3/min after 60 min.

*The test was finished.

Table 5. Summary temperature measurements

Insulation Fire door without intumescent

joint

Fire door with intumescent joint

Average temperature rise, 140 °C

60 minutes, no failure* 60 minutes, no failure* Maximum temperature rise,

180 °C

60 minutes, no failure* 60 minutes, no failure* *The test was finished.

Regarding the fire resistance of the tested fire doors, even if the tests were not aiming for type approval, the results show that both doors failed integrity criteria. It occurred after 30 minutes for the test without intumescent joint and after 58 minutes with intumescent joint. On the other hand, both doors satisfied the insulation criteria. As stated previously, the test specimen was not certified or type approved.

Regarding the maximum radiation that was measured at 1.0 m from the unexposed side of the doors, it was higher without the intumescent joint, 1.61 kW/m2 compared to 1.19 kW/m2 for

the door with intumescent joint. Even if this measurement was made just as an observation and not in accordance with any of the test methods, the performance criteria for the radiation (W) of 15.0 kW/m2 is not exceeded.

Concerning the smoke leakage, the leakage rate was lower in the test with the fire door with the intumescent joint than in the test with the door without the intumescent joint. For the door with intumescent joint the rate was below 0.11 m3/(min.m) during the first 60 minutes, while

in the test without the intumescent joint it reached 0.11 m3/(min.m) after around 14 minutes

and a peak 0.27 m3/min x m after 60 minutes of tests. For lift doors, the performance is

satisfied as long as the leakage rate per meter width of the door opening does not exceed 3.0 m3/(min.m), not taking into account the first 14 min of the test. For the present study, the

criterion is satisfied for both doors. However, the test was not carried out to measure the amount of smoke coming out of the fire doors during the fire exposure but rather to compare the influence of the presence of an intumescent joint. The test method seems to be suitable to

(16)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 15 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

evaluate smoke tightness of marine door but a further work must be done regarding the development of a proper performance criterion for marine application.

(17)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 16 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

4 Conclusion

The goal of this part of the RoBound project was to clarify the fire integrity performance of doors in boundaries of ro-ro spaces and to give recommendations on how sufficient fire integrity can be ensured regarding smoke tightness. This was studied by evaluating the smoke leakage for a typical A class fire door and also for a door with an intumescent joint to prevent smoke spread. The evaluation tests were based on the requirements for A class divisions in the FTP Code, Part 3. As this code does not provide any guidance regarding the smoke leakage, a canopy was added to gather and measure the leaking smoke during the tests, according to EN 81-58:2018 which is used for lift doors in fire boundaries.

Two doors were tested, one of which with an intumescent joint. Both doors failed the 60 minute integrity criteria due to the presence of a sustained flames before 60 minutes of test, but they both satisfied the insulation criteria with a rise of temperature lower than 140 °C in average at the unexposed side of the doors. The door without the intumescent joint presented a smoke leakage rate which was almost twice as high as the rate of smoke leakage given by the fire door with an intumescent joint.

The results indicate that the two doors reached the same performance based on the FTP Code criteria, but that they present a difference in terms of smoke tightness.

It is the opinion of RISE, as already expressed in the FIRESAFE II project [6] that, in order to account for the smoke tightness requirement of A class divisions, the International Maritime Organization should strongly consider a modification of the FTP Code by the addition of a test procedure and criteria to evaluate smoke leakage for doors in A class divisions. A starting point for such a test procedure could be the EN 81-58 standard, which was concluded useful in this study and which may be well combined with the current test procedure in the FTP Code, Part 3.

(18)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 17 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Acknowledgments

RISE would like to thank ISOVER who supported the project by providing fire insulation for the fire tests.

(19)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 18 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

References

1. S.-C. o. F. s. Implementation, “FSI 21/5 Casuality Statistics and investigation,” International Maritime Organization, London, 2012.

2. IMO, International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974, London: International Maritime Organization, 1974.

3. International Maritime Organization, International Code for Application of Fire Test Procedures, 2010, London: IMO, 2010.

4. A. Olofsson, F. Evegren, P. Mindykowski, RoBound project – Literature Study. 5. Swedish Standards Institute, Safety rules for the construction and installation of lifts –

Examination and tests - Part 58: Landing doors fire resistance test, Stockholm: SIS, 2018 6. J. Leroux et al. FIRESAFE II project – Containment and Evacuation, 2018

(20)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 19 (19)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

(21)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Contact person RISE Date Reference Page

Pierrick Mindykowski 2021-06-16 2P01122 20 (10)

Division Safety and Transport +46 10 516 59 87

pierrick.mindykowski@ri.se

Fire resistance test of door for marine application with

intumescent list around the door

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Postal address Office location Phone / Fax / E-mail This document may not be reproduced other than in full, except with the prior written approval of RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB.

Box 857 501 15 BORÅS SWEDEN Brinellgatan 4 504 62 Borås SWEDEN +46 10-516 50 00 +46 33-13 55 02 info@ri.se

Test

This report details the method of construction, the test conditions and the results obtained when the specific element of construction described herein was tested following the procedure outlined in the accredited test method:

• 2010 FTP Code International code for application of Fire Test Procedures, 2010 (resolution MSC.307(88)) 2012 Edition

Any significant deviation with respect to size, constructional details, loads, stresses, edge or end conditions other than those allowed under the field of direct application in the relevant test method is not covered by this report.

The test was carried out with the following listed deviations from the test method:

The test was performed in accordance with the FTP Code 2010 with adaptation to perform leakage test to measure the smoke exiting the doors by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator

in accordance with EN18-58:2018 what is described in clause 3.6.4.

The specimen design, properties of included components and assembly has not been verified in accordance with the requirements of the test method.

Product

Fire door HI BD

Product designation

Fire door HI BD

Reference number

2P01122-03-1

(22)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 21 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

1 Purpose of the test

The purpose of the test was to measure the amount of smoke coming out of the sample during the fire exposure described in Chapter 2, by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator. This was

done by using EN18-58:2018 in accordance with what is described in section 6.3.4.

2 Test specimen and test setup

2.1 General information

The test specimen consisted of one single leaf hinged metal door. The specimen was equipped with intumescent list around the outer edge of the door leaf. The door was built as a IMO A60 door but not classified.

The manufacturer was Hellbergs Dörrar I Mellerud AB.

The construction of the test specimen can be seen from the sponsor's drawing and specification in appendix 1. The test specimen is also described in chapter 2.3 below.

2.2 Sampling and delivery of the test specimen

The test specimen consisted of one single leaf hinged metal door designated fire door HI BD, built as IMO A60 door, ordered specific for the project order confirmation number 64089 from Hellbergs Dörrar I Mellerud AB, therefor no sampling of the test specimen was performed. One test specimen was manufactured by the sponsor of the test and was delivered to RISE, mounted and tested.

The test specimen arrived at RISE on September 8, 2020.

2.3 Description of the construction

As the purpose of the test is not to certify, classify or to be used for any assessment, no detailed description of the test specimen or its included components is provided. A general description is made below.

The construction consisted of a single leaf hinged IMO A60 metal door assembly. The outer dimensions of the test specimen were (width x height x thickness) 1290 x 2240 x 54 mm. The dimensions of the door leaf were (width x height x thickness) 1123 x 2146 x 54 mm. The specimen was equipped with intumescent list around the outer edge of the door leaf. The producer has supplied RISE with a drawing of the test specimen but al ingoing details are redrawn according to the producer, see appendix 1.

(23)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 22 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

2.4 Number of test specimens and test direction

According to the FTP Code a hinged door should be tested with the opening away from the heating conditions unless the Administration deems otherwise.

The test was performed with the door leaf opening outwards (away from) the furnace.

2.5 Test setup

The test setup can be seen in appendix 2.

2.6 Supporting construction

The supporting construction was mounted in RISE´s concrete frame for IMO fire tests with opening dimension (width x height) 2440 x 2500 mm.

The dimension of the bulkhead was (width x height) 2420 x 2480 mm and consisted of a 4,5 mm thick steel plate, stiffeners of L-profile 65 x 65 x 6 mm with centre distance 600 mm and a perimeter frame profile of 65 x 6 mm flat bar. The bulkhead was welded into the test frame with centre distance approx. 600 mm.

The bulkhead was mounted in the frame with the stiffeners on none fire exposed side.

The bulkhead was insulated with 60 mm stone wool on the fire exposed side and the stiffeners were mounted on the unexposed side. The stone wool insulation was designated Isover Ultimate Marine slab U Seaprotect Slab 36 the nominal density was 100 kg/m3.

Stiffeners of L-profiles 80 x 40 x 6 mm was welded to the bulkhead on the exposed side to be used to mount the door in.

The steel bulkhead was manufactured and insulated by RISE.

2.7 Mounting of the test specimen

The test specimen was mounted in the supporting construction. The mounting of the test specimen was overseen by RISE.

The door frame was attached to the supporting bulkhead with 6 pieces of steel screws on each side of the door. The gap between the frame and the bulkhead was sealed with rock wool insulation.

(24)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 23 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

2.8 Conditioning

2.8.1 Climate conditions

The test specimen was stored in RISE's furnace hall before the test. The temperature in the furnace hall was in average 19°C and the relative humidity was in average 54 % during this time.

2.9 Verification

2.9.1 Verification of the construction of the test specimen

The verification that the test specimen was in accordance with the sponsor's drawings and specifications was carried out by RISE on the test specimen. No verification of included materials was performed.

2.10 Pre-test measurements, examination and preparation

2.10.1 Door clearances

The clearances between the door leaf and the adjacent frame members and between the door leaf and the sill were measured prior the test.

The measuring points and the measuring results are shown in appendix 2.

2.10.2 Non-combustibility and low flame-spread characteristics of included materials

According to Annex 1: Part 3, Appendix 1, paragraph 3, Specifications, in FTP Code 2010 (2012 Edition) test reports regarding the non-combustibility of the included materials should be enclosed in the test report. The sponsor has neither supplied RISE with such reports nor given RISE the assignment to perform such tests.

2.10.3 Placing of test specimen on the furnace

After the mounting of the test specimen in the supporting construction, the concrete frame with the supporting construction and test specimen were placed on RISE's vertical furnace.

2.10.4 Final setting

The door leaf was opened 300 mm and closed manually.

(25)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 24 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

3 Test procedure and results

3.1 General information

The test was performed on October 30, 2020. The test lasted 62 minutes.

The test was performed on RISEs vertical furnace for fire resistance test. The maximum fire exposed area of the furnace is (width x height) 3000 x 3000 mm and the depth of the furnace is 1800 mm. The heat exposure comes from 6 propane driven burners.

3.2 Witness of test

The test was not witnessed by the sponsor of the test.

3.3 Fire test procedure

The fire test means that the test specimens are subjected to a standardized fire exposure from one side (fire exposed side) and measurements and visual judgments are performed at the opposite side (unexposed side). The extent of the measurements and assessments depends on the sponsor's desired use of results from the test.

The amount of smoke coming out of the sample during the fire exposure was measured by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator. This was done in accordance with what is described

in clause 3.6.4.

3.3.1 Leakage test procedure

Leakage test was performed according to annex A, annex C and annex D in EN 81-58:2018. The procedure and result is presented in clause 3.6.4.

3.4 Test conditions

The furnace was controlled in accordance with ISO 834:1999.

3.4.1 Temperatures

The furnace temperature was measured with six plate thermocouples (PT1 – PT6). The junctions of the thermocouples were positioned approximately 100 mm from the fire exposed surface of the test specimen at the commencement of the test.

The average temperature in the furnace (of PT1 – PT6) in relation to the standard time-temperature curve is shown in appendix 3.

The temperature at each thermocouple (PT1 – PT6) in relation to the standard time-temperature curve is shown in appendix 3.

The percent deviation of the area under the average furnace time-temperature curve from the area under the standard time-temperature curve and permitted deviation, is shown in a graph in appendix 3.

(26)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 25 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB 3.4.2 Pressure

According to FTP Code 2010 shall a pressure of zero be established at a height of 500 mm above the notional floor level to the test specimen.

The standard EN81-58:2018 prescribes a positive pressure over the entire test specimen, this deviates from the FTP Code 2010.

To be able to perform the leakage test according to EN81-58:2018, the pressure was controlled as described below.

The furnace pressure was controlled at the position 350 mm above the lower edge of the test specimen. Using a pressure gradient of 8 Pa per meter of the height of the furnace the control pressure at this level was calculated to be 6 Pa in order to establish a pressure of 2 Pa in level with the sill.

The standard 20 Pa level was calculated to be 2146 mm above the sill of the test specimen by using a pressure gradient of 8 Pa per meter height of the furnace.

A pressure correction factor, 20/Pfurn, to be used for correction of the leakage rate was

calculated by using the calculated furnace pressure in level with the standard 20 Pa level. The correction factor was 0,891.

The calculated furnace pressure in level with the sill and in level with the 20 Pa level and permitted deviation is shown in Appendix 3.

The equipment for pressure measurements fulfils the EGOLF recommendation 024Rev1-2018. The measured pressure is presented in the graph as a moving average over a period of one minute.

3.5 Ambient temperature

The ambient air temperature was measured with one thermocouple. The ambient air temperature during the test is shown in appendix 3.

The ambient air temperature at the beginning of the test was 16,9 °C.

The ambient temperature was measured with a thermocouple located close to the furnace.

3.6 Measurements on test specimen

During the test, the properties needed for the requested classification by the sponsor were measured and the behaviour of the test specimen was evaluated during the heat exposure.

3.6.1 Temperatures

The temperature rise on the unexposed surface of the test specimen was measured with 5 thermocouples (C1 – C5). The thermocouples were positioned as shown in appendix 4. The temperature rises are shown in appendix 4.

(27)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 26 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB 3.6.2 Heat radiation

The average level of radiation during the test was evaluated by measuring the total heat flux. A heat flux meter was positioned 1,0 m from the centre of the test specimen.

The maximum total heat flux during the test was 1,19 kW/m2.

The total heat flux is shown in appendix 4.

3.6.3 Deflection

The deflection of the door assembly during the test was measured by two potentiometers. The measuring points and the deflection of the test specimen during the test are shown in appendix 4.

The deflection of the test specimen during the test is shown in appendix 4.

3.6.4 Leakage rate according to EN 81-58:2018

The leakage rate of the test specimen was measured with equipment and measuring

instruments as described in the test method. In general, the equipment and measurements were • a canopy with curtains placed over and in front of the test specimen

• the canopy was connected to a duct, built according to ISO 5167-4:2003, the duct was connected to a suction fan designated FAHB-3-031-6-2-1 with inv. no BX52014. • the concentration of CO2 was measured in the furnace and in the duct connected to the

canopy

• the volume of the air flow through the duct was measured

• the ambient air temperature and the temperature of the air flowing through the duct were measured

Prior to the fire test the leakage rate measurement system was verified and a correction factor was calculated in accordance with Annex D of the test method. The correction factor derived from the verification of the leakage rate measurement system was 0,893.

The total leakage during the fire test was calculated as the reference volume of air (reference temperature is 20°C) multiplied by the concentration of CO2 in the air flowing through the duct

divided by the concentration of CO2 in the furnace air. The leakage rate was calculated as the

total leakage divided by the width of the door opening. The leakage rate was then multiplied by two correction factors, one derived from the verification of the leakage rate measurement system and one derived from measuring the pressure gradient in the furnace.

The maximum corrected leakage rate during the fire test, after the commencement of the test and ending at the termination of the test was 0,11 m3/(min x m width of the door opening).

(28)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 27 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

3.7 Observations

3.7.1 Photographs from the test

Photographs taken in connection with the test are shown in appendix 4.

3.7.2 Observations during the test

Table : Observations Time

min:sec

Observations (the observations refer to the exposed/unexposed side if nothing else is stated)

00:00 Test starts.

03:30 Smoke emits from the right lower corner at the sill. 06:40 Smoke emits from the left lower corner at the sill. 07:00 Smoke emits from the right side at the upper hinge.

12:00 Smoke emits between the frame and the door leaf in hight with the lock.. 22:10 Smoke emits at lock and liquid is visible under the lock.

28:00 Observation on the exposed side: Pyrolytic are visible on both sides of the door, the lock and handle is still in place.

46:00 The intumescent list is visible al around the door leaf. 53:50 Red glow can be seen in the intumescent list at the sill. 56:50 Smoke is once more visible at the sill.

58:30 Integrity failure: A small flame is visible in the intumescent list at the lower left

corner between the door leaf and the sill with durability more than 10 seconds. 62:00 Test terminates on request of the sponsor.

• Integrity tests with cotton wool pads were not performed during the test since no leakage of hot gases were observed.

• Integrity tests with gap gauges were not performed during the test since no through gaps were observed.

3.8 Post-test measurements and observations

3.8.1 Observations after the test

Unexposed side:

Door leaf is buckled. Discolouration can be seen in the steel. Gaps are visible in the corners on the right side between door leaf and frame. The handle is in place,

Exposed side.

The door leaf is deformed but intact. There are visible gaps between door and frame. The handle has melted. The frame is intact towards the profile in the bulkhead.

(29)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 28 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

4 Summary

The test specimens, one single leaf hinged metal door, described in chapter 2, has been tested according to the accredited test methods:

• FTP Code 2010 (2012 Edition) Annex 1, Part 3

The test was carried out with the following listed deviations from the test method:

The test was performed in accordance with the FTP Code 2010 with adaptation to perform leakage test to measure the smoke exiting the doors by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator

in accordance with EN18-58:2018 what is described in clause 3.6.4.

The specimen design, properties of included components and assembly has not been verified in accordance with the requirements of the test method.

Below is a summary of the results obtained during the test and essential information about the test specimen.

4.1 Fire test

The test lasted for 62 minutes.

Summary of results

The described test specimen was tested with opening direction away from the furnace. For information regarding the validity of the result in different directions see chapter "Number of test specimens and test direction".

Table: Summary of integrity measurements

Integrity Result

• Sustained flaming 58 minutes

• Gap gauges diameter 6 mm and 25 mm 60 minutes, no failure*

• Cotton wool pad test 60 minutes, no failure*

• Corrected leakage rate per meter width of the door opening, 3,0 m3/min.

60 minutes, no failure* 0,11 m3/min after 60 min.

Table: Summary temperature measurements

Insulation Result

• Average temperature rise, 140 °C 60 minutes, no failure* • Maximum temperature rise, 180 °C 60 minutes, no failure* Table: Summary radiation measurement

Radiation Result

• Maximum radiation during the test 1,19 kW/m2, after 60 minutes *The test has been discontinued at the request of the sponsor.

Because of the nature of fire resistance testing and the consequent difficulty in quantifying the uncertainty of measurement of fire resistance, it is not possible to provide a stated degree of accuracy of the result.

(30)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 29 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

5 Classification

The test specimen could not be classified.

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Department Safety Research - Fire Safe Transport

Table : Appendices

Appendix Description Page

1 Drawings and specifications from the sponsor Order confirmation 1 – 2 3 - 4 2 Test setup 1 Door clearances 2 3 Test conditions 1 4 Position of thermocouples: 1

Temperatures on test specimen: Graph 2 – 5

Heat radiation 10

Deflection 11

Leakage rate 12

(31)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 1 (1)

Appendix 3

(32)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 1 (2)

Appendix 4

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Test setup

(33)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 2 (2)

Appendix 4

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

G

aps:

F

ron

t edge

G

aps:

B

ack

edge

G

aps:

Upp

er edge

G

aps:

Lower

edge

P1 P2 P1 P2 P1 P2 P F1 3,8 4,0 B1 3,2 2,3 U1 2,4 3,1 L1 11,6 F2 3,7 3,4 B2 4,1 2,3 U2 2,6 2,7 L2 14,2 F3 4,4 3,4 B3 3,5 2,3 U3 1,3 2,5 L3 9,7 F4 4,5 3,7 B4 2,9 1,7 F1 F2 F3 F4 B1 B2 B3 B4 U1 U2 U3 L1 L2 L3 P P P1

P2

P1 P2

(34)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 1 (12)

(35)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 2 (12)

(36)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 3 (12)

(37)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 4 (12)

(38)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 5 (12)

(39)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 6 (12)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

(40)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 7 (12)

(41)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 8 (12)

(42)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 9 (12)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

(43)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 10 (12)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

(44)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 11 (12)

(45)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 12 (12)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Photographs from the test

Photo: The test specimen before the test.

(46)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Contact person RISE Date Reference Page

Pierrick Mindykowski 2021-06-16 2P01122 13 (10)

Division Safety and Transport +46 10 516 59 87

pierrick.mindykowski@ri.se

Fire resistance test of door for marine application with

intumescent list around the door without intumescent list

around the door

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

Postal address Office location Phone / Fax / E-mail This document may not be reproduced other than in full, except with the prior written approval of RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB.

Box 857 501 15 BORÅS SWEDEN Brinellgatan 4 504 62 Borås SWEDEN +46 10-516 50 00 +46 33-13 55 02 info@ri.se

Test

This report details the method of construction, the test conditions and the results obtained when the specific element of construction described herein was tested following the procedure outlined in the accredited test method:

• 2010 FTP Code International code for application of Fire Test Procedures, 2010 (resolution MSC.307(88)) 2012 Edition

Any significant deviation with respect to size, constructional details, loads, stresses, edge or end conditions other than those allowed under the field of direct application in the relevant test method is not covered by this report.

The test was carried out with the following listed deviations from the test method:

The test was performed in accordance with the FTP Code 2010 with adaptation to perform

leakage test to measure the smoke exiting the doors by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator in accordance with EN18-58:2018 what is described in clause 3.6.4.

The specimen design, properties of included components and assembly has not been verified in accordance with the requirements of the test method.

Product

Fire door HI BD

Product designation

Fire door HI BD

Reference number

2P01122-03-2

(47)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 14 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

1 Purpose of the test

The purpose of the test was to measure the amount of smoke coming out of the sample during the fire exposure described in Chapter 2, by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator. This was

done by using EN18-58:2018 in accordance with what is described in section 6.3.4.

2 Test specimen and test setup

2.1 General information

The test specimen consisted of one single leaf hinged metal door. The specimen was without intumescent list around the outer edge of the door leaf. The door was built as a IMO A60 door but not classified.

The manufacturer was Hellbergs Dörrar I Mellerud AB.

The construction of the test specimen can be seen from the sponsor's drawing and specification in appendix 1. The test specimen is also described in chapter 2.3 below.

2.2 Sampling and delivery of the test specimen

The test specimen consisted of one single leaf hinged metal door designated fire door HI BD, built as IMO A60 door, ordered specific for the project, order confirmation number 64089 from Hellbergs Dörrar AB, therefor no sampling of the test specimen was performed. One test specimen was manufactured by the sponsor of the test and was delivered to RISE, mounted and tested.

The test specimen arrived at RISE on September 8, 2020.

2.3 Description of the construction

As the purpose of the test is not to certify, classify or to be used for any assessment, no detailed description of the test specimen or its included components is provided. A general description is made below.

The construction consisted of a single leaf hinged IMO A60 metal door assembly. The outer dimensions of the test specimen were (width x height x thickness) 1290 x 2240 x 54 mm. The dimensions of the door leaf were (width x height x thickness) 1123 x 2146 x 54 mm. The specimen was without intumescent list around the outer edge of the door leaf.

The producer has supplied RISE with a drawing of the test specimen but al ingoing details are redrawn according to the producer, see appendix 1.

(48)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 15 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

2.4 Number of test specimens and test direction

According to the FTP Code a hinged door should be tested with the opening away from the heating conditions unless the Administration deems otherwise.

The test was performed with the door leaf opening outwards (away from) the furnace.

2.5 Test setup

The test setup can be seen in appendix 2.

2.6 Supporting construction

The supporting construction was mounted in RISE´s concrete frame for IMO fire tests with opening dimension (width x height) 2440 x 2500 mm.

The dimension of the bulkhead was (width x height) 2420 x 2480 mm and consisted of a 4,5 mm thick steel plate, stiffeners of L-profile 65 x 65 x 6 mm with centre distance 600 mm and a perimeter frame profile of 65 x 6 mm flat bar. The bulkhead was welded into the test frame with centre distance approx. 600 mm.

The bulkhead was mounted in the frame with the stiffeners on none fire exposed side.

The bulkhead was insulated with 60 mm stone wool on the fire exposed side and the stiffeners were mounted on the unexposed side. The stone wool insulation was designated Isover Ultimate Marine slab U Seaprotect Slab 36 the nominal density was 100 kg/m3.

Stiffeners of L-profiles 80 x 40 x 6 mm was welded to the bulkhead on the exposed side to be used to mount the door in.

The steel bulkhead was manufactured and insulated by RISE.

2.7 Mounting of the test specimen

The test specimen was mounted in the supporting construction. The mounting of the test specimen was overseen by RISE.

The door frame was attached to the supporting bulkhead with 6 pieces of steel screws on each side of the door. The gap between the frame and the bulkhead was sealed with rock wool insulation.

(49)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 16 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

2.8 Conditioning

2.8.1 Climate conditions

The test specimen was stored in RISE's furnace hall before the test. The temperature in the furnace hall was in average 19°C and the relative humidity was in average 54 % during this time.

2.9 Verification

2.9.1 Verification of the construction of the test specimen

The verification that the test specimen was in accordance with the sponsor's drawings and specifications was carried out by RISE on the test specimen. No verification of included materials was performed.

2.10 Pre-test measurements, examination and preparation

2.10.1 Door clearances

The clearances between the door leaf and the adjacent frame members and between the door leaf and the sill were measured prior the test.

The measuring points and the measuring results are shown in appendix 2.

2.10.2 Non-combustibility and low flame-spread characteristics of included materials

According to Annex 1: Part 3, Appendix 1, paragraph 3, Specifications, in FTP Code 2010 (2012 Edition) test reports regarding the non-combustibility of the included materials should be enclosed in the test report. The sponsor has neither supplied RISE with such reports nor given RISE the assignment to perform such tests.

2.10.3 Placing of test specimen on the furnace

After the mounting of the test specimen in the supporting construction, the concrete frame with the supporting construction and test specimen were placed on RISE's vertical furnace.

2.10.4 Final setting

The door leaf was opened 300 mm and closed manually.

(50)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 17 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB

3 Test procedure and results

3.1 General information

The test was performed on November 17, 2020. The test lasted 62 minutes.

The test was performed on RISEs vertical furnace for fire resistance test. The maximum fire exposed area of the furnace is (width x height) 3000 x 3000 mm and the depth of the furnace is 1800 mm. The heat exposure comes from 6 propane driven burners.

3.2 Witness of test

The test was not witnessed.

3.3 Fire test procedure

The fire test means that the test specimens are subjected to a standardized fire exposure from one side (fire exposed side) and measurements and visual judgments are performed at the opposite side (unexposed side). The extent of the measurements and assessments depends on the sponsor's desired use of results from the test.

The amount of smoke coming out of the sample during the fire exposure was measured by using the amount of CO2 as an indicator. This was done in accordance with what is described

in clause 3.6.4.

3.3.1 Leakage test procedure

Leakage test was performed according to annex A, annex C and annex D in EN 81-58:2018. The procedure and result is presented in clause 3.6.4.

3.4 Test conditions

The furnace was controlled in accordance with ISO 834:1999.

3.4.1 Temperatures

The furnace temperature was measured with six plate thermocouples (PT1 – PT6). The junctions of the thermocouples were positioned approximately 100 mm from the fire exposed surface of the test specimen at the commencement of the test.

The average temperature in the furnace (of PT1 – PT6) in relation to the standard time-temperature curve is shown in appendix 3.

The temperature at each thermocouple (PT1 – PT6) in relation to the standard time-temperature curve is shown in appendix 3.

The percent deviation of the area under the average furnace time-temperature curve from the area under the standard time-temperature curve and permitted deviation, is shown in a graph in appendix 3.

(51)

SAFETY and TRANSPORT

Date Reference Page

2021-06-16 2P01122 18 (10)

RISE Research Institutes of Sweden AB 3.4.2 Pressure

According to FTP Code 2010 shall a pressure of zero be established at a height of 500 mm above the notional floor level to the test specimen.

The standard EN81-58:2018 prescribes a positive pressure over the entire test specimen, this deviates from the FTP Code 2010.

To be able to perform the leakage test according to EN81-58:2018, the pressure was controlled as described below.

The furnace pressure was controlled at the position 350 mm above the lower edge of the test specimen. Using a pressure gradient of 8 Pa per meter of the height of the furnace the control pressure at this level was calculated to be 6 Pa in order to establish a pressure of 2 Pa in level with the sill.

The standard 20 Pa level was calculated to be 2146 mm above the sill of the test specimen by using a pressure gradient of 8 Pa per meter height of the furnace.

A pressure correction factor, 20/Pfurn, to be used for correction of the leakage rate was

calculated by using the calculated furnace pressure on level with the standard 20 Pa level. The correction factor was 0,954.

The calculated furnace pressure in level with the sill and in level with the 20 Pa level and permitted deviation is shown in Appendix 3.

The equipment for pressure measurements fulfils the EGOLF recommendation 024Rev1-2018. The measured pressure is presented in the graph as a moving average over a period of one minute.

3.5 Ambient temperature

The ambient air temperature was measured with one thermocouple. The ambient air temperature during the test is shown in appendix 3.

The ambient air temperature at the beginning of the test was 18,9 °C.

The ambient temperature was measured with a thermocouple located close to the furnace.

3.6 Measurements on test specimen

During the test, the properties needed for the requested classification by the sponsor were measured and the behaviour of the test specimen was evaluated during the heat exposure.

3.6.1 Temperatures

The temperature rise on the unexposed surface of the test specimen was measured with 5 thermocouples (C1 – C5). The thermocouples were positioned as shown in appendix 4. The temperature rises are shown in appendix 4.

References

Related documents

Högt tryck (4,9 bar) och hög vinkel (20) ger för de flesta massatyper tillfredställande packning inom 150 varv. Anpassning till CEN-förslaget med 6 bars tryck innebär att en vinkel

Informationssäkerhet är de åtgärder som vidtas för att förhindra att information: görs tillgänglig för eller i övrigt kommer obehöriga till del (konfidentialitet),

Syftet med studien är att beskriva administrativ personals upplevelser av fysisk aktivitet som hälsofrämjande åtgärd och hur fysisk aktivitet kan stimuleras på eller i anslutning

9 Om nuvarande tekniska dagvattensystem fokuserat på att så snabbt som möjligt avleda vattnet från vägarna och de hårdgjorda ytorna fokuserar det ekologiska systemet

Lastanordningen ska konstrueras så att maximal tid för transportering av betongelementen från produktionslokal till traversgård är mindre än dagens

I chose to confine the study to the idioms a thorn in the side, une épine au pied/dans le pied and en nagel i ögat because they all consist of lexical items denoting a sharp object

Torrfåror nedom dammar till regleringsverksamhet varierar i hur mycket vatten som faktiskt rinner i dem och för att få en representativ bild av torrfåror har de grovt delats in i

The present study aimed to elucidate associations between the perceived legitimacy of work tasks, the psychosocial work environment, and the utilization of work time among