This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Cables and reaction to fire

Why do you suppose that the MHCLG did not feel it necessary to mandate levels of performance for cables with respect to their reaction to fire as was their prerogative under CPR?

Clearly the current non-prescriptive approach is either working or there is no significant evidence that cables and wiring systems have unduly contributed to the propagation of a fire or resulted in emissions that made a situation untenable when it would not have otherwise been. 

Further, what does it actually mean in the note in 422.2.1 that cables need to satisfy the requirements of the CPR in terms of their reaction to fire? I can find nothing specific in the CPR other than the need for CE marking and the requirements placed on the manufacturers for technical information.
Parents

  • Not necessarily true - there are all sorts of establishments where doors do not unlock in the event of a fire -




    seconded. Either for security to stop unauthourised folk getting in to see something, or because what is in the room is dangerous, and should never be let out.

    There are also systems for places  where you do not go in to rescue someone, because  it is a waste of time, and would involve the loss of additional lives.


Reply

  • Not necessarily true - there are all sorts of establishments where doors do not unlock in the event of a fire -




    seconded. Either for security to stop unauthourised folk getting in to see something, or because what is in the room is dangerous, and should never be let out.

    There are also systems for places  where you do not go in to rescue someone, because  it is a waste of time, and would involve the loss of additional lives.


Children
No Data