Significant investment in product development and testing for its Open State Cavity Barrier (OSCB) and new Wall Cavity Barrier (Red Edition) ranges has enhanced their suitability for rainscreen cladding systems, says AIM – Acoustic & Insulation Manufacturing. Open state cavity barriers and full fill cavity barriers are crucial to fire safety within rainscreen cladding on medium and high-rise buildings.   Together they can achieve compartmentation within the void created by the rainscreen cladding. This then provides an effective barrier to the passage of hot smoke and fire behind the cladding system.   The OSCB is installed horizontally to permit free flowing ventilation through the cavity in a vertical plane and the wall cavity barrier is fitted vertically to complete compartment lines. AIM’s six OSCBs allow the ventilation necessary within the wall construction to prevent problems of condensation allowing free airflow and drainage with either a 25mm or 44mm air gap.  They can fill voids up to 425mm (or greater in particular circumstances).  In the event of a fire, heat activates the OSCBs intumescent strip which expands quickly to close the cavity fully.  They offer either a 60, 90 or 120-minute performance for both integrity and insulation confirmed by testing in accordance with ASFP Technical Guidance Document 19 and to the general principles of BS EN 1363-1:2020. For use in cavity voids up to 600mm AIM’s new Wall Cavity Barrier (Red Edition) range is available cut to size or in slab form.  Available in three thicknesses, 75mm, 100mm and 125mm, they prevent the passage of heat, flame and smoke within the cavity for 30, 60 or 120-minute fire rating periods tested to BS EN 1366-4:2021.  This rating makes these wall cavity barriers suitable for medium to high rise buildings.  Both the AIM OSCB and Wall Cavity Barrier (Red Edition) products have third party certification issued by IFC Certification Ltd. “The wide scope of test evidence we now have for the use of our OSCB and Wall Cavity Barrier (Red Edition) ranges gives us a compelling fire barrier package for rainscreen cladding,” explains Ian Exall, AIM’s commercial director.  “With new technical literature covering the use of these two products together to achieve compartmentation in external cladding, we aim to make specification and installation more straightforward for specifiers, system providers and installers.” “We look forward to making further product development and testing announcements during the next few months.” AIM’s OSCBs and Wall Cavity Barrier (Red Edition) ranges are suitable for both new build rainscreen projects and remediation work. AIM provides technical, specification, training and on-site support.  New Wall Cavity Barrier (Red Edition) and OSCB technical literature can be downloaded at: https://www.aimlimited.co.uk/cladding/ Part of the Performance Technology Group, UK-based AIM – Acoustic & Insulation Manufacturing has over 30 years of experience in the design, testing and manufacturing of high-quality fire, thermal and acoustic barriers.  The company produces a wide variety of bespoke insulation products to customer specification and a range of standard products.  www.aimlimited.co.uk Building, Design & Construction Magazine | The Choice of Industry Professionals

A comprehensively revised Code of Practice for the selection of building hardware for fire-resisting and escape door assemblies and doorsets has been published by The Guild of Architectural Ironmongers (GAI) and the Door & Hardware Federation (DHF).  This new edition, issue No. 5, is the first revision in more than a decade, and represents a significant update and consolidation of previous guidelines to reflect the very latest legislative requirements and best practices in the industry.  It provides an essential reference and resource for a broad spectrum of construction industry professionals including architects, building control officers, fire officers, responsible persons, duty holders, manufacturers, specifiers, and suppliers of building hardware and fire doors.  GAI technical manager Douglas Masterson said: “The primary goal of this Code of Practice is to ensure that key stakeholders throughout the construction industry have access to the most current and comprehensive advice on selecting hardware that meets the stringent requirements for fire safety and escape routes.  “While the Code is advisory, it is designed to provide robust guidance that aligns with the latest legal standards.  “While compliance with the Code does not confer immunity from legal, local authority or insurance requirements, it will significantly enhance the safety and reliability of fire-resisting and escape door assemblies.”  The Code addresses a wide range of legislative requirements, including: •             Construction Products Regulations in both the EU and UK. •             Building Regulations throughout the UK and Ireland, including the Building Regulations 2010 (England & Wales), Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004, Building Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012, and Building Regulations 1997-2021 (Ireland). •             Workplace Fire Safety Legislation across the UK and Ireland, such as the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. •             Equality Legislation applicable in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland.  Additionally, the Code considers third-party certification schemes and declarations of conformity with relevant standards, ensuring that the guidance provided is both comprehensive and up to date.  The Code applies to building hardware used on timber fire doors with up to two hours of fire resistance and steel fire doors with up to four hours of fire resistance.  The hardware items covered are categorised into essential items necessary for the successful operation of the doors (such as pivots and hinges, door closing devices, latch or locks, intumescent and smoke seals, and panic bolts), and optional (non-essential) items that could potentially cause door failure if not properly selected or installed.   As a part of this revision there are several new sections relating to electric locking and access control, which are of increasing importance in the world of building hardware. Issue 5 of the Code replaces the previous issue 4, as well as all previous codes of practice published by both the Association of Building Hardware Manufacturers (now DHF) and the Guild of Architectural Ironmongers, all of which have been withdrawn to ensure that professionals are working with the most current and relevant information.  DHF general manager Michael Skelding said: “This revision is the result of more than two years work by the teams at the DHF and GAI in conjunction with technical specialists at the leading companies in our industry.  “The result should be seen as an essential reference document for anyone involved in the selection, installation and testing of building hardware and furniture for fire and escape doors.”  Code of Practice: Hardware for Fire and Escape Doors edition 5 can be downloaded for free at www.firecode.org.uk Building, Design & Construction Magazine | The Choice of Industry Professionals

In a world where architectural beauty often steals the spotlight, the grim reality of fire safety lurks in the shadows—especially in high-rise buildings. The spectre of Grenfell continues to loom large, urging us to reassess our priorities when it comes to safeguarding lives. We have delved into the timeline of what regulatory changes have been made and what still needs to be done, to try to prevent tragedies like this from being repeated. Regulatory Changes Post Grenfell Shortly after the seven-year anniversary of the Grenfell fire tragedy, which claimed 72 lives, came the alarming news of a tower block in East London that caught fire over the August bank holiday weekend, also due to non-compliant cladding. Thankfully, no lives were lost in this incident, but homes were destroyed and cherished possessions lost. While the building was in the process of removing the unsafe cladding, we must ask: is enough being done quickly enough to address cladding safety issues? This has led us to examine the timeline of regulatory changes aimed at preventing such tragedies. It’s important to note that cladding itself isn’t inherently dangerous. It serves as a protective layer, providing thermal insulation, weather resistance and aesthetic enhancement. However, we must ensure that materials are safe to use for these purposes. The Tragedy of Grenfell in 2017 Several factors led to the catastrophic outcome of the fire, but three key considerations are essential for any retrofitting cladding or facade project: the choice of cladding material, the risk of fire spread and the adequacy of fire safety measures. In the case of Grenfell Tower, the use of aluminium composite material (ACM) panels with a highly flammable polyethylene core posed a significant risk. Compounding the issue was that the cavity barriers that were designed to prevent fire spread in the ventilation gaps were either ineffective or poorly installed. Furthermore, the building was severely lacking in fire suppression systems, with no sprinklers and only a single escape route, creating a perfect storm for disaster. Immediately Post Grenfell In 2018, Dame Judith Hackitt urgently reviewed fire safety and building regulations, resulting in the discontinuation of desktop studies for evaluating fire protection. This left many practices in a dilemma about which products and combinations to specify. Common materials once deemed acceptable for taller buildings, such as certain cavity trays and timber decking for balconies, were no longer acceptable due to combustibility. This created a significant gap in the industry as manufacturers struggled to meet the demand for safe alternatives. Additionally, many building materials needed retesting, causing further delays in the availability of compliant products for taller structures. The Introduction of the Building Safety Act In July 2020, the UK Parliament enacted the Building Safety Act, which came into effect in April 2022. This legislation promised to clarify building standards and enhance the competence of those overseeing higher-risk buildings. In 2023, a “higher-risk building” was  then defined as any structure of 18 meters (or seven stories) high, containing two or more residential units. This definition was updated to exclude care homes, refurbishments, hospitals, and hotels. Additionally, the act introduced three ‘Gateways’ that must be navigated from the initial planning phase through construction and post-occupation. For a building to be registered with the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) for process through to occupation, the industry must meet specific criteria at each Gateway. The Golden Thread Gateway 1 – covers the design stage and has been in effect since August 2021. During this phase, the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) reviews planning applications and base project information, to ensure that building designs adequately address fire safety concerns before granting planning permission. Gateway 2 – pertains to the preconstruction stage, with a 12-week determination period that began in October 2023. No construction can commence until the BSR approves the building control application and confirms that the design complies with building regulations. Gateway 3 – focuses on occupancy and came into effect in October 2023, featuring an 8-week determination period. A building cannot be occupied until the BSR assesses the overall construction and ensures it meets regulatory standards, culminating in the issuance of a completion certificate. These Gateways have introduced a new role for the BSR, which now decides on building applications, replacing local building control and approved inspectors. An accountable person, such as the building owner, freeholder, or management company must continuously evaluate safety risks and provide a ‘Safe Case Report’ that outlines how these risks are managed. The determination periods for Gateways 2 and 3 are shaping the construction industry, as the law is enforced, and companies adapt to enhance resilience and compliance. Effects of the introduction of the BSR As a result, there have knock-on effects on the industry. Cindy Cane, Senior Fire Safety Consultant at ORSA, an independent compliance consultancy specialising in all matters relating to health, safety, fire and the environment comments, “delays through process changes bring about cost increases and lessening interest by contractors to tender for such works.” Cindy also comments that concerningly, any delays in remediation also have yet more repercussions on the building’s residents and adds that owners of units in high-risk buildings face higher insurance costs and a scarcity of insurance companies offering to cover leaseholders. They also face difficulty selling units with unsafe cladding and longer periods of increased leasehold costs, that may include interim fire safety actions such waking watch patrols and additional detection and fire alarms. BSR Future Plans The BSR is actively addressing noncompliant cladding, having already assessed 40% of occupied high-risk buildings. When recladding is necessary, the goal is to closely replicate the original facade design and colours to secure planning permission. Typically, improvements in thermal performance and fire protection accompany these efforts. Performance indicators are continuously reviewed to determine any additional actions or guidance needed for stairs and ramps, emergency egress for disabled access and automatic water fire suppression systems. The recent Autumn Budget has promised to improve ‘building safety and accelerating remediation of unsafe housing in response to Grenfell Tower fire’ with over £1