Design & Technical Support
Resolve the site condition before it becomes a handover argument.
Overview
Passive-fire problems become expensive when the drawing, the tested or assessed system, the product information and the actual site condition stop matching. We sort that out before it is built. You send us the detail and photographs of the actual condition; we tell you what the difference is, whether the evidence still covers it, and what has to happen if it does not — while it is still cheap to fix.
When the site does not match the detail
The most common passive-fire problem is not a missing product. It is a detail that was correct on paper meeting a building that is not quite what the paper said. The wall turns out to be lightweight where the detail assumed masonry. The opening is larger than the tested arrangement. A service was added after the detail was chosen. The steel member is a different section. The frame was replaced at some point and nobody recorded it.
None of that is unusual and none of it is a disaster, provided it is identified before the work is covered up. What causes the expensive version is a mismatch that gets built anyway and is found at handover, when the surrounding construction is finished and the person who chose the detail has left the project.
Send us the detail you are working to, photographs of the actual condition in context, and whatever dimensions and material information you already have. We will tell you what the difference is, whether the test reports still cover it, and — where it does not — exactly what has to be resolved and by whom.
- The tested detail does not match the wall, floor, opening, steel member or duct in front of you — We identify the difference and tell you whether the evidence still covers it
- A contractor wants to substitute a product or system — We compare the proposed system against the specified one on the evidence, not on a datasheet claim
- Services have changed since the detail was chosen — We reassess the detail against the configuration that is actually going in
- A defect will not close with the original detail — We work out why, and what will close it
- Nobody is sure whose decision it is — We tell you which decision is missing and who has to make it, so it can be chased rather than argued about later
Input before construction starts
The cheapest passive-fire problem is the one resolved on a drawing. Once services are installed, ceilings closed and walls lined, the same problem costs several times more and usually arrives attached to a programme delay.
Early review is most useful when the service configuration, substrate, structural member, access route or intended system is already known — typically at detailed design, during shop drawing review, or before the first services penetrate a fire-rated element. Bring us the drawings, the specification and the systems you intend to use, and we will identify the interfaces likely to cause trouble, the conditions where the evidence will need checking, and the sequencing decisions that are easier to make now than later.
This is contractor-side buildability review: whether the detail as drawn can actually be built in the building as it exists, with the services routed the way they are going to be routed. It is the cheapest hour anyone spends on a passive fire package.
The evidence pack we want first
- The project drawing, detail or specification that creates the requirement.
- The tested or assessed system or report reference already being relied on, if one exists.
- Clear site photographs showing the condition in context.
- Dimensions and material, service or member information where already known.
- The exact question or mismatch that needs resolving.
- The project stage: design, pre-construction, installation, inspection, rectification or handover.
- The person or project role who needs the answer, and any approval workflow already nominated.
You get a straight answer, or the reason there is not one yet
Where the evidence supports the condition, we say so and you can build it. Where it does not, we tell you that too — and what would resolve it, and who has to resolve it. What you will not get is a confident sentence invented to close the conversation, because that is the one that costs money at handover.
Questions
Frequently asked questions
- Can you review a detail before we build it?
- Yes, and it is the cheapest point to involve us. Early review works best once the service configuration, substrate, structural member, access or intended system is known — detailed design, shop drawing review, or before the first service goes through a rated element.
- Can you approve a product substitution?
- Not from a marketing claim — but send us both systems and we will assess the proposed one against the project requirement and the evidence for your actual configuration, and tell you whether it stands up.
- What if no tested detail exactly matches the site?
- That happens often. We document the difference precisely and take it to the manufacturer, assessor or engineer who can resolve it — rather than inventing a field solution that nobody will stand behind.
- Do you provide engineering assessments?
- We identify and document the condition, assemble the evidence the assessment needs, and run it with the assessor — so the review starts with a complete package instead of a round of questions.
Drawings, photos or a defect report in front of you?
Send what you already have. We will tell you what else is needed before the work can be reviewed, priced or booked for site inspection.