Contents Subscribe Ad Index
globalinsulation
insulationMAGAZINE
Stephen Long European Manufacturers of Expanded Polystyrene, EUMEPS
A burning issue – changing perspectives on the
fire performance of buildings
EUMEPS, the European Manufacturers of Expanded Polystyrene, is a European organisation
representing the concerns and requirements of National Associations of manufacturers of EPS.1 In
this paper it describes the fire performance of EPS, one of the world’s foremost insulation products.
H eating and cooling of buildings accounts for more
than 25% of the total energy demand in Europe.
As increasing legislative and environmental pressure
dictate increased energy efficiency and associated
greenhouse gas emission reduction, the importance of
effective insulation in building also increases. Just as we
could not imagine a new building today without a high
level of thermal insulation and other energy efficient
measures, we should apply the same focus to fire per-
formance. Full understanding of fire performance and
best practices for design and installation of insulation
are essential to ensure that we use the best insulation
materials with a minimal fire risk to the building. Inter-
estingly, energy efficiency and low fire risk in buildings
converge in the need for careful design and construc-
tion with many parallel requirements. As we concen-
trate on energy performance, we should simultaneously
ensure that better insulated construction doesn’t affect
Below: fire safety of the building. The subject of fire perform-
of a fire, showing
ance of a building is complex; however there are several
temperature as a common themes which can be highlighted.
Insulation fills the space inside structures and so is
not the primary material exposed to flame in a prop-
28 globalinsulation
globalinsulationMAGAZINEMay 2008
erly designed building. In addition, insulation material
is generally very light and has a relatively low calorific
value. (e.g. insulation amounts to less than 10% of the
total calorific value of a roof structure). “Inflamma-
ble”, as applied to building materials, is a relative term:
everything burns above 1000°C, even concrete. Steel
structures collapse at temperatures between 450°C and
600°C. The overall fire risk of a building depends upon
the combination of materials and the construction.
Only an integrated assessment of design, structural
details and site construction techniques can ensure fire
safety for both occupants and developers. Correct de-
sign and construction is needed in order to simultane-
ously optimise both insulation and fire performance.
Structural measures which really help prevent fire dam-
age include effective compartmentalisation and service-
able fire doors.
The European legislation agrees that testing and test
methods used to assess the fire performance suitability
of insulation materials for buildings should evolve to-
wards ‘in end use condition’. This ensures a much more
representative assessment than testing on the naked
product by itself. We need to ensure that key influencers
for insulation materials (e.g. architects, insurers, fire
services) are aware of these changes and understand
the implications for fire safety.
This paper discusses the factors involved in a fire,
the role of insulation materials, in particular EPS,
and the legislation and testing which govern their
use. The paper starts by looking at the key stages
in fire development before concentrating on cur-
rent determination methods for building fire risk. It
concludes that, in a well designed and constructed
building, insulation materials of all compositions
have a negligible contribution to fire safety.
Stages of a fire2
In a building in everyday use there is a natural bal-
ance between flammable materials and oxygen in
the environment. At the initial stage of a fire, ig-
nition energy comes into contact with a flamma-
ble material. Above a temperature of about 200°C
the material will give off flammable gases which

will burn, either due to the
original ignition energy or
spontaneously. In the case
of gas this can lead directly
to flames, whereas with
solids (such as furniture)
they first become glow-
ing ignition sources. In the
first stage of the fire there is
a gradual build up in heat
energy in the form of com-
bustible gases. The temper-
ature is still relatively low
and the fire is localised. The
temperature can suddenly
increase significantly and
spread all over the compart-
ment of the building due to
‘flashover’.
After flashover the
chances of rescuing people
and equipment are greatly
reduced. The fire will spread throughout the building
and will eventually self-extinguish due to the lack of fur-
ther combustible materials. A rapid local burnout (e.g.
through a skylight) can therefore be beneficial to the
further development of the fire, as heat and smoke are
removed from the fire zone through these openings.
Fire behaviour of EPS
In common with most organic building materials, EPS
foam is combustible. When burning, EPS behaves like
other hydrocarbons and gives off combustion products
of carbon dioxide, water and carbon. At temperature
above 100°C EPS begins to soften, contract and finally
melts. At higher temperatures gaseous combustible
products are formed by decomposition of the melt.
Combustible gases are only formed at temperatures
above 350°C. The inherent burning properties depend
upon whether the EPS contains a fire retardant addi-
tive or not. The presence of fire retardant additives leads
to a better fire behaviour. The fire retardant ‘SE’ (self
extinguishing) grades are more difficult to ignite and
considerably reduce the rate of spread of flame during a
fire. The additives cause flame quenching, so that when
the ignition source is removed the EPS will not continue
to burn. Molten EPSSE will not be ignited by welding
sparks, glowing cigarettes or small burning items. In the
presence of large ignition sources, from fires involving
other materials, EPSSE will eventually burn. In such
instances the building is usually beyond the point of
rescue.
Plastic insulation used to be associated with in-
creased fire risk. This was caused by fires in large ag-
ricultural buildings where nonfire retardant insulation
was used unprotected. In practice, EPS burning be-
haviour depends upon the conditions under which it
is used. It is recommended by the industry that EPS is
used with a protective material facing or behind brick,
concrete, gypsum, etc.
Flammable insulation products, such as EPS, have
globalinsulation
insulationMAGAZINE
a reduced ignition risk and cause of fire spread if they
contain fire retarding additives. However, the best way
to avoid fire spread is by appropriate protection of the
insulation from any ignition source. Any insulation
material should not be used unprotected, not only for
fire performance but also for mechanical and long-term
insulation properties.
Heat release
Compared to other insulation materials, EPS has a lower
calorific value per unit of thermal insulation.3 However,
the calorific value of EPS (40MJ/kg) is about twice that
of timber (18.6MJ/kg). However, as for many insulation
materials, the mass of EPS is low (98% air to 2% poly-
styrene) and so the amount of heat release is also low
in the event of a fire. In general, the heat content and
potential heat release of other building materials is far
more significant than that of insulation in determining
the fire risk. Insulation has low density and a low rela-
tive calorific value: in a typical composite roof the insu-
lation material amounts to only about 10% of the total
calorific value4 and the differences between various in-
sulation materials are small. Most important however in
the majority of cases is not the static fire load of the ba-
sic structure but the variable fire load, i.e. the contents
of the building. In most cases the variable far outweighs
that of the static fire load and further reduces the sig-
nificance of the insulation material.
Since the insulation material fills the space inside
structures and is protected, it is not the material exposed
to the flames and the heat. The heat release of insulation
materials in the event of fire is dependent upon the con-
struction of the building (ventilation, presence of other
materials, degree of compartmentalisation, etc.). With-
in a building the calorific value of the contents usually
outweighs that of the structural components.
Smoke
Smoke is an important factor in fire. High density smoke
will inhibit the search for exits and hence increase the
globalinsulation
globalinsulationMAGAZINEMay 2008 29
globalinsulation
insulationMAGAZINE
risk to occupants. Smoke
fumes are toxic in gen-
eral and have low oxygen
content, whilst soot par-
ticles can adversely affect
breathing. In actual fires
where much smoke has
been generated, it has of-
ten been claimed that it
originated from burning
EPS insulation. In some
cases this claim was even made for fires in buildings
containing no such insulation! In fact, especially after
the first short phase of the fire, most smoke originates
from the content of the building such as paper and fur-
niture or other construction materials such as burning
wood. Exact prediction of smoke-producing potential
is difficult due to the wide range of conditions found
Above: EPS within actual fires. Effective surface protection will re-
burning
behaviour, strict flaming and therefore the production of smoke.
showing the However, whereas plastics in a flaming fire can produce
spread of flame more smoke from a given mass than many other mate-
over the course of
rials it is used at very low densities in insulation. EPS,
time.
when used correctly, does not lead to an increased risk
of smoke density.
Whereas plastic-based insulation, such as EPS, can
produce more smoke from a given mass than many
other materials in a flaming fire, it is used at much lower
densities. When used correctly EPS does not lead to an
increased risk of smoke density.
Flame spread
Flame spread is a process of progressive ignition along a
continuous surface. The extent and rate of flame spread
depends largely upon the ignitability of and the rate
of heat release from a construction material. By using
insulation materials only behind protective coatings,
bricks, concrete or renders, the risk of flame spread is
determined by the heat transfer, integrity of the protec-
tion and the ventilation. For example, in a cavity wall
insulated with EPSSE, flame spread is unlikely due to a
lack of circulation of air. The extent of the involvement
of any insulation is dependent on the failure pattern of
the protective coatings. With good design and careful
construction, the rate at which the insulation contrib-
utes heat, smoke and fumes to the fire can be effectively
reduced and the time to involvement delayed.
EPS is protected from fire by surrounding materials
and will only ignite when the whole of the building is
ablaze. In these cases EPS, and other insulation materi-
als, will not contribute to the propagation of the fire and
the building is already beyond the point of rescue.
Toxicity
It is difficult to predict actual fire behaviour from small-
scale tests. However, by combining an assessment of the
thermal decomposition products with their biological
effects allows an estimation of the likely effects. Exten-
sive test have been carried out in accordance with DIN
53436.5 These demonstrate that smoke fumes from EPS
are less toxic than those from natural products such as
30 globalinsulationMAGAZINEMay 2008
chipboard, expanded cork, rubber, etc. EPS performs
well due to the extremely low density and light weight
of EPS insulation. In an EPS fire, styrene can be released
in small concentrations but will be further decomposed
to carbon dioxide and water. Carbon monoxide, which
is released at much higher concentrations from natural
products, is a greater toxicity risk.
A study carried out by the Swedish SP Fire Institute
in 2003 looked at 25 different building materials, includ-
ing the most common insulation materials.6 The conclu-
sion of this investigation was that isocyanate is the most
dangerous gas produced. As an industry, we have to be
open in interpreting such findings; otherwise it can be
detrimental to the industry as a whole. It is clear that we
need to be transparent about the risks of our materials
but we need to be objective in the way we interpret the
results and minimise risk. Finger pointing does not help
the important role we play in ensuring energy efficient,
fire safe buildings.
The toxicity of combustion products of insulation
materials needs to be seen in the context of that from all
building components. In this respect, we can have con-
fidence that properly installed insulation should not be
considered a significant contributor to overall toxicity
risk in the case of a fire.
Plastic insulation materials are flammable. However,
this is only relevant if assessment is made as an exposed
insulating material. Fortunately, the fire safety philoso-
phy in Europe has been developed on the basis of as-
sessing structures or products ‘in end use conditions’.
There are performance requirements in relation to the
complete building element and not only relating to fire
risk. Insulation should optimally be protected by a fac-
ing. When used in this way, any insulation material does
not present an undue fire hazard or lead to an increased
smoke density or toxicity risk.
The overriding evidence from the available data in-
dicates that in a well designed and constructed build-
ing, insulation materials have a negligible contribution
to fire safety.
Why use EPS Insulation?
Fire performance of insulation is a key factor but it is
far from the only reason why a certain insulating mate-
rial is chosen. It is worth reminding ourselves why EPS
has such a well respected and long history. The key at-
tributes of EPS are tabulated in Table 1.7-13
The importance of industry unity
It is now well recognised that in order to meet the in-
creasing desire for energy efficient buildings, we need to
 globalinsulation
insulationMAGAZINE
optimise the long term insulation properties. However, Requirements have yet to be scoped out. ER3, ‘Hygiene
we need to keep this in the front of the decision makers’ and health in the environment’, is in the early phase but
minds. This is the continuing focus of the efforts of the could have a considerable impact on insulation materi-
combined insulation industry associations in Europe: als in the future.
the European Insulation Platform.14 This comprises In addition to these ‘vertical standards’ a series of
BING, EURIMA, EXIBA15 and EUMEPS. The political supporting standards were developed, the relevant test
lobbying is currently targeting four main areas: methods or socalled ‘horizontal’ standards, set up to de-
1. The ambitious implementation of the EU’s Energy termine product properties such as ‘Reaction to Fire.’ It
Performance in Buildings Directive; is important to note that the European legislation deter-
2. For public buildings to lead by example; mines the testing method but individual countries can
3. Appropriate financial support mechanisms to enable decide upon the level requirement for differing building
the upgrading of energy efficiency in buildings; structures.
4. Adoption of a clear strategy for passive houses. The primary purpose of fire protection, and the
There is a strong case to extend such concerted, joint main concern of the local authorities and fire services,
industry activity to that of fire safety and the first moves is to protect people from the effects of fire and to enable
in this direction are happening in agreeing appropriate them to escape safely should it occur. The main danger
fire testing. for people in the early stages of a fire is from smoke and
fumes. The principles of fire protection are:
The construction products directive and fire • To provide a means of timely escape for people;
testing • To protect the structure from collapse;
In order to couple the use of the best materials for en- • To limit the spread of fire;
ergy conservation and fire safety a fresh look at the ba- • To provide access and safety for fire fighters.
sic requirements and how this is being assessed today is Historically, national authorities have introduced build-
needed. Happily, industry ing regulations, stand-
and political consensus EPS attribute ards and authorisation
is being reached for ap- Excellent thermal insulation performance to weight ratio procedures with which
propriate standardisation Light, rigid engineers must com-
of performance testing of ply when designing and
Not toxic
building insulation mate- erecting buildings. From
Easily cut into shape
rials, working on a princi- an insurer’s perspective,
ple of performance testing Good balance of mechanical properties the primary driver is
rather than prescriptive Good acoustic properties to contain the fire, thus
measures. Seismic resistance minimising the damage
In order to harmonise not susceptible to water/mould growth and subsequent financial
and ensure a free trade in claim whilst optimising
Resistant to insects and rodents
the EU for building prod- insurance premiums. In-
Properties maintained over building lifetime
ucts, the European Com- surers have introduced
mission introduced the Recyclable their own tests in order
Construction Products Favourable life cycle analysis to cover these interests.
Directive (CPD/89/106/ Their needs and those of
EC). This directive contains general rules for the con- the fire services and national authorities are not always
struction industry and covers standards, authorisation compatible and make the fire testing requirements com-
procedures, attestation of conformity, certification cen- plicated and costly.
tres, the permanent committee for construction, etc. The various existing systems of performance in case
The European Commission included six interpretative of fire were replaced by a system of ‘Euroclasses’ (ER2),
documents in the CPD, relating to the six Essential Re- consisting of a classification system and a series of test
quirements (ERs): methods, of which the single burning item test (SBI)
1. Mechanical resistance and stability; simulates the development of fire in a garbage bin in the
2. Safety in case of a fire; corner of a room. In future, in all EU countries, perform-
3. Hygiene, health in the environment; ance will be assessed in ‘end use application’. By testing
4. Safety in use; under ‘end use condition’ the anomalies that can arise
5. Protection against noise; by assessing materials independently are minimised.
6. Energy economy and heat retention. However, every fire is different and so testing can only
For a range of building products CEN (Committée Eu- simulate real situations. By opting for severe test condi-
ropeénne de Normalisation) was asked to prepare prod- tions the confidence level that a given structure is safe is
uct standards. The common insulation materials are optimised. The pitfall for assessment of fire behaviour in
specified by a series of harmonised product standards ‘end use condition’ is that the number of possible con-
EN 1316213167 (for EPS: EN 13163). In these product structions to be tested could become unmanageable.
standards the way in which the properties related to the Significant progress towards a solution for this prob-
six essential requirements must be determined is speci- lem has been made this year in the ‘Insulation Products’
fied. We should also be aware that some of the Essential Technical Committee 88. This now specifies defined

globalinsulation
globalinsulationMAGAZINEMay 2008 31
globalinsulation
insulationMAGAZINE
mounting and fixing tors, notably the appropriate design and construction.
for end use condition EUMEPS and the insulation industry in general have to
fire testing of insulation help educate about the appropriate design and construc-
products in the new An- tion, to ensure use of all the benefits of the insulation
nex F and is agreed for material without risk and at an acceptable cost. To opti-
all insulation materials. mise the overall building properties we need to use the
Formal incorporation best materials where insulation is required and use the
of this amendment into appropriate design and construction techniques to as-
the CEN Product Stand- sure the structure, in order to ensure maximum energy
ards will take about two efficiency and fire performance. These properties can be
years. By establishing used to the optimum in a well designed building, which
standard structures for includes the following features for preventing the spread
testing of insulation the of fire and protecting insulation elements:
industry can rational- • Interconnection of cavities, or of cavities and rooms,
ise further the amount must be prevented;
of costly testing and the • Smoke and flame must be prevented from bypassing
result will be more con- fire-resistant elements;
sistent comparisons of • Individual cavities or voids should not exceed certain
building structures for dimensions;
performance. • Imperfections of fit between building elements in-
A EUMEPS SBI test- tended to resist fire, and openings within separat-
ing programme was ing elements and cavity barriers, must all be fire
published in 2004.16 stopped;
This illustrated the im- • Insulation materials should be protected.
portance of mounting
and fixing conditions on Summary
EPS specimens in the SBI EPS, or any plastic based insulation material, used cor-
apparatus and hence the need for the standardised re- rectly is not a fire risk.19 Major, well publicised fires that
Above: EPS quirements. More recent independent EUMEPS testing in the first instance have been attributed to EPS have
burning
behaviour on a this year has taken place in line with the new Annex F later been shown to be independent of the insulation.
large scale. agreement for ‘defined end use condition’ testing. This Amongst these are the Sun Valley (1993)20 and Leiden
has confirmed the excellent performance of EPS insula- (2005)21 fires.
tion in steel and gypsum structures. The classification of There is no scientifically validated data about the re-
Bs1d0 is identical to the same build up with other insu- lationship between EPS, the risk of fire and the extent
lation products, including mineral wool or foamglass.17 of fire damage. Numerous fires, largely initiated in the
There has been in the past much discussion amongst roof, have been investigated by TNO and BDA in the
the technical experts about the appropriate fire tests for Netherlands since 2001. Particular emphasis was placed
building materials.18 The newly agreed standard mount- on the role played by insulation material in causing the
ing and fixing in Annex F should put an end to much of fires in question and the extent to which insulation ma-
this debate and allow the industry to focus on meeting terial may have helped the fires to spread. The data base
the market need for safe, environmentally-sound build- continues to be built. This research reveals that there is
ings. In addition, we could argue that the insistence by no correlation between the use of EPS and the most se-
insurers for their own test methods for fire perform- vere fire damage. In fact, no fire has been publicly attrib-
ance of insulation materials is counter to the intent of uted to plastic materials in general, in Europe, during
the Construction Products Directive for free trade of the recent period.22
construction products. The political process has agreed The good news is that the incidence and severity of
testing conditions suitable for testing fire behaviour and fires in terms of loss of life and cost of damage is de-
no further tests should be required. creasing in most developed countries.23 The challenge
If these properly designed testing and fire engineer- we have today as an industry is to maintain this momen-
ing methods are used to assess fire safety of construc- tum and extend it globally whilst we also address the
tions and buildings, it can be reliably demonstrated pressing needs for energy efficiency in buildings. We in
that there is no fire risk caused by the insulation used. EUMEPS believe that the use of plastic insulation ma-
With these methods, related to end use conditions, it is terials, in particular EPS, is compatible with fire safety
possible to help to gain confidence amongst architects, in buildings. The facts are there, we have to extend the
insurers, local authorities and fire services and to give message and belief to those responsible for the specifica-
positive perspectives about insulation fire risk. tion, design, construction and care of our buildings.

Building design considerations References

Fires do not start with the insulation material, so the 1 For more information please consult http://www.
influence of insulation materials upon the overall fire eumeps.org.
performance of building depends upon other fac- 2. International Standardisation Organisation (ISO),

32 globalinsulationMAGAZINEMay 2008
 globalinsulation
insulationMAGAZINE
Technical Report 91221.
3. F H Prager, ‘Research into the causes of fire’, Cellular
Polymers, 203, 2001.
4. Source from BDA concerning roof structures, http://
www.bda.nl.
5. Further details available from EUMEPS, ‘Behaviour
of EPS in case of fire’, August 2002.
6. Swedish National Testing and Research Institute, ‘Par-
ticles and Isocyanates from Fires’, SP Report, 2003.
7. G A Athanasopoulos, ‘Use of EPS compressible inclu-
sions for the structural isolation against seismic (as well
as static) lateral earth pressures”, University of Patras,
Greece, 2005.
8. ‘Flood resilient homes – what homeowners can do to
reduce flood damage’, Association of British Insurers.
9. ‘Insulation for sustainability – a guide’ XCO2 Conis-
bee for BING.
10. ‘Repetitive loads on flat roofs: An improved meth-
od to predict potential future damage’, BING, October
2005.
11. 2004 revision of the EU Packaging Wastes Directive
94/62/EC.
12. ‘The green guide for housing specification’, Building
Research Establishment, 2000.
13 ‘Study on external environmental eEffects related to
the life cycle of products and services’, Austrian Institut
fuer Baubiologie und Oekologie (IBO), 2005; European
Commission, BIO Intelligence Service, February 2003;
GUA Energy Savings by Plastics Insulation January
2006.
14. ‘Tackling climate change: why demand side meas-
ures supply truly costeffective solutions’, EIP, 2007.
15. http://www.bing.org; http://www.eurima.ord; http://
www.exiba.org.
16. ‘SBI testing programme – mounting and fixing of
EPS boards’, EUMEPS – 24 February 2004.
17. EPS FR+steel certified Bs1d0; EPS FR+9.5mm gyp-
sum certified Bs1d0.
18. ‘Summary of the fire testing methods and evidence
appropriate to buildings incorporating insulated panels’,
IACSC, September 2003. International Fire Consult-
ants Ltd; ‘Are fire tests for insulating panels adequate’,”
June 2006; ‘Current state of European standards on rigid
polyurethane foams in the construction industry. Tech-
nical information No.10/2001’, Bayer, September 2001.
19. To gain a better overview of the ‘Behaviour of EPS
in case of fire”, a downloadable leaflet of the same name
is available from the EUMEPS website: http://www.
eumeps.org.
20. ‘Sun Valley fire – revisited’, International Fire Con-
sultants, http://www.epsconstructiongroup.co.uk
21. Stybenex, factsheet 4 – http://www.stybenex.nl
22. PlasticsEurope
23. World Fire Statistics Centre also known as Geneva
Association, http://www.genevaassociation.org.

globalinsulation
globalinsulationMAGAZINEMay 2008 33