Gateway 2 lessons: Preparing construction projects for Gateway 3 success

by Breaking NewsBuilding ManagementBuilding ManagementConstructionConstructionFire EngineeringFire SuppressionIFSJ ExclusivesInspectionPassive

Quelfire shares expert insights into the key lessons from Gateway 2, highlighting common compliance challenges and how construction teams can prepare for Gateway 3

In many ways, Gateway 2 has become the new normal. It’s already changing the industry for the better, especially for teams that genuinely want to get things right. That said, the industry isn’t fully there yet.

Some still hold the mindset of “we’ve always done it this way” and approach the Gateway regime as something they have to do, rather than as something that can make a real difference in how we design and construct buildings.

From our perspective at Quelfire, it’s a much-needed change that is pushing the industry toward better decisions and safer buildings – which can only be good things, surely? In early applications, Ishfaq was surprised by the disconnect between the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) teams and the construction industry.

He highlighted that there seemed to be no established process; some BSR teams used staged applications, while others required full submissions.

Some submissions completed in early Stages 3/4 with no contractor details were approved in 12 weeks, whereas other T1 contractors, for instance, provided thorough information on specific parts of the build and waited about 9 months for approval.

Ultimately, this suggests that the BSR was still very much working out its processes during this stage. Because the introduction of the Gateways was such a significant change for the industry, the focus has naturally been on the first stop-and-go gateway, Gateway 2.

However, as the built environment transitions beyond this, the next unknown is Gateway 3, which introduces a new level of uncertainty. Ishfaq raised concerns about potential delays from Gateway 3, especially given the delays experienced with the second Gateway.

He believes it hasn’t been “road tested enough yet” to know what it will entail; the industry is still waiting for feedback.

Where are construction projects still falling short at Gateway 2?

Typically, R5 Consultants will distribute their project schedule to key parties, ready for submission at Gateway 2.

However, upon receiving the completed schedule, the team often finds gaps in expectations and information, with each party often having different ideas about elements of the project.

Ishfaq said, “The challenge with firestopping is that it’s one of the few elements of construction that is genuinely collaborative. The architect will set their position of all these walls, the structural engineer will dictate what size the openings and letterboxes can be and then the M&E engineer needs to tell you what is actually passing through and where and then you can come to a resolution on what the firestopping needs to be.” What Ishfaq and his team are finding is that they’re getting pushback from consultants due to tight deadlines and rising costs, because they haven’t given enough time to Gateway requirements.

Furthermore, Whitty argued that contractors “can’t play the system anymore” and that part of the Gateway regime is about making concrete decisions and following them through on-site.

He said that hidden costs, along with having to redesign a project two or three times, slow development and cost a lot of money to resolve.

What does good Gateway 2 compliance actually look like?

The whole reason for the Building Safety Act 2022 and subsequent Gateways is to improve building safety and protect those in them. Early fire stopping engagement is the only way to ensure this, as it brings all key parties together at the design stage to discuss key deliverables and how they’ll be achieved.

It puts fire safety at the heart of every decision, ensuring the project is designed and then built around available fire stopping tested solutions. Ishfaq said that when looking at the mechanics of what you’re going to submit, it is about design procurement alongside product and system procurement.

If contractors review the information and decide on deliverables, a systematic approach can be taken to articulate it to the regulator.

Further to this, Whitty stated that main contractors need to be clear about and commit to products and systems they want to see in the building. He also raised that you’ve got to make it easy for the regulator to say yes.

You’re taking the BSR on a journey – give examples, show the rationale behind the decisions. This also includes being in dialogue with your regulator spokesperson and finding out what’s required of you: ask the questions.

All panellists agreed that it is better for project teams to take their time at the design stage and focus on getting it right the first time. Multiple redesigns cost time and money, add project pressure and stress and ultimately slow the whole project down.

You might discover that the BSR will ask for additional information after submission. By putting in the effort beforehand, you give yourself an advantage.

Thorough design may take time upfront, but it pays off in the long run for business security and profitability. Not to mention it prioritises building safety!

How can construction teams start preparing for Gateway 3 now?

Both Whitty and Ishfaq agreed that contractors need to improve their QA process. Whitty also went on to say that it’s about the execution of what you set out to do. It’s about evidencing that what you have installed is as per what you submitted at Gateway 2.

You can’t leave it to the last minute to prove how your piling went in, for example, you’ve got to be thinking about all of these things from the get-go.

Ultimately, no one knows what Gateway 3 will fully entail, so if you’re not preparing for it, start now. Willmott Dixon is preparing for Gateway 3 by enhancing its pre-start procedures, working through key deliverables before construction even begins.

The team goes through what they are building, what they will be evidencing and how often and what good looks like. Whitty stated that having these early on-site conversations has been driving value in production and efficiency and that there is generally less conflict on site.

By working closely with supply chain partners, behaviours become apparent. Their willingness to collaborate, but also how they plan, prepare and deliver to make Gateway 3 more achievable.

Are construction projects ready for Gateway 3?

While the built environment’s focus has been on Gateway 2, it highlights one question: Are we ready for what comes next? Gateway 3 is currently the big unknown. The unknown can be scary, but especially for those unprepared.

“We’ll deal with it later” can no longer be an option, as evidence is crucial to demonstrating that what is built is what was designed for Gateway 2. That means thinking ahead now and applying all practices across all projects.

Because, at the end of the day, this is about whole building safety and protecting lives. And sticking to the agreed plan.

This article is based on Quelfire’s London Build 2025 panel discussion, titled Gateway 2: What We Know Now. Craig Wells, Sales Director at Quelfire, was joined by Graeme Whitty, National Product Director at Willmott Dixon and Nasar Ishfaq, Director, Architect and Principal Designer at R5 Consultants, to discuss Gateway 2 and what they have learned since its introduction. However, this article touches on why you should look beyond Gateway 2 to Gateway 3. It also explains how to prepare for it.

Is the safety of fire suppression systems considered in BESS hazards?

by Breaking NewsFire SuppressionFire SuppressionHealth and SafetyIFSJ ExclusivesUtilitiesWarehouse

In today’s era of large-scale energy storage deployment, fire safety is no longer simply a matter of “whether a fire can be extinguished.” When a lithium-ion battery goes into thermal runaway, it releases large quantities of flammable gases, including hydrogen, carbon monoxide and methane.

When these gases mix with air and accumulate within confined spaces such as BESS containers, they can reach explosive limits. Once that happens, any ignition source can trigger a violent explosion.

However, one risk that has long been overlooked is that the fire suppression product itself can become the ignition source for an explosion.

Conventional fire suppression systems can become ignition sources

Conventional fire suppression systems—such as gas systems, CO₂ extinguishers and FK-5112 systems—typically contain high-pressure vessels, solenoid actuators and electrical tubing.

In the event of flammable gas accumulation inside an energy storage enclosure, if these devices activate or malfunction, their internal electrical contacts, motor operation and high-pressure discharge can generate electrical arcs, high temperatures or mechanical sparks—potentially igniting the surrounding flammable gas atmosphere.

In other words, a fire suppression system without explosion-proof design can be more dangerous in an energy storage explosion scenario than the fire itself.

Are aerosol fire suppression systems suitable for hazardous BESS environments?

Aerosol fire suppression systems have become one of the commonly used fire protection solutions in BESS due to their non-pressurised design, simple installation and maintenance and environmental benefits. So, the question is: how do aerosol units perform in potentially explosive atmospheres?

If we look at the design standards for aerosol systems, not all aerosol products are automatically suitable for use in hazardous explosive areas:

EN 15276-2:2019—Fixed firefighting systems—Condensed aerosol extinguishing systems—Part 2: Design, installation and maintenance—Clause 4.3 explicitly states: Where aerosol generators are used in potentially explosive atmosphere, the compatibility of the generator to the atmosphere for the determined lifetime should be assessed according to ATEX directive 2014/34/EU[5].

ISO 15779:2011—Condensed aerosol fire extinguishing systems—Requirements and test methods for components and system design, installation and maintenance —General requirements—Clause 4.6 similarly states: Under certain conditions, the potential for explosive atmospheres may exist. Areas where such potential may exist are classified as hazardous. Condensed aerosols may be used in hazardous areas subject to the manufacturer obtaining the specific listings and approvals for such areas from the appropriate authorities.

Only when an aerosol unit has obtained the necessary approval for use in explosive atmospheres can it be installed in BESS. This is likely a design requirement that has been overlooked within the industry.

Explosion-proof fire suppression design is becoming critical for energy storage safety

Energy storage safety is a complete, multi-layered defense: it requires preventing thermal runaway, controlling flammable gas accumulation and—most critically—ensuring that the fire suppression equipment that activates under accident conditions is itself safe and reliable.

With their non-pressurised design, arc-free operation and modular construction, aerosol fire suppression systems—after obtaining explosion-proof certification—are a fire protection solution worth prioritising in energy storage applications.

Energy storage safety is no longer just about “whether the fire can be put out.” Under the most severe accident conditions, whether the fire suppression product itself remains safe and operational is what designers should consider most. An effective system design is one that strictly follows the fire suppression system’s design standards.

How aerial firefighting platforms improve access and control during complex fire incidents

by Breaking NewsFirefighting EquipmentIFSJ ExclusivesProductsVehicles

Bronto Skylift explains how aerial firefighting platforms support safer firefighter access, elevated suppression and improved operational control across urban, industrial and port environments

Fire and rescue services face incidents where restricted access and height can affect firefighter safety. Urban areas include tall buildings and façades that can be difficult to reach from ground level. Industrial sites, including ports and petrochemical facilities, add hazardous materials and restricted approach routes.

Their value is no longer defined only by height. A platform creates a safer operating position, places crews or monitors where they are needed and delivers extinguishing agents from a controlled location.

Why aerial firefighting platforms are designed for different operational risks

Fire risks vary between regions and operating environments. A municipal fire service in a dense city centre faces different demands from an emergency team protecting a refinery or port. The equipment must reflect those differences.

Truck-mounted aerial platforms have become an established option for fire departments because they combine extinguishing capacity with rescue capability. With vertical reach ranging from 28 to more than 100 metres and the ability to reach below ground level, they can be used across high-rise buildings and difficult access points.

Stefano Leporale, Fire & Rescue Director at Bronto Skylift, identifies versatility as the defining factor in urban response: “The urban landscape holds a multitude of structures requiring the utmost versatility from firefighting equipment. Versatility is the single most important benefit of an aerial platform.”

That versatility concerns configuration as well as movement. Pump capacity, water and foam systems, cage design and control options can be adapted to the risk the platform is expected to address.

Configuring aerial firefighting platforms for municipal and industrial response

Municipal and industrial firefighting place different technical demands on aerial equipment.

In municipal environments, platforms must support rescue and suppression at the same time. They need to be lighter and manoeuvrable, with the ability to work around confined streets and restricted access points. Integrated cage systems allow crews to work at height with their equipment, supporting rescue operations from a stable position.

In industrial environments, the main demand is often high-output suppression. Fires in petrochemical or oil and gas settings can involve hazardous materials and pressurised systems. These incidents require high water discharge capacity, foam application and the monitor positioned at a safe distance from heat or toxic atmospheres.

Industrial aerial platforms are often built with larger water and foam capacity and higher pump performance. In some industrial models, the rescue cage can be omitted in favour of water and foam towers, with powder systems added where the risk profile requires them.

How aerial firefighting platforms improve urban and industrial fire access

In a high-rise incident, internal access can be delayed, obstructed or unsafe. An aerial platform gives crews an external route to the working area and allows firefighting or rescue tasks to be carried out from a controlled elevated position.

The cage is central to municipal use. It allows personnel and equipment to be positioned at height, supporting rescue work and suppression without relying solely on internal stairwells or fixed systems.

Industrial incidents can develop in environments where direct approach exposes firefighters to radiant heat, toxic smoke or unstable structures. Aerial platforms reduce that exposure by placing the extinguishing system above or beyond the hazard.

In petrochemical and oil and gas operations, integrated foam systems allow elevated application onto pressurised tanks, loading racks or pipeline manifolds. Remote control and camera options allow the unit to be operated from a distance, keeping firefighters further from the hazard area.

Ports present a different set of access problems. Standard pumpers may struggle to reach parts of the incident ground, particularly where the target is above deck level or below the surrounding surface. An aerial platform gives fire and rescue services a way to apply water or foam from height onto ships or port-side structures.

How Hamburg Fire and Rescue Service uses the Bronto F70RPX

Hamburg Fire and Rescue Service provides a practical example of how an aerial platform can be configured around local operating conditions. The service operates one of the tallest aerial rescue platforms in Germany, the Bronto F70RPX, known locally as the TMF 70. The 70-metre platform was developed in close cooperation with Hamburg and tailored to the city’s requirements.

The F70RPX can operate in winds up to 12.5 m/s. An integrated anemometer monitors wind speed continuously and automatically limits movement if conditions exceed the safe threshold. The Bronto+ control system monitors outrigger width, boom angle, platform load and other operating parameters to support safe deployment.

For Hamburg, the platform was acquired to close a defined operational need. Lars Scheugl, Instructor at Hamburg Fire and Rescue Service, said: “The F70RPX is a great acquisition for us. It improves our ability to reach high places and is vital for the city of Hamburg.”

The platform provides a working height of 70 metres and a horizontal outreach of 33 metres. At 40 metres, the boom still delivers 28 metres of outreach, supporting up-and-over access across roofs and façades. The water monitor can provide a throw distance of up to 100 metres using water, foam or a combined mixture. The unit also includes an integrated Cobra Cutting System. This uses high-pressure water mixed with abrasive material to cut through walls or roofs from the outside, allowing crews to begin attacking a fire without entering the structure.

Operational experience shaping aerial firefighting platform design

The Hamburg platform was jointly designed with technical coordination by Thorsten Ahrens, Technical Procurement of Hamburg Fire and Rescue Service. Scheugl and his team also contributed operational experience from special vehicle use and active firefighting.

This cooperation influenced control logic and cage layout. The aim was to produce a platform suited to Hamburg’s working environment, including industrial facilities and maritime exposure.

The result is a platform that supports work at height and below ground level. The hydraulic outrigger system and control mechanics support stability at full outreach or on uneven terrain.

Scheugl described how this applies in port conditions: “When we’re working here in the harbour, we often face accessibility issues involving ships and various harbour operations. With this unit we can perform rescue operations and other work below ground level.”

After initial training by Bronto Skylift, Hamburg Fire and Rescue Service developed a dedicated training programme for special-purpose vehicles. Clear control layouts and an intuitive control system helped crews bring the unit into service.

Why access and control remain critical in aerial firefighting operations

The role of an aerial platform is best understood through the operational problem it solves. Fire and rescue services need to place crews and extinguishing agents where ground access is limited, unsafe or too slow.

A municipal service may need cage capacity and manoeuvrability for rescue work. An industrial operator may need higher foam output and remote operation. A port authority may need reach above deck level and below quay level.

Height alone does not define capability. Outreach and stability shape how the equipment performs, along with below-ground access and extinguishing output.

Aerial platforms extend operational reach by allowing crews to work from a controlled distance from the hazard. Their value sits in creating access where it is restricted and maintaining control where conditions leave little margin for error.

Advanced fire protection systems for battery storage, offshore wind and critical infrastructure

by Featured NewsFire SuppressionFire SuppressionIFSJ ExclusivesPorts & MaritimeWarehouse

HAFEX CEO Ufuk Can Günaydın discusses how advanced fire protection systems are evolving to support battery energy storage, offshore wind, marine operations and critical infrastructure in increasingly complex risk environments

As industries accelerate investment in renewable energy, electrification, critical infrastructure and offshore operations, fire protection requirements are becoming increasingly complex.

From Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) and offshore wind turbines to marine vessels, high-risk environments require suppression systems designed specifically for operational demands that conventional solutions may not fully address.

In this context, HAFEX, a fire protection engineering company specialising in suppression technologies for technically demanding sectors, develops and manufactures fire protection systems with a focus on reliability, certification and performance in mission-critical environments.

Led by Fire Engineer and CEO Ufuk Can Günaydın, the company has expanded internationally by developing sector[1]specific solutions tailored to challenging operating conditions, including offshore environments, battery storage installations, telecommunications infrastructure and military assets.

“The key factor has been our ability to combine engineering expertise with sector-specific fire protection solutions,” Günaydın tells IFSJ. “These industries require more than standard fire suppression; they demand reliability, certification, adaptability and a deep understanding of operational risks.”

Fire protection strategies for battery energy storage systems

As renewable energy deployment accelerates globally, HAFEX has identified BESS as a major strategic growth area.

“BESS applications are one of the most important focus areas for us,” says Günaydın. “Lithium-ion battery fires behave very differently from conventional fires, especially because of thermal runaway and the risk of re-ignition.”

To address these challenges, HAFEX has developed aerosol and clean-agent suppression technologies designed for rapid activation, early-stage suppression and protection within enclosed battery environments.

The company also places emphasis on system integration, detection and risk-based design, aiming to reduce fire spread and support safer long-term operation of infrastructure.

Fire protection challenges across offshore wind and marine infrastructure

Marine and offshore environments represent another major focus area for HAFEX, particularly as offshore wind development continues to expand globally.

“Offshore and marine environments are challenging because fire protection systems must operate under harsh conditions such as vibration, humidity, saltwater exposure, limited access and extreme weather,” Günaydın explains.

For its part, HAFEX has developed systems incorporating real-time fire detection, continuous temperature monitoring and daily reporting of environmental changes to support early risk identification.

The company protects wind turbine risk zones separately, including nacelles, transformers and electrical cabinets, allowing more targeted suppression and risk management.

This approach has already been tested in operational environments. According to HAFEX, seven discharge cases have been recorded within installations for Enel Green Power Mexico across more than 300 Siemens Gamesa wind turbines, with three confirmed fire incidents successfully extinguished.

Following these deployments, the company has expanded further into the Asia-Pacific region, where it has reported protecting more than 400 offshore wind turbines across multiple global turbine brands.

Fire suppression solutions for critical electronic infrastructure

Meanwhile, in environments containing sensitive electronic infrastructure, fire suppression requirements differ significantly from conventional industrial settings. The priority is not only extinguishing fire quickly but doing so without damaging critical assets or disrupting operations.

“For sensitive electronics, the goal is not only to extinguish the fire but also to protect the equipment and avoid damaging the electronics,” says Günaydın.

Accordingly, HAFEX manufactures a certified strontium-based aerosol suppression system designed to avoid the conductivity issues that potassium-based extinguishing agents faces, particularly strontium-based aerosols has no hydrophilic characteristics.

The company proves that it’s clean and electrically non-conductive suppression technologies are suitable for data centres, server rooms, electrical cabinets and telecommunication systems.

HAFEX also reports protecting more than 4,000 4G and 5G base stations globally. “Our approach focuses on fast detection, targeted suppression and minimal residue—nearly none—which allows critical systems to remain protected without causing secondary damage,” Günaydın explains.

Fire protection requirements for defence and military applications

HAFEX also supplies fire suppression systems for naval and air force applications, where reliability and compliance requirements are significantly more demanding than in many commercial projects.

“Defence applications require a much higher level of reliability, durability and technical compliance,” says Günaydın. “Systems must perform under vibration, shock, restricted space, temperature variation and demanding operational conditions.”

Because defence platforms often involve mission-critical assets, fire protection systems must be engineered to function consistently under extreme operational stress.

In that respect, its defence-focused aerosol generators incorporate three detection and activation mechanisms within a single unit, alongside self-activation capability at 300°C.

Preparing for future fire risks

Looking ahead, HAFEX sees one of the biggest challenges as managing fire risks associated with rapidly evolving technologies. “The biggest challenge will be protecting new technologies before risks become widespread,” Günaydın explains.

Electrification, automation, renewable energy infrastructure, data centres and high-density battery systems are all creating new fire scenarios that legacy suppression technologies may not fully address.

At the same time, they are creating new opportunities for manufacturers capable of delivering specialised and application-specific solutions. “We believe the future will require smarter, more compact, environmentally responsible and application-specific suppression systems,” says Günaydın.

ECCOTARP highlights rapid-deployment containment tanks

by EventsFeatured NewsFire EngineeringFire SuppressionIFSJ Exclusives

The ECCOTARP Self-supporting containment tanks have been designed for a wide range of applications. They can serve as emergency water reservoirs, transfer tanks, collection tanks for hazardous substances, or quarantine tanks for cooling down and extinguishing ignited EV batteries.

Their smart foldable design saves space during transport and storage, while assembly takes only a few minutes.

Integrated welded polypropylene plates ensure a firm and stable tank shape even when the tank is empty.

The company is inviting you to learn more about these multifunctional tanks used by emergency response units as well as across various industrial sectors at INTERSCHUTZ next week.

📍 Visit ECCOTARP at Booth E13, Hall 17.

ESS fire protection: how NFPA 855 and early warning systems are shaping energy storage safety

by Featured NewsFire SuppressionIFSJ Exclusives

As energy storage system (ESS) deployments expand globally, Jim Dickinson of Fireaway explains how NFPA 855, early warning systems and layered ESS fire protection strategies are helping operators identify thermal runaway risks

What fire risks do energy storage systems present that fire service professionals need to be aware of?

One of the challenges is that there are many misconceptions around energy storage systems (ESS) and where those fires start. Everyone talks about lithium battery fires and the role they play, but around 90% of fires do not actually start in the battery itself. They start in the electrical areas of the ESS.

The batteries are getting a lot safer. The newer generation of batteries is improving, but if a battery goes into thermal runaway, you get a mixture of gases coming off it, and they are very difficult to deal with.

Once it gets into a deep-seated lithium fire, there is not really any product on the market that can simply put that out. At that stage, you are struggling to contain it. For us, the focus is twofold.

The first part is providing a layered fire protection approach across ESS. The first stage is prevention. We do that using UltraSense. We have an all-gas flammable sensor that provides early warning. It is UL-listed, and it gives warning before an event develops.

We can link that to the battery management system in the ESS. We do that with a number of partners globally, and that is the first key part of the approach.

The next part is detection. We use standard detection, and we work with partners to provide those detection systems Suppression is provided using Stat-X aerosol. That is designed with our engineering team to protect the areas at risk.

We are trying to get to the earliest possible stage of fire protection. The aim is to get an early indication and connect that with the battery management system, so people can get to site before the situation develops.

How do fire protection strategies vary between utility-scale ESS sites and smaller in-building installations?

Large-scale ESS sites have a lot more management around them. They are more detailed, with more energy management and more fire detection and suppression planning.

They also need more planning at local level. If you go somewhere like California, you have local authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) making decisions around what can go in and how it can be deployed.

In Europe, it is very different. Europe does not have its own standard for this, so everybody follows National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 855. That is the global industry standard.

It would be good if other standards were being presented, but NFPA 855 is the main one that is out there. It is the one we follow, and it is the one the ESS manufacturers use.

ESS fire protection: how NFPA 855 and early warning systems are shaping energy storage safety

I was in China last week, and that is the standard everybody is following there as well. Some companies say that, if they are in Europe, they need to use a European Norm (EN) version. The issue is that there is no EN approval for an ESS system.

There is no European or UK standard for that. The biggest point is making sure the risk is assessed at the early planning stage. Firefighters and fire professionals should be engaged early, as they are in the United States (US), where the local AHJ will be involved. Europe is a little different.

Australia is slightly different as well, with its own regional variations. It is a tough area, because practices vary by region. Batteries are also changing. We used to have large 40-foot containers with plenty of space to install systems.

Batteries have now become more condensed. They have improved efficiency, and systems have become smaller, more compact and lower risk.

That was one of the reasons we got into UltraSense. It allows us to offer something compact that can go into those areas and detect early. That was important for us. In the US, fire marshals are heavily involved in decisions.

In Europe and the UK, that level of involvement is generally not there in the same way. With smaller-scale systems, we see this in charging facilities and in buildings. There is a risk, but those systems are often not assessed in the same way.

We have seen buildings where people have not carried outa full risk assessment and have not properly assessed the hazard itself. That is where the issue sits.

Could you explain how condensed aerosol systems are applied within ESS environments and what they are designed to achieve?

The suppression part of the approach is Stat-X aerosol. It is designed to protect the areas at risk within the ESS. It forms part of a wider layered approach. UltraSense gives the early warning, standard detection can sit alongside that, and Stat-X provides suppression for the protected areas.

The key point is that this is designed around the risk. Our engineering team works on that design to make sure the system is protecting the right areas.

What role does early detection play in identifying thermal runaway and supporting effective incident response?

Early detection is the key to this. UltraSense can be linked to the battery management system. That allows the system to identify the cell that is starting to go off and allows everything to be shut down.

You then have standard detection alongside that, followed by suppression. That is the approach we take. The aim is to get a warning as early as possible, before the situation develops into something more difficult to manage.

How are standards influencing how ESS fire protection systems are designed and deployed?

NFPA 855 is the main standard being followed globally. Even in China, that is the standard everybody is following. ESS manufacturers are using it, and it is the one we follow.

There is no EN approval for an ESS system at the moment, so if somebody is looking for a European or UK standard, there is not one in place in that form. That means NFPA 855 has become the main reference point across the industry.

When operators or fire services assess ESS protection solutions, what factors guide decisions?

The main factor is whether the risk has been assessed properly. That needs to happen at the early stage, during planning. Firefighters and fire professionals should be involved from the start.

In the US, the local AHJ is involved in those decisions. In other regions, that involvement can be different, so the process needs to reflect local requirements. The other factor is whether the system provides a layered approach. For us, early warning should be supported by detection, with suppression designed around the areas at risk.

What lessons from recent ESS incidents should fire service professionals consider when planning for future risks?

The main lesson is that the hazard needs to be assessed properly. People often focus only on the battery, but most ESS fires start in the electrical areas. That needs to be understood when systems are planned and protected.

The other lesson is that early warning matters. If you can identify a problem early, link that information to the battery management system and shut things down, you have a better chance of managing the risk before it develops.

That applies across utility-scale systems, charging facilities and smaller systems in buildings. The scale changes, but the need for proper assessment and early engagement remains the same.

Li-ion BESS fire safety standards: how off-gas detection is reshaping battery safety regulations

by Breaking NewsFire DetectionFire DetectionFire SuppressionGas DetectionIFSJ ExclusivesWarehouse

As lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) deployments accelerate worldwide, Honeywell explains how evolving Li-ion BESS fire safety standards and off-gas detection technologies are transforming thermal runaway prevention and regulatory compliance

The global stationary lithium-ion (Li-ion) Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) market is entering a period of rapid expansion. Driven by net-zero commitments, grid modernisation and surging energy demand linked to AI infrastructure and data centres, the sector is expected to grow at more than 18.5%  annually through 2034, according to Global Market Insights.

But as deployment accelerates, so too does scrutiny of one of the sector’s biggest risks: thermal runaway.

Until recently, the stationary BESS industry operated in a relatively underdeveloped regulatory environment, despite the growing use of large-scale lithium-ion battery systems in utilities, data centres, telecoms and commercial infrastructure.

That began to change in 2020 with the introduction of new off-gas detection technologies capable of identifying electrolyte solvent vapours released before thermal runaway begins.

These systems represented a significant shift in fire safety strategy. Rather than relying solely on conventional fire suppression, ventilation or flammable gas detection, the industry began focusing on earlier intervention.

This technological development has since influenced a wave of new fire safety standards, product certifications and building codes aimed specifically at Li-ion BESS risks.

For fire safety engineers, OEMs, system integrators and BESS operators, understanding this evolving regulatory landscape is now critical to ensuring compliance and future-proofing installations.

Why Li-ion BESS thermal runaway demands a new fire safety approach

Thermal runaway remains the defining fire hazard in lithium-ion battery systems. Before thermal runaway, lithium-ion cells  typically vent trace amounts of electrolyte vapours and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Detecting these early warning signs can provide a critical intervention window (in some cases up to 30 minutes) to isolate affected batteries, stop charging and activate ventilation.

This shift from reaction to prevention is now being embedded into standards worldwide.

How NFPA and UL standards are reshaping Li-ion BESS fire safety

The US-based National Fire Protection  Association (NFPA), whose standards are widely referenced globally, has been central to this regulatory evolution.

NFPA 855 has become the cornerstone standard for stationary energy storage installations. The updated edition introduced stronger requirements. Notably, Annex G of NFPA 855 explicitly recognises the limitations of Lower Explosion Limit (LEL) sensors and battery voltage monitoring as thermal runaway safeguards.

Instead, the guidance highlights off-gas monitoring as one of the most effective methods for early detection, stating that cell-level detection close to or inside battery modules provides the most reliable pre-thermal-runaway warning.

The standard also notes that early detection can enable electrical isolation of affected cells, potentially stopping overheating before escalation.

NFPA 75 addresses lithium-ion battery fire risks in data centres

The rapid growth of AI and hyperscale data centres has increased reliance on lithium-ion Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPSs), bringing new fire risks into critical digital infrastructure.

Reflecting this, the 2024 edition of NFPA 75, covering fire protection of information technology equipment, introduced off-gas detection requirements for Li-ion UPS systems for the first time.

The standard specifies that approved systems must monitor for electrolyte vapour released prior to thermal runaway and be installed according to manufacturer instructions.

Importantly, NFPA 75 also clarifies that conventional flammable gas sensors are not suitable substitutes. At early off-gas stages, released vapours occur only in trace concentrations – often at ppm or ppb levels – far below thresholds designed for explosion prevention.This means specialised off-gas detection is necessary.

NFPA 76 strengthens Li-ion battery fire safety for telecom facilities

Similar revisions were made to NFPA 76, which governs telecommunications facilities.

The 2024 update requires approved systems to monitor electrolyte vapour release in battery installations above 20kWh where batteries are grouped within close proximity.

Upon detection, systems must automatically stop charging affected batteries and disconnect them from load.

Again, the standard reinforces that traditional flammable gas sensors are insufficient for thermal  runaway detection.

NFPA 400 ventilation requirements for Li-ion BESS fire safety

The NFPA 400 Hazardous Materials Code (2025) adds another important dimension, requiring exhaust ventilation systems to account for the density of potential vapours released from hazardous materials.

Off-gas detection systems can support compliance by automatically

triggering ventilation when electrolyte vapours are detected.

Li-ion BESS product certification evolves with fire safety standards

Alongside installation standards, product certification requirements are becoming more rigorous. The recently revised UL 2075 Gas and Vapor Detectors and Sensors standard introduces updated requirements covering detector design, construction and performance.

For off-gas detection manufacturers, this creates a clearer pathway for third-party validation of systems designed to detect lithium-ion electrolyte vapours, hydrogen and carbon monoxide.

How insurers are driving higher Li-ion BESS fire safety standards

Insurance providers have also emerged as influential drivers of BESS safety best practice.FM Global’s Property Loss Prevention Data Sheets 5-33, widely referenced by industrial operators and insurers, provide guidance for the design, operation and protection of stationary Li-ion BESSs.

The 2023 revision introduced new recommendations for thermal runaway prevention. Section 2.5.3.3 calls for early intervention systems capable of automatically and electrically isolating affected batteries when cell temperatures exceed thresholds and VOCs indicate pre-thermal[1]runaway venting.

The guidance requires FM approved VOC detectors which the new FM Approvals Standard 6540 fulfils with the establishment of dedicated testing and verification criteria for off-gas detectors certification.

This reflects growing insurer demand for independently verified detection performance in high-risk energy installations.

Why early off-gas detection is becoming central to BESS fire safety

Europe has also been active in formalising guidance around lithium-ion battery fire risks.The UK’s Fire Industry Association (FIA) was among the earliest organisations to formally endorse off-gas detection.

Its 2020 guidance on Li-ion battery fires concluded that systems capable of detecting low-concentration off-gases can provide early warning of impending thermal runaway and trigger shutdown systems to electrically isolate battery racks before escalation.

It also emphasises strategic sensor positioning to account for cooling airflow and the use of reference sensors to reduce false alarms.Meanwhile, the UK Fire Protection Association’s Need to Know Guide RE1 recommends early detection of off-gases or electrolyte vapours for critical and significant BESS installations, linked directly to shutdown and disconnection systems.

Together, these documents signal a broader European shift toward integrating early gas detection into battery fire protection strategies.

How local fire codes are strengthening Li-ion BESS safety requirements

Beyond standards bodies, regional building and fire codes are increasingly codifying these requirements. Among the earliest examples was the 2022 Connecticut State Fire Safety Code, which introduced provisions requiring systems capable of detecting electrolyte vapours at the start of battery venting, automatically shutting down affected BESS racks, transmitting fire alarm signals and activating mechanical ventilation.

Austin City Council’s 2024 Technical Building Codes, effective from July 2025, include similar requirements. For lithium-ion BESS installations above 20kWh, systems must include off-gas detection that both operates independently from the Battery

Management System (BMS) and identifies the affected rack. These provisions suggest local codes may act as regulatory accelerators, particularly in jurisdictions with fast-growing battery deployment.

New research supports off-gas detection for Li-ion BESS safety

Academic and industry research is also reinforcing the importance of early detection. A DNV study found that off-gas detection combined with automated shutdown protocols can prevent thermal runaway progression.

“Importantly, NFPA 75 also clarifies that conventional flammable gas sensors are not suitable substitutes.”

Separately, a 2024 study showed that commercial VOC sensors consistently triggered during cell venting events, even in large battery packs.

Research supported by UL Research Institutes and ESRI is also exploring improved off-gas monitoring in BESS applications, suggesting standards may become more prescriptive.

So, the stationary lithium-ion BESS sector is no longer operating in a regulatory vacuum Across North America and Europe, fire safety standards, insurer requirements and local building codes are converging around a common conclusion: early detection of electrolyte vapours is essential for mitigating thermal runaway risk.

For developers, operators and manufacturers, this means compliance is no longer simply about installing suppression systems or meeting baseline fire codes. It increasingly requires a proactive safety architecture built around prevention, early warning and automated intervention.

Supporting Li-ion BESS compliance through early off-gas detection

Honeywell’s Li-ion Tamer has emerged as one of the best-known systems designed specifically to address the early detection requirements now referenced across multiple standards and guidance documents.

Unlike conventional flammable gas detection, Li-ion Tamer is engineered to identify trace levels of electrolyte vapours released during the earliest stages of battery cell failure, before thermal runaway occurs.

This enables operators to respond earlier through shutdown, electrical isolation and ventilation strategies, helping reduce the risk of escalation. The system has been referenced throughout the industry’s regulatory evolution because it addresses a critical gap in traditional battery fire protection approaches: detecting battery distress before smoke, heat or explosive gas concentrations are present.

As BESS deployments expand into utilities, data centres, telecoms and commercial buildings, early intervention is becoming central to fire safety design. Solutions such as Li-ion Tamer can help operators and system integrators align installations with increasingly specific requirements around off-gas detection, rack-level monitoring and automated response protocols.

With regulatory scrutiny increasing, technologies that support earlier warning and actionable intervention are likely to play a growing role in helping the industry build safer, more resilient energy storage infrastructure

How AVD Fire is setting the global safety standard in lithium-ion battery fire suppression

by Breaking NewsFire SuppressionFire SuppressionFirefighting EquipmentIFSJ ExclusivesProductsWarehouse

As lithium-ion battery adoption accelerates, AVD Fire explains how certified lithium-ion battery fire suppression technologies are redefining fire safety, containment and thermal runaway mitigation

From electric vehicles and airport ground operations to logistics hubs and energy storage systems, lithium-ion batteries now underpin critical infrastructure. Yet with this growth comes a well-documented and escalating challenge: thermal runaway events that are difficult to suppress, highly volatile and prone to re-ignition.

For fire safety professionals, insurers and regulators, the question is no longer if lithium-ion battery incidents will occur – but how effectively they can be controlled, contained and mitigated.

This is where Aqueous Vermiculite Dispersion (AVD) has emerged as a globally recognised, field-proven solution – redefining expectations for lithium-ion fire suppression.

AVD is not simply an incremental improvement on conventional extinguishing agents – it represents a fundamental shift in how lithium-ion fires are managed.Unlike traditional methods that focus solely on cooling or oxygen displacement, AVD introduces a dual-action mechanism:

  • Rapid cooling to reduce thermal escalation
  • Formation of a vermiculite barrier layer, preventing oxygen reintroduction and suppressing re-ignition

This unique approach directly addresses the core challenge of lithium-ion fires: sustained chemical reactions within the battery cells.The result is controlled suppression, reduced fire spread and significantly improved post-incident stability – a critical factor for emergency responders and site operators alike.

Certified lithium-ion fire suppression performance and proven credibility

As global scrutiny intensifies around lithium-ion fire risks, independent testing and certification are no longer optional – they are essential.AVD Fire’s product portfolio has been developed and validated to meet the highest international standards, assuring both regulatory bodies and commercial stakeholders.

AVD extinguishers are supported by a comprehensive framework of certifications and third-party validations, including:

  • UL witness testing conducted at AVD Fire’s UK test facility
  • Emirates Safety Laboratory testing, demonstrating performance under controlled conditions
  • NTA 8133 certification for lithium-ion fire extinguishing capability
  • British Kitemark accreditation, reinforcing product quality and manufacturing standards

These credentials are not merely technical milestones – they represent market trust, regulatory confidence and operational reliability.

DIN-certified EV fire blankets for lithium-ion battery fire containment

While fire extinguishers are critical for early-stage intervention, large-scale lithium-ion incidents – particularly involving electric vehicles – require a different strategy: containment.

AVD Fire’s EV Fire Blankets are engineered to meet the rigorous DIN SPEC 91489:2024-11 Standard for EV fire containment. Key performance attributes include:

  • Resistance to sustained temperatures exceeding 1000°C
  • Structural integrity in oxidising environments
  • Capability to contain flames, heat and hazardous off-gassing
  • Protection against debris and projectile risks during thermal runaway

For high-risk environments such as airports, tunnels, ports and logistics centres, these blankets provide a critical first-response containment solution, limiting damage and enabling safer incident management.

Fire Suppression Kits (FSKs) for lithium-ion battery incident response

Recognising that lithium-ion incidents often require multi-layered response strategies, AVD Fire has developed Fire Suppression Kits (FSKs) to complement its core product range.

These kits are designed to support assisted mitigation, equipping personnel with:

  • Specialist tools for safe handling and isolation
  • Personal protective equipment (PPE)
  • Integrated AVD extinguishing solutions

In environments such as distribution centres, manufacturing facilities and transport hubs, FSKs provide a structured and repeatable response framework, reducing reliance on improvised or inconsistent procedures.

Global lithium-ion fire safety distribution with local expertise

AVD Fire’s international growth has been driven not only by product innovation, but also through the development of a trusted global distribution network.Today, AVD Fire solutions are supported by established distribution and service partners across:

  • Europe
  • Middle East
  • North America
  • Asia-Pacific
  • Caribbean

This network ensures customers benefit from local technical expertise, regulatory understanding, product availability and rapid response capability within their respective regions.

As lithium-ion battery adoption continues to accelerate globally, AVD Fire remains committed to supporting its existing distribution partners, while selectively expanding representation in strategic regions where opportunities and market coverage gaps exist.

The company is currently open to discussions with qualified partners in selected territories worldwide, including parts of:

  • Latin America
  • Africa
  • Southeast Asia
  • Selected regions within North America
  • EMEA

For distributors and fire safety specialists, this represents an opportunity to align with a globally recognised lithium-ion battery fire suppression specialist in a rapidly growing market.

Full-scale lithium-ion battery fire testing and validation

While certifications and laboratory testing provide essential validation, real-world performance remains the ultimate benchmark.

To further demonstrate the effectiveness of its solutions, AVD Fire recently conducted two full-scale live fire tests in North America, involving electric vehicles undergoing thermal runaway.

In these controlled tests:

  • Two Tesla vehicles were intentionally ignited to simulate thermal runaway conditions
  • AVD Fire deployed both its DIN-certified EV blanket and Premium fire blanket
  • The fires were successfully contained and ultimately extinguished

The outcomes demonstrated:

  • Effective containment of flames and heat
  • Significant reduction in fire spread risk
  • Controlled suppression without escalation
  • Enhanced safety for operators and surrounding infrastructure

These tests provide compelling evidence that AVD solutions are not only compliant and certified but also operationally effective in the most demanding real-world scenarios.

Leading the future of lithium-ion battery fire safety

As lithium-ion battery technology continues to reshape industries, the fire safety sector must evolve in parallel.

The transition requires:

  • New suppression technologies designed specifically for lithium-ion risks
  • Certified, standards-driven solutions that meet global regulatory expectations
  • Integrated response systems that combine suppression, containment and operational safety

AVD Fire is at the forefront of this transition – delivering solutions that are scientifically advanced, independently validated, and globally deployed.

Why the fire safety industry must act on lithium-ion battery risks

The challenge of lithium-ion battery fires is not theoretical – it is immediate, growing and

increasingly complex. For fire safety professionals, infrastructure operators and distributors, the priority is clear: Adopt solutions that are proven, certified and designed specifically for the risks at hand.

AVD Fire invites industry stakeholders to:

  • Explore its full range of lithium-ion fire protection solutions
  • Engage in collaborative testing and validation programmes
  • Partner in expanding global distribution and implementation

The future of fire safety demands more than adaptation – it demands leadership. AVD is setting that standard.

Fluorine-free firefighting foam without compromise: The role of Enviro 3×3 NEO from Dafo Fomtec

by Breaking NewsFire SuppressionIFSJ ExclusivesMiddle East - Breaking NewsMiddle East - Products

John Olav Ottesen explains how the company’s new fluorine-free firefighting foam combines evidence-led testing, fully hydrated polymer technology and operational reliability

In January 2026 Dafo Fomtec announced the launch of Enviro 3×3 NEO, the sixth-generation alcohol-resistant synthetic fluorine-free firefighting foam (AR SFFF) that represents the culmination of its Enviro Programme.

Following the launch, International Fire & Safety Journal sat down with Founder and CEO John Olav Ottesen to discuss what sets the new concentrate apart, why an evidence-led testing programme has underpinned Fomtec’s approach to the fluorine-free transition and why the Middle East remains central to its strategy as the GCC accelerates its own move away from PFAS-based foams.

Enviro 3×3 NEO is described as the sixth generation in the Enviro range. Where does it sit in Fomtec’s line-up and why now?

NEO is the product that the Enviro Programme has been driving towards from the beginning. It is an alcohol-resistant synthetic fluorine-free concentrate engineered specifically for petrochemical, oil and gas, marine and offshore operations.

The timing of the launch reflects both where the regulatory landscape is heading and where our evidence base has brought us.

NEO delivers the performance profile those high-hazard industries demand, while meeting the environmental expectations industry and regulators are rightly placing on us. It is, in every sense, a no-compromise product.

You describe the Enviro Programme as the foundation of everything Fomtec has done in SFFFs. Why has it mattered so much and what has it actually delivered?

When we began the Enviro Programme more than a decade ago, we recognised early that removing fluorine from firefighting foam could not be a marketing exercise and had to be science.

Fluorinated foams had decades of real-world data behind them; a credible fluorine-free

alternative needed a comparable evidence base and it did not yet exist. The Programme has been built on full-scale fire testing at a scale few have attempted: over 2,500 full-scale fires to date, on hydrocarbons from heptane to Jet A-1 to plant-based fuels and gasoline blends, alongside polar solvents, foam destroyers and fuels tested with fresh, brackish and sea water.

Out of it has come the entire Enviro family (Class A, ICAO, USP, ARK, 3×3 Plus, Ultra, eMax and now NEO). We have also developed an analytical modelling tool that allows us to predict performance on a client’s fuel without setting it on fire.

For Fomtec, the Enviro Programme is a benchmark for how fluorine-free foam should be developed and not just a research project.

The launch material highlights the elimination of the “hidden gum” effect associated with partially hydrated polymer systems. Can you expand on this and explain where it sits within Fomtec’s broader formulation approach?

This goes to the heart of Fomtec’s formulation philosophy and it applies across the entire Enviro range. Alcohol-resistant foams need polymers to build the membrane that extinguishes polar solvent fires, but how those polymers are handled in the concentrate matters enormously.

There are broadly three possibilities. Un-hydrated polymers — essentially dry polymer added to the concentrate — will absorb water unpredictably over time, leading to viscosity drift, sediment formation and potential proportioning failure.

Partially hydrated polymers avoid the dry-powder problem but bring their own issue: the “hidden gum” effect, where viscosity increase, phase separation and polymer drop-out can develop when the foam encounters water ingress or suboptimal storage.

Either way, the operator ends up with a concentrate that no longer behaves like the product they originally approved. Fomtec’s commitment, across every AR product in the Enviro range, is to use only 100% fully hydrated polymers. That is a formulation decision, not a marketing one.

It means stable viscosity and known shear-thinning today and in the  future. For high-hazard sites where systems can sit dormant for long periods and must perform on first demand, that reliability is not optional.

NEO is a 3 × 3 product (3% for hydrocarbons and 3% for polar solvents). Why does that matter operationally?

For any facility holding both hydrocarbon and polar solvent inventories a single 3% concentrate simplifies almost everything. One product in the tank, one proportioning setting, one set of procedures.

The envelope includes MEK, ethyl and butyl acetate, IPA, methanol, ethanol and acetone, and it handles what we call “foam destroyers” such as MTBE. For a fire officer, that breadth under one SKU is a real operational advantage.

Performance with seawater and brackish water is repeatedly highlighted in the NEO documentation. Does that tie back to what we have just been discussing?

Directly. Many GCC and offshore installations draw firewater from the sea and the quality is simply not a controlled variable. We have validated NEO across fresh, brackish and sea water so the performance envelope is the same whichever source the deluge draws from.

The 100% hydrated polymer formulation holds its viscosity and shear-thinning profile and proportioning remains uniform.  For Gulf operators, marine and offshore facilities anywhere in the world, that consistency across water qualities is what separates a predictable fire performance margin from a guess.

ECHA’s restriction dossier is advancing, with SEAC and RAC opinions due by end-2026 and legislation anticipated in 2027. How should end users interpret the timeline?

I would urge end users not to confuse the regulatory timetable with their own planning timetable. Even with the derogations we expect — and Fomtec has

consistently supported the time-limited derogations approach — the direction of travel is settled globally, not just in Europe. The GCC is watching ECHA closely and procurement specifications in the region are already shifting toward fluorine-free.

A safe transition takes time, and Fomtec continues to supply fresh, approved C6 foam to customers while they plan and execute that work. That is not a contradiction; it is how we reduce risk. A responsible transition is holistic — the foam, the system, the procedures, the training.

What should the industry, and the Middle East region in particular, take from NEO and the next phase of the Enviro Programme?

First, demand evidence: ask your foam supplier for full-scale data on your fuels, your hardware and your water quality. Second, treat fluorine-free as an engineering project, not a procurement decision. Third, start now. Enviro 3×3 NEO is where the Enviro Programme was always heading, but the Programme continues — more fuels, more hardware combinations, more validation.

The Middle East will be central to that next phase, through Leaders in Fire 2026, through Intersec and through engagement with the region’s NOCs and the wider JOIFF community. We are ready for what comes next — and with NEO, our customers are too.

Built to move: The difference behind Lamella in curtain wall fire protection

by AmericasAmericas - Breaking NewsAmericas - Featured NewsAmericas - ProductsBreaking NewsBuilding ManagementFire EngineeringFire SuppressionFire SuppressionIFSJ ExclusivesPassiveProducts

In facade design, passive fire protection must perform over time in real building conditions, not just in testing.

This is especially important in curtain wall construction, where facades accommodate movement from wind loads, thermal expansion, and structural deflection. In these cases, a firestop or perimeter seal must do more than fit at installation. It must maintain the seal over time as the building moves.

This is where a Lamella material offers something distinctly different.

Fire protection must do more than achieve fire resistance

Passive fire protection performance depends on more than fire rating alone. It must also maintain the right form, fit, and compressibility over the life of the system.

Some standard stone wool solutions use a horizontal fiber structure. While stable, this can reduce their ability to accommodate repeated lateral compression over time. As movement and compression continue, internal fiber bonds can break down, reducing the product’s ability to recover and potentially allowing gaps to form between the fire protection and the facade or slab edge.

In curtain wall systems, where movement is expected, that loss of recovery can become a critical performance issue. Passive fire protection must remain closely fitted between the facade and the floor slab or inner construction, maintaining integrity as those elements move relative to one another. If the material cannot flex, recover, and sustain contact, the long-term effectiveness of the seal may be at risk.

A material engineered differently

Siderise® developed its own unique Lamella to address these real-world demands. Rather than using a conventional horizontal fiber structure, Siderise Lamella is manufactured from a specially formulated stone wool with vertically oriented fibers. This vertical arrangement allows the product to better withstand lateral compression and to recover more reliably from movement. Accelerated age testing in accordance with EOTA Technical Report 024 has demonstrated that Siderise’s Lamella structure can be repeatedly laterally compressed without loss of recovery or flex.

A smarter experience on site

Lamella also brings practical advantages. The integrated foil facing is clearly marked on top/bottom, and with the fibers already oriented vertically, it significantly reduces the risk of installer error.

Traditional solutions can also require application of spray, with insulation cut and compressed onsite before being sealed with an elastomeric compound. Because Siderise’s product is pre-compressed in the factory, Lamella and the applied foil scrim provide such a high level of fire resistance that an additional wet seal is unnecessary. As that compression is applied, the facing visibly wrinkles, providing a visual indicator that the product has been installed correctly.

Built for the reality of modern facades

Siderise Lamella is engineered to maintain form, fit, and integrity in building envelope applications where movement is inevitable. In curtain wall systems, where small gaps can have significant consequences, that ability to move with the building is a critical performance requirement.

Learn more about the innovation behind Lamella at www.siderise-us.com/lamella