Passive and Active Fire Protection: comparison

Summary: Fire protection integrates passive measures —construction elements and treatments that contain and delay fire growth— and active measures —systems that detect, alert and suppress or mitigate fires—, together with components that ensure operational availability. Project documentation must define required technical evidence (type testing in accredited laboratories such as AFITI, project documentation, commissioning and maintenance) so that on-site performance matches tested conditions (ISO/IEC 17025).

1. Concept and objectives

• Passive Fire Protection (PFP): elements and treatments to maintain integrity, thermal insulation and/or load-bearing capacity for a predefined period (EI / R / REI, E, I). Examples: coatings, fire façades, doors and seals.
• Active Fire Protection (AFP): systems that require power and communications to detect, alert or intervene (detectors, alarm panels, sprinklers, gaseous systems, pumps, dampers and smoke control fans).

PFP limits fire spread and preserves conditions for intervention; AFP reduces fire growth and facilitates evacuation.

2. Passive protection — technical criteria

• Fire resistance of building elements: expressed in minutes (EI30, EI60…) and obtained through standardized tests reproducing thermal and mechanical loading.
• Reaction to fire of products: defines material contribution to fire growth and Euroclass classification; tests include EN ISO 1182, EN ISO 1716 and EN 13823.
• Seals and service penetrations: tested per EN 1366 series to ensure compartmentation is maintained.

3. Active protection — technical criteria

• Detectors and alarms: sensitivity, RTI and response times per risk scenario and occupancy.
• Sprinkler and extinguishing systems: K-factor, design density and coverage area.
• Smoke control: flows, pressures and zoning strategies.

Reliability requires redundancy in power, signal architecture and continuous supervision during commissioning.

Practical comparison: passive vs active

4. Components ensuring availability

Cables for AFP must be selected for fire integrity (IEC 60331, EN 50200). Requirements must be defined in design documentation.

5. Assurance and verification chain

1. Type testing at an accredited laboratory.
2. Technical documentation including installation conditions.
3. Design specification referencing tested mounting conditions.
4. Installation and QA with dimensional and functional checks.
5. Commissioning with integrated system tests.
6. Maintenance and change management.

6. Relevant technical metrics

• PFP: EI classification, integrity (E), insulation (I).
• Detectors: RTI, sensitivity, activation time.
• Sprinklers: K-factor, density, hydraulic area.
• Cables: fire integrity time.

7. Recommendations for design documentation

• State the reference test standard and tested mounting condition.
• Define on-site verification requirements.
• Establish a maintenance programme with frequency and responsibilities.
• For performance-based designs, document criteria and justify with calculations.

8. Conclusion

Effective fire design integrates PFP and AFP, specifies test-based conditions, ensures operational availability, and maintains verification throughout the service life. Specifications must reference applicable standards and the mounting conditions that make laboratory evidence valid on site.