The UK Fire Chemistry Network An EPSRC funded network in Analytical Chemistry

1. The UK Fire Chemistry Network An EPSRC funded network in Analytical Chemistry Richard Hull Reader in Fire Materials CMRI

2. Fire Chemistry • Fire Chemistry is the chemistry of unwanted fires and of the action of fire retardants. • Fire Chemistry is hard! It involves analytical and conceptual challenges. • Fire Chemistry is important! Large industrial sectors rely on the availability of suitable fire retardant formulations, and the goalposts are constantly moving.

3. UK Fire Chemistry (2) • A Report assembled by the Chemistry Leadership Council Innovation Task Force on research and technology priorities in July 2004 highlighted the need for greater focus and excellence in research and technology. • Industry, Research Councils and academia need to develop ever-closer relationships to ensure that a higher proportion of the exciting science in our universities is transformed into economic benefit for the UK. • In the area of materials chemistry it identifies new opportunity areas where materials chemistry is/will be the key contributor to commercial success … • • Nanomaterials and nanocomposites • • Green (sustainable or renewable) alternatives to existing materials • • Smart coatings ($50bn global market for all coatings) • • Technical textiles (e.g. defence, sport, woundcare)

4. UK Fire Chemistry (2) • Leading edge Science • • Polymer chemistry, including continuous polymerisation processes, reactiveprocessing and a better understanding of structure-performance • • Fire chemistry • The existing UK position (relative strengths) in these science areas is: • • Fire chemistry is world class and well-focused but under-resourced • http://www.chemistry.org.uk

5. Fire Chemistry Discussion Group (FCDG) and the Fire Chemistry Network • The FCDG is the informal name for the Society of Chemical Industry’s Fire Chemistry Group (which organises meetings such as these). • The Fire Chemistry Network has separate functions but similar members since both aim to be as inclusive to all those working in fire chemistry as possible. • Both aim at inclusivity and welcome your participation!

6. Academic Members • Bolton - Dennis Price, Dick Horrocks, Baljinder Kandola, Richard Hull • Central Lancashire - Georgi Makhiladze • Edinburgh - Dougal Drysdale, Jose Torero • Greenwich – JohnTetteh, Mike Thomas • Leeds - John Staggs • Manchester Metropolitan - Chris Liauw, Roger Rothon, Norman Allen • Northumberland - Peter Carty • Nottingham Trent – Fengge Gao • Queens University Belfast - Peter Hornsby • Sheffield - Barry Hunt, John Ebdon • Strathclyde - John Liggat • Turin - Giovanni Camino • Ulster - Jim Shields

7. Strathclyde FR Mechanisms Edinburgh Fire Dynamics Fire Chemistry in the UK UCLAN Fire Safety Engineering Leeds Combustion studies and Fire Modelling MMU Polymer Decomposition Sheffield FR Polymer Synthesis and Characterisation Ulster Fire Safety Engineering Nottingham Trent Polymer Processing Bolton Techniques for and Mechanisms of FR Composites and Textiles QMC/FTT Physical Fire Models Greenwich FR Mechanisms And modelling Brunel FR Polymer Processing and Behaviour and fire safety engineering

8. Fire Chemistry in the UK Strathclyde FR Mechanisms Edinburgh Fire Dynamics UCLAN Fire Safety Engineering Leeds Combustion studies and Fire Modelling MMU Polymer Decomposition Sheffield FR Polymer Synthesis and Characterisation Ulster Fire Safety Engineering Nottingham Trent Polymer Processing Bolton Techniques for and Mechanisms of FR Composites and Textiles QMC/FTT Physical Fire Models Greenwich FR Mechanisms And modelling Brunel FR Polymer Processing and Behaviour and fire safety engineering

9. Industrial Collaborators • Acordis – Jon Taylor • Akzonobel Paul Jackson • Belden CDT - Gary Ogden • Borealis – Magnus Persson, Bernt-Ake Sultan • British Vita – Ken Hillier • Clariant - Adrian.Beard • Dow Chemicals - Christine Lukas • Fire and Risk Sciences BRE, Peter Fardell, David Purser, Jenny Purser • Fire Testing Technology/Interscience Comms - Steve Grayson • Great Lakes – David Buszard • Joseph Storey – Phil Wallace • Lucite – Ian Robinson • Minelco - Richard Day, Luke Holingbery • NIST - Marc Nyden • Pilkington – Su Varma • Polytail - Frank Agunloye • Rhodia - Ranbir Padda • Scapa Polymerics – Peter Salthouse • Tin Technology – Paul Cusack • Zotefoams - Neil Witten

10. Aims of the Network • To reduce death and injury in fires, and reduce the frequency and severity of major fire disasters. • To develop better fire retardant materials meeting current and future safety, environmental and commercial requirements. • To establish the United Kingdom as the world leader in the research and development of fire retardant materials.

11. Objectives • To enhance the development of fire retardant materials. • To facilitate mechanistic studies of polymer degradation and fire retardant action. • To increase the interaction between research workers, academics and industrialists within the fire chemistry community. • To reduce the development time for new materials. • To enhance the training of research students and post-doctoral workers. • To raise the awareness of the different techniques and methodologies in fire research.

12. Major Activities – Research Exchanges • Research Exchanges for research students or post doctoral workers. Use of equipment and expertise at another institution. • So far these have involved Greenwich, Edinburgh, Politechnico Torino, Salford, Bolton and Manchester Metropolitan.

13. Major Activities – Focussed Meetings • Nanocomposites for Fire Retardancy • Joint meeting with Fire Engineering Research Network • Interpretation of Cone Calorimetric Data (international group of experts, one meeting in UK, one in US co-sponsored by NIST) to advise best way forward

14. Major Activities – Fire Research Academy • ODPM given the task of setting up Academy, to embrace research from fire fighting, fire protection, fire safety …and possibly fire chemistry. • There is a Network meeting today at 4 p.m. to discuss this specific issue, and obtain a collective view – please feel welcome to join us!

15. KPMG Research Families • Causes and Consequences of Fire • … will include fire science such as reaction kinetics, flame spread, extinguishment and ignition • Human behaviour concerning fires • Fire Safety Engineering : Impact of fires on structures • Fire Prevention and Community Fire Safety • Resources, operations and management in the Fire Service

16. KPMG Research Structure Diagram

17. Perceived benefits of a Fire Research Academy • Co-ordinated approach to fire research • Avoidance of duplication of effort • Improved collaboration in obtaining funding • National level lobbying for major improvements in funding levels • Restoration of UK’s leading position in Fire Research

18. Possible disadvantages of a Fire Research Academy • Academy may act as additional hurdle for funding. • Those outside the academy may find it hard to start work in fire area. • Research Councils may see earmarked funding as a reason to eliminate proposals from responsive mode funding.

19. Fire Chemistry Network Position Statement • Future Potential • In order to meet its objectives, it is necessary for funding bodies to recognise the cost of fire to the UK economy (around £5 bn and 500 lives annually), and the industrial benefits of leading the world in fire safety. • To minimise this cost it will be necessary to provide direct support to programmes of research aimed at limiting the costs of fire, and to develop strategies to ensure continuity of funding until the cost is reduced to an acceptable level. • The majority of lives are lost by inhalation of toxic gases, which will account for a significant proportion of the cost to the UK economy. Currently, the yield of toxic gases from commercial materials is poorly understood, and the supply of reliable data to support the fire safety engineering profession is inadequate. • Further, it is essential to recognise that fire can only take hold when suitable fuel is available, and the development of fire retardant materials for medium and high risk applications makes an important contribution to the UK’s fire research strategy. Only when fire scientists and fire retardant chemists work together can fire safety be optimised, yet the omission of fire retardant materials in the identification of the UK’s strategic areas for fire research appears to overlook this.

20. Fire Chemistry Network Position Statement cont’d • Funding Mechanisms • The current system focuses funding through the ODPM to particular fire research organisations, the DTI to universities and research organisations demonstrating significant industrial support, and the research councils to universities. A distinction has been made between fundamental research carried out in universities and applied research addressing particular issues in other research organisations. In practice, this distinction is far from clear cut. • It is generally accepted that funding levels for fire research are inadequate and that the distribution process favours fragmentation and leads to a climate of hostility among fire research organizations. Inadequate funding allocation and review processes are false economies, and are likely to lead to wasteful expenditure. Any new funding methodology must be designed to maximise collaboration and be inclusive of all the major players. Further the enormous cost of fire to the UK economy clearly justifies increased expenditure to reduce this loss in both the short and longer term. The coordination of a concerted campaign to raise awareness of the cost and damage of fire, and recognition of the effectiveness of relatively small amounts of funding on reducing this cost (as achieved by flame retarding upholstered furniture), would have significant benefits. • The objectives for any concerted action should be the generation of further resources for fire research and the implementation of a coordinated plan for research and education. It should not be the mere centralization of the existing funding, and all stakeholders must be confident that the methodology is open, consistent, responsive and fair, and able to adapt to changing opportunities and threats. Indeed, centralisation of this funding caries the risk of damaging vital elements in the overall strategy, possibly by shifting funding from fundamental research to the solution of particular problems to gain political kudos (or avoid ministerial embarrassment) in the short term. Furthermore, excess concentration of resources to too few organisations could lead to erosion of the knowledge base, restricted training opportunities and blinkered progress.