12.06.2026

Certificate of Compliance: Fire Protection—Fundamentals, Calculations, and Practice

Building design

Four fire extinguishers on a green wall—a quiet snapshot of everyday architecture. Photo: jandira_sonnendeck

Anyone who puts a building into service assumes responsibility for more than just aesthetics and functionality. The fire safety compliance certificate is the legal and technical instrument used to demonstrate that the installed construction products and building systems actually meet the requirements that were a prerequisite for the planning and approval processes. It lies at the intersection of product law, building code regulations, and structural testing practices, and is equally binding and significant for architects, specialist planners, and building owners.

What the Fire Safety Certificate of Conformity Means Legally and Technically
Which legal bases and standards define and regulate this instrument
How the conformity confirmation process works in practice
Which construction products and building systems are affected and why
What role conformity marks, test certificates, and certificates of suitability play
Who issues the confirmation, who reviews it, and who bears responsibility
What typical errors occur in practice and how they can be avoided
How the confirmation of conformity fits into the overall system of structural fire protection

Definition and Legal Basis: What the Fire Protection Declaration of Conformity Is

The fire protection conformity certificate is a written declaration confirming that a construction product or building system complies with the requirements relevant to its use in fire protection. These requirements may stem from a general building authority approval (abZ), a general building authority test certificate (abP), a European Technical Assessment (ETA), or a case-by-case approval (ZiE). The declaration is not a marketing document or voluntary certification, but rather an instrument required by building codes that documents the transition from abstract product characteristics to concrete use in construction.

The legal basis lies in the state building codes of the German federal states, which are largely based on the Model Building Code (MBO). The MBO distinguishes between regulated and unregulated construction products. Regulated construction products comply with a technical building regulation or a harmonized European standard and may be used without further proof, provided they bear the conformity mark (Ü mark). Non-regulated construction products require separate proof of suitability for use, which is provided by the aforementioned instruments. For construction products relevant to fire protection, a higher level of requirements applies because failure in the event of a fire can pose an immediate threat to life.

The Ü mark, which is affixed to regulated construction products, is the visible symbol of the declaration of conformity. It indicates that the manufacturer declares that its product complies with the applicable technical regulations. For construction products that are not covered by harmonized European standards but perform fire protection functions, the fire protection declaration of conformity is the key proof that bridges the gap between product approval and installation. Without it, there is no formal proof that the product used is in fact what the approval specified.

The System of Proofs of Suitability: Approvals, Test Certificates, and Standards

To properly understand the fire safety declaration of conformity, one must understand the system of proof of suitability in which it is embedded. This system has several levels that apply differently depending on the product type and application. At the foundation are harmonized European standards (hEN), which are adopted under the Construction Products Regulation (EU Regulation No. 305/2011, or CPR for short). Products that comply with such a standard bear the CE marking; however, this marking does not constitute approval for use under national law but merely declares the product’s performance characteristics.

For products without a harmonized standard or for applications that fall outside the scope of a standard, national instruments apply. The General Building Authority Approval (abZ) is issued by the German Institute for Building Technology (DIBt) in Berlin and fully describes the permissible conditions of use for a product. The General Building Inspection Test Certificate (abP) is a simplified instrument for products whose suitability for use can be demonstrated through testing without the need for a full approval. Both documents contain precise information on installation conditions, processing instructions, and maintenance requirements that are directly relevant to the subsequent confirmation of compliance with fire safety standards.

Since the amendment of the Construction Products Act, the DIBt has gradually supplemented or replaced the general building authority approval with the general type approval (aBG) and the general building authority test certificate with the general type test certificate (aBPZ). These terms no longer refer solely to the product itself, but to the construction type—that is, the combination of product, installation situation, and installation rules. This distinction is significant for fire protection: A fire protection system, such as a cable penetration or a fire damper, will only function as tested if all components and the installation precisely comply with the specifications of the proof of suitability for use. The fire protection conformity confirmation is the document that confirms exactly this for the specific construction project.

Who issues the Fire Safety Conformity Certificate, and who bears responsibility?

The issue of responsibility is particularly sensitive in fire protection because defects can have irreversible consequences in an emergency. Depending on the product and the level of requirements, the Fire Safety Conformity Certificate can be issued in two ways: by the manufacturer itself or by a recognized testing, inspection, and certification body (PÜZ body). The applicable method is determined by the respective proof of suitability for use. For simpler products with a lower risk potential, the manufacturer’s declaration is sufficient; for safety-critical construction products with high fire safety requirements, third-party monitoring by an accredited body is mandatory.

By issuing a declaration of conformity, the manufacturer makes a legally binding statement that its product meets the requirements of the declaration of suitability for use. This declaration requires an in-house production control system (WPK)—that is, an internal quality management system that ensures consistent manufacturing quality. The WPK is not an informal tool, but a normatively required component of the proof of conformity. For products subject to third-party supervision, the in-house production control is supplemented by regular audits conducted by the PÜZ body, which makes the right to award the conformity mark contingent upon ongoing compliance with the requirements.

On the construction site, the contractor is responsible for ensuring that only products with a valid certificate of conformity are installed and that the installation complies with the specifications of the certificate of suitability. The architect or specialist planner is required to request, review, and document the certificates of conformity. The building inspection authority may require the submission of these documents as part of its construction supervision. In practice, the documentation chain is often incomplete because the importance of the fire protection certificate of conformity is underestimated on the construction site, and the pressure of the construction schedule takes precedence over the careful filing of supporting documents.

The Role of the Fire Protection Planner and the Expert

In buildings classified as Class 4 and 5, as well as in special-purpose structures, many federal states require the involvement of a qualified fire protection planner or a recognized fire protection expert. This expert not only reviews the fire protection concept during the planning phase but also oversees the construction process and ultimately confirms that the completed building complies with the approved fire protection concept. The certificates of conformity for the installed fire protection products are an essential part of the expert’s basis for review. Without complete supporting documentation, the expert cannot issue the final certificate, which prevents the building from being put into use.

Typical Fire Protection Products and Their Compliance Requirements

The range of construction products for which a fire protection conformity certificate is required extends from building materials and components to complex systems. Among the most common product groups are fire dampers in ventilation and air-handling systems, cable penetrations and pipe penetrations in ceilings and walls, fire-rated doors and gates, fire-resistant glazing, fire-resistant coatings (so-called reactive fire protection systems that foam up and insulate in the event of a fire), fire-resistant plasters and panels, as well as insulation materials with a fire protection classification.

Each of these product groups has specific requirements regarding proof of suitability for use and the type of conformity assessment. A fire damper, for example, must not only be the correct product; it must also be installed in the correct wall construction, with the correct fasteners, and with the correct control system in order to achieve the tested fire resistance rating. Deviations from the installation instructions in the proof of suitability—even if they seem plausible from a structural engineering perspective—void the validity of the confirmation of conformity. This principle of systemic conformity is not sufficiently understood by many tradespeople on the construction site and leads to one of the most common errors in structural fire protection.

Reactive fire protection systems—specifically coatings applied to steel structures that form an insulating layer by foaming in the event of a fire, thereby delaying the critical heating of the steel—deserve special attention. The effectiveness of these systems depends heavily on the coating thickness, the substrate, the application method, and the environmental conditions. The fire protection compliance certificate for such systems requires complete documentation of the coating thickness through measurement reports, which must be prepared by the applicator and archived by the client. If these records are missing, the certificate of compliance is not formally valid, even if the product was applied correctly.

Common Mistakes in Practice and How to Avoid Them

Practical experience reveals a recurring pattern of errors that can be divided into three categories: documentation gaps, product mix-ups, and installation errors. Documentation gaps arise when certificates of compliance are available but are not systematically collected, organized, and handed over to the building owner. Complete fire protection documentation is essential for subsequent use, maintenance, and any potential renovations. If it is missing, a time-consuming assessment by experts must be conducted in cases of doubt—a process that is expensive and rarely provides complete certainty.

Product mix-ups occur when a similar but not identical product is installed on the construction site because the one originally planned is temporarily unavailable. Any product change in the area of fire protection requires a new review to determine whether the new certificate of suitability applies to the specific installation situation and whether a fire protection conformity certificate is available for the replacement product. This verification step is often skipped in day-to-day construction site operations because it takes time and the urgency of the problem is not immediately apparent.

Installation errors are the most serious category. They occur when the installation instructions in the certificate of suitability are not followed—whether due to ignorance, a tendency to cut corners, or because the instructions in the document are difficult to understand. Typical installation errors with cable penetrations include the use of incorrect filling materials, insufficient fastening, or the mixing of products from different manufacturers that have not been tested together. For fire-rated doors, common errors include incorrectly adjusted door closers, missing or improperly installed seals, and subsequent modifications to the frame or door leaf that invalidate the certification.

To avoid these errors, a structured fire protection management system on the construction site is recommended, comprising the following elements:

Early specification of all fire protection-related products in the request for proposals, with an explicit requirement for a certificate of conformity
Establishment of a central document folder for all fire safety certifications on the construction site
Training of the contractors on the specific installation instructions for the products used
Random inspections of installation sites by the site manager or fire safety planner during construction
Full handover of the documentation to the building owner as part of the building documentation

The Fire Safety Declaration of Conformity in the European Context

The German system of conformity certification does not exist in isolation but is in tension with the European Construction Products Regulation. The Construction Products Regulation governs the CE marking of construction products and creates a single European market for these products. However, it expressly does not regulate the use of these products under national building codes. This means that a product with CE marking and a declared fire protection performance may not automatically be installed in Germany if a national approval or proof of suitability for use is required for the specific application.

In practice, this duality leads to confusion. Manufacturers from other EU countries who supply their products with CE marking and a declaration of performance are often surprised that additional documentation is required for the German market. Conversely, German planners and building owners must carefully verify, in the case of imported products, whether the CE marking is sufficient for the intended use or whether a national certificate of suitability—and thus a confirmation of compliance with fire protection requirements under German law—is required. The DIBt and the state building authorities have published guidance on this matter; however, this guidance must be updated regularly because the European standards framework is constantly evolving.

European Technical Assessments (ETAs) issued by the DIBt or another authorized Technical Assessment Body may, in certain cases, be recognized as proof of suitability for use under German law. For fire protection products, however, this is subject to strict conditions, because while the European classification standards (in particular the EN 13501 series) harmonize test methods and classifications, the national requirements for fire resistance classes and installation conditions remain enshrined in national law. The fire protection certificate of conformity thus remains a genuinely national instrument, even if the products to which it refers may have been tested and classified at the European level.

Context: Why the Fire Safety Declaration of Conformity Is More Than Just Bureaucracy

It would be a mistake to view the fire safety declaration of conformity as a mere administrative requirement to be fulfilled with as little effort as possible. It serves as the link between the abstract verification of product properties and concrete safety within the building. A fire protection system that has achieved the required fire resistance class in the laboratory will only provide protection in an emergency if it has also been correctly installed and documented on site. The certificate of conformity is the formal proof that this transition has been successfully completed.

For architects and specialist planners, this entails a dual responsibility: they must not only specify the correct products but also ensure that the installation and documentation meet the requirements. This responsibility does not end with the handover of the building, because subsequent changes to fire protection-relevant building components—such as replacing a fire door or retrofitting conduits with certified fire barriers—require new, valid certificates of conformity. Failure to do so not only jeopardizes the building’s operating permit but also results in significant liability in the event of damage.

This issue is gaining importance due to the increasing complexity of modern buildings and the growing density of technical installations. Buildings with extensive building services, data centers, laboratories, or special usage requirements have a multitude of penetrations, fire-resistant barriers, and fire protection systems, each of which requires its own documentation. In this context, the fire protection compliance certificate is not a single document but a structured verification system that must accompany the building throughout its entire service life. Those who consistently implement this system from the very beginning not only ensure legal compliance but also lay the foundation for a permanently effective level of fire protection that truly lives up to its name.

22.01.2025

Project

Co-creation instead of participation

Building design

Management

Participation versus co-creation: Would the Superkilen work better today if citizens had been integrated into the process from the outset?

Superkilen in Copenhagen has failed. The citizens as a whole use the square more as a place to pass through than to linger, even though they were integrated into the planning process through participation – according to a long-term analysis by students at the Danish Institute for Study Abroad. During the design and development process, the Superkilen planners asked citizens to suggest artifacts from their countries of origin for the new city square. Holistic planning with co-creation and prototypes would have been one way of increasing acceptance of the square.

Co-creation

Co-creation originally comes from the business world, which began to involve consumers in the product development process in the 1990s. The Leading Cities research group defines co-creation in urban development as “the active flow of ideas and information between five sectors: government, business, academia, non-profit organizations and citizens that promotes participation, engagement and development.”

What is the difference to citizen participation? Public participation is a means for planners to learn more about the attitudes and opinions of local residents and to develop new ideas. They increase acceptance for a project. Co-creation, on the other hand, involves the most important sectors of society on an equal footing from the outset.

It therefore offers citizens and citizens’ organizations a better opportunity to be truly heard and gain more influence in planning processes. Co-creation views users as proactive citizens rather than consumers, and focuses on long-term cultural change and the whole community rather than individual user groups. Where citizen participation seeks to integrate citizens’ opinions into an already prescribed program, co-creation helps future users to shape and enforce their own decisions. Co-creation is an endless process in the best sense of the word, with regular exchanges taking place between those involved.

Co-creation has a number of advantages. The public provides input and feels equal, citizens feel they are taken seriously. They become much more aware of their living environment. In return, the government has to be much more responsive and responsive to citizens and other sectors. In return, however, it saves costs because only what is actually needed and used is implemented and the risk of a new project is correspondingly low.

Prototypes

In large design projects such as Superkilen, it is extremely important to test ideas in advance before they become a permanent part of the landscape or city. It is a long way from the abstract idea, analysis and public participation to the concrete installation. The prototype should be seen as a learning tool that can be optimized and changed in the next step. Prototypes are a democratic way of dealing with public space, they also reduce the risk of a failed project and unnecessary expenditure.

The holistic approach

Combining co-creation with the prototyping approach makes it easier to explore the potential of a space. This holistic approach leads to more sustainable and vibrant places in the city. However, the Superkilen started with an assumption that co-creation and prototyping would have led to a different design. Users would accept the space better and make it more their own. Perhaps a more critical examination of the initial idea would also have been achieved.

You can read Bianca Hermannsen’s current analysis of the square here.
Robert Schäfer visited Superkilen in 2012, directly after the opening. You can read his review of the new city square in Copenhagen here.
Watch the video here to see how BIG travels with local residents to their countries of origin to select artifacts for Superkilen.

19.12.2024

Design

Heavyweight with a message

Building design

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work by stone sculptor Marc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains what message he wants to convey with his sculpture, why he only uses white marble and […]

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work bystone sculptorMarc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains the message hewants to conveywith hissculpture, why he only works with white stone and why he launched an appeal to collect eggshells before the opening.

Marc Reist: It’s a logical consequence of my artistic work and how I reflect on my surroundings by observing them. I notice how certain rules and mechanisms are similar on both a small and large scale. I never consciously came up with the topic, it just developed. I think it started in 2005.

The Globo Uovo symbolizes the world and the origin of life. Was there a specific reason for this idea?

Yes, that was in 2011. I was invited by a newspaper in Switzerland to write a few columns. I started to write about resources and food in these texts and about what bothers me: the way we deal with food, the way we deal with our environment. And during this phase, I designed the globe and then the egg. The eggs actually always resonate with me. Regularly for my wife – I only mention this in passing – for her birthday, for Mother’s Day, there are always drawings of chicken and egg. I either start with the chicken or the egg, but the egg always resonates.

Do the many openings in the sculpture also have a meaning?

The openings were created by the lines of longitude and latitude. And I found them very special as soon as I was able to work in the egg. There is a feeling of protection when you are in your human egg and you can see the outside world through these openings. At the same time, it could also be a prison. These feelings arose in me when I was working in the egg.

From a professional point of view – I trained as a stone sculptor and also took the master craftsman’s examination – I know almost all the materials. But even so, I used to only work with black stone for my shapes. And now, for years, I’ve only been working in white. For the small sculptures I make, I use a bright white marble. There is no other solution for me and for my forms. I have never used any materials with textures. They are beautiful, but not for my shapes.

But the marble for the egg has a certain texture. Was a block of 55 tons in pure white not available?

For the Globo Uovo, the stone is a little more marbled. Because this size in pure white – that would have been almost impossible and would have meant such a long wait. And the egg in this size in pure white would almost be a little too beautiful(laughs), almost baroque. That’s impossible. Visually too, it’s almost not rock anymore.

So the egg also looks much more “alive”.

Exactly, that’s what I mean. This methamorphosis of the rock, this mountain, that has to resonate.

How did the change from black to white rock come about?

That’s an interesting question. I have to go back to that. I wanted to make a really big sculpture in the 1990s. I chose a large block in Carrara without knowing what I was going to do with it. I wanted to be inspired by the material, by the block. I normally proceed differently. I have a drawing or a model and then work on the stone. But now I wanted to be influenced by the block. At the time, it was 20 tons in size. And that put an enormous strain on me(laughs). I suddenly realized that the further north the block was transported from Italy, the greater the strain in my head became. I was very blocked! And suddenly I found the solution. I then worked out a light cloth from this block. That was probably my solution, to release this heaviness in me in relation to the block. And since then I’ve only worked with white stone.

Are there purely visual reasons why you like to work with marble a lot, or is it also because of its properties?

Both, actually. My sculptures are also a matter of light. Not only with the large egg, but also with the other sculptures. The way the light passes through the opening and the edges is what makes it so good. And the properties for working are a pleasant side effect. It is easy to work with because it is so even, so homogeneous. But I mainly use marble because light and shadow are important for my sculptures.

You also want to send out a message with your art objects.

Yes, absolutely. I think that’s the greatest task of an artist. That his work is seen and heard, as the case may be. Communication is important. It makes no sense at all if I make an egg like this just to have another beautiful sculpture in a park somewhere. That wouldn’t be enough. It needs a message.

What message is that?

We have great difficulties with resources in general. This is most sensitive when it comes to food. And I really want to draw attention to the fact that people need to deal with the issue of food and resources. That a small train of thought changes.

Your sculpture is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. Before the exhibition began, you launched an appeal to collect eggshells. What was the reason?

We had planned a performance with a dancer for the vernissage. I needed a lot of eggshells for that. Over the course of a year, people collected around 35,000 eggshells, washed them and brought them to me. Something you would normally throw away. For the exhibition opening, we laid them out on the floor of the museum and cleared paths, like a labyrinth. The dancer danced her way through it. But every now and then she made missteps on the eggshells, causing them to crack. And at the same time, with every misstep, a part of her body died. Because the shells represent our resources and if they are destroyed, the person dies too. And so she danced through the labyrinth and gradually died a dramatic death after three or four missteps.

Find out more about the project and the natural stone work in the February issue of STEIN. You can also find more information at www.stein-magazin.de/skulptur-des-monats-globo-uovo.