Condor Roof Ventilators in
Fire Risk Areas

Given the possibility that, during a fire storm, flying debris could shear or dislodge the Condor Ventilator Terminal from it’s base, Condor engineers have developed a device to arrest possible debris entry into the roof.

The ‘basket’ ( optional equipment) is a perforated steel sheet tubular section, with hole size of 3.5mm, and a sealed steel catchment tray welded to the bottom.
...(as per diagram)

The ‘basket’ is designed to have the minimum proportional free air value of 150% of ventilator throat.

Note: Free Air is the unresisted value of the open area and not the size of the opening.

Roof Ventilators in Fire Risk Areas

When installing a roof ventilator to a building in a fire risk area,

DO NOT INSERT FLYWIRE SCREENING INTO THE THROAT OF THE VENTILATOR

This is potentially dangerous practice and can result in creating the very thing you were attempting to guard against.

The flywire will rapidly collect dust and fibre, on the underside of the flywire and seal the throat of the roof ventilator.

If a fire is to occur and come within close proximity to the ventilator, the fibre mass on the screen will ignite and fall down INSIDE the roof, as there is no exhaust movement of the air volume in the roof ventilator throat due to having been sealed.

Condor has found no evidence supporting the introduction of fine screening to the throat of a roof ventilator designed to exhaust an air volume through thermal or pressure differential.

There is however a great deal of evidence showing that burning embers can and do gain entry through,

incorrect installation of flashings
inadequate flashing design for such areas
incorrect selection of flashings
unscreened air intake, eave and gable vents

The Condor Roof Ventilator, installed as per manufacturers recommendations, does not fall into any of these categories.

Much has been thought, said, supposed, and conjectured over regarding roof ventilation in general, but in particular to high fire risk areas.

Most of what has been said has been stated, suggested and surmised has been on a platform of ignorance, fear and supposition with little or no true reference.

The Australian Building Codes Board, it appears, postulate knowledge with no specific research to back it up.
When the department was questioned about various issues regarding ventilation, the ABCB claimed that the recommendations come from Peak Industries.
The analogy being like allowing banks to set a preferred interest rate.

When asked to show the information, they have none, much less specific to.

Then the ABCB presents these standards to Australian Building Authorities & City Corporations, who blindly accept believing that the ABCB have the research to back their claims.

The ABCB accepts no responsibility for any negative outcome arising from their recommendations claiming that they are recommendations only and that it is the City Corporations or Councils that enforce these recommendations.

Mediocrity at it's best.

When confronted with any anomaly in the Building Codes, the homeowner/builder is advised to inquire as to whether the city council is accepting responsibility for any negative outcome arising from the standard/s imposed in the construction of the building

contact details