In an interview with Architecture Today, Steve Johnson, Fire-Retardant (FR) Product Manager at James Latham, discusses the key considerations when selecting fire-retardant panel products, highlighting differences in performance, compliance requirements and specification best practice.
Fire-retardant panels are widely used across commercial, education, healthcare and hospitality projects, but not all products perform in the same way. James Latham’s range includes fire-retardant MDF, chipboard, plywood, OSB and laminates, each designed for different applications and regulatory requirements. According to Johnson, these products are engineered so that fire-retardant chemicals are integrated throughout the panel rather than applied only to the surface, ensuring performance is maintained even when panels are cut or machined.
A key distinction highlighted in the article is the difference between reaction to fire and fire resistance. Fire-retardant panels are intended to reduce flame spread and limit a material’s contribution to a fire, but they do not automatically provide a specific fire-resistant period. Fire resistance can only be achieved as part of a fully tested construction system rather than through an individual panel alone.
The article also outlines the importance of the European classification standard BS EN 13501-1, which assesses reaction-to-fire performance. Beyond the headline A to F rating, architects are encouraged to consider smoke production and flaming droplet ratings. For example, Garnica Fireshield plywood achieves a B-s1,d0 classification, indicating limited fire contribution, minimal smoke production and no flaming droplets.
Johnson explains that different fire-retardant products offer varying advantages. Structural plywoods such as WISA SpruceFR provide both structural performance and enhanced fire behaviour, while lightweight products such as Garnica Fireshield Poplar plywood offer easier handling and broad certification across sectors including construction, marine and rail. Fire-retardant MDF and chipboard generally provide comparable fire performance, with selection often influenced by finish, appearance, fabrication requirements and cost.
The role of laminates is also discussed. Johnson notes that achieving compliance requires attention not only to the laminate and substrate, but also to the adhesive system used to bond them together. An unsuitable adhesive can compromise the performance of the entire assembly when exposed to heat.
Addressing common specification errors, Johnson warns against assuming that a fire-retardant panel automatically delivers a defined fire-resistance period: “There is no such thing as a ‘60-minute board’ or a ‘90-minute board’ in isolation.”
He stresses that fire performance depends on complete tested systems incorporating framing, insulation, linings, fixings and other components. Architects should also carefully consider test evidence, fields of application, penetrations, joints and any modifications that could affect certified performance.
Finally, Johnson highlights the importance of certification and traceability. James Latham maintains comprehensive technical documentation, including declarations of performance, fire test results and certification details, to help specifiers make informed decisions and ensure compliance with CE and UKCA requirements. The company also provides technical guidance and ongoing support to architects throughout the specification process.
Overall, the article emphasises that successful specification of fire-retardant panels requires a clear understanding of product performance, testing standards and whole-system fire design, rather than relying solely on individual material classifications.
