Key Takeaways
In this article
Manufacturing environments vary enormously. A food production site, metal fabrication plant, timber workshop, plastics manufacturer, electronics facility and chemical processing area can all sit under the broad heading of “manufacturing”, but their fire risks are very different.
The risks usually come from a combination of ignition sources, fuel sources and operational conditions. Electrical faults in machinery, panels and control equipment are common concerns. So are overheating motors, bearings, drives and conveyors. Many sites also handle flammable liquids, oils, solvents, paints, coatings, combustible dust, packaging or finished goods that can increase the fire load significantly.
Other risks are created by the manufacturing process itself. Welding, grinding, cutting, ovens, furnaces, process heating, enclosed machinery, dust extraction, spray booths, battery charging and hot work can all introduce hazards that would not normally be present in a standard commercial building.
In many factories, the fire risk is not limited to one obvious source. A small electrical fault can ignite packaging. A hot bearing can ignite dust or material on a conveyor. A spark from grinding can enter an extraction duct. A solvent vapour can ignite if ventilation is poor. A fire in one control panel can stop an entire production line.
The consequences can be serious. Beyond life safety and property damage, a manufacturing fire can cause production downtime, loss of contracts, supply chain disruption, machinery replacement, contamination, environmental issues and insurance complications.
This is why manufacturing fire protection needs to be designed around process risk and business continuity, not just basic building compliance.
A suitable manufacturing fire protection strategy starts with a proper risk assessment.
This should consider the building, but it should also go deeper into the actual production processes. The assessment should look at what materials are used, stored or processed, where ignition sources exist, which machines generate heat or sparks, whether combustible dust is present, and what would happen if a specific machine, line or control area was lost.
A good risk assessment normally identifies that different areas of the same factory need different protection. A general production area may need automatic detection and alarm coverage, while a CNC machine may need local automatic suppression. A spray booth may need specialist detection, ventilation interlocks and suppression. A switch room may need non-conductive gaseous suppression. A dust extraction system may need spark detection, explosion isolation or suppression.
This layered approach is usually more effective than trying to protect the whole facility with one generic system.
The risk assessment should also consider site occupancy. Some manufacturing sites are fully staffed during production hours but only lightly occupied at night. Others run continuously with shift teams. Some areas may be unmanned for long periods. The detection, alarm signalling and suppression strategy should reflect how quickly people can investigate and respond.
Fire detection in manufacturing needs careful selection. Standard smoke detection may be suitable in some areas, but it is not always the right answer.
Factories can contain dust, steam, heat, fumes, welding activity, process smoke, high ceilings, moving air and physical obstructions. The wrong detector type can lead to false alarms, missed detection or a system that operators eventually learn to ignore.
Smoke detection can work well in offices, welfare areas, clean production spaces, electrical rooms and some storage areas. However, in dusty, steamy or smoky process environments, standard point smoke detectors may not be suitable without careful assessment.
Aspirating smoke detection can provide very early warning in selected manufacturing environments, particularly where access is difficult, ceilings are high, airflow is challenging, or early intervention is important. It may be useful for electrical rooms, control rooms, clean production areas, high-value process spaces or specialist enclosures.
Heat detection can be useful where smoke detection would create unwanted alarms, such as areas with steam, dust or process fumes. It is generally slower than smoke detection, so it should be used where it matches the risk and response strategy.
Linear heat detection can be valuable for conveyors, cable routes, machinery, tunnels, ducts, plant areas and other risks where a continuous detection cable can be run close to the hazard.
Flame detection can provide rapid detection where flaming fires may develop quickly, especially in high-risk industrial areas, fuel handling, paint or spray areas, outdoor plant, or where smoke detection is unsuitable. The detector type and positioning need careful design to avoid false alarms from welding, sunlight, hot surfaces or process activity.
Gas detection may be needed where flammable gases, toxic gases, CO2, refrigerants or process gases are present. Gas detection is not a replacement for fire detection, but it can be a critical part of the wider safety strategy.
In some extraction and conveying systems, particularly where combustible dust or dry material is moved through ductwork, spark detection and suppression may be needed to stop ignition sources travelling into filters, cyclones, silos or collection units.
The important point is that detection should be matched to the hazard. In manufacturing, detector selection is a design decision, not a standard shopping list.
Manufacturing fire suppression also needs to be risk-specific. Different hazards require different extinguishing methods.
Sprinklers can provide effective protection for many factory and warehouse areas. They are particularly relevant where there is a wider property protection or insurer requirement. However, sprinklers are not always the right answer for every manufacturing risk. Water may be unsuitable around certain electrical equipment, reactive materials, specialist machinery or high-value process equipment.
Water mist may be suitable for selected plant, machinery or industrial risks where reduced water volume is beneficial. It can be useful in some enclosed machinery or process applications, but it must be properly tested and approved for the specific hazard.
Gaseous suppression can be suitable for enclosed electrical rooms, control rooms, server rooms, MCC rooms, turbine enclosures, generator spaces and other areas where water or residue would cause unacceptable damage. Modern clean agent and inert gas systems may be appropriate depending on room size, occupancy, environmental requirements and business continuity needs. CO2 may be suitable for specific unmanned or controlled risks, but it must be treated carefully because of the life safety hazard.
CO2 can also be used in local application systems for certain machinery or process risks. Unlike total flooding, which fills an enclosed volume, local application discharges directly onto or around a defined hazard. This can be relevant where the risk is a specific machine, open process area or item of plant rather than a whole enclosed room. Nozzle positioning, discharge rate, cooling effect, oxygen displacement and safe access arrangements all become critical.
Foam may be suitable for certain flammable liquid risks, bunded areas, fuel storage, process tanks or spill hazards. Foam systems need to be designed around the liquid type, surface area, containment and re-ignition risk.
Dry chemical systems can be effective for some flammable liquid or specialist industrial risks, but residue and clean-up need to be considered carefully. In sensitive manufacturing areas, residue can create contamination or equipment damage.
Some manufacturing risks are best protected at machine level. CNC machines, enclosed grinding machines, EDM machines, test cells, engine enclosures and specialist process equipment may benefit from dedicated local detection and suppression. Machine-level systems can detect and suppress a fire at source, limiting damage to one item of plant rather than allowing a fire to spread into the wider factory.
Book a Site Fire Protection Review
Manufacturing fire protection needs to be considered under several overlapping duties and standards.
In England and Wales, the responsible person must ensure that a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment is carried out and that appropriate fire precautions are in place. For manufacturing sites, this should include both life safety and the specific risks created by the industrial process.
Building Regulations and Approved Document B may be relevant to new buildings, extensions, alterations and material changes of use. These deal with matters such as means of escape, internal fire spread, external fire spread, structural fire precautions and fire service access.
Where dangerous substances are present, DSEAR is particularly important. DSEAR applies where substances can create fire, explosion or similar energy-release risks. This can include flammable liquids, gases, vapours, dusts and other dangerous substances used or generated during manufacturing.
DSEAR considerations may include identifying dangerous substances, assessing fire and explosion risks, controlling ignition sources, classifying hazardous zones where explosive atmospheres may occur, selecting suitable equipment, providing suitable ventilation or containment, training staff and contractors, and reviewing processes when materials or layouts change.
Relevant standards may also include BS 5839-1:2025 for fire detection and fire alarm systems, BS EN 12845 for automatic sprinkler systems, BS EN 15004 for gaseous fire extinguishing systems, BS EN 17966:2024 for CO2 fire extinguishing systems where applicable, the BS 7273 series for actuation of fire protection measures, the BS 5306 series for portable extinguishers and fire extinguishing equipment, and applicable ATEX or DSEAR guidance for hazardous areas.
The exact requirements will depend on the site, process, insurer and fire strategy. A manufacturing fire protection scheme should not be designed around a single standard in isolation.
Combustible dust is one of the most serious and sometimes underestimated risks in manufacturing.
Dust from materials such as wood, flour, sugar, grain, plastics, textiles, paper, aluminium, magnesium and other powders can create explosive atmospheres under the right conditions.
A dust explosion generally needs combustible dust, oxygen, dispersion of the dust into a cloud, confinement and an ignition source. If those conditions come together, the result can be extremely destructive. A small initial event can also disturb settled dust, creating a larger secondary explosion.
Controls may include good housekeeping, local exhaust ventilation, dust extraction and collection, spark detection, explosion relief venting, explosion isolation, anti-static controls, suitable electrical equipment, hot work controls, preventive maintenance, DSEAR risk assessment and staff training.
This is an area where generic fire alarm and suppression design is not enough. Combustible dust risks need specialist assessment because the hazard is not simply fire. It may include explosion, pressure wave, flame propagation and secondary ignition.
Manufacturing facilities often depend on electrical control infrastructure. Switch rooms, motor control centres, PLC panels, inverter drives, control cabinets and distribution boards can be business-critical.
A fire in one electrical room can stop production across the whole site.
These areas may require early warning smoke detection, aspirating smoke detection, thermal monitoring, clean agent or inert gas suppression, CO2 suppression for suitable unmanned risks, ventilation shutdown interfaces, power isolation strategy, clear access controls and regular maintenance.
Water-based suppression may not be appropriate in many electrical environments, particularly where equipment damage or electrical hazard would be unacceptable. The design should consider both fire suppression and safe recovery.
Maintenance is especially important in manufacturing because fire protection systems often sit within harsh environments.
Dust, vibration, temperature change, process contamination, mechanical damage and production alterations can all affect system performance.
A good maintenance regime should include planned inspection and servicing, routine user checks, cleaning of detectors and sampling points, testing of alarms and interfaces, testing of plant shutdown signals, checking suppression cylinder pressures or contents, inspecting nozzles for obstruction, reviewing changes to machinery or layout, checking fire-stopping after cable or service works, documenting impairments and returning systems to service after maintenance or production changes.
Manufacturing sites also need good impairment control. If a suppression system, sprinkler zone, detection circuit or fire alarm interface is isolated during maintenance, the site needs a clear procedure to manage the temporary risk and return the system to service.
Production pressure should never be allowed to permanently override fire protection. A system left isolated because it is inconvenient to reset is a serious management failure.
The most common problems are usually practical rather than theoretical.
Fire detection is often designed like an office system rather than a factory system. Smoke detectors may be installed in dusty or steamy areas where they are unsuitable. Machinery may be added without reviewing fire protection. Extraction systems may be overlooked. Electrical rooms may be protected only by the general building alarm. Fire-stopping may be damaged by new cables or services. Sprinkler heads may be obstructed by storage or production changes. Suppression nozzles may become blocked or no longer aligned with the risk.
Other issues are management-related. Hot work may not be properly controlled. DSEAR risks may not be reflected in the detection or suppression design. Alarm interfaces may not be tested. Staff may be unsure what happens when a system activates. Maintenance may be delayed because of production demands. Insurer requirements may be considered too late.
Manufacturing sites change frequently. That is why fire protection should be reviewed whenever machinery, materials, storage, processes, extraction, layout or production hours change.
Proper manufacturing fire protection is an engineering process.
It should start with a site survey and process risk review. From there, the design should consider fire risk, business continuity, ignition sources, fuel loads, hazardous substances, DSEAR issues, detection strategy, suppression strategy, cause-and-effect planning, installation, commissioning, staff training, maintenance and periodic review.
Cause-and-effect is particularly important. In manufacturing, a fire protection system may need to do more than raise an alarm. It may need to shut down a machine, stop extraction, close dampers, isolate fuel, activate suppression, signal the building fire alarm, notify remote monitoring and guide staff response.
That sequence must be planned and documented.
Manufacturing fire protection should never be based on assumptions.
The right system depends on what is being manufactured, how it is manufactured, what materials are present, how the building is arranged, how critical the process is, and what would happen if fire occurred.
A good strategy should protect people, production equipment, critical plant, stock, materials, the building, business continuity, compliance position and insurance requirements.
For some sites, the correct answer may be enhanced fire detection and alarm coverage. For others, it may be local machine suppression, sprinkler protection, spark detection, gaseous suppression, gas detection, hazardous area controls or a combination of several systems.
Astro Fire Systems can support manufacturing clients with specialist fire detection, fire suppression, gas detection, sprinkler monitoring, gaseous systems, CO2 systems, maintenance and technical reviews for industrial environments.
The aim is simple: understand the real process risk and design protection that works in that environment.
Manufacturing facilities are too varied and too important for generic fire protection. The safest and most reliable approach is a risk-led, engineered system that protects the specific hazards, supports compliance and keeps production resilient.
Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 - responsible person duties and fire risk assessment
Building Regulations, Approved Document B
DSEAR (Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002)
ATEX and hazardous area guidance
BS 5839-1:2025 - fire detection and fire alarm systems
BS EN 12845 - automatic sprinkler systems
BS EN 15004 - gaseous fire extinguishing systems
BS EN 17966:2024 - CO2 fire extinguishing systems
BS 7273 series - actuation of fire protection measures
BS 5306 series - portable extinguishers and fire extinguishing equipment
Manufacturer design manuals and system approvals
Insurer requirements
Site-specific fire risk assessment
There is no single fire protection solution that suits every manufacturing facility. The level of protection required depends on the processes being carried out, the materials being handled, the potential fire hazards present and the consequences of a fire affecting production.
Fire detection and alarm systems are commonly used to provide early warning of fire, support evacuation procedures and initiate emergency response arrangements. However, in many manufacturing environments, detection alone may not provide sufficient protection for critical equipment, high-risk processes or business continuity objectives.
Higher-risk areas such as CNC machinery, electrical switchrooms, spray booths, extraction systems, flammable liquid stores, battery charging facilities and specialist production equipment often require additional protection measures. Depending on the risk, this may include local application fire suppression, automatic extinguishing systems, spark detection, specialist detection technologies or enhanced compartmentation.
The most appropriate solution should be determined through a fire risk assessment, consideration of insurer requirements and an understanding of the operational impact that a fire could have on the business. In many manufacturing facilities, different areas of the site require different protection strategies rather than a single approach applied across the entire building.
Reviewed by David Cullis, Managing Director, Astro Fire Systems Ltd. Astro Fire Systems Ltd is BAFE certificated under SP203-1 (Fire Detection & Alarm Systems) and SP203-3 (Fixed Fire Suppression Systems).
DSEAR (The Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations) is UK legislation designed to protect people from the risks associated with dangerous substances and potentially explosive atmospheres in the workplace. If your factory uses, stores, processes or generates substances that could catch fire, explode or create a hazardous atmosphere, DSEAR may apply.
Dangerous substances can include flammable liquids, solvents, paints, oils, fuels, gases, vapours, combustible dusts and certain chemical products. As a result, DSEAR is relevant to a far wider range of manufacturing facilities than many people realise. Industries such as engineering, woodworking, food production, printing, automotive manufacturing, powder coating and chemical processing may all have DSEAR considerations.
Where DSEAR applies, employers are required to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment, identify potential ignition sources, assess the likelihood and consequences of fire or explosion, and implement appropriate control measures. This may include hazardous area classification (zoning), selection of suitable equipment, ventilation measures, fire and explosion protection systems, staff training and emergency procedures.
DSEAR compliance is a legal requirement rather than an optional best-practice exercise. However, the level of control required depends on the specific hazards present and the nature of the process being undertaken. A competent DSEAR assessment is often the starting point for determining the most appropriate fire detection, suppression and explosion protection measures for a manufacturing environment.
Not every DSEAR area requires fire suppression, but many DSEAR assessments identify the need for specialist detection, suppression or explosion protection measures.
They can, but only if the detector technology is suitable for the environment. Dust, steam, airborne fibres, process emissions and other contaminants can affect the performance of conventional smoke detectors, potentially leading to unwanted alarms, increased maintenance requirements or reduced reliability.
The challenge in manufacturing environments is balancing early fire detection with resistance to the normal conditions created by the production process. In some areas, conventional point smoke detectors may remain entirely appropriate. In others, alternative technologies may provide a more reliable solution.
Depending on the hazard and operating conditions, this may include heat detection, linear heat detection, flame detection, aspirating smoke detection, spark detection or specialist industrial detection systems. For example, spark detection is commonly used within extraction and dust collection systems, whilst aspirating smoke detection may be used in cleaner, high-value production areas where very early warning is required.
The correct solution should be based on a fire risk assessment, the environmental conditions present and the type of fire that is most likely to occur. Choosing the wrong detector technology can result in poor performance, unnecessary disruption and increased maintenance costs. Effective industrial fire detection is therefore a design decision based on risk and environment rather than simply selecting a detector from a catalogue.
Not always, but many CNC machines represent a fire risk that justifies dedicated local fire suppression. The requirement depends on the machining process, the materials being worked, the type of coolant or lubricant used, the machine design and the potential consequences of a fire.
Fires within CNC machines can develop rapidly due to the combination of heat, friction, metal swarf, cutting fluids and enclosed working areas. Certain machining operations, particularly those involving oil-based coolants, can create conditions where ignition and fire spread occur before personnel become aware of the problem. Once established, a machine fire can result in significant equipment damage, production downtime and disruption to wider manufacturing operations.
Local application fire suppression systems are designed to detect and extinguish fires within the machine enclosure before they spread beyond the protected equipment. These systems can often minimise damage, reduce production losses and limit business interruption compared with relying solely on manual firefighting or factory-wide fire protection systems.
There are many dedicated fire protection solutions specifically designed for CNC machinery, ranging from compact self-contained suppression systems through to more sophisticated integrated detection and extinguishing arrangements. In many cases, these systems provide a highly effective and cost-efficient means of protecting valuable production equipment without the complexity or cost associated with protecting an entire manufacturing area.
Whether suppression is required should be determined through a fire risk assessment, consideration of insurer requirements and an evaluation of the specific hazards associated with the machining process. Whilst not every CNC machine requires dedicated suppression, many manufacturers regard it as an important risk management measure for protecting critical production assets, reducing downtime and maintaining operational resilience.
For many businesses, the greatest concern is not the cost of repairing the machine itself, but the loss of production, missed deliveries and operational disruption that can follow a machine fire.
Manufacturing fire protection should be reviewed whenever there is a significant change to the process, equipment, materials or building environment. One of the most common causes of fire protection systems becoming ineffective is not equipment failure, but the gradual evolution of the manufacturing process whilst the original fire protection strategy remains unchanged.
Changes such as new machinery, altered production layouts, different raw materials, increased storage quantities, new extraction systems, modified ventilation arrangements or changes to operating procedures can all affect the suitability of existing fire protection measures. In some cases, a system that was entirely appropriate when first installed may no longer provide adequate protection following operational changes.
Manufacturing environments are particularly dynamic. Production equipment is replaced, processes are optimised, storage arrangements change and business demands evolve. Each of these changes has the potential to alter the fire risk profile of the site and should be considered as part of ongoing fire risk management.
Routine inspection, testing and maintenance should continue in accordance with the relevant standards, manufacturer recommendations and insurer requirements. However, servicing alone does not confirm that a fire protection strategy remains suitable for the current manufacturing process.
The most effective approach is to review fire protection whenever significant operational changes occur rather than waiting until an incident, insurer recommendation or enforcement action highlights a problem. Fire protection should evolve alongside the manufacturing process it is intended to protect.
Whether you need a new system, an existing installation reviewed, or maintenance support, our engineers can help. Call 01905 964703 or request a free site survey.
Get in touch
BAFE accredited fire protection specialists (SP203). Over 20 years of experience in fire suppression and detection for data centres, manufacturing, commercial and public sector clients across the UK.
BAFE 302724 | Worcester, UK | Nationwide service
