Fire Safety and Acoustic Treatments
Published:

Fire Safety and Acoustic Treatments

Quality acoustics should enhance a space—not compromise its safety. Taking the time to understand material behavior is one of the most important design decisions you can make.

Context Without Exploitation

Fire safety in interior finishes remains an ongoing and critical consideration—particularly in spaces where acoustic treatments are installed overhead or across large wall surfaces. In assembly occupancies such as nightclubs, theaters, restaurants, event venues, and other public gathering spaces, acoustic materials play a visible role in both performance and design intent. However, their behavior under fire exposure is an equally important—yet often underexamined—aspect of specification.

This paper and accompanying video documentation are intended to support architects, interior designers, acoustic consultants, specifiers, and facility owners by clarifying how different acoustic materials respond when exposed to flame. It further addresses why relying solely on generalized marketing terms such as “fire retardant” can create a false sense of security, and why a deeper understanding of material behavior is essential to informed, responsible design decisions.
Sparklers being used inside of a nightclub

Why Acoustic Materials Pose Unique Fire Risks

Acoustic materials are often:

  • Installed in large surface areas
  • Mounted above occupants
  • Composed of organic polymer structures
  • Positioned near lighting, electrical, or heat sources

When improperly selected, these materials can:

  • Ignite rapidly
  • Produce flaming melt-drip
  • Contribute to secondary fires
  • Accelerate flashover conditions
  • Generate flame and dense toxic smoke that can obscure exit paths and reduce visibility during egress

Sound control should never come at the expense of life safety.

Materials Tested

In controlled, in-house fire exposure testing, multiple commercially available acoustic materials were evaluated side-by-side, including:

  • Melamine resin–based acoustic foam
  • Polyethylene (PE) acoustic foam/felt
  • Polyurethane (PU) acoustic foam

All samples were subjected to identical flame exposure conditions for visual and behavioral comparison.

Observed Fire Behavior

Polyethylene & Polyurethane Materials

Across all tested PE and PU samples, the following behaviors were consistently observed:

  • Rapid ignition
  • Sustained flame propagation
  • Molten, flaming drip
  • Secondary ignition upon contact with the test surface
  • Accumulation of burning material forming a flaming pool
  • Release of dense, toxic smoke and combustion byproducts

Notably, several of these products were marketed as fire retardant, yet still exhibited aggressive combustion behavior under direct flame exposure.
Polyurethane acoustic foam on fire, advertised as fire retardant
Polyurethane acoustic foam advertised
asfire retardant/flame resistant

 

Melamine Acoustic Foam

In contrast, melamine-based acoustic foam demonstrated fundamentally different behavior:

  • Self-limiting flame response under direct exposure
  • Immediate flame extinguishment upon removal of the ignition source
  • No flaming melt-drip
  • No secondary ignition on the test surface
  • Structural charring rather than material collapse or flow

This behavior aligns with the inherent properties of melamine resin foams, which are thermoset rather than thermoplastic in nature.
Attempting to ignite Melamine acoustic foam.
Attempting to ignite Melamine acoustic foam.
The foam only charred and flame was not
present after removing the source.

Why Melamine Foam Is Inherently Fire Resistant

Melamine foam is inherently fire resistant due to its nitrogen-rich molecular structure and thermoset composition. When combustion occurs, nitrogen within the resin is released as inert gases, which dilute oxygen at the flame front and actively suppress ignition.Instead of melting or dripping, melamine foam forms a char layerthat insulates the underlying material and prevents flame propagation.Once the ignition source is removed, combustion self-extinguishes immediately, without reliance on surface-applied fire-retardant chemicals.
Fire resistance engineered at the molecular level in melamine foam
Fire resistance engineered at the molecular level,
no applied coatings required.
ID Material Advertised Flame Resistant/Fire Retardant Continued Burning After Flame Source Removed Melt-Drip Caused Secondary Fire
A Poly-Fiber/Polyethylene
Yes
 Caught Fire
Melt-Drip
Caused Secondary Fire
B Unspecified
No
 Caught Fire
 Melt-Drip
 Caused Secondary Fire
C Polyurethane Yes Caught Fire
 Melt-Drip
 Caused Secondary Fire
D Polyurethane Yes Caught Fire
 Melt-Drip
Caused Secondary Fire
E Not Specified Yes Caught Fire
 Melt-Drip
 Caused Secondary Fire
F Polyurethane Yes
Caught Fire
 Melt-Drip
 Caused Secondary Fire
G Melamine (Natural White) Yes
No
 No No
H Melamine (Natural White Color Coated) Yes No
No
 No
I Melamine (Natural Black) Yes No
 No No
Why “Fire Retardant” Isn’t Enough

A critical takeaway from this testing is the difference between:

  • Additive fire retardancy (commonly used in PE/PU foams)
  • Inherent fire resistance (as seen in melamine resin foams)

It is also important to recognize that fire ratings and “fire retardant” claims can be misleading when the ignition source is not clearly defined. Some materials may perform acceptably under low-energy ignition scenarios (such as a smoldering source or lit cigarette), yet behave very differently when exposed to direct, open flame.

Additive treatments may:

  • Delay ignition briefly
  • Still melt, drip, and propagate flame once ignited
  • Degrade over time or under sustained heat exposure

Inherent material behavior, by contrast, does not rely on surface chemistry alone and remains more predictable across a wider range of fire exposure conditions.
DID YOU KNOW?

Many acoustic materials rely on applied fire-retardant sprays or coatings to meet flame-spread requirements. These treatments are not permanent and typically require reapplication every 1 to 5 years, depending on environmental conditions such as humidity, UV exposure, cleaning practices, and physical handling. In high-use or higher-risk environments, ongoing inspection, testing, and even annual reapplication may be necessary to maintain compliance and intended fire performance.

Melamine-based acoustic foam, by contrast, does not depend on surface-applied fire-retardant treatments. Its fire resistance is inherent to the material itself, meaning there is no coating to degrade, wear off, or require reapplication over time. As a result, melamine provides a more stable, predictable fire performance throughout its service life—reducing maintenance burden, long-term risk, and reliance on periodic chemical treatments.

Standards Matter—But Understanding Them Matters More

Techlite’s melamine acoustic products are Class A rated and tested to ASTM E-84, which evaluates:

  • Flame spread
  • Smoke development

However, certifications should be the starting point—not the finish line. Designers and specifiers should also ask:

  • How does the material behave once ignited?
  • Does it melt or drip?
  • Does it contribute to secondary fire spread?
  • Is it thermoplastic or thermoset?

Why In-House Fire Testing Was Conducted

Rather than relying solely on datasheets or third-party claims, Techlite conducted comparative fire exposure testing to better understand real-world material behavior.

The videos and images shown in this article are:

  • Unedited
  • Conducted under identical conditions
  • Intended for educational evaluation—not theatrical demonstration

Key Takeaways for Designers & Facility Owners

  • Acoustic performance alone is not sufficient
  • Marketing terms like “fire retardant” require scrutiny
  • Thermoplastic foams can introduce severe secondary fire risks
  • Material chemistry matters as much as test ratings
  • Fire behavior should be evaluated before installation, not after an incident

This evaluation reinforces the importance of informed material selection in acoustic design. Fire performance is not binary, and material behavior under flame exposure should be carefully considered alongside code compliance.

 

Back to blog