Building-integrated photovoltaic (BIPV) façade systems introduce high-voltage ignition sources, carrying DC currents up to 1000 V, directly into façade structures, a hazard unprecedented in conventional façades. Despite this, the regulatory framework in the Netherlands falls short in adequately addressing the fire safety risks posed by BIPV façade systems, with no short-term tendency for improval. Currently, the applicable fire safety regulations do not address the unique electrical characteristics of BIPV systems, considering them equal to conventional construction materials. The testing methods fail to account for the distinct ignition scenarios these systems present, resulting in fire classifications for façades that are not adequately representative. Furthermore, there is no statutory quality system in place to guarantee an acceptable level of safety.

Through the execution of a fault tree analysis, several foundational findings were identified regarding the fire risks of BIPV façade systems. The most common failure modes are electric arcs and hot-spots. In addition to the inherent risks of façades and the chimney effect, BIPV façade systems introduce further risks. They expose combustible materials to new ignition sources, contain components within cavities that may not be designed to operate at high temperatures, present inspection and maintenance challenges, cable penetrations which can facilitate fire spread and heavyweight BIPV modules can pose a risk of injury or blocking pathways if they fall.

A wide variety of measures have been identified to tackle the fire risks of BIPV system. To narrow it down, it is most effective to first focus on preventing the ignition of fire. This can primarily be achieved by proper design and installation of electrical systems, validating them through quality schemes, and performing periodic maintenance with infrared (IR) inspections. While quality installation by accredited installers (InstallQ) minimizes errors, it doesn't eliminate them entirely. Therefore, independent quality inspections (SCOPE12) are crucial for added safety and reliability.

Subsequently, to limit the development of fire, it is essential to always employ a glass/glass or glass/copper BIPV module (fire class B: NEN-EN 13501-1), and use a protective fire barrier (fire class A2/A1: NEN-EN 13501-1) in the cavity. Additionally, segmenting BIPV façades and cavities that span multiple fire compartments through physical barriers or well-performing cavity barriers is necessary. Utilizing smart detailing around façade openings and BIPV cavities, ensuring modules are easily removable from the façade, and implementing well-performing cable penetrations through the façade are also critical steps.

As these measures require an integrated approach, it is emphasized that the architect, façade designer, BIPV manufacturer and electrical installer should closely collaborate to design the electrical configuration of the BIPV system and adequately implement the effects of the system on the detailing, particularly in the façade (e.g. component placement in façade, cable penetrations, etc.).

To improve the spread of knowledge, a design support tool has been developed. This tool provides a framework that highlights critical fire safety considerations through 23 risk parameters on building, façade and product level, enabling users to conduct risk assessments and offering specific measures based on design input. User feedback confirmed the tool's potential in raising awareness among designers about BIPV challenges, facilitating informed decision-making, and integrating fire safety from the outset.

The design support tool does not provide a guaranteed 'fire safe' solution; fire safety should always be assessed in its unique context, especially due to the electro-technical characteristics of BIPV systems. The tool is a preliminary setup that lays a solid framework but requires further refinement through empirical research and end-use testing. It is particularly relevant in the current pre-normative state, guiding designers through fire safety complexities and potentially supporting future regulatory developments.