Manufacturer
30 years of ACERMI: Two-way interviews
The manufacturer organizations FILMM and AFIPEB were present at the birth of ACERMI, when the association was set up by CSTB and LNE. Their respective chairmen Dirk de Meulder and Paul Jallon recall the reasons why, and give us their perspective on its development since.
As pioneers of certification, what were the reasons that interested you in ACERMI certification at the time of its introduction, and what did you expect of it?
- Dirk de Meulder
- The publication of the thermal insulation regulations in 1974 following the oil crisis made it important to have a system capable of producing a reliable indication of insulation performance. But in those days, there were no such things as characterization standards. So it was important that products launched into the market could be assessed against a shared and known benchmark, and that those comparisons should be carried out by an independent body. And 10 years later - in 1985 - ACERMI was born. For us, it was the most secure and objective way of having the performance of our products validated.
- Paul Jallon
- Right from the beginning, the certification process was not limited solely to performance measurement. It also aimed to ensure the long-term delivery of that performance by monitoring the manufacturing process. The result gave manufacturers and users a dependable and neutral benchmarking system.
So was the result in line with your expectations?
- Paul Jallon
- Without a doubt. Not only did it introduce a new level of strictness into performance measurement, but it also helped to provide a better understanding of how materials behave. Ultimately, that helped us to check production consistency.
- Dirk de Meulder
- Certification has played a major role in product range development. It has enabled that development to take place inside a framework that is trusted, because customers feel supported in their choices. Just look at the change in the number of certifications, especially over the period from 2000 to 2010 (300) and again from 2010 to 2015 (600). That gives real credibility to the products concerned.
What are the key stages in how ACERMI certification has evolved? And does that evolution meet the expectations of manufacturers?
- Dirk de Meulder
- I see three distinct stages. First came the creation of the association and the implementation and consolidation of methods, then the incorporation of European requirements (between 2001 and 2003), especially CE marking, and lastly, the inclusion of new products like - most recently - biosourced materials (thanks to the Springboard Guidelines), at the same time as practical application recommendations (in the form of Technical Assessments in France).
- Paul Jallon
- The 'European' stage, which included CE marking, was definitely an important moment. Professionals have chosen to retain a certification system which on the one hand is voluntary, and on the other hand complements CE marking by going further than just the essential product characteristics. In this way, ACERMI offers to certify more than just usage criteria to inform the construction choices of contractors. More demanding and systematically involving an independent body, the ACERMI system is more reassuring for users. Especially since it still embraces the concept of long-term production consistency.
Do you think that ACERMI certification is as useful today as it was when it was first introduced?
- Paul Jallon
- It is just as useful, but in a different way. Originally introduced to provide reliable assessment resources, it has become an effective marketing endorsement precisely as a result of the way in which it is awarded and the scope of product characteristics it covers.
Does it need to evolve any further, and if so, to achieve what?
- Dirk de Meulder
- It must be attentive to the wishes of our customers. There are undoubtedly additional aspects that could be identified to provide clear formation on product suitability for particular applications, especially in conjunction with best professional practice.
- Paul Jallon
- A number of developments are potentially possible, but what's important is to retain the objectivity and independence of ACERMI certification.
