Tower block fire - london

ubersonic said:
To be perfectly honest, while it's fully possible this was caused by some greedy so and so trying to cut costs it's also just as likely it was an accidental chain of unfortunate events.

What I mean is, it's possible that the company hired to install the cladding cut corners and used the cheapo stuff knowing it didn't conform to regs, but it's also just as possible that they looked at the regs, saw the requirement for cladding to be of limited combustibility, then looked at the data sheet for the cheap cladding, saw a great fire standards result and went with that. In that case while that person is to blame as they made the decision, it's not entirely their fault as it was an honest mistake.

In the case of the advertising, it's not required for a manufacturer to list all the standards a product fails to meet, just the ones it does.
Click to expand...


yeah i can see that.

swiss cheese model of error prevention isn't it?

the idea being holes in each layer should be caught by the next.

clearly here this failed.

the question will be at what point.

misrepresentation by companies may be a big factor "we have excellent fire safety results" * bury actual regs requirement sin page 145 of a 600 page document*
 
The thing that kinda scares me a little is, if I didn't know about Grenfell Tower, and I saw this data sheet:

12woCmM.jpg

I would see that the PE panels used on Grenfell have a class 0 (the best) fire resistance certification, and would be inclined to use them on a project requiring fire resistance /shudder.
 
ubersonic said:
The thing that kinda scares me a little is, if I didn't know about Grenfell Tower, and I saw this data sheet:

12woCmM.jpg

I would see that the PE panels used on Grenfell have a class 0 (the best) fire resistance certification, and would be inclined to use them on a project requiring fire resistance /shudder.
Click to expand...


just googl,ed the standrad


http://www.densol.biz/downloads/catlogues/BS 476 Part 6.pdf

not read yet but you might want to read lets see if a layman can pick u pthis is wrong
 
Tefal said:
just googl,ed the standrad
Click to expand...

It was kinda funny in this thread a couple of weeks ago when I was posting excerpts from the regs and highlighting how the panels did not conform to the requirements and some posters were like "Nono the TV says they conform", one even told me straight that they thought I was interpreting the the regs wrong and that just because it said cladding had to be of limited combustibility that didn't mean flammable cladding wasn't acceptable XD
 
ubersonic said:
It was kinda funny in this thread a couple of weeks ago when I was posting excerpts from the regs and highlighting how the panels did not conform to the requirements and some posters were like "Nono the TV says they conform", one even told me straight that they thought I was interpreting the the regs wrong and that just because it said cladding had to be of limited combustibility that didn't mean flammable cladding wasn't acceptable XD
Click to expand...


fair does, honestly gogoling regs i cant find the 18 meters thing.

but im facing this a s a bored semi interested person killing time
 
Chris Wilson said:
Classy speech compared to the Labour comment that it was murder :)

I still maintain amnesties for illegal aliens is weak and a dangerous precedent though.
Click to expand...

The purpose of the amnesty is to ensure that people in need of medical aid or other support feel safe enough to seek it out rather than frightened to. You can't have someone with serious injuries afraid to go to a hospital. To allow that puts lives in danger.
 
h4rm0ny said:
The purpose of the amnesty is to ensure that people in need of medical aid or other support feel safe enough to seek it out rather than frightened to. You can't have someone with serious injuries afraid to go to a hospital. To allow that puts lives in danger.
Click to expand...


it has nothing to do with medical aid.

otherwise wed have a nation wide amnesty in all A&E rooms.
 
Tefal said:
fair does, honestly gogoling regs i cant find the 18 meters thing.
Click to expand...

It's from the Building regs, specifically Building Regulations 2010 APPROVED DOCUMENT B – VOL 2 Fire safety, here's a couple of relevant bits:

"The external walls of the building shall adequately resist the spread of fire over the walls and from one building to another."
"In a building with a storey 18m or more above ground level any insulation product, filler material (not including gaskets, sealants and similar) etc. used in the external wall construction should be of limited combustibility"
"The external envelope of a building should not provide a medium for fire spread if it is likely to be a risk to health or safety. The use of combustible materials in the cladding system and extensive cavities may present such a risk in tall buildings."

Appendix A gives requirements for the definitions of resisting combustion, it's the amount of time a material takes to succumb to the fire. "Flammable" is not an acceptable level of fire resistance ^^

If interested: https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=https://www.kentbuildingcontrol.co.uk/pdf/AD_B_V2_2013.pdf
 
ubersonic said:
It's from the Building regs, specifically Building Regulations 2010 APPROVED DOCUMENT B – VOL 2 Fire safety, here's a couple of relevant bits:

"The external walls of the building shall adequately resist the spread of fire over the walls and from one building to another."
"In a building with a storey 18m or more above ground level any insulation product, filler material (not including gaskets, sealants and similar) etc. used in the external wall construction should be of limited combustibility"
"The external envelope of a building should not provide a medium for fire spread if it is likely to be a risk to health or safety. The use of combustible materials in the cladding system and extensive cavities may present such a risk in tall buildings."

Appendix A gives requirements for the definitions of resisting combustion, it's the amount of time a material takes to succumb to the fire. "Flammable" is not an acceptable level of fire resistance ^^



"In a building with a storey 18m or more above ground level any insulation product, filler material (not including gaskets, sealants and similar) etc. used in the external wall construction should be of limited combustibility"
Click to expand...


that sounds like ity will be the issue.

hoe far someone hd to dig to dterime this compared to what the manufacturer said. #


"limited combustibility" seems airly vauge
Click to expand...
 
Orionaut said:
Eg, are not certain injuries (Say Gunshot wounds) notifiable??
Click to expand...


If you believe your doctor will respect patient confidentiality in this day and age, think again, gunshot wounds, serious knife wounds, predeliction to certain genetic irregularities, and other ailments are all subject to GMC patient confidentiality guidelines. Surprisingly serious communicable diseases like AIDS are not notifiable, unlike in many other developed countries. If you have time to kill the tome is available at:

http://www.gmc-uk.org/guidance/ethical_guidance/30608.asp
 
Tefal said:
fair does, honestly gogoling regs i cant find the 18 meters thing.

but im facing this a s a bored semi interested person killing time
Click to expand...

I posted this the other day after a long read of ADB2;

Well apparently testing has shown that the cladding was combustible and around 600 other high rise buildings have used the same, or similar products. I await the manufacturers comments on this to see what testing they did on it themselves that enabled them to claim it was suitable.

I have certainly learned something from all this but I still come back to the inadequacy of the Building Regulations with regards rain screen cladding guidance.

ADB2 P12.7 simply states;

In a building with a storey 18m or more above ground level any insulation product, filler material (not including gaskets, sealants and similar) etc. used in the external wall construction should be of limited combustibility (see Appendix A). This restriction does not apply to masonry cavity wall construction which complies with Diagram 34 in Section 9.
Click to expand...

This is the paragraph that experts are saying is the key paragraph and yet there is no mention the cladding system, I suppose the key word is "any". It does refer you to Appendix A and specifically table 7 which states;

Insulation material in external wall construction referred to in paragraph 12.7 must either;
  • Any non-combustible material listed in Table A6.
  • Any material of density 300/kg/m’ or more, which when tested to BS 476-11:1982, does not flame and the rise in temperature on the furnace thermocouple is not more than 20ºC
  • Any material with a non-combustible core at least 8mm thick having combustible facings (on one or both sides) not more than 0.5mm thick. (Where a flame spread rating is specified, these materials must also meet the appropriate test requirements)
  • Any material of density less than 300kg/m3, which when tested to BS 476-11:1982, does not flame for more than 10 seconds and the rise in temperature on the centre (specimen) thermocouple is not more than 35°C and on the furnace thermocouple is not more than 25ºC
Click to expand...

To me this paragraph is about insulation and is very unclear if its also relevant to cladding but this is what they are saying.

Note it refers to Table 6 which is very location specific, none of which is external cladding but its the material class that we are interested in here and they are as follows;
  • Any material which when tested to BS 476-11:1982 does not flame nor cause any rise in temperature on either the centre (specimen) or furnace thermocouples
  • Totally inorganic materials such as concrete, fired clay, ceramics, metals, plaster and masonry containing not more than 1% by weight or volume of organic material. (Use in buildings of combustible metals such as magnesium/aluminium alloys should be assessed in each individual case)
  • Concrete bricks or blocks meeting BS EN 771-3:2003
  • Products classified as non-combustible under BS 476-4:1970
Click to expand...

So there we are, clear as mud.
Click to expand...

I still maintain its very unclear within the regs as it specifically talks about insulation under table 7 and not cladding. There is a lot of experts including the RIBA saying that the regs need to be more dynamic in updating in response to the rapid moving material market within the construction industry.

You simply can not rely on single testing results of individual elements within an envelope, testing needs to be done on a whole build-up point of view.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom