ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 11th June 2018, 05:49 AM   #1721
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
That it has a plastic back, and that unlike models with metal backs it can engulf a kitchen in flames in less than 90 seconds?

I already posted it.
No, you claimed, "this particular model has been proven to be uniquely dangerous..." The FF175BP is not even remotely unique in having a plastic back. Estimates very, but it would be safe to say that at least half of the fridge-freezers on sale have plastic backs, and this has been the case for a very long time - as stated, the FF175BP has been manufactured since at least 2006. As Architect points out, all appliances must at a minimum comply with EU safety standards, and there no suggestion that the FF175BP in particular or indeed any plastic-backed fridge-freezer breaches them.

Last edited by Information Analyst; 11th June 2018 at 05:55 AM.
Information Analyst is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 06:03 AM   #1722
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,793
Originally Posted by Architect View Post
<snip>

Really? How do you know? Howerver for what it's worth I would expect a design team using a proprietary cladding system to ask for the manufacturer's technical department to provide details if not published in brochures.

Isn't that one of those "argument by assertion" critters?

How do you think Arconic would respond when they are submitted a request to provide details for an application of a product which they have already made abundantly clear that they do not recommend for use in that application?

Do you really think that they are going to say, "Well, we specifically recommend against using our Reynobond PE product for buildings more than 40 ft. high because it is too flammable for such uses, but if you guys really, really want to put it on a 24 story apartment building then we'll get our detailers right on it, and give you an approved by us solution."?

Quote:

But that's academic here, as there was no effective fire stopping around the windows. That's something a reasonably competent designer and installer both should have realised.

I tend to agree that there was no effective firestopping system around the windows, although, unlike you apparently, I am not convinced that there is any conventional one which would have been "effective".

The designer of the details for those window penetrations most certainly should have been aware of the unique problems presented by the use of the Reynobond PE panels, and designed their details with that specific issue in mind. Do you believe they were? Do you believe they did?

Does "installer" mean something different in the U.K. than it does here in the U.S.?

Here, the "installer" would be some (usually small) subcontractor, or even the subcontractor of a subcontractor, who would have been given a set of shop drawings (as well as the pertinent contract plans and specifications) all of which having been approved by the project architect, the project engineer, as well as reviewed by the relevant building permit authorities on at the very least a local level (and possibly a state and federal level as well). They would have been reviewed for compliance by fire safety authorities.

The installer would have no reason to question anything. Their responsibility would have been to install the product as detailed.

It is possible that someone at that level might express a concern to someone with more authority than they have, but that would be the extent of what they could do, and if their concerns were disregarded there would be little they could do beyond that as long as everything was in compliance with those documents.

Of course, in the U.S. that ACP product would never have been approved for use in the first place, being as how it is banned here for such applications.

Wanna know why?

Quote:

Along with the cladding specification, it's absolutely critical.

<snip>

A truism. Very profound.

Okay. Let's talk about the cladding specification.

Why was that particular product approved for use on a 24 story building in the U.K?

Why were the manufacturer's specific cautions disregarded?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."

Last edited by quadraginta; 11th June 2018 at 06:10 AM.
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 06:06 AM   #1723
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,793
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
No, you claimed, "this particular model has been proven to be uniquely dangerous..." The FF175BP is not even remotely unique in having a plastic back. Estimates very, but it would be safe to say that at least half of the fridge-freezers on sale have plastic backs, and this has been the case for a very long time - as stated, the FF175BP has been manufactured since at least 2006. As Architect points out, all appliances must at a minimum comply with EU safety standards, and there no suggestion that the FF175BP in particular or indeed any plastic-backed fridge-freezer breaches them.

This only brings those standards into question. They aren't allowed here.

Kinda like using polyethylene cored panels on tall buildings. That isn't allowed here either.

Or in much of the E.U. either.

Fancy that.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 06:07 AM   #1724
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,444
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Are you suggesting that the quote is false, because it was in the Mirror?
...I'm saying what I said. I never said the quote was false. I said the article lacks context. And that the lack of context doesn't surprise me because "the Mirror."

Quote:
And what does that have to do with the accuracy of his statement last year. Do you think that because he has a different job now his expertise then is no longer relevant?
I'm saying he was a Watch Manager. He now no longer is a Watch Manager. Would you care to share with us what a Watch Manager does? And what qualifies a Watch Manager as an expert in this particular matter? You are the one that's citing him. Why have you chosen to cite him and not somebody else?

Quote:
Not necessarily fraudulent. Although it is certainly a consideration. There are other reasons they might have arrived at conclusions which permitted that statement.
What are those reasons?

Quote:
After all, someone(s?) in the U.K. government found ways to deem the Reynobond PE panels "safe" for use on Grenfell.
Apparently the Architect has "provided this information including linked minutes of Parliamentary Committees and therein the advice of the Fire Brigade".

Quote:
How do you suppose that came about?
If you really want to know the answer to that question can I suggest you read the information provided by Architect?

Quote:
What, in that year, has changed which suggests that the refrigerator was not the initial cause of the fire?
I never suggested that the refrigerator was not the "initial cause of the fire."

Are you 100% certain the refrigerator was the initial cause of the fire?

Its a year later and Whirlpool have stated "Investigations by the UK Government and Whirlpool have confirmed there are no safety issues with Hotpoint fridge freezer models FF175BP". So maybe the Mirror quoted Vaughan-Davies out of context. Or maybe the Mirror presented some videos to Vaughan-Davies and asked for his reaction and he gave it.

Quote:
Pretty much everyone here has, in some fashion or another "google[d] stuff to back up [their] position". There is nothing unusual about that. Even the investigators who trudged through the burning debris likely found the Internet to be of use when researching the issues.
And how is that helping the conversation here?

Quote:
I am not some lay person skimming the surface of Google results. I've been in the heavy commercial construction trade since the 70's. I have been a superintendent on projects costing many tens of millions of dollars, and am familiar with the specific uses, applications, and problems involved in using quite a few different ACP cladding products and the systems involved in installing them.
I was the first person on the moon. I was the first person to run a sub-four-minute mile. I made the Kessel run in 12 parsecs. I. Am. Spartacus.

Quote:
My "position" is not based merely on "stuff" I googled.
Your "position" is one that you came too on your own, and you googled stuff to support it. That appears to be pretty obvious to me.

You may well have qualifications relevant to the discussion. That doesn't mean that quoting a year-old article from a tabloid newspaper with an out-of-context quote from an "expert" can't be criticised.

Quote:
So do I.
Then perhaps it would be better to use information from the enquiry than to randomly google stuff and post it here.

Quote:
And I think that trying to spread out responsibility by constantly bringing up problems with window penetration details when it is unlikely that any penetration detail would have stopped the ignition of those panels under those circumstances is a substantial misdirection when the core issue is the use of a specifically contraindicated, highly flammable cladding, and how it was approved for use in the Grenfell renovation.
What is this "spread out responsibility" nonsense? Who are you to gauge what "is and isn't" likely? I'm well aware of your qualifications, and I'm well aware of the qualifications of the people you are arguing with. I don't think you've made the case as to "what is likely and what isn't." So if people want to "constantly" bring up something that they feel is relevant then I don't see the problem with them doing so. Unlike you the people who are "constantly talking about it" are being very clear that what they are talking about is speculation, the enquiry is ongoing, and that they will defer to the results of the enquiry when it is all wrapped up. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Quote:
Yes, I would like to know who did the detailing for a window penetration for that Reynobond PE product, and who approved those details.

Because it wasn't the manufacturer. They would not have approved any details which involved using that product on a 24 story building.

Whoever those people were, they should have known that they were designing for an inappropriate use of the product they were detailing for, and I think that that indeed should be thoroughly reviewed.

But the fact remains that because it was a polyethylene cored ACP panel that they were detailing for, one which the manufacturer had specifically stated was not appropriate for use in such applications because of exactly the concerns that resulted in the Grenfell blaze, it had no business being used there in the first place.

The source of original ignition is of interest, but it didn't have to be by a window penetration. It didn't even have to be by a penetration at all. It could have been a fire ignited on the outside of the building. At least one of the other massive tall building fires which were a result of using polyethylene core ACP products was started by a fire initiated in equipment on the roof. The melted, burning polyethylene dripped down on panels below, igniting them with the same speed and ferocity.

Once the Reynobond PE panels started burning, once they became invested with flame, for whatever reason, the results would have been the same.
This has nothing to do with the Fridge-freezer. Do you have anything more to say about that?
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 06:15 AM   #1725
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,609
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Isn't that one of those "argument by assertion" critters?
No, but let me explain why. A manufacturer will rarely, if ever, provide a full suite of technical details on their website or in their brochure for all but the most straightforward materials inasmuch as there are various project-specific application details. It is therefore quite normal for a specifier to have to contact a technical department and seek further information.

Quote:
How do you think Arconic would respond when they are submitted a request to provide details for an application of a product which they have already made abundantly clear that they do not recommend for use in that application?

Do you really think that they are going to say, "Well, we specifically recommend against using our Reynobond PE product for buildings more than 40 ft. high because it is too flammable for such uses, but if you guys really, really want to put it on a 24 story apartment building then we'll get our detailers right on it, and give you an approved by us solution."?
As a matter of interest, which section of the architect's specification are you referring to and where can I find it in the online inquiry documents?

Quote:
I tend to agree that there was no effective firestopping system around the windows, although, unlike you apparently, I am not convinced that there is any conventional one which would have been "effective".
Whether you agree or not is academic. The "as-built" window detail has been identified as part of the investigation and there are several illustrations showing the built-up within the expert witness reports. In short, it is a matter of fact and not opinion that there was no firestopping. Internal linings comprised uPVC thin sheet lining around the internal margins, with a clear cavity behind.

As for whether adequate fire resisting linings detail do exist, I'm afraid that is a matter of demonstrable fact. The British Gypsum White Book, for example, clearly provides a series of products and details with fire resistances (including thermal integrity) in the range 30-120 minutes, which would have dealt with internal spread. Kingspan produce details for external stopping which we have, in my office, used.

Quote:
The designer of the details for those window penetrations most certainly should have been aware of the unique problems presented by the use of the Reynobond PE panels, and designed their details with that specific issue in mind. Do you believe they were? Do you believe they did?
Firstly, the desgner of any building should have an understanding of the design, detailing, and performance of all the products he or she uses. This is a legal requirement as a result of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1995.

Now, in order to assess whether that was the case here we would need to review the Production Information, broadly analagous to old RIBA Plan of Works stage G/H. Can you show me where, on the Inquiry document list, you have identified these and are able to demonstrate the extent to which they reflect the "as build" detailing?

Quote:
Does "installer" m,ean something different in the U.K. than it does here in the U.S.?

Here, the "installer" would be some (usually small) subcontractor, or even the subcontractor of a subcontractor, who would have been given a set of shop drawings (as well as the pertinent contract plans and specifications) all of which having been approved by the project architect, the project engineer,as well as reviewed by the relevant building authorities on at the very least a local level (and possibly a state and federal level as well). They would have been reviewed for compliance by fire safety authorities.
This information is all set out within the online expert inquiry reports.

Quote:
The installer would have no reason to question anything. Their responsibility would have been to install the product as detailed.
This does not reflect the legal position in the United Kingdom.

Quote:
It is possible that someone at that level might express a concern to someone with more authority than they have, but that would be the extent of what they could do, and if their concerns were disregarded there would be little they could do beyond that as long as everything was in compliance with those documents.
This does not reflect the legal position in the United Kingdom.

Quote:
Why was that particular product approved for use on a 24 story building in the U.K?
Can you provide evidence that this particular product is, or was, approved for use on tall buildings in the UK?
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party

Last edited by Architect; 11th June 2018 at 06:16 AM.
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 06:16 AM   #1726
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
This only brings those standards into question. They aren't allowed here.
Do you have a source for that, and if so, what is the stated reasoning for banning them?

Quote:
Kinda like using polyethylene cored panels on tall buildings. That isn't allowed here either.

Or in much of the E.U. either.

Fancy that.
Fancy what? There's no contradiction there. If theyt're not allowed in "much if the E.U.," then they don't breach EU regulations, only local ones.
Information Analyst is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 06:41 AM   #1727
banquetbear
Graduate Poster
 
banquetbear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,444
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Whipping out your "I'm a professional, and therefore I'm better than you are." card won't work on me.
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
I've been in the heavy commercial construction trade since the 70's. I have been a superintendent on projects costing many tens of millions of dollars, and am familiar with the specific uses, applications, and problems involved in using quite a few different ACP cladding products and the systems involved in installing them.
...remarkable.
banquetbear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 09:50 AM   #1728
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,142
Originally Posted by Architect View Post
.....
Whether you agree or not is academic. The "as-built" window detail has been identified as part of the investigation and there are several illustrations showing the built-up within the expert witness reports. In short, it is a matter of fact and not opinion that there was no firestopping. Internal linings comprised uPVC thin sheet lining around the internal margins, with a clear cavity behind.

As for whether adequate fire resisting linings detail do exist, I'm afraid that is a matter of demonstrable fact. The British Gypsum White Book, for example, clearly provides a series of products and details with fire resistances (including thermal integrity) in the range 30-120 minutes, which would have dealt with internal spread. Kingspan produce details for external stopping which we have, in my office, used.
.....
Allow me to ask -- again -- how does firestopping in the window cavity prevent the spread of heat and flames through windows that are open or broken? By all accounts, many residents left their windows open because it was a warm night. As the cladding burned, it ignited curtains and furnishings near open windows throughout the building. Ordinary glass breaks pretty quickly during a fire. The windows in the unit where the fire started may have been left open, or they might have broken from the heat. As the fire spread through the cladding, the heat would have broken other closed windows if they weren't made of heat-resistant glass. How would perfect firestopping have prevented this particular catastrophe?
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 11:09 AM   #1729
P.J. Denyer
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,179
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Allow me to ask -- again -- how does firestopping in the window cavity prevent the spread of heat and flames through windows that are open or broken? By all accounts, many residents left their windows open because it was a warm night. As the cladding burned, it ignited curtains and furnishings near open windows throughout the building. Ordinary glass breaks pretty quickly during a fire. The windows in the unit where the fire started may have been left open, or they might have broken from the heat. As the fire spread through the cladding, the heat would have broken other closed windows if they weren't made of heat-resistant glass. How would perfect firestopping have prevented this particular catastrophe?
This has been answered already, the fire stopping should have prevented flames from reaching the flammable material. In my non professional opinion the use of such material on a building like this seems inexcusable, but I can certainly understand that allowing flames to directly access the flammable part of the composite panels increased the danger.

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
The point is that that situation shouldn't have arisen if the flames hadn't been able to access the cavity. Not that I disagree with your point about flamibility, but there are other lessons to be learned too, it's not just that the building was wrapped in flammable material, it's also the fact that it was installed in such a way as to allow a fire to easily reach it. Like the difference between having highly flamable petrol in your car's petrol tank or having it in open mason jars on the back seat while you drive down a bumpy road smoking a cigarette.
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
You're still working the wrong way around. If the fire prevention measures had worked properly, the fire wouldn't have got out of the 4th floor flat. Discussing it getting into flats from the outside is discussing why the petrol on the back seat caught fire, from the analogy above. The real question is how fire got out of the flat where it started, because as I am sure you remember, fire prevention in England and Wales is all about containing any fire within compartments.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 11:12 AM   #1730
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London, UK.
Posts: 7,775
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Allow me to ask -- again -- how does firestopping in the window cavity prevent the spread of heat and flames through windows that are open or broken? By all accounts, many residents left their windows open because it was a warm night. As the cladding burned, it ignited curtains and furnishings near open windows throughout the building. Ordinary glass breaks pretty quickly during a fire. The windows in the unit where the fire started may have been left open, or they might have broken from the heat. As the fire spread through the cladding, the heat would have broken other closed windows if they weren't made of heat-resistant glass. How would perfect firestopping have prevented this particular catastrophe?
It's my impression that the fire-stopping should have prevented the fire from penetrating - at all or too quickly - from the flat to the cavity between the original concrete walls and the cladding, because the windows were relocated from being "inside"/flush with the concrete walls, to being flush with the exterior surface of the cladding. Once the fire had taken hold of both sides of the cladding, it could penetrate into other flats by the reverse of the same action, which fire-stopping would have similarly prevented or delayed. Open or broken windows would have allowed some spread, but not - in isolation - anything like as rapidly as actually happened. The flats as built were designed to contain fire within what was essentially a concrete box, so moving the windows outwards compromised that natural protection, if the window installation wasn't adequately protected against fire, both internally and externally.

I'm sure Mike or Architect can confirm or dispute this interpretation.
Information Analyst is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 11:32 AM   #1731
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,142
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
This has been answered already, the fire stopping should have prevented flames from reaching the flammable material. In my non professional opinion the use of such material on a building like this seems inexcusable, but I can certainly understand that allowing flames to directly access the flammable part of the composite panels increased the danger.

It appears that of the three cladding options -- flammable, fire-resistant and fireproof -- the flammable kind was selected because it was cheapest. How much would it have added to the total cost to require adequate firestopping, vs. using another cladding option?

Last edited by Bob001; 11th June 2018 at 11:33 AM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 11:56 AM   #1732
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,491
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
It's my impression that the fire-stopping should have prevented the fire from penetrating - at all or too quickly - from the flat to the cavity between the original concrete walls and the cladding, because the windows were relocated from being "inside"/flush with the concrete walls, to being flush with the exterior surface of the cladding. Once the fire had taken hold of both sides of the cladding, it could penetrate into other flats by the reverse of the same action, which fire-stopping would have similarly prevented or delayed. Open or broken windows would have allowed some spread, but not - in isolation - anything like as rapidly as actually happened. The flats as built were designed to contain fire within what was essentially a concrete box, so moving the windows outwards compromised that natural protection, if the window installation wasn't adequately protected against fire, both internally and externally.

I'm sure Mike or Architect can confirm or dispute this interpretation.
Spot on, IA.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 11:58 AM   #1733
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,491
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It appears that of the three cladding options -- flammable, fire-resistant and fireproof -- the flammable kind was selected because it was cheapest. How much would it have added to the total cost to require adequate firestopping, vs. using another cladding option?
Could you care to comment on the BBA Certificate status of these three options, and how this would affect the choice of material for this situation.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:06 PM   #1734
P.J. Denyer
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,179
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It appears that of the three cladding options -- flammable, fire-resistant and fireproof -- the flammable kind was selected because it was cheapest. How much would it have added to the total cost to require adequate firestopping, vs. using another cladding option?
Perhaps you should read what I've written. I've already said that I think using the flammable cladding was was inexcusable. You asked how the fire stops were supposed to prevent the fire spreading if the windows were open or broken, that has been answered. Trying to understanding how one failure contributed to the outcome doesn't mean ignoring the other factors.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:18 PM   #1735
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,142
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
Perhaps you should read what I've written. I've already said that I think using the flammable cladding was was inexcusable. You asked how the fire stops were supposed to prevent the fire spreading if the windows were open or broken, that has been answered. Trying to understanding how one failure contributed to the outcome doesn't mean ignoring the other factors.
It's pretty clear that investigations of air crashes, industrial "accidents" etc. reveal a cascade of failures, none of which can be ignored. But this one factor seems to be the subject of extensive discussion here, and it looks like the lack of firestopping is one example of the cost-cutting mentality that seems to have pervaded this project.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:26 PM   #1736
P.J. Denyer
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,179
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
It's pretty clear that investigations of air crashes, industrial "accidents" etc. reveal a cascade of failures, none of which can be ignored. But this one factor seems to be the subject of extensive discussion here, and it looks like the lack of firestopping is one example of the cost-cutting mentality that seems to have pervaded this project.
I agree with the highlighted, but I'd point out that one of the main reasons that the lack of firestopping has become the subject of so much discussion is that you have asked about it several times and didn't accept the answers.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:40 PM   #1737
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,142
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Could you care to comment on the BBA Certificate status of these three options, and how this would affect the choice of material for this situation.

Well, here's what the BBA says about its certificate:
Quote:
Certificates are intended to provide the information that would be required by an experienced and competent building professional to make a judgement as to their suitability for a particular location, as defined in the Building Regulations. The Certificate makes no reference to suitable areas of use as we cannot be aware of the specific circumstances and specifications that will apply in each case.[emphasis added]
http://www.bbacerts.co.uk/wpfb-file/..._11042018-pdf/ [pdf download]


I suspect you would like me to note that the cladding used had a fire-approval rating. Others question the validity of that rating and the testing procedures (or lack thereof) used to assign it.

Quote:
Fire tests carried out as early as 2014 showed cladding used on Grenfell Tower failed to meet the safety standards originally claimed by its manufacturer, a BBC investigation has found.

The firm Arconic knew the test rating had been downgraded, but the UK body that certifies building products said it was not told about the change.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43558186


Quote:
An estimated 18 tonnes of insulation foam and eight tonnes of cladding panels were attached to the tower, analysis of planning documents by the University of Leeds suggests.

The energy released when all these combustible materials burned would have been equivalent to around 51 tonnes of pinewood wrapped around the building in two thin 12mm sheets, separated by a 50mm gap with holes cut out for windows, it says.

"If you set that on fire near the bottom you can imagine what would happen and how fast the fire will grow," Dr Roth Phylaktou, a senior lecturer specialising in fire and explosion engineering at the university, told the BBC.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40645205


Quote:
As an architect I need that certification to allow building control to confirm that the panel is fit for purpose.Yet the only certification Arconics offers is a British Board of Agreement (BBA) certificate, which outlines where and how the product can be used in the UK. Paragraph 6.5 states : “For resistance to fire, the performance of a wall incorporating this product, can only be determined by tests from a suitably accredited laboratory, and is not covered by this certificate”. In other words BBA refuses to approve the Reynobond PE panel for use in external walls as no tests were submitted. Any professional reading that should have an alarm bell going off in their head.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/opinio...fell_cladding/


It seems clear that the manufacturer of the cladding recommended against its use for this purpose. That should certainly have been a primary factor in deciding whether to select it.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:44 PM   #1738
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,142
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
I agree with the highlighted, but I'd point out that one of the main reasons that the lack of firestopping has become the subject of so much discussion is that you have asked about it several times and didn't accept the answers.
Fair enough. I note that "firestopping" seems to be used to refer to both the design and installation of the windows in the walls, and also the design and installation of the cladding panels themselves. Both would require adequate firestopping to reduce the impact of fire.

Last edited by Bob001; 11th June 2018 at 12:49 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:46 PM   #1739
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,609
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Allow me to ask -- again -- how does firestopping in the window cavity prevent the spread of heat and flames through windows that are open or broken? By all accounts, many residents left their windows open because it was a warm night. As the cladding burned, it ignited curtains and furnishings near open windows throughout the building. Ordinary glass breaks pretty quickly during a fire. The windows in the unit where the fire started may have been left open, or they might have broken from the heat. As the fire spread through the cladding, the heat would have broken other closed windows if they weren't made of heat-resistant glass. How would perfect firestopping have prevented this particular catastrophe?
There should be adequate protection of the cavity to both the interior and the exterior of the window unless a fire resistant glazing such as Pyrostop has been used.

Pyrostop was not used, nor would it normally be unless there was a deck access immediately adjacent to the windows.
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party

Last edited by Architect; 11th June 2018 at 12:50 PM.
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 12:59 PM   #1740
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,491
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
......... it looks like the lack of firestopping is one example of the cost-cutting mentality that seems to have pervaded this project.
How can you know this?
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 01:38 PM   #1741
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,142
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
How can you know this?
That seems to be a pretty widely held opinion. Proving it will be a matter for the courts.

Quote:
Pressure to keep costs down during the refurbishment of Grenfell Tower appears to have driven the decision to use cheaper cladding on the block, an investigation has revealed.

Leaked documents including an “urgent nudge email” from housing bosses suggest aluminium panels with a flammable core were selected for the west London tower in the place of a fireproof zinc material to save nearly £300,000 – with reportedly little discussion of possible implications for residents’ safety.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7815971.html

Quote:
The contract to improve insulation and replace heating and water systems in the block was supposed to be carried out by building firm Leadbitter, but the contractor said it could not do the work for less than £11.27 million, £1.6 million above the council’s budget.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nants-accused/

Quote:
Promising to cut “red tape,” business-friendly politicians evidently judged that cost concerns outweighed the risks of allowing flammable materials to be used in facades. Builders in Britain were allowed to wrap residential apartment towers — perhaps several hundred of them — from top to bottom in highly flammable materials, a practice forbidden in the United States and many European countries. And companies did not hesitate to supply the British market.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/24/w...ndon-fire.html

Etc., etc.

Last edited by Bob001; 11th June 2018 at 01:40 PM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 01:58 PM   #1742
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,609
"Britain"?
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 02:33 PM   #1743
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,491
Originally Posted by Architect View Post
"Britain"?
Not the only weakness in that list of press cuttings, which do nothing other than add another layer of opinion on opinion.
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 02:40 PM   #1744
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 23,491
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
That seems to be a pretty widely held opinion. Proving it will be a matter for the courts.........
Yet you state it as fact. Interesting.

You missed my point, of course, which is that you haven't made any case that firestopping was absent as a result of cost cutting. Firestopping is cheap as chips. Possibly the cheapest detail of the entire cladding ensemble. And there is an established paper-trail of drawings now. Can you give the drawing number of the drawings which included firestopping around windows, with the revision number of the one that removed the detail? Or there'll be an AI, perhaps, or a CVI to cover it. Perhaps you could link to those......assuming of course that they were cut out of the contract as part of your "widely held opinion".
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2018, 02:44 PM   #1745
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,609
Irregular cavity, fire stopping challenging there, but on window lines potentially very straightforward. I look forward to the detailed evidence, not least as regards site supervision / inspection.
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2018, 10:57 AM   #1746
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 18,224
Ten fire engines attending a fire at an Edmonton towerblock:

https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/incid...ton-flat-fire/
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2018, 11:03 AM   #1747
P.J. Denyer
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,179
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Ten fire engines attending a fire at an Edmonton towerblock:

https://www.london-fire.gov.uk/incid...ton-flat-fire/
Please, not a repeat performance.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th July 2018, 11:09 AM   #1748
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 68,633
Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer View Post
Please, not a repeat performance.
Nope, they got the fire under control fairly quickly. But it does show you that the London disaster didn't need to happen.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st July 2018, 10:39 AM   #1749
Aber
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,289
There seems to be a major problem with fire doors:

Quote:
Fire doors made by five different suppliers have failed fire safety tests and have been withdrawn from the market, the government has announced, in the latest fallout from the Grenfell Tower disaster.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...formance-tests
Aber is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st August 2018, 02:35 PM   #1750
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,793
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
There seems to be a major problem with fire doors:

Quote:
Fire doors made by five different suppliers have failed fire safety tests and have been withdrawn from the market, the government has announced, in the latest fallout from the Grenfell Tower disaster.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...formance-tests

How were these doors certified to be in compliance with their fire resistance rating to begin with?

Was something about their design or manufacture changed after certification (if any)?

Either the certification process failed, or the manufacturers have committed a crime.

It seems like it has to be one or the other.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2018, 06:13 AM   #1751
Dave_46
Graduate Poster
 
Dave_46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK (south Bucks)
Posts: 1,022
Originally Posted by Aber View Post
There seems to be a major problem with fire doors:




https://www.theguardian.com/society/...formance-tests
Are the reports for these tests in the public domain yet?

If so anyone got a link?

Dave
Dave_46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2018, 08:05 AM   #1752
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Moomin Valley
Posts: 13,746
Originally Posted by Dave_46 View Post
Are the reports for these tests in the public domain yet?

If so anyone got a link?

Dave

An expert witness at the recent public inquiry confirmed that the fire doors installed only kept out the flames for twenty minutes, when it should have been at least one hour. (Half an hour, according to Brokenshire and the GUARDIAN.)

Disclaimer: I am not an architect.
__________________
If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth and beauty. ~ Japanese Proverb

Last edited by Vixen; 13th August 2018 at 08:07 AM.
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th August 2018, 11:29 AM   #1753
Dave_46
Graduate Poster
 
Dave_46's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK (south Bucks)
Posts: 1,022
I want to see the reports to know how the doors were installed for test, and if not in accordance with the manufacturers instructions, why not.

Newspaper reports don't give that sort of detailed information.

Dave
Dave_46 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:33 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.