Gordo

Yeah I don’t think anyone will do time over this. There were almost identical cladding fires in Dubai and even in England previously with less loss of life and nothing was learned from it. To be honest I don’t expect much to change now either. The Hackett report was watered way down when published from the initial sound bites at start. No political will to change the system due to the costs, time and bureaucracy that would ensue. Most people involved were either ignorant or complacent and easily mislead, however the manufacturers were knowingly untruthful and misleading to their customers in the pursuit of profit. I would like them to be punished brutally beyond all others. People rely on them to make informed decisions. I would also like to see fire safety given greater consideration than insulation whereas now all anyone talks about is insulation.

Do as you chose to do. I have see it in practice often and advise it is is extremely poor practice. Often the cheapest grey polythene 9mm thick lagging too. Obviously there are a lot of people out there who have not given this much thought. The plumbers don’t seem to care from the reaction I have got, the builders don’t seem too interested as it’s a plumbers thing and the clients don’t know any better. Just letting people know that this should not be accepted normal practice if you care about conservation of energy. Heating pipes should be within the screed or laid on at least 25mm thick PUR insulation (with remainder of insulation thickness between pipes). If it is just the primary pipes that’s not quite so bad, these could be properly lagged with 25mm quality lagging as a minimum.

The traditional hierarchy has collapsed long ago. It is a quagmire or designers, specialist designers, project managers, specialist sub-contract managers, planning supervisor etc etc etc. Whole thing is a comedy show just waiting to go wrong. Far to many cooks spoiling the broth. I suspect they will now need a designated fire manager or such who is responsible similar to CDM requirements. Just another layer or confusion but probably necessary

I’d second Annker there. Although your proposals sound reasonable. BC will not provide such guidance. They only inspect and if concerned will ask for evidence of adequacy

It is a supply and fit specialist job. Heating pipes MUST be fitted on top of insulation within the heated/insulated envelope. Anyone who fits heating pipes (without serious thickness lagging) under insulation are foolish.

They were all at fault. As soon as it happened they try to blame BC. But they were all ignorant and complacent in it. The architect had no real idea about cladding. The cladding designer seemed to have little idea. The contractor did his own thing in substituted materials, little quality control and installed cavity barriers incorrectly. The fire engineer didn’t consider the details fully. The manufacturer of products mislead everyone (to sell products) in knowledge of concerns and the BC officer was mislead, over worked and somewhat complacent. Everyone though it was someone else’s responsibility to consider fire safety in cladding. I would pin the biggest culpability on product manufacturer followed by the confused convoluted works procurement system.

Looking at the design with heave protection to inner face. I suspect there are or were trees in close proximity for this? Installing this heave protection is not a safe operation. I would refuse to install this heave protection and observe others do same. Unless heave is very likely Deep trenchfill foundation are quite common. I have seen some even deeper but I understand around 4m is point where piles become economical. Just dig and pour dry lean mix concrete as you go. Pack down lean mix with digger and it will shore up excavation. Cast a reinforced concrete foundation on top. Be sure to excavate plumb and best widen trench out to at least 900mm to allow for inaccuracies. NO ONE IS EXPECTED TO ENTER TRENCH WITH THIS TECHNIQUE FOR FEAR OF COLLAPSE. Engineers assume a level knowledge and competence in design. As this is a well established practice they obviously didn’t feel the need to provide a risk assessment. no not do it like this lolol use LEAN MIX DIG AND POUR

Yeah N Ireland generally lag behind England guidance by up 10 years or so. Ridiculous really they should just adopt England guidance. One benefit is occasionally they can improve on guidance that has been out a while with the benefit of hindsight. Sometimes it’s more confused (so occasionally refer to England guidance for comparison) With a population of 1.7 million why oh why should they think it necessary to have their own regulations & guidance. Thanks for that I didn’t realise that class 0 had been binned elsewhere. it was a bit of a strange classification TBH. Class 0 would never have inferred a product was non-combustible in N Ireland guidance for this privilege they need A1 rating. Ie Class 0 or euro class B requirement for circulation spaces linings. but our guidance still allow class 0 or euro class B to surface of buildings over 18m 1m from a boundary ??? It is technical ok but so open to poor interpretation. Some might think that funny. Thank the lord we don’t have many tall buildings.

The actual building regulations are really performance requirements. They also provide Approved documents and refer to second tier documents that are presumed to show compliance. However yo do hot have to follow these Approved documents to comply, but it then up to you to demonstrate that you will comply by other means such as a manufacturer 3rd party certification (BBA etc) or another authoritative document such as a BS or even provide a reasoned argument that you are achieving an equal standard. More straightforward just to follow Approved documents. I've never seen T beam floors without a ventilated void so can’t help you much with avoiding vents BTW the guidance is generally that the prepared ground below floor void should not be below ground levels due to risk of ponding ground water. Might be a good idea to provide a small diameter drainage pipe to bottom of void piped to an external gully for piece of mind

Just my preference based on my concerns about corrosion of reinforcement, however any technical guidance I have read would agree no void = no ventilation.

Yeah this is a common approach. One which I personally don’t agree with but that’s for another day maybe lol

The concern is minimal cover to reinforcement in PPC T beams and likely corrosion of same. It has been argued by some PPC floor slab manufacturers that they do not have corrosion concerns therefore ventilation is not necessary. Best get a declaration from T beam manufacturer for their particular product. Perhaps they may have a BBA certificate or equivalent to clarify this point and hopefully avoid vents. I would be f the opinion that in the loading up of PPC flooring (where the arching levels out) there will be micro cracks in concrete which may leave reinforcing vulnerable to corrosion. 20yrs down the line who will be left to sort it out if there is a problem.

I doubt they would mind. They not clerk of works so don’t expect to see everything. Just looking for general compliance. And if it’s not a load bearing stud little interest to them really

It’s all about the laws of diminishing returns. I think we have well exceeded the reasonable financial payback for increasing insulation now with U values. Detailing and quality of install are more important now than the mm of insulation in middle

Primitive maybe but seem to work lol. N Ireland wind speeds are similar to Scotland other than North. I thought the Scottish were supposed to be thrifty lol impermeable was a very poor choice of words for air tightness sorry for confusing you lol

It was in a few high spec one-off dwellings under the supervision of a particular architect who had his own ideas about things (including his own house) and didn’t accept advice about much. The makeup was standing seam zinc roofing on the isolation fleece on breathable underlay on OSB / ply deck on rafters with full fill PUR insulation. No ventilation to US of deck. Slates are considered impermeable in BS 5250 however we all know that traditional slate is imperfect therefore permeable to some degree

BS 5250 recommendation is for 50mm ventilated gap over sloped ceiling insulation if underlay isn’t LR breathable. Yeah timber sarking seem peculiar to Scotland area. No sure about current trend there. Our older stock is all slates on battens (quite leaky lol) Current trend everywhere as far as I can see is slates & battens on breathable underlay.

I have seen problems with unventilated cold decks (sarking board) and metal cladding. Where the US of impermeable cladding sweat on clod days soaking the timber deck. There were fungus mushrooms and all. If the US of the deck is properly through ventilated this shouldn’t have been an issue. Do they accept 25mm ventilation gap to sloping ceilings in your parts? as they insist on 50mm here as per BS 5250. Guess your relying on condensation risk analysis maybe

Gaps and thermal loops are a huge concern that few give adequate consideration to. Sealed gaps are your U value friend.

That is a undisputed fact.

Yeah not a fan of PUR insulation. Toxic chemical soup that I understand of gasses of concern to hyper allergenic people (sick building syndrome) and definitely shrinks over time, performance drips over time. In a fire it gives of very toxic smoke. Anyone in authority talks about it gets bought off or sued. Glenfell tells you all you need to know about how much you can rely on their declarations.

Make sure service void is sealed at top to avoid thermal bypass. No reason not to fill this void with mineral wool before plaster board maybe. It will be a challenge to fit the breather paper. I’d still go with more breathable, easy worked with, toxic & cheap drytherm but your choice.

I am aware of two house fires where the fire raged through the cavity walls with pumped EPS bead insulation and poor/no cavity barriers at tops of walls. One was only partially built in a housing development at time of fire. I was surprised TBH of the resulting damage. Meter cupboard built into cavity walls is a concern as this I understand started one of the fires. I’m not familiar with England zero carbon policies but can confirm that there is no appetite to enforce this in N Ireland in current economic climate. Seems to have been a climb down on it. Wales sprinklers is contentious. Hugh capital costs to industry but lives will definitely be saved. Guess it all comes down to devolved governments value placed on life when balancing the cost to benefit when writing regulations. Is one life worth £10 million extra costs to population? Speaking to a fire expert (involved in advising our government in regs) regarding the fire strategy in N Ireland dwellings. I was astounded to realise that our strategy is that the person in the bedroom where a fire starts is assumed to die. The strategy is to get everyone else out, hence we dictate FAs only in circulation areas, Living room and Kitchen. I believe England may not require FAs in Kitchen and Living (not sure). I always advise people of this fact and suggest the consider FAs throughout especially bedrooms. I would pay extra for my families safety.

Good point. AD B only applies to England. TB E applies to N Ireland. Perhaps N Ireland standard is higher or more conservative should I say. Although this debate rages in N Ireland where different councils interpret this very point differently. Poor builders don’t know if they are coming or going. Personally my view with traditional cavity walls is that as long as the cavity is sealed a fire would be starved of oxygen and is a low risk. But I don’t like to rely on my opinion as I could be missing something.

Nasty cavity closers. They need a suitable timber or steel frame or plasterboard to actually provide the FR or use a FR closer.