Grenfell Tower fire

[ProDave]

Yes, but faulty white goods might result in a fire in that one flat, it should not lead to the destruction of the entire block.

[Triassic]

I agree, however we also need to address the cause of the fire.

[Jeremy Harris]

I think that one of the main problems seems to be an almost total disconnect in the way that fire safety has been addressed.  The building, as originally designed, used the compartmented safe zone system, where the main structure of the building was designed to be fire resistant, with each flat, and each floor, being a safe zone in the event of a fire INSIDE the building.  When it was designed this was a good approach, because the OUTSIDE of the building was non-flammable, so a fire could only, realistically be inside the building. 

 

Fitting fire doors and giving advice to residents to stay inside their flats in the even of a fire that was outside their front door was sensible.  The floors and walls of the building were pretty fire resistant, and by keeping residents in their flats they wouldn't need to provide lots of fire escapes.  This meant that a single staircase would be OK for several hundred residents, as they wouldn't all be trying to get down it at once, with firefighters trying to get up at the same time.

 

That all changed the day they decided to fit flammable cladding on the outside of the building.  That dramatically changed the overall fire risk, as has been shown in many similar facade fires around the world, going back perhaps as long as a decade ago.  However, no one seemed to look at the changes the cladding made to the overall fire safety plan for the building, something that, in the light of the common knowledge of facade fires and the speed with which they are known to spread, seem to me to be criminally negligent.  For the residents to still have been given advice to stay inside their flats, even whilst the fire was raging outside (which is what they were reportedly told to do when they phoned 999) was equally negligent, and whoever gave that advice to the emergency services needs to be held to account for it.

 

On completion of this refurbishment there must have been a fire safety inspection.  I was responsible for a building refurbishment years ago and well remember the mass of data that was needed with regard to demonstrating that all fire safety requirements were in place and working before the building could be deemed fit to occupy, so I am absolutely certain the same would have been done here.  Once more this brings into question the effectiveness with which building regulation compliance inspections are carried out, fire safety being a building regs issue.

 

Notwithstanding the possibility that a domestic appliance may have been the source of this fire, the question is "Would the entire block have caught fire if that appliance had caught fire before the external cladding was fitted?"

 

I very strongly suspect that it would not have, and there may well be information from previous incidents during the 40 years that the building had been in use before the cladding was fitted that could support this.

 

I see a fair few potential prosecutions in the offing, not that these will be of any consolation to the families and friends of those killed, or the residents that have been burned out of their homes.

Edited June 14, 2017 by JSHarris

[Stones]

A truly horrific day, and one that will stay with bereaved families, survivors and members of the emergency services for a long time to come.

 

We've already seen pictures of the effect today has had on fire fighters.  A lot of gruesome work lies ahead for them and the Police as they move into recovery and identification. 

 

 

 

[Onoff]

Just watching an Arnold Tarling fire safety expert on BBC now saying he reckons it was PU foam used. He proceeds to set fire to a lump of gun foam and says see how fast it burns.

[ProDave]

Jeremy made an excellent summary there.

 

Surely, in the case of a building that relied on it's structure (concrete) being totally inflamable, then building regs should not allow a flamable cladding to be put on the outside?

 

I expect the enquiry will fluff around the edges and avoid the real issue, as most enquiries seem to.

[Jeremy Harris]

13 hours ago, Stones said:

A truly horrific day, and one that will stay with bereaved families, survivors and members of the emergency services for a long time to come.

 

We've already seen pictures of the effect today has had on fire fighters.  A lot of gruesome work lies ahead for them and the Police as they move into recovery and identification. 

 

Very true, and, given the stress that has already been placed on all the London emergency services over the past three months, I cannot begin to imagine what some of them must be going through.

 

I have a couple of friends who were/are police officers, including the really great officer who attended the accident I had a few years ago, where a pedestrian runner crossed the dual carriageway in front of my car and was very nearly killed.  The effect on me at the time was traumatic, as when the casualty was airlifted away this police officer had the job of letting me know that he wasn't expected to live.  By pure good fortune the casualty did survive, albeit with major life-changing injuries, and that police officer has kept in touch with me, not because he has a duty to, but out of the kindness of his heart.  We've become good friends over the years since, and he's told me some pretty grim tales of the things he's had to deal with as a traffic officer.  Frankly I have no idea how he copes, apart from his (pretty black) sense of humour.

[NSS]

Shocking. So many speculative opinions, so few expressions of sympathy for all those affected. 

[Stones]

5 minutes ago, JSHarris said:

 

Very true, and, given the stress that has already been placed on all the London emergency services over the past three months, I cannot begin to imagine what some of them must be going through.

 

I have a couple of friends who were/are police officers, including the really great officer who attended the accident I had a few years ago, where a pedestrian runner crossed the dual carriageway in front of my car and was very nearly killed.  The effect on me at the time was traumatic, as when the casualty was airlifted away this police officer had the job of letting me know that he wasn't expected to live.  By pure good fortune the casualty did survive, albeit with major life-changing injuries, and that police officer has kept in touch with me, not because he has a duty to, but out of the kindness of his heart.  We've become good friends over the year since, and he's told me some pretty grim tales of the things he's had to deal with as a traffic officer.  Frankly I have no idea how he copes, apart from his (pretty black) sense of humour.

 

I've related before my experience of dealing with the victims of fire.  It's not something that's easily forgotten.  I certainly don't envy the task the guys have ahead of them.

[ProDave]

2 minutes ago, NSS said:

Shocking. So many speculative opinions, so few expressions of sympathy for all those affected. 

That is very true. It is a great tragedy for all those involved and a lot of lives have changed forever as a result.

 

But what I think strikes us all, was this was totally avoidable. Had the block been left alone and not clad, I suspect there would have been a fire in one flat, with no loss of life and it would barely make page 2 of a local rag.

[Declan52]

We have all grew up with the fantasy of being in the police or fire brigade and there are bits of the job that would be very full filling but being first on the scene at incidents like car crashes and murders would put my head away. How they cope is beyond me esp as the pay packet ain't really no where near where it should be. Fair play to anyone who does it.

[Jeremy Harris]

14 minutes ago, ProDave said:

Jeremy made an excellent summary there.

 

Surely, in the case of a building that relied on it's structure (concrete) being totally inflamable, then building regs should not allow a flamable cladding to be put on the outside?

 

I expect the enquiry will fluff around the edges and avoid the real issue, as most enquiries seem to.

 

 

I think they just aren't joined up, Dave.  The government and local authority have no responsibility for building control, or inspections.  BBA accreditation of materials is a complete farce - look at the way multifoil managed to get an accreditation, using demonstrably false data.  They only got caught out when their competitors sussed that it was fishy and paid to have they own tests done, whereupon the accreditation was later withdrawn.  How many other scams have we seen regarding compliance with building regs?  I know I've droned on and on about the failure to comply that is self-evident in so many new developments, but frankly this tragedy is the worst possible example of that.  We already have the companies involved, like this one: http://wittukgroup.co.uk/grenfell-tower-london-w11-1tq-regeneration-project/  pulling their web pages down, but they are still archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20170614035707/http://wittukgroup.co.uk/grenfell-tower-london-w11-1tq-regeneration-project/

 

I have the greatest sympathy with all those who have been killed, their families and friends, and the people who have been made homeless, or who are injured.  However, this simply should not have been able to happen.  This building would not have caused all those deaths and injuries if it had not been refurbished in a bloody dangerous and incompetent manner, and I'm afraid that makes me damned angry.  It was such an avoidable tragedy, in so many ways.

Edited June 14, 2017 by JSHarris

[ProDave]

Serious sugestion.

 

Should one smoke hood per resident not be an essential item in high rise to allow you to evacuate even if the stairwell is full of smoke?

[ADLIan]

Re multi foil. The original multi foil from Actis was never accredited by the BBA. Actis made exaggerated claims based on their own, very flawed, test regime. Both BBA and BRE were very proactive in bringing multi foils in line using correct and recognised measurement techniques rather than the Actis comparison method. There are now several multi foils that are BBA approved with much more realistic thermals though I'm not aware of Actis being one of them!

[NSS]

53 minutes ago, ProDave said:

That is very true. It is a great tragedy for all those involved and a lot of lives have changed forever as a result.

 

But what I think strikes us all, was this was totally avoidable. Had the block been left alone and not clad, I suspect there would have been a fire in one flat, with no loss of life and it would barely make page 2 of a local rag.

And you may well be right Dave, but that will be for expert investigators to establish. I'm not saying it's a subject that shouldn't be discussed here, nor that speculation about cause is not justifiable, but it seems to me that we should be responsible enough to refrain from pointing fingers at specific companies/products for fear of defaming innocent parties. My point however was that I was shocked that the discussion had not been prefixed by expressions of sadness/sympathy for those affected (be that victims, their families/friends, the emergency services, etc). Six degrees of separation. Let"s hope nobody reading this thread is closer to this tragedy.

[PeterW]

@NSS I think this is an abject case of how fast the media respond - at 8am this morning when the original post was made there was no report of loss of life but rather that a tower block had seemingly gone up from the outside in. 

 

As today has unfolded it has become apparent that there has been a significant loss of life and the posts have subsequently reflected this tragic turn of events. 

 

I expect I write on behalf of all of the members of BuildHub in expressing our sadness and our thoughts going out to those both directly and indirectly affected. 

[gravelld]

1 hour ago, JSHarris said:

Notwithstanding the possibility that a domestic appliance may have been the source of this fire, the question is "Would the entire block have caught fire if that appliance had caught fire before the external cladding was fitted?"

 

I'm not sure that is the question. That reads like you think fire safety and existence of cladding are incompatible. Surely it's a matter of design (and the rest of the construction process). After all, a refurbishment was required.

 

Surely the question is why fire safety wasn't improved/maintained at the same time as performance/aesthetics.

[PeterW]

8 minutes ago, gravelld said:

 

I'm not sure that is the question. That reads like you think fire safety and existence of cladding are incompatible. Surely it's a matter of design (and the rest of the construction process). After all, a refurbishment was required.

 

Surely the question is why fire safety wasn't improved/maintained at the same time as performance/aesthetics.

 

I think it's a mix of the two questions and has the addition of the cladding created a fire risk that was previously not present...?

 

This was a 1974 building that had limited escape routes as it had a single stairwell - no amount of refurbishment is going to fix a fundamental design issue and it will most likely be a significant factor in the inquiry following this tragic event. 

[Jeremy Harris]

21 minutes ago, gravelld said:

 

I'm not sure that is the question. That reads like you think fire safety and existence of cladding are incompatible. Surely it's a matter of design (and the rest of the construction process). After all, a refurbishment was required.

 

Surely the question is why fire safety wasn't improved/maintained at the same time as performance/aesthetics.

 

There was no easy way to overcome the fundamental problem with the building, after flammable cladding had been fitted.  It only had a single stairwell, and in order to be safe after the cladding had been fitted it would need safe escape routes from every floor, that were capable of handling the volume of people that would be evacuating under an exterior fire event, and allow firefighters access from inside to both rescue people and tackle the fire from inside.

 

Looking at the design of the building, with its single internal stairwell and there was no way to add additional access.  Clearly external access via bridges to external stairs would not have worked, as the external fire would have compromised these.

 

Frankly the decision to use flammable cladding was the key factor that massively increased the fire risk, and which could not have been overcome without major structural redesign, and I suspect that would have been impossible, as it's almost certainly a building with a structural centre core, built around the stairwell and lift shafts.

[Ferdinand]

17 minutes ago, PeterW said:

 

I think it's a mix of the two questions and has the addition of the cladding created a fire risk that was previously not present...?

 

This was a 1974 building that had limited escape routes as it had a single stairwell - no amount of refurbishment is going to fix a fundamental design issue and it will most likely be a significant factor in the inquiry following this tragic event. 

 

Aiui single stairs are a standard design in larger buildings being built now, because a single stair in a concrete core is a safe design - convincing fire expert on the news describing where he lives.

 

Design issues are perhaps more likely to be eg smoke exclusion or that the refurbishment had rendered the existing fire strategies inappropriate.

 

F

 

 

[Jeremy Harris]

11 hours ago, Ferdinand said:

 

Aiui single stairs are a standard design in larger buildings being built now, because a single stair in a concrete core is a safe design - convincing fire expert on the news describing where he lives.

 

Design issues are perhaps more likely to be eg smoke exclusion or that the refurbishment had rendered the existing fire strategies inappropriate.

 

F

 

 

True on a building that has no external fire hazard, where the "safe citadel" fire protection scheme works well, not at all true in a building where there is a high external fire risk that will penetrate every "safe citadel" at every level within a few tens of minutes of the fire starting.

 

 

[Redoctober]

Unfortunately my day job took me to the scene today - saw the community coming together, the damage caused and had the unenviable task of talking to the survivors. Truly harrowing experiences - Home in the bosom of my family and cradling a large glass of Red. 30 years of dealing with death and destruction on a daily basis, and still the bar gets higher!!

Appreciate those around you tonight and spare a thought for those sleeping in the various churches and sports centres.

Goodnight PW.

[NSS]

2 hours ago, ADLIan said:

Re multi foil. The original multi foil from Actis was never accredited by the BBA. Actis made exaggerated claims based on their own, very flawed, test regime. Both BBA and BRE were very proactive in bringing multi foils in line using correct and recognised measurement techniques rather than the Actis comparison method. There are now several multi foils that are BBA approved with much more realistic thermals though I'm not aware of Actis being one of them!

Think you'll find that at least some of the current Actis product does hold BBA certification. That said, IF the external cladding of Grenfell Tower is found to have contributed to this tragedy, and if BBA certificates exist for any such products, then I'd question whether BBA approval is worth the paper it's written on.

[ADLIan]

At least Actis are declaring realistic values for the certified product! Triso Super 10 was the product that created the problem several years ago and Actis still claim the exaggerated thermal performance based on their flawed comparison test for this.

 

We do not know if the cladding system (rather than individual materials) is BBA approved here. Perhaps more info on the cladding and components will come to light in the coming days. Having seen tv coverage I've a good idea on type of insulation involved but will not speculate on this forum.

[Triassic]

An interesting read.  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire

 

 

Edited June 15, 2017 by Triassic
Typo