Off Topic London Fire

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
originallambrettaman said:
It's flame ******ant, rather than being completely inflammable, but it still shouldn't have burned the way it did. There are dozens of buildings clad in this stuff in the UK and hundreds (possibly thousands) worldwide. Courtesy of BBC new this morning.
Click to expand...

Not wishing to be pedantic but flammable and inflammable mean the same thing - such materials are capable of catching fire; flame ******ants are added to slow down the rate of burn and that depends on the properties of the ******ant and the application of the materials it protects. Buy cheap, burn faster. What we all saw was the equivalent of someone 'drawing' their old coal fire by creating a draught over combustible materials. All it needed was a firelighter. This was engineered in the cause of aesthetic energy saving, done on the cheap by a cash-strapped ALMO, but, and I have no doubt in my mind, totally compliant. This raises many hard questions that are only just beginning to be brought up in the public arena, but anyone involved in construction will be shaking their heads quietly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ullofaman and DMD
Fez said:
Not wishing to be pedantic but flammable and inflammable mean the same thing - such materials are capable of catching fire; flame ******ants are added to slow down the rate of burn and that depends on the properties of the ******ant and the application of the materials it protects. Buy cheap, burn faster. What we all saw was the equivalent of someone 'drawing' their old coal fire by creating a draught over combustible materials. All it needed was a firelighter. This was engineered in the cause of aesthetic energy saving, done on the cheap by a cash-strapped ALMO, but, and I have no doubt in my mind, totally compliant. This raises many hard questions that are only just beginning to be brought up in the public arena, but anyone involved in construction will be shaking their heads quietly.
Click to expand...

We'll find out in due course if the wrong stuff was used, or there was a fault with it, but it was supposed to be the highest spec available...

Design specifications seen by the Press Association suggest the renovation work carried out at Grenfell Tower included a 50mm "ventilated cavity" next to 150mm of Celotex FR5000 insulation. This insulation, according to Celotex, has a Class 0 rating under UK building regulations, meaning it has the highest rating for preventing the spread of flames and prevents the spread of heat.
 
originallambrettaman said:
We'll find out in due course if the wrong stuff was used, or there was a fault with it, but it was supposed to be the highest spec available...

Design specifications seen by the Press Association suggest the renovation work carried out at Grenfell Tower included a 50mm "ventilated cavity" next to 150mm of Celotex FR5000 insulation. This insulation, according to Celotex, has a Class 0 rating under UK building regulations, meaning it has the highest rating for preventing the spread of flames and prevents the spread of heat.
Click to expand...

I found it a bit strange, one the BBC this morning they said that the cladding was fire ******ant, but once it does catch fire it burns rapidly. Maybe it is coated with a ******ant, and once that is breached then what is underneath is very inflammable.
 
originallambrettaman said:
We'll find out in due course if the wrong stuff was used, or there was a fault with it, but it was supposed to be the highest spec available...

Design specifications seen by the Press Association suggest the renovation work carried out at Grenfell Tower included a 50mm "ventilated cavity" next to 150mm of Celotex FR5000 insulation. This insulation, according to Celotex, has a Class 0 rating under UK building regulations, meaning it has the highest rating for preventing the spread of flames and prevents the spread of heat.
Click to expand...

I will be extremely surprised if the products used are non-compliant with building regs; but unsurprised to be shown that the products are susceptible to installation applications and 'unforseen events'. TWT, as I know there is much more to come and the ramifications are very serious for the industry and social housing sector.
 
I'm not sure it will reach triple figures, the Telegraph have compiled a list of everyone they believe is missing and there's 26 of them (there's actually 31 names on the list, but that was before the official death toll rose from 12 to 17).
 
Fez said:
I will be extremely surprised if the products used are non-compliant with building regs; but unsurprised to be shown that the products are susceptible to installation applications and 'unforseen events'. TWT, as I know thete is much more to come and the ramifications are very serious for the industry and social housing sector.
Click to expand...

The council has already confirmed it met building regs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fez
originallambrettaman said:
I'm not sure it will reach triple figures, the Telegraph have compiled a list of everyone they believe is missing and there's 26 of them (there's actually 31 names on the list, but that was before the official death toll rose from 12 to 17).
Click to expand...

I hope you're right.
 
One of the big problems with tower blocks is
The sole stairwell essentially becomes a chimney, smoke rises obviously

A modern sprinker system would have been incredibly effective at lowering the intensity of the heat and flames

Loud fire alarms in the public areas of the building

A fire extinguisher at the fire start point could have ended it right there

And regardless of whether the cladding was extremely flammable, which i doubt, it is still more prone to fire than the original concrete facade

These horrific post war tower blocks should not be in use in 2017

But alas it's far too early to know exactly why it spread so fast etc
The experts will figure it out
 
BrAdY said:
And regardless of whether the cladding was extremely flammable, which i doubt, it is still more prone to fire than the original concrete facade
Click to expand...

Just look at the remaining facade and the fall of ash, rather than panels, this product was flammable; the degree of how flammable it was is best judged by the outcome rather than a specification sheet.

Modern buildings are equally susceptible to this happening. The structure of the building had nothing to do with the outcome, the recent refurbishment is what should be critically investigated. Building Regulations, materials regulations and permitted application is where the real scrutiny belongs.
 
Last edited:
John Ex Aberdeen now E.R. said:
I found it a bit strange, one the BBC this morning they said that the cladding was fire ******ant, but once it does catch fire it burns rapidly. Maybe it is coated with a ******ant, and once that is breached then what is underneath is very inflammable.
Click to expand...

That's exactly how insulation burns. It flashes, resists up to a point then all goes up in seconds. Trust me I know <laugh>
 
  • Like
Reactions: John Ex Aberdeen now E.R.
17 dead...17 too many.
RIP to them all and thoughts to all the family + friends of the deceased and injured

<rose><rose><rose> <rose><rose><rose>
<rose><rose><rose> <rose><rose><rose>
<rose><rose><rose> <rose><rose>

I pray I do not need any more roses
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back