Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)

TonyTiger66

Fire at Grenfell Tower in London

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Gorbygould said:

I read that the manufacturer of the cladding also make non flammable version which is more expensive. Apparently, for the whole of the tower block, the additional cost for the non flammable cladding would have been £5,000.

What's the point making the flats able to contain a fire, if you then stick fuel on the outside?

 

Unimaginable horror as a result of stupidity & penny-pinching.

 

Your source please? This sounds like fake news to me.

 

I see the whole world has suddenly become fire engineering experts. In my experience this is a technically complex discipline underpinned by complex mathematical techniques, only mastered by extensive study and lots of field work. As wise people have said above, we should be concentrating on the immediate needs of the survivors and those grieving, and give space and time to those who properly understand the subject to unravel what is a very complex technical, regulatory and social problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 3DStewart said:

Your source please? This sounds like fake news to me.

 

I see the whole world has suddenly become fire engineering experts. In my experience this is a technically complex discipline underpinned by complex mathematical techniques, only mastered by extensive study and lots of field work. As wise people have said above, we should be concentrating on the immediate needs of the survivors and those grieving, and give space and time to those who properly understand the subject to unravel what is a very complex technical, regulatory and social problem.

My source was the BBC news website – not normally known for fake news.

I have never claimed to be a fire engineering expert, I'm just doing the same as many on here, just mentioning information (from a reliable source) that I have read.

I agree entirely that we should be concentrating on the immediate needs of the survivors, but that doesn't mean that I am not allowed to voice my opinion as everyone else on here has been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No such thing as non flammable by that definition. Everything has a flash point including us, people. Reach that flash point and its spontaneous combustion. Hate to think what the temperature reached.

What was the start of the fire though ? The cladding just spread it. I don't believe a Fridge blew up just like that, not for a second. Something is not right. We wont know til the experts have worked it out. That cladding did spread that fire though and so fast. Don't need to be an expert to see that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Gorbygould said:

My source was the BBC news website – not normally known for fake news.

 

I can't find it on the BBC website, but I have found it on the Evening Standard's website and it's an appalling piece of journalism, being based on unverified rumour and 2nd hand reports.  Assuming the product is named correctly, the article is factually incorrect as just 5 mins on the suppliers website would get you to the product brochure which clearly states that the PE and FR versions are both Class A products (ASTM E84) with regards to both flame spread and smoke development. Brochure here if it interests you.

 

BTW, I've no connection with any of this, just fed up with seeing a horrible situation made a 1,000 times worse by everybody getting worked up by every bit of rubbish they hear or read.

 

Edited by 3DStewart
Further explanation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, 3DStewart said:

I can't find it on the BBC website, but I have found it on the Evening Standard's website and it's an appalling piece of journalism, being based on unverified rumour and 2nd hand reports.  Assuming the product is named correctly, the article is factually incorrect as just 5 mins on the suppliers website would get you to the product brochure which clearly states that the PE and FR versions are both Class A products (ASTM E84) with regards to both flame spread and smoke development. Brochure here if it interests you.

BBC website is the ONLY place I read the news – I don't read any papers.

I have since read the article you provided a link for, and it appears that the story is second hand – quoted from the Times. I'm not a lover of newspapers, but even I would have to admit that Times is usually pretty accurate – arguably more believable than a sales brochure.

Regardless of what it says in the sale brochure, you only need to see the photos of the dreadful aftermath to see that the stuff burned, it looks like charcoal and I doubt it looked like that before.

You are giving your own personally opinion on the standard of journalism on this article – but I don't say that you are claiming to be an expert in that field. Stating an opinion doesn't mean that I am claiming to be an expert in anything. As I said before, I am only adding my own opinion – just as everyone on this thread is doing.

Edited by Gorbygould
Changed one word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As somebody has said nothing is fireproof. 24/7 the steelwork melted.

 

Talk of fire resistance and you are on the right wavelength. Also true to say

that there are many materials which have a low fire resistance within buildings.

It is the way they are used fixed and protected and tested which is the criteria.

 

We use many things which are highly dangerous. Electricity and gas. It is the

way they are harnessed and used.

 

Add that reinforced concrete will fail. Engineers inspected the structure to

ensure this had not happened. Steel reinforcement within the structure will

loose its tensile strength and you are left with concrete which has a good

compressive strength but very very little tensile strength. You need both.

 

 

Laurie

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by LaurieS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LaurieS said:

As somebody has said nothing is fireproof. 24/7 the steelwork melted.

 

Talk of fire resistance and you are on the right wavelength. Also true to say

that there are many materials which have a low fire resistance within buildings.

It is the way they are used fixed and protected and tested which is the criteria

I didn't say 'fireproof'. The OED defines 'non flammable' as 'Not catching fire easily'.

My apologise if my meaning was not clear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Non flammable is, in my opinon, not much use as an expression in

building construction terms. It means a material it is not easily set alight.

 

Fire resistance is followed by a rating. It can be a single alone material a

combination of materials also both used in a particular circumnstance

and which have obtained a rating in the respect of which they were

repeatedly testing to the point of failure of the material or system.

 

Laurie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is a rush to judgement in some quarters. I doubt if it's as simple as the fire resistance of the cladding. I think we'll find there were a serious of factors which led to this tragedy. From working in aviation all these years and reading accident reports there is never one single reason for an accident. When the final report comes out we'll be a lot wiser.

I got the definite impression that there was some kind of chimney effect the way the flames raced up the building. I think I read somewhere that there was a gap behind the cladding, perhaps it produced a venturi effect which accelerated the flame upwards, a blowtorch effect essentially. This probably wouldn't have been anticipated by the designers. Pure speculation on my part. But I'll be anything that the cladding may have been well within spec but for one reason or another something happened which no one expected.

 

I also think this has now opened a can of worms. One expert, an actual expert, predicted that several towers might have to demolished or completely refurbished. It won't just be towers I think. This is a wake up call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, noelh said:

I think there is a rush to judgement in some quarters. I doubt if it's as simple as the fire resistance of the cladding. I think we'll find there were a serious of factors which led to this tragedy. From working in aviation all these years and reading accident reports there is never one single reason for an accident. When the final report comes out we'll be a lot wiser.

I got the definite impression that there was some kind of chimney effect the way the flames raced up the building. I think I read somewhere that there was a gap behind the cladding, perhaps it produced a venturi effect which accelerated the flame upwards, a blowtorch effect essentially. This probably wouldn't have been anticipated by the designers. Pure speculation on my part. But I'll be anything that the cladding may have been well within spec but for one reason or another something happened which no one expected.

 

I also think this has now opened a can of worms. One expert, an actual expert, predicted that several towers might have to demolished or completely refurbished. It won't just be towers I think. This is a wake up call.

A  ex fire officer has said the same that the effect was of a chimney racing the flames up the building 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, bzn20 said:

I don't believe a Fridge blew up just like that, not for a second

Same here when i heard it and something else that was said on the BBC was that kind of stuff was banned in America and elsewhere...

Edited by Vince1159

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 3DStewart said:

 

BTW, I've no connection with any of this, just fed up with seeing a horrible situation made a 1,000 times worse by everybody getting worked up by every bit of rubbish they hear or read.

 

 

Do I side with that Stewart. If people are not careful we will have riots on our hands due to the hyping of this matter with out foundation.

 

Laurie (and another Stewart)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the same report on the BBC website that the company makes a version of the cladding that is fire retardant which was more expensive. Also in the article which was more interesting that the Germans dont allow this type of cladding on building over 15 stories, nor do the Americans. Both countries which more highrise housing than us.

 

No doubt there will be somne sobering things learnt from this but I feel e must stay away from blame and speculation and wait for the facts. Though the facts must come out as quickly as possible I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As everyone says, first thoughts must be prayers for the victims and sympathy and support for all others affected. However, whatever the details of HOW it happened, it's clear that the underlying safety assumption about such hi-rise blocks --- that if a fire happened in a flat it would be contained within that flat -- is no longer reliable. Whether that's due to ageing materials, or cladding the outside of the flats in a way that provided a route for the fire to spread, I'm sure the Public Inquiry will discover. Something clearly needs to be changed, though...

 

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, cmatthewbacon said:

Something clearly needs to be changed, though...

 

Totally agree..One little detail amongst a plethora  is the fire protection design and systems in force were broken, redirected and contaminated by cladding. The internal box ,each flat. Doesn't matter the path is now affected by (Cladding) another route , up the outside at the speed of light. Another combustible to bypass and consume. The adhesives, sealants, insulation and UPVC. If I wanted to burn something that's exactly what I'd stick in there.

 

In the aviation industry, we prided ourselves, with good reason. I hate the cliché "Lessons will be learned" . We actually do/did. Every accident, causes, could be corrosion, could be servicing, could be material, could be pilot error, whatever it is. The aviation industry does take heed. We learn, we really do. The aviation world are the only outfit that change by each tragedy. The NHS, Maritime and just about anything else doesn't have a system that can touch the aviation industry. Remember "The Herald of Free Enterprise" ? Literally Keeling over because they hadn't put in the MODs required to set sail with the ******ing doors open?

You want safe? Sit in an Aeroplane ! Yeah, I know they still crash.. Its life, its the Gremlins! We wouldn't sit there and say cock all ,we knew if it was wrong, we'd say something. We aint the NHS where "Doctors" and Surgeons " hide. Don't bite me, my wife is disabled by those **********. Your paying for it and I had to give up work ! I even had  word with hospital records because they can be altered after a problem...Guess what, aircraft servicing records can't . We are honest and serious about our responsibilities. We are the only ones, we are really. Sorry, I meant I was !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A matter of manners, I feel that the Prime Ministers non attendence at Trooping the Colour is a snub to the Queen and perhaps in part to the reception she got at the fire scene. The government of the day sends our forces to fight and die for us it would have been the least she could do is pop in for one hour she only lives next door for gods sake! This I hope is not a political post as I would have said it if Mr Corbyn had done the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

This fire is simply the worst tragic event imaginable. We can speculate all we want on what happened; but what truly happened will only be divulged after a lengthy forensic investigation. This event is too important to be judged in the media because this has world wide ramifications...and we owe it to all those that lost their lives...at a minimum to let the right people do their investigations without undue media pressure.

 

There are basic design challenges which cause hazards in high rise buildings. In most building construction laws it requires the strict use of all non-combustible materials. In addition fire-sprinklers are needed throughout the building particularly one if this height. Furnishings and personal belongings all provide fuel for a fire which often provide toxic/thick smoke...its the smoke that kills...flames just try and cover the tragic event up. People need air and often windows are broken to reduce heat and provide air. People are evacuated and then their apartment becomes fuel and flames wick up the outside of the building via openings. Early evacuation is key in this issue. I believe helos were used in Dubi fire...to evacuate occupants from roof.

 

Heat is tremendous in a fire and fire protection systems and materials can be only tested. Never seen a test where they burn a high rise to see what happens...maybe its time. The test is very critical and yet those tests are different all around the world. What is key is fire alarms and quick and orderly evacuation from the building. Fire protection systems are designed by engineers...and with the correct application they work well. But no system is effective as the early evacuation of a building in an emergency.   

 

Periodically, 12months at least the building is inspected by local fire department inspectors to determine functional/hazardous conditions within the building. The building is then required to upgrade/fix what is needed but that order is sent to the property owner. Emergency services dread dealing with a high rise apartment/office because of its inherent nature of the building. What is sad is this is not the first time a building of this nature has experienced this type of tragic fire. There have been examples of this all around the world...and something needs to be done about it ASAP.

 

Renovation of an old apartment block is complicated and in most cases simply not possible. Best solution is demolition...because its too expensive and a reduction in fire safety to make the renovation viable in most cases. Heritage buildings do get concessions but not in this case. If not...its simply a watering down of the building and fire codes…and there can be tragic consequences as a result.

 

PHIL.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LongMan2 said:

Hi,

 

This fire is simply the worst tragic event imaginable. We can speculate all we want on what happened; but what truly happened will only be divulged after a lengthy forensic investigation. This event is too important to be judged in the media because this has world wide ramifications...and we owe it to all those that lost their lives...at a minimum to let the right people do their investigations without undue media pressure.

 

There are basic design challenges which cause hazards in high rise buildings. In most building construction laws it requires the strict use of all non-combustible materials. In addition fire-sprinklers are needed throughout the building particularly one if this height. Furnishings and personal belongings all provide fuel for a fire which often provide toxic/thick smoke...its the smoke that kills...flames just try and cover the tragic event up. People need air and often windows are broken to reduce heat and provide air. People are evacuated and then their apartment becomes fuel and flames wick up the outside of the building via openings. Early evacuation is key in this issue. I believe helos were used in Dubi fire...to evacuate occupants from roof.

 

Heat is tremendous in a fire and fire protection systems and materials can be only tested. Never seen a test where they burn a high rise to see what happens...maybe its time. The test is very critical and yet those tests are different all around the world. What is key is fire alarms and quick and orderly evacuation from the building. Fire protection systems are designed by engineers...and with the correct application they work well. But no system is effective as the early evacuation of a building in an emergency.   

 

Periodically, 12months at least the building is inspected by local fire department inspectors to determine functional/hazardous conditions within the building. The building is then required to upgrade/fix what is needed but that order is sent to the property owner. Emergency services dread dealing with a high rise apartment/office because of its inherent nature of the building. What is sad is this is not the first time a building of this nature has experienced this type of tragic fire. There have been examples of this all around the world...and something needs to be done about it ASAP.

 

Renovation of an old apartment block is complicated and in most cases simply not possible. Best solution is demolition...because its too expensive and a reduction in fire safety to make the renovation viable in most cases. Heritage buildings do get concessions but not in this case. If not...its simply a watering down of the building and fire codes…and there can be tragic consequences as a result.

 

PHIL.

 

 

Where did you get all this stuff Phil ? What are you qualified in ?

 

Laurie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Laurie,

 

Oh it doesn't really matter what I'm qualified in...and there is plenty of publications on the subject...but I just wanted to get my point across. From the poor visual evidence there was too much going on with this fire to make any assumptions...it will obviously take a while to get to the bottom of this. I hope some took a picture of this fire early on....But I will say I've been in many many buildings over the decades officially and seen too much. Self-certification (SC) is like giving the fox the key to the hen house...but not sure if this is the case; yet SC is an obvious disaster. But I digress...we still don't know all the facts to determine what happened...I hope everything is looked into...including negligence, arson, or deliberate act of violence. 

 

Laurie every time I walk into a building around the world I look where the exits signs are and the general lay of the building...its like a tormented habit I have. I hate to say this but I don't like going to a building that is not what I consider a safe environment. Safe environment is a term I use for any building or structure that maintains, looks, and provides safe and healthy conditions for its occupants...including me. Some buildings I can't wait to get outside...but dat is just me.  

 

The question is... what good can come out of this tragic horrific nightmare? Any ideas?

 

PHIL.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, LongMan2 said:

Hi Laurie,

The question is... what good can come out of this tragic horrific nightmare? Any ideas?

 

PHIL.

 

Hi Phil Apologies for the rudeness. Tired last night and ratty.

 

Any ideas. Make sure it does not happen again. That means at speed with the proper professionals who know their job but properly sort out the problem.

 

Laurie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know I work in security in a office block   so far I,ve seen  in different companies

 Contractor s not allowed to use main entrance  use a fire exit

Fire exits  used for deliveries  rubbish removal

Storage (Calor Gas,boxes petrol cans paint )

Cars parked in front of doors in car park due to no parking

Doors padlocked (get key from Facilities office on ground floor  door locked on fourth floor ) This to stop other company employees from accessing their area in a emergency

Desks placed across escape route

We are a foreign company so your laws do not apply to us

Sorry if this upsets anyone

I,m disabled but I  want to work on the top floor if there's a fire or emergency somebody will have to come and get me

Can Security man the phones on customer service ??

Try to the head count oh lets run around laughing so the  fireman has to look for missing people that are here

Wont sign in as visitors  so we know whose in because its against the data protection act ( its not )

 

And the best one

 

We are having the  six month /yearly fire drill don't bother leaving the office we know you know the drill

 

Have your  rules/drills but don't disturb or disrupt staff from working

After all the disasters in fires you would think we have learned but we have not and we wont learn from this one either

 

 

when the fire officer checks  its

 

Really who did that ,oh I wll get that sorted

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Panzer Vor!!! said:

As you know I work in security in a office block   so far I,ve seen  in different companies

 Contractor s not allowed to use main entrance  use a fire exit

Fire exits  used for deliveries  rubbish removal

Storage (Calor Gas,boxes petrol cans paint )

Cars parked in front of doors in car park due to no parking

Doors padlocked (get key from Facilities office on ground floor  door locked on fourth floor ) This to stop other company employees from accessing their area in a emergency

Desks placed across escape route

We are a foreign company so your laws do not apply to us

Sorry if this upsets anyone

I,m disabled but I  want to work on the top floor if there's a fire or emergency somebody will have to come and get me

Can Security man the phones on customer service ??

Try to the head count oh lets run around laughing so the  fireman has to look for missing people that are here

Wont sign in as visitors  so we know whose in because its against the data protection act ( its not )

 

And the best one

 

We are having the  six month /yearly fire drill don't bother leaving the office we know you know the drill

 

Have your  rules/drills but don't disturb or disrupt staff from working

After all the disasters in fires you would think we have learned but we have not and we wont learn from this one either

 

 

when the fire officer checks  its

 

Really who did that ,oh I wll get that sorted

 

 

We used to live in a 4 bed Flat in a large converted 1803 house. After watching that BBC 999 tv prog with Michael Burke about house fires. The said its more than a good idea to have fire drills...So we did the next day with our 2 oldest and a few years later with the two youngest. They knew what to do and more importantly what not to do.

We were staying in a Hotel and the Fire Alarm went off. The kids, 12,13and14 were up stairs we were in the carpark packing up the car.My daughter got the two boys out doors shut, had the key and people were queueing for lift !! She told the boys don't use the lift in a fire and carried down stairs from the 4th floor. Meanwhile the duty manager was outside the main doors doing next to nothing. Wheres the fire assembly point out here? er..Why haven't you got the role call sheets? er...I'm on my toes.. he says "You can't go in". I just breezed past him and in.  My kids were just coming off the staircase. So proud of my girl to do that. It shakes you up a bit not know exactly whats going on. People were coming out the lifts ! If it had been a building going up in flames ?

The fire was a one of those catering toaster conveyor efforts. We didn't know that, could have been anything but when the bell goes.....

 

I phoned to the Hotel Chain to tell them what I thought of their fire and emergency evac procedures and the manager's lack of action. They were horrified and promised to look into it. I didn't expect or even want a reply, just sort it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to go into any discussion, but just want to offer my deepest sympathy with the dead, missing and their families.

 

With my highest regards

Hans J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi all,

 

Further...Buildings which exceed a certain height limitation need to be fully sprinkled and provided with non combustible materials. There are lots and lots of companies that toat their products or methods are the greatest in providing protection, yet do they really? Testing laboratories are approached by companies to test their products...as those companies are paying the bill do you think the test could be slanted one way? How long will those products last with the designed FRR or do they need to be removed/repaired? That laboratory staff and business has to survive now don’t it...would want them to get a bad rep from manufacturers. Not saying it happens but because of the stakes (Life safety) you would think the accredited national laboratories (Govt laboratories) would test those products...or have the life safety standards be watered down by greedy product manufactures or developers lobbyists...approaching those all important committee members with their wonderful products. I have to think about that one..

 

Those fire crews entering the building all know what happened in the world trade center and to be honest I wonder if any structural engineer was consulted in this emergency to verify the building would be standing to allow fire fighting to take place. Combination of high heat and water could cause shelling of the protective structural concrete layer...weakening the structure. Could the fire damage building topple over causing extensive destruction to surrounding neighborhoods...etc...its starting to look like the taller the building the bigger the risk now don’t it. I hope the building had security monitoring the comings and goings...regular fire drills and sweeps once every quarter. I hope govt understand that high rise is a soft target for deliberate acts of violence and steps up security...accordingly until this middle eastern issues are resolved.

 

How to you deal with a fire that is taller than the biggest articulated ladder snorkel you have? I don’t really know...so maybe you should limit the height of the buildings to that height. Common sense right? But no...as developers put pressure local govt planners to make the buildings higher as they make more money. I just hope we move on and think a little smarter...

 

Fires need fuel, air, and heat to grow and cause a thermal disaster. We fight a fires from the bottom up...so maybe aerial drenching the building would be better. I’m sure there are helos that could drop, squirt, or shower retardant on buildings...just like they do in forest fires. Preventing fire spread from the outside of the building structure and cooling structural/glazing…All fire crews would do is catch the residue like they do now with inflatable catchment rings...just thinking outside the box. Then they could enter the building and put out spot fires and complete the emergency situation.

 

Each major building within the municipality should be familiar to the local fire chief/commander and he has a select group that knows what to do when a event takes place. Command and control...is key. But sadly that is not always the case...we are all human right, things go wrong...things interferer. To be honest the full scale test of a 30 storey residential building is looking like a major event but should be done ASAP….The whole world needs to get involved...its to important. Who knows what we will learn in the years to come after the testing is completed...It may keep all the worlds city communities a lot safer....

 

 

PHIL.

 

 

Edited by LongMan2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×