HEALTH & SAFETY
without taking into account the potential risk factors, which could come at a high price.
Evidently, there is a clear rationale for replacing the existing roof surface with a like-for-like system, particularly if the existing system has delivered a long service life, but advances in roofing technology mean that there are various alternative approaches that may prove better for the building, safer during the installation and more manageable for the FM.
Many liquid roofing systems avoid the need for hot works completely, removing the inherent fire risk and potential knock-on effects that could prove costly for the building owner and occupier.
Hot works are required for any bitumen or asphalt roof surface and involve the use of a naked flame on-site. Such systems require installation by an experienced
roofing contractor with a licence for the use of hot works equipment. The safety risks are taken very seriously by contractors to ensure risk is minimised for their own team, the building, its occupants and the general public.
However, all hot works involve an inherent fire risk, even in the most capable and safety-conscious hands. Indeed, the use of hot works is one of the biggest health & safety risks associated with roofing schemes, in particular those that use a blow torch.
Even when the equipment is not in use, if it is stored on-site during the roof refurbishment programme it continues to present a fire risk outside of working hours due to the potential for accidental or malicious mishandling. It’s essential, therefore, that secure storage is provided for any equipment stored on-site during an installation.
“SYSTEMS REQUIRE INSTALLATION BY AN EXPERIENCED ROOFING
CONTRACTOR WITH A LICENCE FOR THE
USE OF HOT WORKS EQUIPMENT.”
In the USA, investigations into hot works-related accidents has led to a hot works standard, defining practices that should be adhered to when carrying out any activities involving hot works.
Amongst the key stipulations of the US standard is that hot works should be avoided wherever possible by considering the use of other methods. A full consideration of the advantages of alternative approaches demonstrates why this advice has been included in the standard.
While a ‘like-for-like’ bitumen or asphalt roof covering involving patch repairs and an overlay may appear to be a cost-effective approach to carrying out a roof refurbishment, it can be a false saving in terms of service life, maintenance costs and the risks associated with hot works.
Using an alternative not only avoids the need to bring hot works to site during the installation but also means that they will not be required at any point in the future to carry out repairs. A liquid system with a BBA-accredited service life will reduce whole life costs, prevent the disruption of future repairs and offer peace of mind that the building will be leak-free for a guaranteed period.
www.tomorrowsfm.com
Where damage to the roof requires urgent attention, a cold liquid system applied as an overlay without the need for any strip out offers a fast alternative to bitumen-based systems, while minimising disruption and avoiding all fire risk.
A cold-applied liquid system can also provide the ideal solution for upgrading the roof’s thermal performance as a fully cold-applied insulated roof build up.
Building the business case for selecting an alternative to a hot works-based system not only involves considering the options from a whole life costs and maintenance perspective but should also factor in the potential disruption that could be caused by a fire.
In order to manage safety on-site, a contractor using hot works may have to control access into and around the building, which could cause inconvenience or logistical issues for the FM and the occupier.
If a fire should occur, beyond the obvious health & safety hazards for the building’s occupants, it could cause structural damage to the building, along with potential smoke and water damage. If this damage makes the building uninhabitable or causes sections of the building to be closed while repairs are carried out, temporary accommodation may have to be found for the occupiers, which could be costly. The fire might also damage or destroy the building’s contents, including office equipment, furniture and paperwork; it could even lead to data loss.
While insurance may cover some or all of the repair and costs of a fire, the claim could have a significant impact on premiums and the incident could also affect occupancy levels and rental returns.
Traditionally, hot works have been a feature of roofing projects because there was no alternative. With the array of cold applied systems now available, it’s time to think differently about the safest way to deliver a roofing scheme.
www.liquidplastics.co.uk TOMORROW’S FM | 57
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
