40 THE CHANGING FACE OF CONSTRUCTION PRODUCT CERTIFICATION ROUND TABLE REVIEW
Grenfell inquiry had recommended expanding the defi nitions of igher isk uildings to almost any complex building. e said he thought the result would be the overnment putting the burden back to industry due to the complexity of the challenge. owever, Nev runwald said that while it was unreasonable to expect civil servants to have the necessary knowledge, we still haven’t got the people in industry to understand the certifi cation they are obtaining, for example around certain product assemblies.
SITE ISSUES – A SCAPEGOAT? Wates’ Nev runwald pushed back against the idea that safety-critical products were only as good as those installing them on sites, citing the renfell inquiry report: ow many times did we talk about the secondary subcontractor ery few; when did we start making mistakes Design, procurement, delivery. e added: The problems start before we get to site, we have to start with the manufacturers who are dithering or doing nothing, and get them to start talking to their sales people.
ryan owey added however that he
regularly sees outrageous specifi cations from subcontractors which are so prescriptive and out of touch with what a contractor’s wanting to see. e added: deally we should be providing a performance specifi cation, so a contractor can pick what they need. The key problem, said Nev runwald, was that the competencies around safety have not yet been agreed, and added that manufacturers and specifi cation writers can both be in a position where you put something forward that is actually wrong, and you don’t know it.
CONCLUSION
The round table was a rare opportunity to bring experts in construction product certifi cation together with manufacturers and specifi ers including architects and housebuilders, to the critical topic of how the sector can build trust with a better testing regime. The renfell Tower catastrophe has had few positive outcomes, but one has been the beginning of a more robust, transparent framework for testing, certifying and marketing products.
While there are major barriers to overcome and points of clarifi cation needed, the round table revealed the
aspiration for much more testing and standards, including systems. ut as architect Mark Taylor characterised it, changing the industry is like moving a supertanker, so the overnment may have to step in to speed progress. e said that architects’ standpoint on product certifi cation has changed, however: Architects used to believe everything that came from the manufacturer. Now we sometimes start from the opposite end and question; we fi nd that whenever we interact with manufacturers in a critical way, there is a benefi t.
The overnment has now responded to the MorrellDay report in the form of a green paper and a consultation with the industry. ut more clarity is needed for the sector, and as it waits for this, the centre would do well to pay attention to multidisciplinary forums such as our round table, and identify shared practical concerns. SME players are in urgent need of support to engage in this improved regime, and need to come to the table to help shape the solutions. nce the overnment’s plans for a new ‘single regulator’ for the sector are revealed, it would seem the right time for a further round table, featuring the diverse supply chain mix we are able to deliver.
ROUND TABLE RECOMMENDATIONS Our attendees provided a set of recommendations for the construction industry & government to adopt, to drive forward improvements in specifi cation of water and energy saving appliances for new homes.
Chris Gaze, Chris Gaze Associates You need a body of tests you can conform against, and which we can trust.
Mike Vaczi, Soprema It’s about looking at the volume of what is going through the testing facilities; with more and more systems being tested, how do they cut down the timelines?
Mark Taylor, Allies and Morrison Accelerate and expand the suite of test standards, fi nd the gaps, and a kind of medium ground which suits the laboratories, but also meets the needs of the real world.
Gabriel Pierazzini, Kier Group There should be a specifi c government-sponsored review of the testing that is available, paying people that are the best of the industry, and not people working in their spare time.
Seán McAlister, Pencil and Brick A government–funded open-source virtual physics building model with building physics at its core and designed for AI testing and development would vastly speed up building product testing, compatibility checking and innovation, against the targets within the Future Homes Standard.
WWW.HBDONLINE.CO.UK
Amanda Long, CCPI Ltd CCPI should be adopted by the Government; it’s really simple, and we are learning there are a lot of benefi ts. It isn’t possible to solve the problems of building safety by ticking boxes.
Tony Ryan, Siderise UK More guidance and clarity around Gateway 2 submissions would be helpful to the industry.
Ross Newman, Warringtonfi re An awareness or PR campaign to dutyholders and design teams around how the Building Safety Act has changed the Building Regulations 2010, specifi cally clauses 11A to 110. Also the expansion of the fi re engineering aspect of standards to cover the areas specifi cally excluded from the scope of the PFPF Passive Fire Protection Forum) Guide to undertaking technical assessments of fi re performance of construction products based on fi re test evidence (2021).
Bryan Cowey, SpecStudio We need to bring accountability back into the product test area, not just allowing people to test one element of a certain system. We need the regime set up so it brings the trust back in.
Nev Grunwald, Wates We should be choosing CCPI products, and we need a funded Secretariat at government level leading on things such as product testing, certifi cation and new standards; and they must include SMEs.
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
