FOCUS
Current affairs
He reflected on the fatal Garrock Court fire in Scotland which presaged the BS 8414 system tests, noting that the aim was ‘not to allow the system to be gamed’, but in his opinion this ‘failed to answer what happened’ with that fire, in that the window materials were what caused the fire to spread up the building. Going into further detail on the legislation
and the standard’s text, he noted that ADB is ‘not concerned about where windows are in walls’, while the references to limited combustibility do not refer to insulated infill panels, which in another section are said to be ‘part of the external wall’. This is contradicted elsewhere, and they are defined as being part of the wall from the interior of the compartment. He asked why there is no window or door
Next steps include focusing on increased costs of construction, regulation changes, putting non combustible building fabrics first, revising ADB, better fire testing, ‘robust’ fire details, and improvements in firefighter and responsible person training, alongside ‘enhanced’ inspections.
Windows and walls
Audacity’s Ian Abley looked at windows and walls through the prism of ADB and BS 8414, noting that those who work with documentation and regulations have ‘gone back to school since Grenfell’ due to the changes needed. Covering definitions of terms in the Hackitt report, he noted that ‘I thought I knew what windows and walls were’, but with changes ahead, a choice must be made between following the text or undertaking system tests – an ‘important decision’. Citing the ‘golden thread’ that was outlined
in Dame Judith’s reports, he said that while this idea of following elements through from start to end is ‘good’, she ‘hasn’t defined’ where this tests and the financial outcome. Reflecting next on BS 8414 cladding tests, and their focus on aluminium composite materials and cavity barriers, he pointed to the fact this ‘went beyond’ what ADB covers, as regards the need to close around openings. Studying specific details of the standard and
ADB, Mr Abley reflected that what may be required ‘might not get accurately installed’, and those in the position to do so ‘must declare or disclose what they are doing post Hackitt’. He asked how anyone could design ‘and then communicate or check’ details of materials used or processes followed ‘unless having undertaken precise testing’.
50 JULY/AUGUST 2018
www.frmjournal.com
Roy Wilsher, chair of the NFCC, noted that the council had been involved in ministerial meetings, data collection, FRS visits, screening tests and interim fire safety meetings in the weeks following Grenfell, and the simultaneous evacuation of the Chalcots Estate the week after, the building being like ‘Swiss cheese covered in petrol’. He also remarked on 24 June 2017, or ‘Mad
Day Saturday’, when NHS trusts nationwide asked FRSs to inspect every building that weekend, which obviously ‘wasn’t possible’. The NFCC assisted with data concerning hundreds of blocks in London and Manchester, and began questioning regulations with regard to insulation materials, asking for clarity in ADB on external fire spread and wall construction, querying why windows were not included. The NFCC has also been coordinating FRS
audits; reporting back to government; providing FRS advice; working with local authorities on known blocks with flammable cladding, other cladding systems, fire doors, private sector blocks, and stay put; and contributing to the inquiry. On the Hackitt report’s findings, the NFCC
provided its own submission and coordinated the FRS submission, with a presence on working groups. It is still preparing its response to the final report, and is part of the first work streams on the JCA and competence, but there was a ‘lot to be
provision in BS 8414, noting that insulated infill panels are part of a wall, and would allow for a system test and alternative to be built ‘in practice’. Referring to Swedish test house RISE, which has had that type of test since 1985, he remarked that BS 8414 ‘should be more rigorous’, and disagreed with other views that only using non combustible materials would solve things – his opinion was that product testing was needed.
NFCC perspective
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
