Fire Sector Summit
compartmentation to protect’ the building. Despite being effectively installed, fire spread through voids, and the house was lost in 40 minutes. Such buildings ‘need intervention early doors’,
as contractor changes to heritage voids or holes cause issues. Third party certification has always been available, but ‘people chose to ignore it’ until Grenfell Tower, Mr Bantock said, addressing the need to ‘think about property protection’, and citing the FPA’s amended ADB, alongside BS 9999 providing a ‘suite of documents design teams can use’. For him, the issue is that fire protection costs
more for the Trust, and is not high priority, so ‘needs to change’. He also addressed unaccredited contractors, the Trust now having trained 50 person maintenance teams to fill gaps. Surveyors have also been trained to research contractors and ensure they are accredited, contractors needing to list products and components and have competency. Niall Rowan, chief operations officer for the Association for Specialist Fire Protection (ASFP), spoke about its yellow book for structural protection, which outlines passive protection and fire stopping, as well as active fire barriers and compartmentation. He also discussed the Windsor Castle fire as an example of heritage fires caused by voids, noting many modern buildings are produced with voids or inadequate cavity barriers. Heritage buildings are a live environment
for contractors, forcing work to be done out of hours, with furnishings that can’t be disturbed, and non functioning fire doors. Contractors need support and information, with some door frames not fire stopped, decorations unable to be moved and inaccessible ceiling voids. Structurally, stones and bricks are usually resilient,
while vaulted and arched bricks work well and can be painted with intumescent material. Heritage building issues from a passive point of view include compartmentation, timber floors and ceilings, an inability to cover or board up areas, and inadequate intumescent coatings.
Getting past these can be done by upgrading
protection above ceilings with supporting mesh and damp proof layers. Hidden spaces and cavities remain a ‘major factor for fire spread’, and as there are rarely cavities in traditional designs, these are ‘unfortunately invasive’ voids created by contractors. All routes of potential fire spread must be
evaluated, like doors or panels, with door hoods one option. Door factors to consider include type, thickness, smoke seals, cavities, glazing, voids and gaps and leaf restraint; while thickness, fire and burn resistance, and sealable gaps should be checked alongside leaf upgrades and their effect on hardware suitability, as well as third party certification of products and installers.
www.frmjournal.com DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 39
The ASFP is ‘sceptical’ of intumescent paint, paper and adhesive strips, and tested polyurethane foam that failed in nine minutes despite claiming it would hold for an hour, while another test saw ignited foam burst through a plastic pipe. The ASFP recommended checking insulation versus integrity, as well as third party certification and heritage considerations.
Data sharing
Peter Dartford, director of 3TC, spoke about data sharing across multiple agencies and the importance of accurate data analysis. Data sharing posed a ‘tricky question because it always raises lots of issues’, but is useful ‘when so much data is collected’, and when instances of fire are going down. After a career in firefighting, Mr Dartford ‘saw
the power and difference’ data can make in reducing community risk and saving lives. Having filled in incident forms, he asked ‘what was my motivation to ensure the information I was providing was absolutely accurate?’, as there was ‘no understanding of what it was for, or where it went’. A key issue was that ‘with little understanding
from those collecting the data’, fires and victims were on an ‘upward trajectory’, 2004 bringing in integrated risk management plans and ‘prescriptive standards of fire’, while risk responsibility passed to authorities in a ‘more balanced approach’. A ‘more traditional’ risk management approach
saw fire safety checks introduced. Firefighters ‘started to understand the importance of data’, and gained a ‘much greater understanding of vulnerabilities’. Previously ‘wider societal factors’ had been missed that increased chances of understanding fires. By stratifying risk, you can see where fires are occurring,
FOCUS
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
