Talk:Grenfell Tower fire background and consequences - Revision history

Designing Buildings: moved Talk:Grenfell Tower fire to Talk:Grenfell Tower fire background and consequences

2024-04-26T09:03:02Z

moved Talk:Grenfell Tower fire to Talk:Grenfell Tower fire background and consequences

← Older revision

Revision as of 09:03, 26 April 2024

88.145.121.126 at 23:57, 27 June 2017

2017-06-27T23:57:23Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:57, 27 June 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~The planning application for this work did specify (and only specified) a fire-retardant insulation product, Celotex FR5000. It is not as thermally insulating as~~ the ~~polyethylene~~ Celotex ~~PE5000 - so this was a conscious decision at the outset by the design team to place fire performance above insulating performance~~.	+	An analysis of the Celotex RS5000 insulation located behind it raises worrying questions.

−	~~This decision was evidently reversed subsequently~~, and ~~this second decision process to place fire performance lower needs to be evidenced~~ for ~~examination and understanding~~.	+	If you look at the Celotex website it states that their products are BBA (British Board of Agrement), CE (European Conformity), and BRE (Building Research Establishment) tested. Two certificate numbers are shown under the BBA insignia despite the BBA website indicating no such certificates exist. A search of the BBA certificates listed elsewhere by Celotex indicates that none were obtained for RS5000 i.e. this particular insulation has no safety certificate.

−	~~-----~~	+	The BRE certification is used as the justification for using this material in facades over 18m in height. Reference is made to the BR135 performance specification. However this applies solely to a unique construction based on two 12.5mm skins of plasterboard on a lightweight steel frame, with another 12.5 mm of incombustible board, then the Celotex RS5000, and finally a further 12.5mm fibre cement facade panel. In other words the insulation has to be totally encapsulated in fireproof material.
−	~~Where~~ in the ~~planning application does it say that?~~	+

−	--~~---~~	+	Only if that construction is followed is the certification valid. The manufacturer even warns architects about this by stating that “The fire performance and classification report issued only relates to the components detailed and constructed in Fig 4. Any changes to the components listed and construction method set out in figure 4 will need to be considered by the building designer”. That’s another way of saying that if you depart from this specification - as the Grenfell Tower facade designer did - then the fire performance is invalid above 18m.
−	~~The product used was Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation, which~~ is ~~polyisocyanurate~~.	+

−	~~-----~~	+	That leaves only the CE certificate. Celotex state that “CE marking confirms that our products fully comply with BS EN 13165 and that key performance characteristics have been verified through independent type testing”. One would therefore assume that since this is a product advertised for use in a fire rated construction then the fire aspects will have been tested. However when you drill down into the certificate only the thermal performance and compressive strength have been verified. The remaining ten categories simply state “No Performance Determined”. This includes Reaction to fire; Release of Dangerous Substances; Durability of reaction to fire against heat; and Durability of thermal resistance against heat. Nowhere does it tell you that polyisocyanurate releases a lethal gas in a severe fire condition. Put simply, this certificate leaves so much risk with the designer that I would have no choice but to refuse to use the product.
−	~~Just as a query~~ with ~~regards to~~ the ~~design concept~~ and ~~decision making with regards~~ to the ~~comment above referring~~ to ~~Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation~~.	+

−	~~Would i be correct in my assumption~~ that ~~this should have been covered in some aspects by a design risk assessment that should have been completed as part of~~ the ~~the contract and duty under the CDM 2015 Regulations?~~	+	That then begs the question that I asked previously about the Reynobond panel. How is it possible for so many people involved in the construction of the Grenfell Tower facade to ignore the warning signs that both these materials were fundamentally unsuited for use on any high rise construction ?
−		+
−	~~If this~~ is so ~~given~~ the ~~terrible events~~ of the Grenfell Tower ~~fire, where does~~ the ~~main duty lie~~ for ~~the~~ use ~~of the correct items for fire as opposed to thermal aspects which may have been part of the hierarchy of control when completing a design risk assessment~~?	+

86.182.149.36 at 07:17, 26 June 2017

2017-06-26T07:17:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:17, 26 June 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	The planning application for this work did specify (and only specified) a fire-retardant insulation product, Celotex FR5000. It is not as thermally insulating as the polyethylene Celotex PE5000 - so this was a conscious decision at the outset by the design team to place fire performance above insulating performance.
		+
		+	This decision was evidently reversed subsequently, and this second decision process to place fire performance lower needs to be evidenced for examination and understanding.
		+
		+	-----
		+	Where in the planning application does it say that?
		+
		+	-----
		+	The product used was Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation, which is polyisocyanurate.
		+
		+	-----
	Just as a query with regards to the design concept and decision making with regards to the comment above referring to Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation.		Just as a query with regards to the design concept and decision making with regards to the comment above referring to Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation.

109.148.220.134 at 17:20, 25 June 2017

2017-06-25T17:20:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:20, 25 June 2017
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~The planning application for this work did specify (and only specified) a fire-retardant insulation product, Celotex FR5000. It is not~~ as ~~thermally insulating as the polyethylene Celotex PE5000 - so this was~~ a ~~conscious decision at the outset by~~ the design ~~team~~ to ~~place fire performance~~ above ~~insulating performance~~.	+	Just as a query with regards to the design concept and decision making with regards to the comment above referring to Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation.

−	~~This decision was evidently reversed subsequently, and~~ this ~~second decision process to place fire performance lower needs to be evidenced for examination~~ and ~~understanding.~~	+	Would i be correct in my assumption that this should have been covered in some aspects by a design risk assessment that should have been completed as part of the the contract and duty under the CDM 2015 Regulations?

−	~~-----~~	+	If this is so given the terrible events of the Grenfell Tower fire, where does the main duty lie for the use of the correct items for fire as opposed to thermal aspects which may have been part of the hierarchy of control when completing a design risk assessment?
−	~~Where in~~ the ~~planning application does it say that?~~	+
−		+
−	~~-----~~	+
−	~~The product used was Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation~~, which ~~is polyisocyanurate.~~	+

Designing Buildings at 14:49, 23 June 2017

2017-06-23T14:49:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:49, 23 June 2017
Line 5:		Line 5:
	-----		-----
	Where in the planning application does it say that?		Where in the planning application does it say that?
		+
		+	-----
		+	The product used was Celotex RS5000 PIR insulation, which is polyisocyanurate.

Designing Buildings at 13:07, 23 June 2017

2017-06-23T13:07:49Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:07, 23 June 2017
Line 2:		Line 2:

	This decision was evidently reversed subsequently, and this second decision process to place fire performance lower needs to be evidenced for examination and understanding.		This decision was evidently reversed subsequently, and this second decision process to place fire performance lower needs to be evidenced for examination and understanding.
		+
		+	-----
		+	Where in the planning application does it say that?

87.115.254.203: Created page with "The planning application for this work did specify (and only specified) a fire-retardant insulation product, Celotex FR5000. It is not as thermally insulating as the polyethylene..."

2017-06-17T11:44:50Z

Created page with "The planning application for this work did specify (and only specified) a fire-retardant insulation product, Celotex FR5000. It is not as thermally insulating as the polyethylene..."

New page

The planning application for this work did specify (and only specified) a fire-retardant insulation product, Celotex FR5000. It is not as thermally insulating as the polyethylene Celotex PE5000 - so this was a conscious decision at the outset by the design team to place fire performance above insulating performance.

This decision was evidently reversed subsequently, and this second decision process to place fire performance lower needs to be evidenced for examination and understanding.