Grenfell Tower block disaster

SilverFox2 said:
Presumably no testing was done before installation ?
Click to expand...

Of course not why would they be tested prior to installation?

All products get tested at Warrington to british standards or tested elsewhere to European standards and certificates of performance get produced. They do not individually get tested each time they are installed. Incidentally the same panels are being installed in Newcastle as we speak.
 
Last edited:
franksinatra said:
Of course not why would they be tested prior to installation?

All products get tested at Warrington to british standards or tested elsewhere to European standards and certificates of performance get produced. They do not individually get tested each time they are installed. Incidentally the same panels are being installed in Newcastle as we speak.
Click to expand...

Sorry FS perhaps I was not clear.

You infer that in fact the cladding would have been tested prior to being used on the installation by Warrington or elsewhere.
Presumably it failed its ability to withstand fire or is it only now being tested for that quality ?
 
SilverFox2 said:
Sorry FS perhaps I was not clear.

You infer that in fact the cladding would have been tested prior to being used on the installation by Warrington or elsewhere.
Presumably it failed its ability to withstand fire or is it only now being tested for that quality ?
Click to expand...

I think the performance of the materials will have long since been established. In my opinion, and only my opinion, I think the arguments will not be about the performance of the product but its suitability on tall buildings and whether the product is accepted under the Building Regulations.

I may have misunderstood your earlier posts but I got the impression you expected further tests of the cladding by the HSE or Council. This will have long been established and listed on the British Board of Agrement Certificate.
 
franksinatra said:
I think the performance of the materials will have long since been established. In my opinion, and only my opinion, I think the arguments will not be about the performance of the product but its suitability on tall buildings and whether the product is accepted under the Building Regulations.

I may have misunderstood your earlier posts but I got the impression you expected further tests of the products prior to installation on the cladding by the HSE or Council. This will have long been established and listed on the British Board of Agrement Certificate.
Click to expand...

Not at all FS, if full traceability is available to whoever checks the H and S risk assessment and method statements and they actually check them fully no complaints at all. By that I mean check back to Standards and not assume Data Sheets are correct, they often are misleading and hide failings in the product.

As you say there is more to this than meets the eye so hopefully it can be resolved and any blame allocated correctly.
 
SilverFox2 said:
Not at all FS, if full traceability is available to whoever checks the H and S risk assessment and method statements and they actually check them fully no complaints at all. By that I mean check back to Standards and not assume Data Sheets are correct, they often are misleading and hide failings in the product.

As you say there is more to this than meets the eye so hopefully it can be resolved and any blame allocated correctly.
Click to expand...

From seeing the interviewing of experts in the fire service, comments by other professionals It appears even now experts cannot agree if the products should be used, or not, which could suggest a failing in the method of assessing the suitability of a product. Anyway its conjecture at this stage but hopefully more information can be provided soon and lessons learnt in the future.
 
Last edited:
The twunts are admitting that now, even now, they are only testing the imflammability of the cladding and not the insulation that it covers, which they admit may be more inflammable!

You couldn't make this up!
 
It's an inconvenient truth that these buildings were all clad with this shit due to the rush to become more thermally efficient as part of the "Decent Homes Standard". Nothing decent about it as far as I can see.
 
denislawsbackheel said:
The twunts are admitting that now, even now, they are only testing the imflammability of the cladding and not the insulation that it covers, which they admit may be more inflammable!

You couldn't make this up!
Click to expand...
If it's Rockwool slab bolted on it don't burn, melts but everything melts if it gets hot enough.
 
The more info I get the worse I feel, people managed to get on the roof, others were hanging on the outside of the window, 42 in one flat thinking they would be safe!!
 
Blue Maverick said:
The more info I get the worse I feel, people managed to get on the roof, others were hanging on the outside of the window, 42 in one flat thinking they would be safe!!
Click to expand...
Has the 42 in one room been confirmed then? Had heard rumours about it but was hoping they weren't true
 
i kne albert davy said:
Thermal performance is the reason for the rockwool mate as for plastic coated cladding appearance is the only reason, there are other coverings safer but I think it's about £5 a metre dearer.
Click to expand...
I live in a Multi and it's brick...they were going to clad it. My flat is roasting in mid winter. Absolutely no need for cladding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top