Grenfell Tower block disaster

[Bigga]

I may sound stupid here but surely someone has to ask why there is a choice in the first place?

Why is there a more flammable option?

Despite being more flammable, does it meet the regulations? If so and the cladding is at fault then the issue is with the regulations rather than the contractor surely?

Your question is quite interesting, actually. This might be a case of 'no options given', 'sales patter' or 'kickbacks'.

I can't see that if someone was doing their job properly, that the cladding would have been used.

Coupled with the fact that one of the ministers for housing 'sat on the recommendation for safety for a few years', it's not looking good for many.

Somebody is going to jail.

 

[The Northern Baptist]

It's not just old buildings being clad is it though? There's a lot of new buildings clad as well.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

There was a letter in the DT from a former district inspector - a role we seem no longer to have - and he was saying that they considered two things when buildings were being erected: first, it mustn't fall down, and second, it mustn't catch fire. After those two they were told to use 'their common sense'! I wonder where in the deep recesses of common sense lies the notion that if there's a fire you stay in your flat!

 

[Vic]

The RATE of airloss will be lowered using the cladding, not removed completely. If you reduce the amount of air loss you reduce the amount of energy you need to heat that air inside the property

Nowt to do with my question. Or anything possibly!

Anyway I think I've found my answer. It was easier to find than I thought.

The air gap is between the insulation and the outer skin which is there only to keep rain off the insulation. But it should have vertical and horizontal compartments so it should not act as a funnel. Next question - for anyone who actually knows - is whether that means the funnel theory is nonsense. As I posted a couple of days ago, I think the coanda effect means fire scrolls up a building. The cladding caught fire but the fire would spread up anyway.

https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/rainscreen-cladding-letting-air-in-to-keep-rain-out


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_effect

http://www.highrisefirefighting.co.uk/physics.html

 

[Blue Llama]

I've never really liked any of our prime ministers, especially may. The shouting at her was a bit harsh, she got labelled a murderer by a few people. Pointing the blame at one person puzzles me.

It worries me that a mob is on the streets being focussed on local and national politicians. They appear to have 3 grievances - No information about the missing, lack of action by authorities and their mind is made up about the cause. As we found in Manchester the police are not going to say x number of people are missing but they must be dead. What did they want? The police to make something up just to have a statement to make? Not sure about any lack of action you would have to be there to see the difficulties. It was obvious to see that the cladding was an issue but focussing in on any one cause before any investigation is taking us back to 17th century mob panic. What about other potential factors that could have been instrumental in the very rapid spread of the fire. Final point where were those bullhorns from that several of the mob had? Not just something you have in the cupboard under the stairs or you pop down to Tesco to buy.

 

[Dubai Blue]

It's not just old buildings being clad is it though? There's a lot of new buildings clad as well.

There's hundreds of new buildings clad in this shit over here, although it has since been banned. @SWP's back is spot on when he questions why there is even a choice in the first place? What possible justification can there be for using plastic insulation cladding on ANY building, regardless of its height or use? Particularly as the price differential is so small.

 

[Bigga]

It worries me that a mob is on the streets being focussed on local and national politicians. They appear to have 3 grievances - No information about the missing, lack of action by authorities and their mind is made up about the cause. As we found in Manchester the police are not going to say x number of people are missing but they must be dead. What did they want? The police to make something up just to have a statement to make? Not sure about any lack of action you would have to be there to see the difficulties. It was obvious to see that the cladding was an issue but focussing in on any one cause before any investigation is taking us back to 17th century mob panic. What about other potential factors that could have been instrumental in the very rapid spread of the fire. Final point where were those bullhorns from that several of the mob had? Not just something you have in the cupboard under the stairs or you pop down to Tesco to buy.

Re: the police, the issue to the police is about keeping them informed, truthfully, not 'drip drip' info. All they want is 'Yes, we've recovered a number of fatalities and we are to identify them'.

That's it.

Not have people frantically holding to hope about whether loved ones may be still in hospital.

All after the fact now, anyway. I think all survivors have been identified.

 

[manctheknife]

Nowt to do with my question. Or anything possibly!

Anyway I think I've found my answer. It was easier to find than I thought.

The air gap is between the insulation and the outer skin which is there only to keep rain off the insulation. But it should have vertical and horizontal compartments so it should not act as a funnel. Next question - for anyone who actually knows - is whether that means the funnel theory is nonsense. As I posted a couple of days ago, I think the coanda effect means fire scrolls up a building. The cladding caught fire but the fire would spread up anyway.

https://www.thenbs.com/knowledge/rainscreen-cladding-letting-air-in-to-keep-rain-out


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_effect

http://www.highrisefirefighting.co.uk/physics.html

The air gap has to be there for the rainscreen panels to work. It expels moisture back out through the horizontal joints in the panels. If the insulation is fixed back to the structure then it will have a membrane on its external face for further damp protection. The panels may be either single skin or double with insulation sandwiched between. There should be fire stopping at every floor level across the whole cavity and tightly wedged, this should be sealed with fire foam. If the system is fitted correctly there is no funnel or chimney or vacuum effect. All panels should have a class 0 flame spread finish.

 

[Vic]

There was a letter in the DT from a former district inspector - a role we seem no longer to have - and he was saying that they considered two things when buildings were being erected: first, it mustn't fall down, and second, it mustn't catch fire. After those two they were told to use 'their common sense'! I wonder where in the deep recesses of common sense lies the notion that if there's a fire you stay in your flat!

It assumes the fire service will get there promptly and put the fire out (a political issue with cuts meaning response times are slower).

It means you haven't got hundreds of people going down stairwells with firefighters trying to go up.

If they stay put they will keep the door shut. If they leave some will leave doors open.

Someone did say they'd seen flames outside and opened the window to get a better look!

It's one of those conundrums. Risk of injury and even panic if everyone leaves and, inevitably smoke in the stairwell when the firefighters enter the flat with the fire. Stay put may (on the statistical balance of risk) still be best advice.

Having two stairwells may revert to the norm - I think it only changed because, it seems awful to say, buildings became more fire resistant.

 

[pluto]

If Germany supposedly banned this cladding why was the rest of Europe still using it. European community quite happy to standardise carrot sizes and shapes but comes to something critical and affecting lives , seemingly nothing.
Could be 100 dead. Total disaster of events