Will we see other fire events similar to Grenfell and Valencia tragedies?
Vincent Spodar
Head of Technical Department ALPOLIC ?? fire regulations & energy efficiency of rainscreen
If we compare the fire regulations in Europe for that type of building (14 floors), we can notice some differences.
Before Grenfell?:
Insulation:
-????????? Spain?: M1 fire class was allowed (similar to the french M classification)
-????????? France: M1 till 50m high buildings & firestop
-????????? UK?: A2-s3,d2
Cladding :
-????????? Spain?: M1 fire class was allowed (similar to the french M classification)
-????????? France: M1 till 50m high buildings & firestop
-????????? UK?: class O & firestop (for rainscreen claddings)
After Grenfell?:
Insulation?:
-????????? Spain & France & UK? A2-s3,d2
Cladding?:
-????????? Spain B-s3,d0
-????????? France A2-s3,d0 + LEPIR2 test
-????????? UK ?A2-s3,d2 + BS8414 test
This means that many buildings built before 2019 used M1 & class O products (EWI/ETICS polystyrol, HPL, wood, ACM PE, etc.).
You should know that the M1 classification & Class O are obtained with all types of material:
Some of these materials were in some cases considered M1 (Spain & France) and class O (UK)?! There is no differentiation in these fire classifications?!
Unlike the official equivalence tables show below, some petrol-based material with Fire Classifications D and E could thus obtain an M1 classification or Class O, and they were considered “safe”!
Fire regulations in Spain, France & UK therefore authorized until 2019, the highly flammable product (classification D) used on the residential building in Valencia & Grenfell!
领英推荐
?
When we are searching for whom is guilty:
Do we look at in details which fire regulation was used? Because the failure started there!
To avoid this high risk, all residential buildings and the products used should be listed, as UK authorities did after Grenfell tragedy, then replace products fire rated C, D and E with products rated A2 or A1. But who will pay for this?
Only authorities can make our future safer and they should pay for it because their fire regulation was too permissive?! If they don't react before other casualties, they can't blame others for it!
What is really surprising is that the English fire classification (class O) and French M classification still exist and are applicable indoors! You can have the same product above your heads (ceiling) than the product used in Valencia & Grenfell buildings! Imagine the burning droplets dripping over your head in case of fire event, while you are trying to escape! Authorities have never accepted to be wrong when they created their fire classification, and didn't react in time to cancel it.
In general, the recent fire regulations in Europe are based on large-scale tests to validate a construction system, I see tests in some countries validating the installation of wooden cladding or other combustible materials. Theoretically, this makes sense to validate what is tested according to the regulation.
But, do large-scale fire tests such as LEPIR 2/BS8414 take into account the following hazards:
-????????? Strong wind like in Valencia: NO sometimes the test rig is even indoor?!
-????????? Flammable blinds on the underside of the balcony and in front of the openings: NO
-????????? Plastic materials/toys left on balconies to save space: NO
-????????? New technologies available in supermarkets (photovoltaic panels, electric bicycles and scooters, home batteries, etc.) which can be found on the balcony and are highly flammable: NO
Why are there no safety factors in large-scale fire tests? In fact, you pass the test or you fail it, there is no room for hazard.
There are many safety factors applied for seismic and wind calculations, why don't we apply a safety factor that would cover these hazards? No one can guarantee that exactly the same conditions as laboratory tests ones, are applied on building site, it is impossible!
Another interesting point is the big burning debris falling down from Valencia building, dangerous for evacuated persons and firefighters, but also spreading the fire to other balconies and to other building. Every large scale test gives the weight and size of debris, why no regulation gives size and weight limits for each type of building? It is something easy to change, no?
In Germany, this type of fire risk does not exist because, for decades, regulations have required an A2 or A1 fire classification for insulation and covering, and the use of cavity barrier. But in France, Spain, Italy, Turkey, Russia and other countries, we will still see this kind of fire event in the years to come, because their fire regulations were too permissive for decades with the use of poor fire rated products, and as long as buildings are not renovated with A2 and A1 products, similar fires will occur?on regular basis! Only authorities can remove this fire risk.
We could write thousands of these examples all over the world, it represents millions of m2?! We can wait for the next fire event or we can react, but at least everybody is informed and they cannot stick heads in the sand.
Will we see other fire events similar to Grenfell and Valencia?tragedies? YES?!
#FireSafety?#Facades?#BuildingSafety?#FireSafeFacades?#FacadeCladding?#ACM?#NonCombustibleMaterial?#FireProtection?# FireSafeEurope?#FireEngineers?#FireRegulation?#architecture?#bardage?#cladding?#rainscreen?#Insurers?#Bardage?#ITE?# Companar?#Grenfell #Alpolic
Founder at WINWIN FACADE
1 个月Tragedies no happen again, we need a safety cladding
Senior Developer | Founder | Building Safety Campaigner | Lib Dem Councillor Candidate (Promoted by Mark Pattenden on behalf of Steve Day, both at Liberal Democrats,?1 Vincent Square, SW1P 2PN)
2 个月We also need the Earl of Lytton's consumer protection legislation written by Daniel Greenberg CB the parliamentary standards commissioner to fund the remediations of all the excluded leaseholders under the Building Safety Act currently 1.7million people. The legislation is available here buildingsafetyscheme.org back in the Lords shortly.
Technical Designer
9 个月I understand what you are trying to say... that the National Class 0 sustained in England couldn't differentiate between ANY reaction to fire Class A1, A2, B, C, D or E to EN 13501-1. I never imagined the French had made a similar mistake. But this diagram is wrong. The Class 2, 3 and 4 measures in BS 476 Part 7 as one component in the two part Class 0 test to Paragraph 13b. are NOT Class 0. To get Class 0 a product has to get Class 1 to BS 476 Part 7, which is easy for a metal faced Polyethylene composite where the test equipment has a water-cooled frame. The core never melts at the edges of the test specimen. But the second measure are the indices for fire propagation to BS 476 Part 6. Class 0 is a two part test. Your diagram should show Class 0 on the European column for Class B, C, D and E. Does that make sense? Not obvious. I hadn't really grasped it until I saw the water-cooled frame for BS 476.
Technical Designer
9 个月Sorry Vincent that is not correct about the UK before and after Grenfell.