There are tens of thousands of buildings in more than 87 tower blocks across the United Kingdom clad in the same aluminum composite that experts claim was largely responsible for the severity of the blaze that erupted on Grenfell Tower in Kensington and claimed at least 79 lives. The material, which is banned in the United States and elsewhere, is intended to improve the aesthetics of the towers, in part to raise nearby property values.
In the case of Grenfell Tower, by just spending £5,000 more on the £8.6 million refurbishment, a fire resistant cladding could have been used and saved these lives. This is not new information. Back in 2000, an inquiry said all cladding systems should use non-combustible materials, following a blaze in Scotland responsible for the death of an elderly man. In addition to the cladding, a lack a sprinkler systems has been blamed for the fire. Just one of eight councils has said it put sprinklers into their flats—18 out of 2,925.
Experts, such as architect Sam Webb, are calling for criminal charges to be filed against the people responsible for the cladding.
Do we know the exact manufacturer of the cladding?
@Non Sequitur — It's called Reynobond and it's made by Arconic, a company spun off from the aluminum giant Alcoa last year.
All 6 Comments
Do we know the exact manufacturer of the cladding?
@Non Sequitur — It's called Reynobond and it's made by Arconic, a company spun off from the aluminum giant Alcoa last year.
Many thanks. I've made a note last week to look into this. Strange thing is we now have clients calling and asking if their buildings could face the same situation. Not sure I ever thought I'd see the day where I have to explain to another adult that brick masonry cladding is not flammable.
Reynobond PE verses Reynobond FR. Architects looked like they spec'd (on Drawing) a mishmash of bit calling the system Rainscreen when the material is not a rains screen system - fire looks to have taken off up the columns - above 12 m codes require a class 0 in Uk - Highrise need to be fire engineered and if the architects did not have that capability they should have either not taken the project of brought in a consultant -looks like here they were decorators picking colours - SAD!
TED, composite panels are rainscreen systems by default. Are you saying they installed it as a face-sealed, or in a curtainwall fashion?
One can't just piece together bits from non-proprietary systems and call it 'non-combustible' or 'Rain-screen' as an ambition -- either needs to be a tested proprietary system assembly or undertake testing of its own - Rain screens are pressure equalisation systems so have to be compartmentalised and designed understanding what will happen in the cavity -- standard manufacture data doesn't acknowledge this. I don't believe the column/spandrel configuration in Grenfell was appropriate for rain screen that already has a full weather tight enclosure (retrofit) - Manufacture diagrams don't show fire safing at floors but is a code requirement
As a personal request, can we PLEASE stop emulating Trump's tweet structure? Idiotic commentary is really frustrating when followed by a single emphasis word, and your commentary is anything but idiotic.
A high-occupancy building without sprinklers? That is a serious omission and / or code deficiency.
UK is a bit behind the time - when I did a big project in UK, we burned a car with sprinklers to prove to the Fire brigade the effectiveness of sprinklers - so we got reduction in means of escape by putting sprinklers in - Fire brigade prefers buckets of sand on the floor
Additionally, one stair - renovation stated that smoke extraction was improved but generally this would require a fairly large shaft adjacent to the stair - no shaft in plans - look like they just put an exhaust fan top -
No centralised fire alarm or annunciation system - question if there were fire hoses in the tower - this tower had a stay in place procedure assuming 1 type of fire starting in a flat - changing the skin to something besides fully non-compostable which the original building had was not considered -
Many questions regarding contractual arrangements of architectural services - which clearly fragmented responsibility of the architect - nevertheless fair warning to practices - in the end you have a moral responsibility to deliver a safe project - walk away from contracts like this -
No wonder there is a rush to blame.
UK doesn't have a FEMA group here - unrealistic to believe a local authority can mobilise as first responders to support the community - UK national government pointed to locals but should have a rapid emergency response group that can set up an framework within hours of an emergency -
Same type of cladding (could not find information on the brand, specifically) that exacerbated the spread of these two fires in the UAE:
http://blog.intersecexpo.com/b...
There was a somehow similar fire in 2013, a 40 storey tower whose cladding burnt entirely.
According to the news the building was unoccupied at the time, however 30 people inside the building were safely evacuated.
It's hard to tell from the clip, but in that case, while the fire basically burnt the whole cladding, it seems to have been less catastrophic than Grenfell. There were even reports the building structure was OK. Any speculations about why this fire was less damaging ? Empty flats, masonry envelope behind the cladding, lack of chimney effect?
You could be right on masonry wall - perhaps sprinklers also protecting interior - Photos of Grenfell on BBC website http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40301289 -- column cladding on Grenfell looks to be the chimney effect -
I was working in Dubai from 2008 to 2016. During that period, several tower fires similar in nature to the Grenfell tower fire occurred. I recollect at least 12 tower fires occurred, although there were few deaths if any, several of these towers remained completely un-useable for several years. Investigations revealed that the aluminum cladding panels with styrene foam for rigidity utilized on the exterior of these towers passed flammability tests but did not pass the composite wall fire tests. Many of the Towers in Dubai were built with this cladding system type. This is a world problem, and not much has been done about these towers that people are still living and working in.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.