Grenfell Tower Fire | Special Session at Structures Congress 2019
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 июн 2019
- The catastrophic fire at Grenfell Tower in London in 2017 prompted two major investigations and an international discussion surrounding fire and structural safety. During this special presentation from Structures Congress 2019, speakers describe what happened and, to the extent allowed by legal circumstances, why it happened.
Наука
Grenfell inquiry still ongoing in England…it’s definitely worth watching . ✌️❤️🌎
Great presentation with attention to clearly explaining and inclusion of video of how the fire spread is invaluable to undertanding the implications, however horrific knowing what happend, but essential to ensuring never again.
Just to note, believe fatalities publicly declared as actually numbered 72, not 71 stated in the introduction but essentially the scale of the incident was same.
The UK government have on 05/07/21 issued the final text of the new Building Safety Bill, which will shortly become law.
Thank you for uploading this.
As soon as the fire brigade saw that the fire was able to rapidly hop from "compartment" to "compartment" they should have realized that the usual "stay put" advice needed to be thrown out in favor of immediate evacuation, and should have notified the 999 emergency operators accordingly and started blasting this advice from loudspeakers. I don't understand why this is rarely mentioned in discussions about Grenfell.
True though you have to admit that firefighters do not like the idea of having to deal with crowded stairways while they are trying to head up to put out the fire.
As far as I'm aware stairwells in blocks are supposed to be vented but this had ended up broken in some refurbishment somewhere so the stairwells were pretty quickly filled with smoke from bottom to top like everything about that night it's just tragic
Like there's probably things the fire service could have done better but the building shouldn't have been in as decayed condition as it was before being wrapped in a firelighter that destroyed it's fire protection.
Stairwells?? Stairwell more like. There was only one.
The fire fighters relied on the presumption that the building was properly constructed in accordance with the Regulations, and thus would have a degree of behaviour predictability. The fact that it was not, and that this contributed to the spread of the flame is a different, but equally serious matter.
With the introduction of the new Building Safety Regulator, administered by the HSE (Health & Safety Executive) will hopefully ensure compliance.
This company was very proud of their work on Grenfell. Until the next day...
wittukgroup.co.uk/grenfell-tower-london-w11-1tq-regeneration-project/
"The large scale works which includes an upgrade of the cladding to the exterior of the building, new windows, a totally new heating & lobby smoke ventilation system all of which will greatly enhance the energy efficiency of the tower and contribute to reducing resident’s living costs."
This guy is only coming out of the left speaker btw - i ran a diagnostic and listened to a random yt video from the left-had-side and everything is fine, except on this video.
If you have a Samsung device, open Settings > Sounds and Vibration > Sound Quality and Effects and enable Dolby Atmos. This gives you high quality sound through both channels and fixes the problem.
Same here!! I went out to another video, and worked fine. I only had very minimal sound in my right bud.
it was like a chimney once it had an opening it was out of control
Inadequate equipment, wrong strategy, poor spontaneous decision making ability onsite, all contribute to this disaster in addition to building’s architectural failure. And why nobody scrutinize that UK manufactured Hotpoint fridge/freezer ? Had it been made by another country, UK tabloids would killed that brand.
Its not just the fridge freezers, tumble dryers (possibly washing machines too) have been causing fires. However, the possibility that a fire could occur is there, regardless, and we must design and construct buildings to be able to contain such an event.
Yes, had the building been constructed to the reg's, then the strategy should of worked ... but as soon as the fire brigade saw that it was not behaving as it should ... they should of evacuated rather than leave it until it was too late.
Reg's are changing ... two stairwells will be required going forth, one can then be dedicated to the fire brigade. There is a evacuation alert system piggybacked off the fire alarm system and builders are now acutely aware that they need to pay attention to the detailing and compartmentalisation.
Most designers insurance is now prohibiting cladding, or charging a premium, which will mean that the cladding is less likely to be used.
Poor choices in application and construction. Not having an active fire suppression system was first. Open joint rain screen design for the ACM allowed the flames to ignite the polyisocyanurate insulation and allowed free flow of oxygen to enter the cavity, fanning the flames. Had the ACM been closed joint, the fire would not have ignited the insulation and would have limited the available oxygen. The lack of zoning the panel areas allowed the flames to spread horizontally and vertically with 100mm thick PIU insulation providing ample fuel. Had mineral fiber insulation been used, that fuel would have been unavailable. Although less of an issue for the ACM, the polyethylene core could have been replaced with a fire retardant core. In the US, we would have had sprinkler systems in that building, we rarely use open joint rain screen, and we would have used a fire retardant core in the ACM.
Forget the design of the joints etc ... plan that site dont do it right ... inert materials, problem doesnt exist.
Why not have fire sprinklers in the air space around the building
Practicality, water freezes in winter, bursts pipes ... dry pipes creates thermal bridging ... strategy is to prevent the fire getting in there in the first place, and if it does, if its inert will be of no effect.
Sprinklers are now being made mandatory in buildings of this type under the new regulations.
For comparision, in Wales (120 miles away) sprinklers have been mandatory even in houses for a couple of years now.
A total tragedy caused by humans valuing money over human life.
I don't know if they did but from my current knowledge, they didn't. So why didn't they get helicopters to pick up water and help put out the fire? ( I understand that you can't pour water on the fire till everyone is evacuated cause the heat is gonna turn the water into boiling hot water). The fire was predominantly on one side early on, so why didn't they tell the other side to evacuate early on so that the flats on the side of the fire, the firefighters could concentrate on getting them out. it was very obvious that the fire was spreading quickly and I just seem like (from the videos at the start of the fire I have seen) the fire fighters were working slow until shit hit the fan (then panic set in). Also, why not send out an emergency text or communication directly to the tenants and tell them not to go up (isn't it a requirement that the block is to have your phone number in case of an emergency?). Anyone with basic knowledge of how fire spread and weather would realise when the fire was going upwards, they would know from just looking that a vacuum was being created so anyone at the top of the tower is gonna be in trouble verses those at the bottom.
The same reason why helicopters were not used on 9/11. Structural fire smoke damages helicopter engines.
Why couldn’t these clad panels, just have been a sheet of aluminum?
because of cost the cladding use was normal use for sign making and display which cost about 30 pound for 8x4feet sheet vs 450 for alu sheet which meet the requirement but increases the risk of the sheet getting stolen
Rockwall cladding I think it’s called would have been so much safer because it’s not flammable. Unfortunately it’s a bit more expensive and that’s all that matters to those people who make those decisions.
THANK YOU for the responses ..
If by having a "thermal" element, it may have qualified for certain "environmental" funding grants.
The aluminium sheets on the internal and external faces of the composite panels are paper thin, with approximately zero structural rigidity.
The polyethylene core is required to make the sheets usably strong and rigid as a cladding material, otherwise it would be like trying to cover the building with huge sheets of paper that will slice you to ribbons if you catch an edge or corner.
To do the job with alu sheet it would have to be many times as thick (increasing cost), would require more workers to handle and install (increasing cost) and would add complexity to the engineering and installation aspects of construction (increasing cost). The very thin laminated sheets in the composite panels also allow for a very smooth and fine finish, which is more difficult to achieve using solid aluminium (once again... increasing cost).
There are so few documentaries on this. I remember waking up one morning and seeing this - all the more poignant because it was the day my marriage collapsed as i caught my now Excel wie
72
Grenfell Tower has been the greatest human made disaster in UK. pray for those Victim for God mercy upon them. I have been long waiting for this investigation. ASCE I LOVE YOU! Dr Angus law. stay put failed. (Grenfell tower did not comply with the building regulation) my questions are where they told of the Implications of using materials of such poor quality.
Question : what is the most important lesson learnt in the aftermath of the Grenfell disaster? Is it the fire safety implementation? No because the concept of having extremely flammable cladding in combination with no sprinkler system could have easily been solved by school children , had they been allowed to do so. This of course leaves the regulatory system as the only other possible route of investigation. So to examine the failure of the regulatory system in a rather more candid manner as discussed above then , we do need to know a little more about the culture of that system. How could it not be politicised with Grenfell tower being less than 2 miles distance from The Houses of Parliament? From what I understand , there are 3 tiers to the system , with the lowest tier driven entirely by profit , the 2nd tier likewise but not as much and the top tier is the neo liberal HSE who incidentally are working for profit also. So the case must be that the top tier were not involved because there was no money in it for them. Now the HSE have left it to the politicians to make up there own scapegoats as the HSE know they will never be indicted themselves because they are all friends and family of those at Westminster. As simple as that.
My left ear enjoyed this.
The way the fire spread so quickly is unbelievable. Scary. Caused by the flammable facade that was fitted to make the building look better. Thanks but no thanks. I’d rather live in a safe building that looks shabby. The speed of the fire spreading reminds me of the fire at Bradford football ground in 1985 when the main stand was engulfed in fire in 4 minutes and 56 people were killed.
It wasn't installed for looks. It was installed for thermal performance.
They used the cheapest cladding. We don't use cladding in the USA 🇺🇸
Your so nasty and uncompassionate how about i say your all a bunch of inbred 3 eyed pricks we arnt like that in the uk
You acting like this incident is somehow localized to another first-world country shows a remarkable lack of critical thinking. I have no doubt that countless buildings across the US, and elsewhere mind you, violate some kind of material requirements because of economic or political reasons. Don't take to virulent and baseless arguments, especially when pertaining to an incident where multiple people lost their lives.
@@amilkyboi wow 👏
@ Cheryl Harewood You obviously didn't watch the video, especially the third speaker.
A building just collapsed in Miami, maybe you don't use cladding, but there are certainly corners cut in building regulations.
Don't have more children then you can carry down a ladder. Don't live higher then your ability to carry your family to safety. Pets, as well. Urologists don't drink city water and engineers don't live in incinerators. This land will come in handy in about twenty years (next generation wealth)
I do not think living in fear is an answer. Otherwise we would not be sailing the seas today if the Titanic Disaster caused such a response. Law change is the answer.
Everyone doesn't have the luxury of being choosy about where they live, and it's silly to think that people should make decisions about children based on something as temporary/uncertain as housing. No one would ever have children if that's the standard by which we decide whether to have children and how many to have. Things happen. You may have been in perfectly safe housing when you had children, but your circumstances may have changed and you found yourself living in that tower. It wasn't people's life choices that were responsible. This shouldn't have happened. Period. If all of our life choices were restricted by all of the things that could possibly go wrong at any given time, we would never do anything, ever.
Don't live in a kelly kettle.
I suggest you should listen to/watch some of the Grenfell enquiry available here on youtube. Considering 71 people died(were murdered) in the Grenfell Tower fire, your very simplistic comment is exceedingly callous. Watch the evidence from the employees of Kingspan... and then you may want to edit your comment.
Manufacturers falsified fire test data.
Considering your other comment on this page, being a bit of a troll arn't you ?
@@designcoordinationmanageme3177 troll is fine. I dont live in stacked housing. Im afraid of fire, collapses, troubled neighbors.
@@deborahelliott833 This article was meant for professionals in the industry, so they can ensure that nothing like this happens again, and was not meant to be an outlet for general public outrage which should be directed elsewhere.