|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Sept 9, 2019 12:33:34 GMT
Struck by news of the fire at the Sutton/Worcester Park block of flats, which appears to have run rampant.
The implications are that the building has utterly failed to contain a fire. Short of some from of massive gas leak and explosion or other such catostrophic event - and there has so far been no report of such - this sort of thing just shouldn't be happening to modern buildings, surely ? (and I haven't been able to get info on its age, but from what i could see its more "recent" than "old")
Obviously outcome of fire investigations needed, but there just seems to be too many instances of either failure of fire safety or just general shoddy building work - think the more recent reporting on state of various new homes.
|
|
|
|
Post by gramsky on Sept 9, 2019 12:47:21 GMT
Struck by news of the fire at the Sutton/Worcester Park block of flats, which appears to have run rampant.
The implications are that the building has utterly failed to contain a fire. Short of some from of massive gas leak and explosion or other such catostrophic event - and there has so far been no report of such - this sort of thing just shouldn't be happening to modern buildings, surely ? (and I haven't been able to get info on its age, but from what i could see its more "recent" than "old")
Obviously outcome of fire investigations needed, but there just seems to be too many instances of either failure of fire safety or just general shoddy building work - think the more recent reporting on state of various new homes.
Looks like similar type and construction to flats at Holborough Lakes, Snodland, Kent in October 2017
www.kentonline.co.uk/malling/news/cause-of-flats-fire-will-134480/
Timber cladding and possibly timber framed.
|
|
|
|
Post by propman on Sept 10, 2019 9:55:44 GMT
I am not sure what the fire specification needs to be. The minimum acceptable is that the building can be safely exited NOT that it can never burn, there is little detail in the article, but as a matter of fact everyone did safely exit.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,874 
Likes: 7,919
|
Post by SteveT on Sept 10, 2019 10:58:56 GMT
I am not sure what the fire specification needs to be. The minimum acceptable is that the building can be safely exited NOT that it can never burn, there is little detail in the article, but as a matter of fact everyone did safely exit. Indeed. About the only way to protect the fabric of a building from destruction by fire is to install automatic fire suppression (ie. usually a system of water sprinklers, but sometimes gas-based suppression in specialist facilities like server rooms). Naturally the fire brigades always push hard to see these fitted in ALL new buildings, but they are not generally required under Building Regs and so, being expensive, rarely get specified. Even new-build schools and other public buildings rarely get them. In the absence of fire suppression, the fire safety standards required of any building are driven by the need to ensure occupants have enough time to escape safely before a fire spreads. Hence the focus on compartmentalisation (fire walls / fire doors) to limit the rate of spread, and fire alarms to ensure occupants realise the need to evacuate when a fire begins.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Sept 10, 2019 11:08:36 GMT
I am not sure what the fire specification needs to be. The minimum acceptable is that the building can be safely exited NOT that it can never burn, there is little detail in the article, but as a matter of fact everyone did safely exit. ... In the absence of fire suppression, the fire safety standards required of any building are driven by the need to ensure occupants have enough time to escape safely before a fire spreads. Hence the focus on compartmentalisation (fire walls / fire doors) to limit the rate of spread, and fire alarms to ensure occupants realise the need to evacuate when a fire begins. Agreed. But the focus on compartmentalization to slow down the spread of fire, as a side effect should give more time enabling to be tackled and bought under control before it envelopes much larger area. Not saying there was anything wrong in this specific case, but it does seem unusual in the modern day that a fire which likely started in one apartment (OK this is indeed complete supposition at this point) should end up engulfing the whole block, and to the point of what looks like may be total destruction.
Aware there are quite a few forumites that are or have been in the building/construction/development business so genuinely interested in views.
Anyway, they should have got that tumble dryer replaced sooner.....
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,058
Likes: 4,847
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 10, 2019 11:39:01 GMT
AIUI, it's believed to have started on a balcony, not in an apartment. (Barbecue? Firepit?) That has to be relevant when it comes to "compartmentalisation", surely? If windows are designed to keep fire in, to achieve compartmentalisation, they will also keep it out. This is the block in question, pre-fire.  |
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,930
Likes: 1,613
|
Post by benaj on Sept 10, 2019 11:49:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Sept 10, 2019 12:37:47 GMT
AIUI, it's believed to have started on a balcony, not in an apartment. (Barbecue? Firepit?) That has to be relevant when it comes to "compartmentalisation", surely? If windows are designed to keep fire in, to achieve compartmentalisation, they will also keep it out. Interesting. Makes more sense.
Can agree the photo appears to be pre-fire :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by propman on Sept 10, 2019 12:42:53 GMT
AIUI, it's believed to have started on a balcony, not in an apartment. (Barbecue? Firepit?) That has to be relevant when it comes to "compartmentalisation", surely? If windows are designed to keep fire in, to achieve compartmentalisation, they will also keep it out. This is the block in question, pre-fire. The compartmentalisation is nort complete, just to slow progression. I would expect that fire would spread rapidly between the balconies (as this would not of itself endanger life) and so would be penetrating all floors at the same time. As a result there would likely be 4 apartments on fire when the alert was given. It is always horrendous when anyone loses their home, but this is not a tower block so desspite the apparent similarities to Grenfell, this is not the same considerations.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Sept 10, 2019 15:24:11 GMT
I've not been following this, so apologies if this point has already been made but... I'd of thought the external cladding is unlikely to be timber, it'll probably be cement based if built recently. E.g. Hardie plank... www.jameshardie.co.uk/product/hardieplank-cladding/That's not to say the insulation between the block work and cladding isn't susceptible to fire. |
|
