London tower block inferno

[shepp]

I'm thinking just the same. The "poor" are blaming the "rich" for not caring. It's a tinder box. Won't take long for the liberals and lefties to start rabble rousing.
Mrs May has disappointed again. How many chances does she need to prove she is any kind of leader?

They are there already, try to whip people up to riot.
Shameful bunch taking advantage for political reasons.
The residents have the public on side, the last thing they need is for these idiots to sour things.

https://order-order.com

 

[johnbarleycorn]

Rather than vitriol and bile forthcoming....
I'd like to be proud of the emergency services this country has, the enormous amount of public concern and spirit that has come to the front from ALL sectors of the community....this is what being BRITISH is all about- when the chips are down we all rally round each other, it doesnt matter who those people are. Not one of those involved wanted to be there and die. There is enough hate flying around- lets not let it infect our pages. Wassail fellow brewers.:drink::drink::drink:

 

[Sadfield]

Rather than vitriol and bile forthcoming....
I'd like to be proud of the emergency services this country has, the enormous amount of public concern and spirit that has come to the front from ALL sectors of the community....this is what being BRITISH is all about- when the chips are down we all rally round each other, it doesnt matter who those people are. Not one of those involved wanted to be there and die. There is enough hate flying around- lets not let it infect our pages. Wassail fellow brewers.:drink::drink::drink:

I saw the following question posted on twitter today.

Can you all cheer me up by each telling me one good thing that has happened in the UK since Jo Cox was murdered?

Easy question to answer.

The response of the majority of people to all the awful thing that have happened.

If you're going to use use the term BRITISH on this thread, this is what the defines it. The compassionate, resilient, resourceful, charitable, selfless and down right obstinate response to adversity, regardless of race, religion, sexuality, age or gender.

 

[MyQul]

They are there already, try to whip people up to riot.
Shameful bunch taking advantage for political reasons.
The residents have the public on side, the last thing they need is for these idiots to sour things.

https://order-order.com

That blog is hardly impartial.

But I completly agree with you noone should be taking advantage of this tragic situation. I read in the paper this evening of the unedifying spectical of a spat between Labour and Conservative councillers trying to blame each other for the tragedy

 

[johnbarleycorn]

I saw the following question posted on twitter today.



Easy question to answer.



If you're going to use use the term BRITISH on this thread, this is what the defines it. The compassionate, resilient, resourceful, charitable, selfless and down right obstinate response to adversity, regardless of race, religion, sexuality, age or gender.

well said dear fellow :thumb:

 

[Dutto]

Just a correction with regard to the installation of sprinkler systems.

The system used on most offshore platforms are "dry" systems that are kept pressurised with dry air to prevent corrosion.

The sprinklers themselves are blocked off with "frangible bulbs" that shatter when they are exposed to the heat of a fire or to an explosion.

When the frangible bulb breaks the air is released from the system and a firewater pump kicks in to provide firewater only to those sprinklers that have shattered bulbs. (i.e. none of the other sprinklers are affected.)

This system reduces the problems that would be caused by an "Area Sprinkler System" being activated and pouring water into an area through ALL the sprinkler heads in the event of the system being activated.

However, the chances are that a sprinkler system would not have worked in the case of Grenfell Tower because the sprinkler system would need to have been extended to the outside of the building; and that would have been discarded if the cladding was considered "fire-resistant".

 

[sdt7618]

Just a correction with regard to the installation of sprinkler systems.

The system used on most offshore platforms are "dry" systems that are kept pressurised with dry air to prevent corrosion.

The sprinklers themselves are blocked off with "frangible bulbs" that shatter when they are exposed to the heat of a fire or to an explosion.

When the frangible bulb breaks the air is released from the system and a firewater pump kicks in to provide firewater only to those sprinklers that have shattered bulbs. (i.e. none of the other sprinklers are affected.)

This system reduces the problems that would be caused by an "Area Sprinkler System" being activated and pouring water into an area through ALL the sprinkler heads in the event of the system being activated.

However, the chances are that a sprinkler system would not have worked in the case of Grenfell Tower because the sprinkler system would need to have been extended to the outside of the building; and that would have been discarded if the cladding was considered "fire-resistant".

Most sprinkler systems work on the principle of the frangilble bulb, however the regs would require a certain water pressure or storage of a set amount of water. No idea what that would be for a tower block, but it would have been huge. Both in storage or pressure. At 20 floors, that would be roughly 60m, that would be 6 bar of water pressure, most water companies would only give 1 bar maybe a little bit more.

Normally a building would have fire separation at floors and safe zones I.e fire escape stairs etc, the cladding would not, hence the fire spread was unhindered.

The science is pretty simple, however the reality has been shown to be catastrophic.

 

[Dutto]

........ At 20 floors, that would be roughly 60m, that would be 6 bar of water pressure, most water companies would only give 1 bar maybe a little bit more.

........

Think on lad!

Are you suggesting that no-one washed a dish or had a shower on the floors above 10 metres?

:whistle:

 

[sdt7618]

Think on lad!

Are you suggesting that no-one washed a dish or had a shower on the floors above 10 metres?

:whistle:

Nope, but running a bath and having a fire suppression system are a whole different kettle of fish. One can pump water certainly, you can even store it when there, but sprinklers have capacity issues, how many high rise block have Olympic size swimming pools on the roof, cause that would be about the min storage for that size building.



Different regs, different rules.

 

[Dutto]

Check out the sketch on the front of the following plan ...

http://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp-country/en_gb/uk/documents/Miller_Decomm_Programme.pdf

Sea level (from where the water is pumped) is well over 60m below the level of the Heli-Pad which had foam monitors fitted.

There is no need for an "Olympic size swimming pool" just a pump (and a spare) at the bottom capable of developing the required flow and pressure.

After the Piper Alpha accident the safety requirements and safety culture offshore changed dramatically and I sincerely hope that the UK construction industry has a similar culture change in the aftermath of Grenfell Tower.

The truth is that making a high-rise building safe isn't impossible but it may very well be expensive.

 

[sdt7618]

Oil industry and " buildings are not the same, so let's pump the water, where is it coming from? Certainly not the sea! Hence the need for storage. The mains water system won't meet the regs and do not have the capacity, or indeed the flow rates required for " construction " type uses.

I get it you have a vast experience and expertise in your fields. How many building have you installed sprinklers in? The many I have done all need storage, because the water companies won't give the assurance on the pressures required in the specific project.

 

[Dutto]

Oil industry and " buildings are not the same, so let's pump the water, where is it coming from? Certainly not the sea! Hence the need for storage. The mains water system won't meet the regs and do not have the capacity, or indeed the flow rates required for " construction " type uses.

I get it you have a vast experience and expertise in your fields. How many building have you installed sprinklers in? The many I have done all need storage, because the water companies won't give the assurance on the pressures required in the specific project.

Sorry, but EVERY oil, gas and chemical industry plant built ONSHORE in the UK has its own water supply.

The reservoir is most often in the form of a pond or a tank which gathers rainwater and is often topped up from the local water supply. (The reservoir doesn't have to be huge because the drains are designed to run the water back to the pond when it is being used.)

I'm fed up of people saying "It can't be done." when quite obviously it can.

 

[MyQul]

I just saw this newsnight interview. It makes for painful viewing as the PM trys to squirm out of answering questions on the fire

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftY1NlPk5YY[/ame]

 

[Tau]

Was watching an interview with a professor on H&S that's advises and costs refurbs on buildings like that tower and she said that the money paid by the coucil £10 million on the refurb was more than sufficent for the expensive fire cladding, she said someone actively made a decision for the one used either for the insulation properities or possibly profiteering.

Good info Dutto not that aware of bulb systems haven't inspected a building for almost 15 years and never did major industrial or residential. As for the watertanks mentioned ther are other issues with them, can think offhand were they ended up spreading legionaires across west London the mandarin oriental comes to mind. With the record of that towers management then large tank on that bilding wouln't get maintained nor checked regularly enough.

 

[shepp]

I can imagine the sort of scenario where the cost cutting may have happened.
A company tenders a price to do a job, the price is rejected and the company are told that the budget has to be below a certain figure.
The quantity surveyor goes over the costs and wittles away at the price where he can, �£5000 off here �£8000 off there.
Quality of materials are down graded, cheaper labour is used, profit margins chipped away at.
Tender is checked over to see if it all complies with current regulations and the new quote is put forward to the client.

The main problem is the cladding should not have complied with current regulations or local authorities should have a basic set of standards that go beyond current regulations. But really the British Standards should cover.

As for the sprinkler system, I don't think it would have been needed if the cladding was fire proof.

As for trying to pin it all on TM, that's just a bunch of vultures who have scented blood and are going in for the kill.

I bet there are examples of buildings in Labour run authorities clad in plastic too.

 

[Dutto]

May I refer you to the following article ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-40290158

... which states ...

"There has never been a multiple loss of life from a fire developing
in a building protected by a properly designed, installed and maintained
fire sprinkler system.

While fire sprinkler systems have been required in new high-rise residential buildings
in England since 2007, it is not compulsory to retrofit them into existing buildings.

So Grenfell Tower had none."​

I rest my case that there was no valid reason for NOT fitting a sprinkler system apart from cost and the will to do it.

 

[MyQul]

I can imagine the sort of scenario where the cost cutting may have happened.
A company tenders a price to do a job, the price is rejected and the company are told that the budget has to be below a certain figure.
The quantity surveyor goes over the costs and wittles away at the price where he can, ��£5000 off here ��£8000 off there.
Quality of materials are down graded, cheaper labour is used, profit margins chipped away at.
Tender is checked over to see if it all complies with current regulations and the new quote is put forward to the client.

The main problem is the cladding should not have complied with current regulations or local authorities should have a basic set of standards that go beyond current regulations. But really the British Standards should cover.

As for the sprinkler system, I don't think it would have been needed if the cladding was fire proof.

As for trying to pin it all on TM, that's just a bunch of vultures who have scented blood and are going in for the kill.

I bet there are examples of buildings in Labour run authorities clad in plastic too.

People are (rightly) extremely angry at what has happened and are looking around for people to blame. One of the targets for blame (rightly or wrongly) is the policy of austerity. But I agree this could/would have happened under any adminstration as the scenario and tendering processyou have so vividly painted is how things are done.
To me the tendering process seems crazy. Going for the cheapest quote. It simply means you get what you pay for, which will be the crappest available

 

[Tau]

. Going for the cheapest quote. It simply means you get what you pay for, which will be the crappest available

Apparently it wasn't, they paid more than other councils for the same work by the same company.

Dutto all towers should have active sprinklers and was well within the budget so again is it profiteering or the management costs again making that decision, it will all come out in the end.

 

[Dutto]

............

I bet there are examples of buildings in Labour run authorities clad in plastic too.

That's one bet I definitely wouldn't pick up! :thumb:

How do you know a politician is lying?

Their lips are moving! :whistle:

 

[MyQul]

Where are the authorities when you need them ( both at Grenfell and here!)

PM sent.............................