Toughened / Laminated glass on low fixed windows: GF & FF

BigGeorge

Looking to understand what are the requirements for toughening or laminating low fixed windows ( i.e. they dont open) for both ground floor & first floor windows in a house. If so, what is the appropriate standard?

e.g. for ground floor windows have to be strengthened on both side / FF on one side only? etc..

martinn123

Any glazed window, below waist height, should be Toughened, both sides.No difference whether it opens or not, no difference between ground floor/ first floor.All glazed doors, should be Toughened.

BigGeorge

thanks for that.

Is the requirement for both side at first floor a building reg issue or good practice. Secondly, is there a standard ( BS / EN) for the toughened glass?

martinn123

As far as I am aware, its a building reg. issueComes from unfortunately children running at the glazing, not realising its there, the toughened will shatter, and no one hurt, so having the outside standard glass, would not eliminate the danger.Not sure about the standard, BS/EN, the ones I get have a kite mark, etched in the corner. Maybe someone else can clarify that one.

muffler

BigGeorge wrote: »

Secondly, is there a standard ( BS / EN) for the toughened glass?

BS6262 Part 4

sinnerboy

There are 2 aspects to consider

1. Human impact
2. Risk of falling

1. Human impact - all overhead glazing , door and side-lite glazing and all glazing within 800mm of the adjacent floor must be safety glass in order that it breaks safely when someone crashes into it ( or if it should break above someone ) . This applies to glazing whether within windows rooflights or within internal screens.

2. Risk of falling. If there is a further risk that some could fall through the glazing and downward to their death ( i.e. a drop > 600mm) then safety glass alone may not be enough. It depends on the glazing size or perhaps more aptly the spacing of the framing elements and their connections AND whether they have been designed to cater for this risk. It is safe to assume that with domestic glazing systems - they have not been. So these glazed areas must be gaurded. . Fixed / unfixed has got nothing to do with these considerations.

sinnerboy

The usual combination for safety glass - is

to the internal - laminated glass
to the external - toughened

martinn123

sinnerboy wrote: »

There are 2 aspects to consider

1. Human impact
2. Risk of falling

1. Human impact - all overhead glazing , door and side-lite glazing and all glazing within 800mm of the adjacent floor must be safety glass in order that it breaks safely when someone crashes into it ( or if it should break above someone ) . This applies to glazing whether within windows rooflights or within internal screens.

2. Risk of falling. If there is a further risk that some could fall through the glazing and downward to their death ( i.e. a drop > 600mm) then safety glass alone may not be enough. It depends on the glazing size or perhaps more aptly the spacing of the framing elements and their connections AND whether they have been designed to cater for this risk. It is safe to assume that with domestic glazing systems - they have not been. So these glazed areas must be gaurded. . Fixed / unfixed has got nothing to do with these considerations.

sinnerboy wrote:

The usual combination for safety glass - is to the internal - laminated glassto the external - toughened

Ouch, not sure I agree with you completely.Laminated, internally, will result in the person impacting bouncing off, not breakage, so in my opinion, safety glass, in windows/doors under 800mm from floor, should be tough, both sides.Where there is a danger of falling through, laminated will prevent the fall, and so should be used in the overhead, situation where a fall is possible.

BigGeorge

Thanks all, been a great help.

2 final questions

• for a ground floor , low level window, would toughened on the inside & outside pass building regds
• Same questions on first floor, or would laminated be required inside

How can I tell if a pane of glass is laminated or not,?as the toughenened has an EN stamp etched in the corner & seems kosher

martinn123

BigGeorge wrote: »

Thanks all, been a great help.

2 final questions

• for a ground floor , low level window, would toughened on the inside & outside pass building regds

• In my opinion Yes

• Same questions on first floor, or would laminated be required insideI would consider tough/tough, OK ............Disclamer.......I am not an Arch/Tech/Eng,

How can I tell if a pane of glass is laminated or not,?as the toughenened has an EN stamp etched in the corner seems kosher

Laminated looks different, as its two sheets of glass bonded together, so its thicker.One further issue, if you have specified Low E or K Glass, for better U Value, it is not available in Lam, as the coating cannot be applied to the Lam.So the U Value of Laminated where used is worse than Tough.This will have an impact on the overall insulation of the home.

sas

martinn123 wrote: »

• In my opinion YesI would consider tough/tough, OK ............Disclamer.......I am not an Arch/Tech/Eng,

Laminated looks different, as its two sheets of glass bonded together, so its thicker.One further issue, if you have specified Low E or K Glass, for better U Value, it is not available in Lam, as the coating cannot be applied to the Lam.So the U Value of Laminated where used is worse than Tough.This will have an impact on the overall insulation of the home.

Presumably if the unit was triple glazed the coating could be applied to the middle non-laminated sheet of glass?

martinn123

sas wrote: »

Presumably if the unit was triple glazed the coating could be applied to the middle non-laminated sheet of glass?

Good question, expect so, but I am unaware of any glass manuf. offering this.My main point is that in my view Laminated should only be used in Domestic situations, in exceptional circumstances.Where additional security is required, for instance.Its main purpose is that it will not break,easily, so in an emergency, you will not be able to break out, and importantly, the emergency services will not be able to break in, easily.I am not sure where it lies with the Fire Reg's, perhaps someone can post a link, or an opinion, if available,

sinnerboy

Toughened or laminated will constitute safety glazing with respect to human impact.

But depending on the size of the first floor window toughened alone will not work. When it breaks - its gone completely. Laminated breaks and remains in place and MAY prevent a fall IF ENGINEERED CORRECTLY.

A failsafe method is to erect a fall prevention barrier internally or externally

martinn123

sinnerboy wrote: »

Toughened or laminated will constitute safety glazing with respect to human impact.

Yes but for different reasons... Tough will shatter into small pieces, unlike Float, which will break into large chunks which will cause injury.....Laminate will not break, as its two pieces of glass bonded together, so the inside piece will crack, be held together by bonding and the outside piece stays intact

But depending on the size of the first floor window toughened alone will not work. When it breaks - its gone completely. Laminated breaks and remains in place and MAY prevent a fall IF ENGINEERED CORRECTLY.

A failsafe method is to erect a fall prevention barrier internally or externally

Thats fine in preventing a fall......is there anything in the Fire Reg's however as with Laminate, exiting in an emergency is difficult, ( assuming you have to break the glass ) to get out.

sinnerboy

No. Fire regs will look for min clear openings for doors and for means of escape or rescue windows

sinnerboy

martinn123 wrote: »

.Laminate will not break, as its two pieces of glass bonded together, so the inside piece will crack, be held together by bonding and the outside piece stays intact

?

martinn123

sinnerboy wrote: »

?

sinnerboy wrote:

Toughened or laminated will constitute safety glazing with respect to human impact.

Assumed you meant.......normal human impact.........not beating the krap out of it with a sledge-hammer

sinnerboy

A child on a trike or adult or child in a wheelchair could impact the glass and cause this damage.

martinn123

sinnerboy wrote: »

A child on a trike or adult or child in a wheelchair could impact the glass and cause this damage.

True, or a small stone cause a chip in your winscreen.however the point I was making on this thread, was,

sinnerboy wrote:

The usual combination for safety glass - is to the internal - laminated glassto the external - toughened

martinn123 wrote:

Ouch, not sure I agree with you completely.Laminated, internally, will result in the person impacting bouncing off, not breakage, so in my opinion, safety glass, in windows/doors under 800mm from floor, should be tough, both sides.Where there is a danger of falling through, laminated will prevent the fall, and so should be used in the overhead, situation where a fall is possible.

The pictures posted confirm my opinion that normal impact will result in possible injury as the person will not Break Through, probably Bounce Back....With Tough, the unit will shatter allowing the person to Break Through, and as the glass is in small pieces, little injury.....Compared to Float, the person will Break Through, but large shards to glass will cause major injury......Except where there is danger of a fall, Tough/Tough should be used.....I queried the Fire Reg's, as a Fireman would have to take action similar to your second picture to break in, however you clarified no Reg's considered this.

sydthebeat

few points:

1. lets not bring 'float glass' into this as it confuses the point.

2. fire escape, and fire access, is dealt within the fire safety certificate in case of apartments or non domestic. TGD B part 5 deals with the domestic situation. The requirement for guarding, which all this is under, is in TGD K

The current regulation states
Guarding should be designed and built in
such a way that it does not present unacceptable
risks of accidents in service. Where guarding
contains glazing, it should be in accordance with the
recommendations of BS 6262 - 4 : 1994.*

* this has been superceded by BS 6262 - 4: 2005 Glazing for Buildings -
Part 4: Code of practice for safety related to human impact. The new draft Part K reflects this.

So the question is, which of laminated or toughened glass, in a first floor situation in glazing below 800mm provides the least risk of accident.

Personally my view would be that id prefer to fall into laminated glazed sheet and bounce back, thus accepting whatever impact injury, than to fall through a toughened sheet and down god knows what number of meters possibly to my death.
Again, its about "risk reduction" and the preferred situation to reduce risk is to laminte internally and toughen externally.

Stove Fan

My preference is for laminated glass as the glass stays together once broken. I have french doors and have 6.4mm laminated outer pane and 4mm toughened inner pane. I had laminated fitted for extra security.

I hate the way toughened glass once broken just falls to the floor when broken, leaving the property open. I have also broken many toughened glass windows and hate the way some although toughened still break into shards and not just cubes and sometimes pop/explode on impact. Depends on the quality. In my velux windows I bought the ones with laminated inner pane for safety.



Stove Fan:D

Mellor

Hmm, Martin, I think you need to slow down and read what you are writing.

martinn123 wrote: »

Thats fine in preventing a fall......is there anything in the Fire Reg's however as with Laminate, exiting in an emergency is difficult, ( assuming you have to break the glass ) to get out.

Not at issue at all. But exiting via laminate isn't impossible.
At first floor, a window that requires safety glass is never design as a exit and there is always a suitable exit in place.

martinn123 wrote:

BigGeorge wrote:

2 final questions
for a ground floor , low level window, would toughened on the inside & outside pass building regds

In my opinion Yes

No disagreement there. Although, laminated/toughened is also acceptable.

martinn123 wrote:

BigGeorge wrote:

Same questions on first floor, or would laminated be required inside

I would consider tough/tough, OK ............Disclamer.......I am not an Arch/Tech/Eng,

How can you consider tugh/tough ok?
Passing through and falling 3 metres is goign to cause more injury than bouncing back.

I think you are worrying far too much about the bounce back risk with laminate glass. It's not like hitting a wall and bouncing back. The pane actually absorbs some of the energy.
If you hit a laminate pane so hard that you bounce back and injury your self, then I'll willing to bet that if it was toughened, you pass through and injury your self off the ground outside.
I have no idea what you are suggesting with first floor.

martinn123

Mellor wrote: »

Hmm, Martin, I think you need to slow down and read what you are writing.
I have no idea what you are suggesting with first floor.

Sorry I am now typing much slower.Original Question.

BigGeorge wrote:

for a ground floor , low level window, would toughened on the inside & outside pass building regds Same questions on first floor, or would laminated be required inside

My reply

Laminated, internally, will result in the person impacting bouncing off, not breakage, so in my opinion, safety glass, in windows/doors under 800mm from floor, should be tough, both sides.Where there is a danger of falling through, laminated will prevent the fall, and so should be used in the overhead, situation where a fall is possible.

Note the phrase, laminate will prevent the fall, and should be used where a fall is possible.

So my opinion,no risk of fall, Tough/tough.risk of fall,tough/lam.

But remember the question was,low level windows.

so why would you have a low level glass upstairs,door to a balcony,no risk of fall.

low level glazing, no balcony,risk of fall.

OK

muffler

martinn123 wrote: »

Sorry I am now typing much slower...Original Question.My replyNote the phrase, laminate will prevent the fall, and should be used where a fall is possible.So my opinion,.........no risk of fall, Tough/tough.........risk of fall........tough/lam.......But remember the question was........low level windows.........so why would you have a low level glass upstairs.........door to a balcony.......no risk of fall......low level glazing, no balcony........risk of fall.........OK

Martin when we have you at a slower pace the above post is a carbon copy of most of your posts with an abundance of continually flowing fullstops like this: .............

To be honest it isn't clear at times what you are trying to say. Would you mind leaving the ...... out of the posts or at least reduce the occurrences. It just makes it easier for everyone and avoids any confusion.

Thanks.

martinn123

muffler wrote: »

Martin when we have you at a slower pace the above post is a carbon copy of most of your posts with an abundance of continually flowing fullstops like this: .............

To be honest it isn't clear at times what you are trying to say. Would you mind leaving the ...... out of the posts or at least reduce the occurrences. It just makes it easier for everyone and avoids any confusion.

Thanks.

Sorry Muffler,when I type, and review the post, there are no paragraphs, something wrong with my computer, so I was using the.....to divide up the sentences.I also get a message' a script is running which will cause your browser to become unresponsive, sorry for dragging the thread off topic, but anyone else got this problem.

muffler

martinn123 wrote: »

Sorry Muffler,when I type, and review the post, there are no paragraphs, something wrong with my computer, so I was using the.....to divide up the sentences.I also get a message' a script is running which will cause your browser to become unresponsive, sorry for dragging the thread off topic, but anyone else got this problem.

No, you're grand. If you're having a little problem with the PC then its everyone's interest to have you in a position to make full use of the keyboard.

Hitting the "enter" key twice will take the cursor down 2 lines thus allowing you to start a new paragraph and apologies if that comes across as condescending. Certainly not my intention.


Regarding the "script" issue the guys over in the PC forum may help with that if you started a new thread.

martinn123

Muffler, thanks for the above,

I have edited my post, to reflect your excellent advice.

Thanks again

muffler

martinn123 wrote: »

Muffler, thanks for the above,

I have edited my post, to reflect your excellent advice.

Thanks again

You're very welcome.

Now. What were we arguing about

sinnerboy

muffler wrote: »

Now. What were we arguing about

Don't go there

imitation

I have a bit full height glass between two rooms in my house (a kind of internal feature window really), the joinery specced toughened glass for the job so they would comply with the regs.

Just to feed the toughed vs laminate debate, from what I have seen I would prefer the toughened glass (on the ground floor at least). Toughened in generally is difficult to break with a blunt object (Heres a good demo of how much punishment it can take) and in the child on a trike situation they are more than likely just to bounce off. On the other hand laminated glass can still leave some sharp edges and present a cut hazard

Mellor

martinn123 wrote: »

Note the phrase, laminate will prevent the fall, and should be used where a fall is possible.

So my opinion,no risk of fall, Tough/tough.risk of fall,tough/lam.

But remember the question was,low level windows.

so why would you have a low level glass upstairs,door to a balcony,no risk of fall.

low level glazing, no balcony,risk of fall.

OK

Martin, nobody mentioned a balcony.
You made an assumption and you were wrong. Obviously a balcony or internal window is treated the same as ground floor. But a huge portion of windows that require safety glass are low level fixed windows.

The posts asked about first floor low level window, there was no mention about risk of fall or lack thereof. You said that tough/tough would be OK. (the post where you noted that you aren't an arch tech). It isn't. Simple as that.

You have clarified regarding a risk of falling above, which is good - but that's not the post I quoted. You also stated in the first reply that there is no difference between first and second. Also incorrect.