Grenfell and combustible ACP cladding

Lumen

Don't remember seeing any dicussion of Grenfell here, so thought I'd start a new thread.

I was doing some reading around on the latest w.r.t. Grenfell type cladding and came across this wiki.

https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire
https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/ACM_cladding_testing_by_BRE

It's really interesting. I learned nothing from the news coverage at the time.

The tldr version seems to be that if you build something from combustible components (cladding and/or insulation) with a nice air gap it burns really well, and if that building is taller than firefighting ladders people die.

One might think this is common sense.

And right at the end of the second link...

ABI [the Association of British Insurers] has called for a ban on the use of all combustible materials in external cladding systems.

That's not quite true. The focus is on high-rise and high-risk buildings.

https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2018/10/ban-on-combustible-cladding-does-not-go-far-enough/

What's the situation in Ireland with this type of cladding? Is it used much? Are the regs different? I guess we don't have that many high rise buildings.

Aside from the fire risk, I can imagine a situation in which certain buildings become uninsurable.

dusteeroads

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbggwtZ5RSc

nothing ever changes

Gumbo

Lumen wrote: »

Don't remember seeing any dicussion of Grenfell here, so thought I'd start a new thread.

I was doing some reading around on the latest w.r.t. Grenfell type cladding and came across this wiki.

https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/Grenfell_Tower_fire
https://www.designingbuildings.co.uk/wiki/ACM_cladding_testing_by_BRE

It's really interesting. I learned nothing from the news coverage at the time.

The tldr version seems to be that if you build something from combustible components (cladding and/or insulation) with a nice air gap it burns really well, and if that building is taller than firefighting ladders people die.

One might think this is common sense.

And right at the end of the second link...



That's not quite true. The focus is on high-rise and high-risk buildings.

https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2018/10/ban-on-combustible-cladding-does-not-go-far-enough/

What's the situation in Ireland with this type of cladding? Is it used much? Are the regs different? I guess we don't have that many high rise buildings.

Aside from the fire risk, I can imagine a situation in which certain buildings become uninsurable.

A major survey was carried out after Grenfell on all buildings with external cladding system sin Dublin. I think it may have been country wide but I can only speak for Dublin as that's where im based.

Most passed the test, but a couple have to carry out remedial works at significant cost. One out in Clongriffin jumps out at me.

ht9zni1gs28crp

I work in this industry, Im up to my eyeballs in reclads at the moment. There are a number of older products on the market that when installed together are the catalyst for a condeming order.

ACM at the moment is the black sheep of the family. Any building with continuous ACM cladding over 18m high is under scrutiny. Couple that with combustible insulation used where it shouldnt have been means a lot of heartache.

People dying in Grenfell is a result of a lot of combinations all failing at once, not just the cladding. From the lack of detection, direction, compartment safe zones breached and un hindered cladding zones. No reasonable material can safely withold fire, its all down to how long it can withstand. The time frame requirements are all down to the total egress time set out.

There arent that many buildings in Ireland over 18m compared to the likes of the UK. Which is arguably a good thing in design and for an aspect of horizon. Although I suspect there are still many buildings out there with their own hidden fire risks not related to cladding. Regs in Ireland will follow closely to those of the UK if not mirror them exactly.

Case Study. Current Situation .
12 Storey Apartment Block. Fully clad in ACM Panels. Local Fire Chief has condemmend it. Total reclad of the building at the Apartment owners cost. I dread to think of each owners bill but its not pretty.

Residents are allowed to remain in apartments but a series of nightwatchmen to sit on each floor have to be employed to suplement the detection system until works are complete.

Gumbo

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

I work in this industry, Im up to my eyeballs in reclads at the moment. There are a number of older products on the market that when installed together are the catalyst for a condeming order.

ACM at the moment is the black sheep of the family. Any building with continuous ACM cladding over 18m high is under scrutiny. Couple that with combustible insulation used where it shouldnt have been means a lot of heartache.

People dying in Grenfell is a result of a lot of combinations all failing at once, not just the cladding. From the lack of detection, direction, compartment safe zones breached and un hindered cladding zones. No reasonable material can safely withold fire, its all down to how long it can withstand. The time frame requirements are all down to the total egress time set out.

There arent that many buildings in Ireland over 18m compared to the likes of the UK. Which is arguably a good thing in design and for an aspect of horizon. Although I suspect there are still many buildings out there with their own hidden fire risks not related to cladding. Regs in Ireland will follow closely to those of the UK if not mirror them exactly.

Case Study. Current Situation .
12 Storey Apartment Block. Fully clad in ACM Panels. Local Fire Chief has condemmend it. Total reclad of the building at the Apartment owners cost. I dread to think of each owners bill but its not pretty.

Residents are allowed to remain in apartments but a series of nightwatchmen to sit on each floor have to be employed to suplement the detection system until works are complete.

+1 And the fact that London fire Brigade operate a "Stay Put" moto, which Dublin Fire brigade do not operate.

DFB officially state "Get Out".

dusteeroads

kceire wrote: »

+1 And the fact that London fire Brigade operate a "Stay Put" moto, which Dublin Fire brigade do not operate.

DFB officially state "Get Out".

Did not know that - but glad to hear it.

The stay put policy is roundly condemned in the Youtube item I posted above.

Del2005

kceire wrote: »

+1 And the fact that London fire Brigade operate a "Stay Put" moto, which Dublin Fire brigade do not operate.

DFB officially state "Get Out".

DFB used to operate stay put until Priory Hall exposed our bigger issue.

Apartments are supposed to be safe inside but cost cutting and lax regulation means that they are death traps now.

ht9zni1gs28crp

Same with the 'flight before fight' policy I would advocate. Get out, get out and just get out is the phrase that needs to be drummed into and fire tests/drills etc. Same as you should at home with your family, Its worth ten minutes walk around your house showing the escape routes and talking about options. Not everyone thinks the same was as those in the industry do.

Gumbo

Del2005 wrote: »

DFB used to operate stay put until Priory Hall exposed our bigger issue.

Apartments are supposed to be safe inside but cost cutting and lax regulation means that they are death traps now.

Safe for a limited amount of time. There's only so much time the fabric f the building can hold back smoke and fire.

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

Same with the 'flight before fight' policy I would advocate. Get out, get out and just get out is the phrase that needs to be drummed into and fire tests/drills etc. Same as you should at home with your family, Its worth ten minutes walk around your house showing the escape routes and talking about options. Not everyone thinks the same was as those in the industry do.

Get Out, Get the Fire Brigade Out and Stay Out!

GreeBo

kceire wrote: »

Safe for a limited amount of time. There's only so much time the fabric f the building can hold back smoke and fire.

If built properly they should be viable for an hour+ if you are near the fire and obviously longer if you are not, plenty of time to get out.

The issue is that they are not built properly and fires are jumping from room to room and apartment to apartment, and in these examples they are doing it via external cladding/insulation making it impossible for fire-fighters to tackle them.


In a properly built building, staying put is safer than trying to make your way through choking smoke, but a properly built building would have fire breaks and sprinklers.

All that said, I would want to be *VERY* confident in the construction before I would sit around and wait to be rescued.

kceire wrote: »

Get Out, Get the Fire Brigade Out and Stay Out!

Thats for houses/etc where there is no expectation on fire resistance and aims to stop people trying to fight the fire or save personal items.

Gumbo

GreeBo wrote: »

If built properly they should be viable for an hour+ if you are near the fire and obviously longer if you are not, plenty of time to get out.

In some cases 30 minute fire resistance is all that's required. That's enough time to get alerted and get out.

GreeBo wrote: »

In a properly built building, staying put is safer than trying to make your way through choking smoke, but a properly built building would have fire breaks and sprinklers.

All that said, I would want to be *VERY* confident in the construction before I would sit around and wait to be rescued.

In a properly built building, the compartment is the unit, the escape stairs should not be full of smoke at all, so its safer to get out through the protected stair core.

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats for houses/etc where there is no expectation on fire resistance and aims to stop people trying to fight the fire or save personal items.

3 storey houses have protected stair cores too with fire doors to keep the core free of smoke and fire. Use these to get out.

In any situation, houses, apartments, offices, retail, get out and stay out. Full Stop.

GreeBo

kceire wrote: »

In some cases 30 minute fire resistance is all that's required. That's enough time to get alerted and get out.


In a properly built building, the compartment is the unit, the escape stairs should not be full of smoke at all, so its safer to get out through the protected stair core.

You have to be able to get to the escape stairs though, which usually means passing through a communal area which, depending on where the fire is, can contain smoke. Also even escape stairs can contain smoke since if the entire building is trying to use them, they are open to the fire.

3 storey houses have protected stair cores too with fire doors to keep the core free of smoke and fire. Use these to get out.

I dont think I have ever seen a 3 storey house where the entire stairs is enclosed with a fire core in Ireland, do you have examples?

In any case, I specifically said this advice does not apply to houses.

ht9zni1gs28crp

GreeBo wrote: »

You have to be able to get to the escape stairs though, which usually means passing through a communal area which, depending on where the fire is, can contain smoke. Also even escape stairs can contain smoke since if the entire building is trying to use them, they are open to the fire

These travel distances are carefully setout in regulations. These maximum distances set travel from any point of the room to the safe compartmented area. Usually in Apartment blocks, once you reach the communal area you are in the compartmented safe egress zone. Each compartement zone will resist fire impact for a set amount of time, and will usually incorporate a ventilation system that kicks in upon detection to vent smoke to allow occupants to escape over a set time. These compartments are usually 90mins Protection or upwards dependant on how many occupants are down to utilise the escape or if its a designated Fire Fighters access point these can go to 120mins+.

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont think I have ever seen a 3 storey house where the entire stairs is enclosed with a fire core in Ireland, do you have examples?

Any house over three stories has to have a fire plan, this may include fire doors /safe zone if the above mentioned Travel Distances are exceeded. You may or may not actually notice the physical characteristics but they should be there by law.

GreeBo wrote: »

In any case, I specifically said this advice does not apply to houses.

The overall mantra of 'get out and stay out' applies to any building

GreeBo

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

The overall mantra of 'get out and stay out' applies to any building

The FDNY disagrees with you.
http://www.fdnysmart.org/safetytips/fire-proof-or-non-fire-proof/

You get out if you are in imminent danger or if its safe to do so.
"safe to do so" depends hugely on the construction of the building you are in.

There are examples of people dying within the fire stairs due to the firemen using those stairs to fight the fire (and causing a chimney effect for the smoke) whereas everyone else who stayed in their apartments survived.

Gumbo

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont think I have ever seen a 3 storey house where the entire stairs is enclosed with a fire core in Ireland, do you have examples?

Go look at any 3 storey house constructed new in Ireland.
Fire doors to the stair core, keeps the fire contained to the room for 30 minutes. The stair core itself is 30 minute fir rated construction.

GreeBo wrote: »

The FDNY disagrees with you.
http://www.fdnysmart.org/safetytips/fire-proof-or-non-fire-proof/

We are specifically talking about Dublin Fire Brigade.

ht9zni1gs28crp

GreeBo wrote: »

The FDNY disagrees with you.
http://www.fdnysmart.org/safetytips/fire-proof-or-non-fire-proof/

You get out if you are in imminent danger or if its safe to do so.
"safe to do so" depends hugely on the construction of the building you are in.

There are examples of people dying within the fire stairs due to the firemen using those stairs to fight the fire (and causing a chimney effect for the smoke) whereas everyone else who stayed in their apartments survived.

Because most people in Ireland live in high rise apartment blocks in downtown Manhattan. :rolleyes:

Have you actually read the article you linked in full before creating a response, or are you just fishing? The clue may be in the title.....

Know your building and know your escape plan, this applies to every building in the world. In Ireland Technical Guidance Document part B aims by design to ensure full and safe egress of all occupants within a structure.

Gumbo

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

Because most people in Ireland live in high rise apartment blocks in downtown Manhattan. :rolleyes:

Have you actually read the article you linked in full before creating a response, or are you just fishing? The clue may be in the title.....

Know your building and know your escape plan, this applies to every building in the world. In Ireland Technical Guidance Document part B aims by design to ensure full and safe egress of all occupants within a structure.

+1
Generally speaking, in Ireland, Fire Safety is designed around Life Safety rather than property protection, so get the occupants out through protected escape routes.

GreeBo

kceire wrote: »

Go look at any 3 storey house constructed new in Ireland.
Fire doors to the stair core, keeps the fire contained to the room for 30 minutes. The stair core itself is 30 minute fir rated construction.

Since when?
I've looked at 3 storey houses and there are no doors between the stairs and "landings".

kceire wrote: »

We are specifically talking about Dublin Fire Brigade.

In a thread titles "Grenfell"?
I think we are specifically talking about fires in tall buildings.

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

Because most people in Ireland live in high rise apartment blocks in downtown Manhattan. :rolleyes:

I dont know why you are rolling your eyes. We are not talking about people in Ireland. We are talking about fires in tall buildings.

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

Have you actually read the article you linked in full before creating a response, or are you just fishing? The clue may be in the title.....

I have read the article in full.

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

Know your building and know your escape plan, this applies to every building in the world. In Ireland Technical Guidance Document part B aims by design to ensure full and safe egress of all occupants within a structure.

Yes know your building.
In modern buildings it is often safer to stay in the building if the building is designed that way.
Or are you disagreeing with the FDNY?

dusteeroads

ht9zni1gs28crp

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont know why you are rolling your eyes. We are not talking about people in Ireland. We are talking about fires in tall buildings.

Ultimatley we are talking about people in Ireland, OP opened a discussion on Grenfell with a query to an Irish view on our own buildings. Irish Technical Guidance documents are derived from BRE and BS with our own slant on it.

GreeBo wrote: »

Yes know your building.
In modern buildings it is often safer to stay in the building if the building is designed that way.
Or are you disagreeing with the FDNY?

You are talking about Ireland here, and the correllation between 'As Builts' and 'For Construction' drawings is often miles apart. What goes in on site historically here in Ireland has proven this too true.....

So yes in a 'modern Irish' building I am disagreeing with the Fire Department of New York in Ireland.

Why not open a seperate discussion regarding fires in tall buildings in New York.

Gumbo

GreeBo wrote: »

Since when?
I've looked at 3 storey houses and there are no doors between the stairs and "landings".

I've no idea what kind of properties you are looking at, but we have national Fire Safety Regulations for 3 storey houses here in Ireland.

Go pick a new development on sale anywhere this weekend. If they have 3 storey houses, go look at them.

sydthebeat

GreeBo wrote: »

Since when?
I've looked at 3 storey houses and there are no doors between the stairs and "landings".

why have you used quotation marks around the word landings, when no one else has used that word, or even referred to landings, in this thread?

dusteeroads

https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/

https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/evidence

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/grenfell-tower

Back to point references

GreeBo

sydthebeat wrote: »

why have you used quotation marks around the word landings, when no one else has used that word, or even referred to landings, in this thread?

Because I'm including landings and hallways but didn't want to type it.

What a bizarre question.

GreeBo

Hugo Greasy Rosebush wrote: »

So yes in a 'modern Irish' building I am disagreeing with the Fire Department of New York in Ireland.

Actually, if you had read the article you would see that you are agreeing with them.
Get out if thats what the building is designed for, stay put if thats what the building is designed for.

GreeBo

kceire wrote: »

I've no idea what kind of properties you are looking at, but we have national Fire Safety Regulations for 3 storey houses here in Ireland.

Go pick a new development on sale anywhere this weekend. If they have 3 storey houses, go look at them.

Are you talking about only the 3rd storey staircase perhaps?

sydthebeat

GreeBo wrote: »

Because I'm including landings and hallways but didn't want to type it.

What a bizarre question.

??
you DID type it though.....

why did you mention landings when no one else did ???

GreeBo

sydthebeat wrote: »

??
you DID type it though.....

why did you mention landings when no one else did ???

landings and HALLWAYS.

I didnt bother typing hallways.

I mentioned landings (and hallways) because thats what you end up on when you exit a stairs....right?

I'm saying I havent seen a 3 storey house in Ireland, new or otherwise, where there is a door from the stairs to each landing/hallway.

sydthebeat

GreeBo wrote: »

I'm saying I havent seen a 3 storey house in Ireland, new or otherwise, where there is a door from the stairs to each landing/hallway.

and who said otherwise?

GreeBo

sydthebeat wrote: »

and who said otherwise?

These two posts did.

kceire wrote: »

Go look at any 3 storey house constructed new in Ireland.
Fire doors to the stair core, keeps the fire contained to the room for 30 minutes. The stair core itself is 30 minute fir rated construction.

kceire wrote: »

Go pick a new development on sale anywhere this weekend. If they have 3 storey houses, go look at them.

sydthebeat

GreeBo wrote: »

These two posts did.

ill let kceire speak for himself but when he says

keeps the fire contained to the room for 30 minutes

i read that as the enclosure between the room and escape route ie hallway / landing / stairs

Gumbo

GreeBo wrote: »

Are you talking about only the 3rd storey staircase perhaps?

I think you need to go read Technical Guidance Document Part B (Fire Safety). In particular, the section with regards to 3 storey dwellings (houses with one floor above 4.5m)

GreeBo wrote: »

Get out if thats what the building is designed for

Which is what every tall building in Ireland is designed for currently.
Take Capital Dock, for example, the principle plan is still get out through the protected shafts.
The building does have some increased fire fighting measures because its height is over 30m such as sprinklers in apartments, wet risers, battery back up fire fighting shafts, but the primary means of escape is still out of the apartment and into the protected escape shaft and down as quick as you can!

*When I say tall, I mean relatively tall by Irish standards.

dusteeroads

Watch from minute 33 the video I posted earlier. The folly of stay put exposed in a most tragic manner.

GreeBo

kceire wrote: »

I think you need to go read Technical Guidance Document Part B (Fire Safety). In particular, the section with regards to 3 storey dwellings (houses with one floor above 4.5m)

Or you could be less of a dick about it and explain your point as sydthebeat did.

kceire wrote: »

Which is what every tall building in Ireland is designed for currently.

Super.
You were the one who originally brought up the "stay put" approach that the LFB *previously* advised.
You now seem to have some massive issue with me pointing out other jurisdictions that still advise this approach in *certain* cases despite the fact that in my very first post I said
"All that said, I would want to be *VERY* confident in the construction before I would sit around and wait to be rescued."

Whatever the reason for your attitude, its clearly too much for you to maintain a civil conversation about it so I'm going to remove myself from it.

GreeBo

dusteeroads wrote: »

Watch from minute 33 the video I posted earlier. The folly of stay put exposed in a most tragic manner.

Its not folly if its the correct approach for the building you are in.

I can post links that show the folly of "Get Out" when the building is designed for you to "Stay Put".

For example:
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/21/nyregion/counterintuitive-advice-when-you-hear-fire-in-a-high-rise-stay-put.html

/edit and from the video you linked

That stay-put policy is a sensible one where the fire service personnel can rely on the compartilization of those blocks

BryanF

GreeBo wrote: »

Or you could be less of a dick about it and explain your point as sydthebeat did.

Attach the post, not the poster. read the forum charter before posting again. And don’t respond to this on thread

Muahahaha

Kingspan looking very bad at the Grenfell inquiry yesterday. Turns out two of their employees knew the insulation cladding was not fully fire retardant but they were selling it under the false premises that the foil backing was

Staff joked safety claims about material used on Grenfell were 'all lies', inquiry told
Kingspan employees’ text exchange questioned insulation product’s fire performance

Staff at Kingspan, a company that made some of the combustible material used on Grenfell tower, joked in 2016 that claims about how safe the product was were “all lies” and it should be scrapped.

Text messages sent the year before the June 2017 disaster, which claimed 72 lives, suggested the employees believed the company was lying to the market about the fire performance of the “**** product” but one of them appeared to think that was funny, the public inquiry heard.

The plastic foam Kooltherm K15 insulation had failed several full-scale fire tests but was being sold on high-rise buildings on the basis of tests that related to the spread of flames across its foil surface rather than the whole material, and on an earlier full-scale test of a different, less combustible version of the product.

In a November 2016 text chat Peter Moss, a member of the firm’s technical team, asked his colleague Arron Chalmers, about the fire performance of the foam insulation, which was marketed as having a class-0 rating – the safest for spread of flames across the surface of a product.After telling Moss that it was class 0, Chalmers added: “Doesn’t actually get class 0 when we test the whole product tho. LOL.” Moss replied: “WHAT. We lied? Honest opinion now.” Chalmers said: “Yeahhhh. Tested K15 as a whole – got class 1 [a worse performance]. Whey. Lol.” Moss’s response was: “**** product. Scrap it.”

Chalmers then explained that it was “worded in such a way that it ‘implies’ the facing can give you class 0 … But don’t tell anyone that.” Moss then quoted the Kingspan marketing literature: “Kingspan Kooltherm K15 is class 0 (non combustible).”Chalmers said: “All lies mate … Alls we do is lie in here”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/dec/08/staff-joked-safety-claims-about-material-used-on-grenfell-were-all-lies-inquiry-told

Pretty serious stuff given 72 people lost their lives over this cladding.

Muahahaha

Good article here on Kingspans shortcomings. Is the Grenfell Tower inferno Kingspan’s Volkswagen moment?
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/is-the-grenfell-tower-inferno-kingspan-s-volkswagen-moment-1.4434411

In short their product Kooltherm 15 failed internal fire tests but they kept on selling it for high rise buildings anyway. Back in October they withdrew testing claims about the product, this depite the Grenfell fire happening in 2017. Their own inhouse fire expert was sacked in 2015 due to an ongoing drug addiction problem.

K15 has been used in hundreds of Irish buildings, including high-rises. Some well-known buildings such as the Central Bank, the Microsoft HQ and the headquarters of the Kerry Group have it installed.

Kingspan also claimed in their own literature that Kooltherm 15 was used on the Aviva Stadium but has since withdrawn that claim. It has however been used on hundreds of public buildings such as hospitals, schools and creches.

More details
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/is-the-grenfell-tower-inferno-kingspan-s-volkswagen-moment-1.4434411

GreeBo

It's pretty shocking stuff for such a large scale firm, I can see some huge claims in their future that they may not be able to survive, I doubt any insurance will cover them if they are found to have knowingly mislead people.

Gumbo

It’s not only high rise buildings that are affected too.

The soffits of basement car parks, particularly where the contractor has not closed off the PIR material correctly. Usually you’d expect to see a cement board but the edges are sometimes missed and this leaves the pir material exposed.

mad m

Currently on podcast 34 of the Grenfell Inquiry. Obviously it was a perfect storm we’ve all come to find out about. Shocking what LFB had to deal with on that terrible night.

I’ve inspected a number of apartments within city centre and out beyond city. I’ve opened up ceilings, walls, pulled out baths etc. It’s shocking to see the lack of fire stopping with cables, soil stacks running through compartment floors and protected corridors not going all way up to underside of compartment floor.

Management companies are a nightmare to deal with.

@Gumbo.

Was out in Clongriffin. I think I seen tall building you mentioned that was in process of external cladding being changed.

GreeBo

I've been in several car parks where the ceiling insulation is just taped panels, in fact I'm pretty sure my office car park is like that...

mad m

GreeBo wrote: »

I've been in several car parks where the ceiling insulation is just taped panels, in fact I'm pretty sure my office car park is like that...

And possibly lumps taken out of it with a passing van with a roof rack.

Gumbo

GreeBo wrote: »

I've been in several car parks where the ceiling insulation is just taped panels, in fact I'm pretty sure my office car park is like that...

I was in one yesterday. They taped the joints. Told them
To remove and fix cement board.

Muahahaha

GreeBo wrote: »

It's pretty shocking stuff for such a large scale firm, I can see some huge claims in their future that they may not be able to survive, I doubt any insurance will cover them if they are found to have knowingly mislead people.

I would have thought that could be part of their problem, it often happens that when companies grow to a colossal size like Kingspan has quality goes down yet they manage to trade well off a strong brand name for just being a 'big' company, people naturally assume big means they sell the best products. . Its certainly telling that two employees were discussing how the fire tests on the K15 product were essentially a fix yet they were laughing about still selling it for high rise buildings. The fact they were having a laugh about selling a defective product suggests the culture of the company is rotten to a degree and they've gotten so big they feel they can get away with selling any old crap. I suppose the thing about fireproofing and insulation is 99.99% of the market will never suffer a fire to find out if it actually works.

I wonder where this goes from here. This K15 product is now on many Irish buildings including hospitals. In the case of Grenfell it was said at the inquiry that only 5% of the insulation was actually K15, they had run out of insulation from their main supplier and needed a quick delivery so went with the K15 from Kingspan to finish the job. This was then used on the columns of the building which were reported to have gone up like an inferno in no time at all. It didnt perform to the standards their own fire tests claimed.

Surely if entire public buildings like the Central Bank and hospitals are covered in this product it all now needs to be retrofitted? The Irish Times article above asks if this is Kingspans 'Volkswagon' which seems a fair question, surely now building & facilities managers have a legal duty of care to ensure a fire hazard like K15 is not on their buildings?

dathi

https://inform.celotex.co.uk/category/celotex-statements/

cleotex were no saints in this either

Calahonda52

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2020/1217/1185006-kingspan-director-retires/


They still don't get it: the 5% is not the issue

The announcements come after recent appearances by Kingspan's employees and former employees as witnesses at the Grenfell Tower Inquiry in London.

A small amount of Kingspan's Kooltherm K15 insulation product was used in the tower block which was destroyed in an inferno that killed 72 people in June 2017.

Kingspan's insulation product made up 5.2% of the insulation used on the building's facade.

The inquiry has been postponed until January 11 as one of the members tested positive for Covid-19 earlier this month.

Muahahaha

Yeah the Kingspan PR team seems to be focusing on the 5% as a way of downplaying Kingspans involvement. But it was said at the inquiry that the 5% that was used was on vertical columns which eye witnesses (ie the fire brigade) described as like burning chimneys with the fire raging upwards through them. It looks like the fire brigade told people on upper levels to remain in their flats, presumably on the assumption that this fire proof insulation would do its job. The other insulation supplier who covered the rest of the building didnt cover themselves in glory either but it seems that the Kingspan K15 product was particularly responsible for the spread of the fire even if only 5% of the building was covered in it.

Just had a look at Kingspans share price, 75 a couple of weeks ago and 63 today. Would imagine this retirement and the new appointments are part of an effort to placate investors.

Another point in it was London Fire Brigade saying their tenders can only go as high as 18m. Kingspan were selling this product as suitable for buildings over 18m high throughout London and further afield. Theres been a boom of tall buildings in the past decade in London, you would wonder how many of them are insulated with this product which surely now has to be replaced?