OT: Recent Tests on High Rise cladding

If we are to believe the media, every sample of cladding (or do they mean the insulation or the cladding in combination with the insulation spaced so as to create a chimney effect?) has failed an unspecified test.

To me this indicates either the test is not the same as the materials were required to meet at the time they were specified; ie the test is either more stringent or is being done in a way that tests the material as installed rather than in isolation Or the materials were not up to the specification required at the time of installation which is far far more serious and heads should roll.

So far I have failed to find details of these tests and just keep coming back to media headline grabbing "all panels have failed the tests"

Can anyone shed good scientific light on this?

Bob

Reply to
Bob Minchin
Loading thread data ...

I've wondered the same thing. It looks to me like they are only removing the outer cladding for testing, not trying to test the whole system (cladding plus insulation plus air gaps plus fire breaks).

Might it be that they have devised a new test, say applying a propane torch to a bottom edge or corner, and are finding that all the panels behave much the same way as the Grenfell ones?

I think that is the way that I would approach the job.

Reply to
newshound

One of the people being interviewed about this last night was very careful to state that the panels have failed to meet the current building standards. He didn't amplify and the interviewer didn't follow up, but I would take that to mean that there could have been a change in the standards. If so, presumably the Councils are giving priority to those blocks that were clad before the change.

Reply to
Nightjar

Me too. It seems inconceivable that everything used up until now has failed its tests that must have been conducted to enable it to be used in the first place, so I agree that the tests now being applied must be different and/or more stringent. But the lack of explanation when stating that all panels now fail testing is most confusing and unhelpful.

Reply to
Davey

Maybe masses of cheap insulation panels will come onto the market suitable for bungalows.

Reply to
tabbypurr

You can make your own using straw bound together with candle wax and a magnesium outer skin.

Cheers

Reply to
Clive Arthur

This was just discussed on R4 - apparently the tests now are on the core material rather than simply heating the aluminium coating of the sandwich. When I was designing things for a rather large IT company all the plastics needed to meet the vertial burning test in UL94 - V0 I think - so it would be interesting to hear how these cladding tests compare.

Reply to
nomail

If its 6 inches thick, then perfect for solid ground floors under the slab, especially if it's a fraction of the new cost.

Reply to
Andrew

And it was also mentioned on the BBC 1 pm news, so there is a recognition around that it is unclear what is being compared with what. Hopefully we will be told soon.

Reply to
Davey

Thanks for this helpful lead. info here

formatting link
about 20 minutes in.

Reply to
Bob Minchin

You have a flare for invention!

Reply to
PeterC

But it might not have to meet the A2 "limited combustibility" tests anyway.

formatting link

National House Builders' Council (NHBC) issued guidance which states that you can use a variety of sub-A2 insulation boards with B-grade external cladding ... The NHBC says Celotex RS 5000, the insulation used at Grenfell Tower can be used with B-grade cladding ... We have also identified one type of insulation that, they say, can be used safely with B-grade cladding, which is actually grade C.

So what's the point of having building regulations, and is a NHBC certificate on a new home (particularly a new home in a tower block) worth the non-fire-retardent paper it's printed on?

Owain

Reply to
spuorgelgoog

Newsnight attempted to explain it yesterday. Not much the wiser - except that NHBC didn't apply to council blocks. Seems the sort of firm that builds tower blocks makes up their own regs. Or something.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Indeed it does seem that there may be an emerging theme whereby US standard s, published "Underwriters Limited" in a litigation/insurance environment a re often better in terms of fire protection than BS/EN standards that are o ften drafted by committees with strong manufacturer influence/representatio n.

Reply to
jimzzr

rds, published "Underwriters Limited" in a litigation/insurance environment are often better in terms of fire protection than BS/EN standards that are often drafted by committees with strong manufacturer influence/representat ion.

the organisation that approves wirenuts, push-in socket connections, cardbo ard mains insulation etc.

NT

Reply to
tabbypurr
[25 lines snipped]

It's "Underwriters Laboratories", BTW.

formatting link

Reply to
Huge

The only BSI committee on which I served was 1/3 manufacturers, 1/3 users and 1/3 neutral outsiders.

Reply to
charles

All the more need to make the structure as fire resistant as possible, then?

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.