The award-winning FIRETEX® FX6002 intumescent coating system from Sherwin-Williams has been selected to deliver fire protection of a new landmark in Milan’s financial district. UnipolSai Tower, currently under construction in the Porta Nuova district of the Italian city, will become the new local headquarters for leading Italian insurance and banking
A leading manufacturer of fire resistance cables believes building safety could remain a ‘ticking time bomb’ if product testing for fire cables is not strengthened. For many years, Wrexham Mineral Cables has been calling for more stringent testing standards as it believes too many cables are classified as fire resistant
Eye on the next generation as work experience opportunities made available to University of Ulster students SPIE UK, a subsidiary of SPIE, the independent European leader in multi-technical services in the areas of energy and communications, has been awarded a four-year contract to be the fire systems maintenance contractor with
The high-pressure water mist fire suppression system designed and manufactured by Yorkshire-based iMist has been awarded LABSS Registered Details certification, making it the only water mist system for domestic and residential projects to hold this prestigious certification. The LABSS Registered Details certification covers all of the components in iMist’s STX12
More than four years following the tragic fire in the Grenfell Tower, we are still waiting for the full legislative response from the government. While it is accepted that the public inquiry has yet to complete its work, are there measures, perhaps including some of those contained in Dame Judith
Dale Kinnersley, Principal Consultant at the FPA discusses the changes within the recently updated residential and domestic sprinkler standard BS 9251:2021 and the concern from UK insurers that this standard is inappropriate when considering the commercial hazards associated with multi-occupancy buildings. The recently updated residential and domestic sprinkler standard BS
A recent blog written by the Department for Education (DfE) highlighted some key points about fire safety in schools. While the article stressed the importance of ensuring all students and staff are safe at school, the author made some interesting claims which were misleading and need clarification. As we head
New planning requirements on fire safety for high-rise residential buildings came into force on August 1st and require developers to consider fire safety at the earliest stages of planning. While we understand this is a starting point on the road to a safer built environment, what does this mean for
Experts are calling for more to be done to stop fire protection systems from failing, after figures from the Home Office revealed that over half a million fire-related incidents were recorded last year with hundreds of deaths resulting. All non-domestic buildings are legally required to have several safety features implemented
Construction technology specialists, Waterguard and Ramtech, have announced plans to interlink their leak and fire detection systems in a bid to improve efficiencies on construction sites across the globe. The complete solution will enable Waterguard’s series 7 leak detection device to ‘talk’ to Ramtech’s REACT platform – a cloud-based solution
The award-winning FIRETEX® FX6002 intumescent coating system from Sherwin-Williams has been selected to deliver fire protection of a new landmark in Milan’s financial district. UnipolSai Tower, currently under construction in the Porta Nuova district of the Italian city, will become the new local headquarters for leading Italian insurance and banking group Unipol, when it opens later in 2021. The 31,000m2 building offers a modern elliptical design over 26 stories, and is LEED Platinum certified to meet the highest environmental standards. Having examined the priorities to protect the steel structure in the event of a fire with up to 2,000 people working there at any one time, Sherwin-Williams experts selected FIRETEX® C69 Epoxy blast primer, followed by FIRETEX FX6002 methacrylate intumescent coating and a topcoat of Acrolon™ 7300 polyurethane for the project. Winner of a 2021 Queen’s Award for Enterprise: Innovation, FIRETEX FX6002 can be applied off-site, enabling paint applicators to transport steelwork in a matter of hours rather than days – which means less downtime, fewer bottlenecks and faster project completion, as specified by the steel fabricator for the construction, MAEG Costruzioni Metalliche. The super-fast drying times and off-site application also allow for greater expression of architectural design. FIRETEX FX6002 can be applied direct to metal without the need for a primer or topcoat in some environments whilst retaining the highest levels of durability. With up to 120 minutes fire protection and long-term corrosion protection to the steelwork, the application of FIRETEX FX6002 makes it possible for steel sections to be coated and shipped in one day as opposed to one week in the same circumstances. Alessio Ortolan, General Manager of Maeg Costruzioni said: “This high-rise office block demands the highest level of fire protection in order to safeguard the structure and the thousands of employees inside. “Sherwin-Williams offered the solution we needed to coat the necessary 5,000 tonnes of steel including H profiles and rectangular beams which connect the external diagrid to the reinforced concrete core. Using FX6002 allowed us to apply off-site, leading to a quick throughput and less damage to the coated beams when lifted into place.” FIRETEX FX6002 can be used on a diverse range of steel section types and for different fire protection scenarios. Valter Volta, Sherwin-Williams Regional Sales Manager for South East Europe, said: “Where the lives of people and safety of property are at stake, only the highest level of fire protection measures can ensure the building’s long-term viability.” “FIRETEX FX6002 offers fabricators across Europe high-quality passive fire protection coatings, which also help in reducing bottlenecks and project costs.” Projects using fire protection coatings delivered by Sherwin-Williams in EMEAI include London’s The Shard and the Leadenhall Building (known as The Cheesegrater), as well as Azerbaijan’s Flame Towers. For more information, visit the FX6002 website.
A leading manufacturer of fire resistance cables believes building safety could remain a ‘ticking time bomb’ if product testing for fire cables is not strengthened. For many years, Wrexham Mineral Cables has been calling for more stringent testing standards as it believes too many cables are classified as fire resistant yet are not fit for purpose in real-life fire scenarios. Under current standards, only ‘fire-resistant’ cables greater than 20mm in diameter undergo testing for direct impacts to reflect falling debris and water jet testing on a single test sample. For ‘ENHANCED fire resistant’ cables under 20mm, no direct impact test takes place, and the water test is just a spray test, whilst different stages of each test are carried out on different samples of cable. Wrexham Mineral Cables believes this is putting lives at risk. It comes at a time when London’s Fire Commissioner Andy Roe has called for urgent change in the building industry as the number of blocks of flats in London with fire safety failings is now more than 1,000. Whilst a majority of the issues are due to cladding, the remainder have other fire safety defects, and in all of these buildings, LFB has suspended its ‘stay put strategy’. Wrexham Mineral Cables Commercial Manager Steve Williams says testing needs to be strengthened for all fire-resistant cables as part of the construction industry’s wider drive to improve building safety. He commented: “ENHANCED fire-resistant’ cables play a fundamental role in ensuring that emergency and building critical systems are supportedin the event of a fire. Not only do they provide early indication of a fire, they keep them safe whilst providing extended time for rescue services to evacuate occupants and ensure critical circuits remain functional for longer periods. This is particularly critical in high rise buildings where evacuation times can be extensive or hindered due to the sheer size of the building. “The tests which construction products are subjected to need to be relevant and relied upon. It is extremely concerning that ‘ENHANCED fire-resistant’ cables most commonly being used in fire alarms, emergency lighting, extraction systems, monitoring systems or even backup generators may not survive fire, water, and direct impact. If this remains the case, building safety will remain a ticking time bomb.” Mr Williams says Mineral Insulated Copper Cable (MICC) is the only fire performance cable that, in historical testing, has survived over 1000˚C, whilst being subjected to direct hammer blows and a full water pressure test using a fire hose. Samples tested have been measured at just 5.7mm in diameter and maintained circuit integrity for over 3 hours. He added: “We remain committed to raising industry standards. And the only way to achieve this is by introducing a higher classification for such products. The Government’s review of current systems for testing construction products was a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done to ensure the safety of buildings. Regardless of size or construction, if a cable is required to function in the event of a fire, each single cable sample must have to pass a true fire scenario test, helping identify those which can survive, rather than simply resist fire. Ensuring that the tests which construction products are subjected to are relevant and can be relied upon is the only way we can make buildings truly safe.”
Eye on the next generation as work experience opportunities made available to University of Ulster students SPIE UK, a subsidiary of SPIE, the independent European leader in multi-technical services in the areas of energy and communications, has been awarded a four-year contract to be the fire systems maintenance contractor with the University of Ulster. The SPIE UK team will be working across all four of the university’s campuses, which are located at Magee (Derry/Londonderry), Coleraine, Jordanstown and Belfast. As part of the contract, SPIE will be conducting planned and reactive maintenance, servicing and repair of fire alarms and gas suppression on a 24/7, 365 days-a-year basis. SPIE UK will also conduct any upgrades to the fire systems as is appropriate. Already being a supplier of services to the university, the SPIE team was well placed to identify bespoke benefits that they could offer to the University of Ulster, including specific system upgrade works. The contract will run for four years, with an optional extension period of a further four years. Working in the community… The University of Ulster has a proud reputation for its regional community engagement and continues to make a major contribution to the economic, social, and cultural development of Northern Ireland. As part of their work with the university, SPIE will likewise be engaging in a number of community benefit pledges. These include the creation of work experience placements across technical and administrative roles for University of Ulster students, as well as participation in the university’s career events. Jim Skivington, Divisional Managing Director, SPIE UK, said, “We are delighted to have been chosen by the University of Ulster to support them as their fire systems maintenance contractor. The team’s deep knowledge and relationship with the university were key to understanding the improvements that needed to be made. I know that that the team is also very much looking forward to supporting the university in its efforts to engage the local community and support its graduate programme, helping to develop the next generation of professionals in the built environment in Northern Ireland.”
The high-pressure water mist fire suppression system designed and manufactured by Yorkshire-based iMist has been awarded LABSS Registered Details certification, making it the only water mist system for domestic and residential projects to hold this prestigious certification. The LABSS Registered Details certification covers all of the components in iMist’s STX12 proprietary high pressure water mist system which includes its STN12 nozzle type. This means that individual projects in Scotland that use the iMist system will not require a project specific in-depth review by Building Standards as the LABSS certificate attests that it has already been assessed and approved for suitability. The certification followed a near year-long comprehensive review of the iMist system with thorough examination of its system design, installation, operation and maintenance manual, including assessing safety in case of fire; safety in use and durability serviceability and identification. Going forward, an annual review process will be carried out before the LABSS certificate is renewed. “With the tightening of regulations post-Grenfell, every fire suppression system should, rightly, undergo a robust review. As water mist systems are a relatively new alternative to traditional sprinkler systems, the authorities in Scotland wanted to understand exactly how the iMist system works and undertook a detailed assessment covering all aspects of the system,” explains Timothy Andrews, iMist business development director. “We have been able to evidence the efficacy of our system which is designed to suppress a fire by automatically discharging very small droplets into the air at high pressure. This fine mist remains in the air, displaces oxygen from the seat of the fire, has a cooling effect and provides surface wetting to limit the fire spread. “LABSS Registered Detail certification means that anyone choosing an iMist system for domestic or most residential projects should be able to fast-track their scheme as the Scottish Government’s Building Standards Divisions (BSD) now has the confidence that the iMist system has passed a thorough assessment.” Use of the LABSS registration negates the need to consult with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) under Section 11 of The Building (Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (as amended). A verifier may still wish to consult with SFRS under Section 10 of the legislation. Alex Pollard, operations director of the fast-growing Hull headquartered business, adds: “Having had an office near Sterling for a number of years, we already have a presence in Scotland and expect the award of the LABSS certificate to turbocharge our business here, creating new jobs for engineers as we expand our operation. “As a business at the forefront of developing new fire suppressant solutions, we are proud to be awarded the LABSS accreditation, alongside our existing LABC certification in England, both of which give people the peace of mind of knowing that the iMist system has been thoroughly tried, tested and approved by the relevant regulatory bodies.”
More than four years following the tragic fire in the Grenfell Tower, we are still waiting for the full legislative response from the government. While it is accepted that the public inquiry has yet to complete its work, are there measures, perhaps including some of those contained in Dame Judith Hackitt’s report from 2018, which could have been introduced already? The Door & Hardware Federation (DHF) is convinced that there are initiatives which could be undertaken today, without pre-judging any findings of the public inquiry. For example, chief among these would be the introduction of a legal requirement for third-party certification of fire-resisting doorsets. The Hackitt report calls for third-party certification of safety-critical construction products and it is clear that fire doorsets at Grenfell failed to protect the landings and the stairwell from smoke and fire spreading from the flats. This failure to protect the escape route had fatal consequences. Fire door certification could be introduced without affecting requirements relating to other components or structures which may be still under consideration. There are several certification schemes in existence today covering manufacture, installation and inspection of fire doorsets, but, even so, some time would inevitably be required for existing facilities to be expanded. This makes it all the more important to begin the process now, without waiting for decisions to be made in other areas. “Fire-resisting doorsets are obviously safety-critical and should therefore be subject to third party certification, at least when the intended use is in high-risk buildings,” explains DHF’s General Manager and Secretary, Michael Skelding. “There really should be little need for discussion on this. If we wait for all the other issues raised by Grenfell to be debated before dealing with this one, we are missing a golden opportunity to make a significant improvement in fire safety in high-risk residential buildings”. DHF’s recommendations come on the cusp of this year’s Fire Door Safety Week, a national safety awareness campaign that was first launched in 2013 and is, this year, taking place from 20th – 26th September. DHF has been a long-standing supporter of the objectives of Fire Door Safety Week, and as always, the federation will be putting its weight behind the campaign’s objectives to raise awareness of the critical role that fire doors play in saving lives and protecting property. “We are very pleased to be able to support Fire Door Safety Week once again this year, and applaud its efforts to increase the public’s understanding of the role that fire doors play,” says Michael. “We continue to stress that the use of fire doorsets, correctly installed and with robust fire door maintenance procedures, are a vital part of fire safety and urge those in positions of responsibility to seek the correct training with regards to installation and maintenance. Equally important is that companies carrying out the manufacturing, installation and repair of these doorsets are also certified.”
Dale Kinnersley, Principal Consultant at the FPA discusses the changes within the recently updated residential and domestic sprinkler standard BS 9251:2021 and the concern from UK insurers that this standard is inappropriate when considering the commercial hazards associated with multi-occupancy buildings. The recently updated residential and domestic sprinkler standard BS 9251:2021 (Fire sprinkler systems for domestic and residential occupancies code of practice) has introduced multi-occupancy (mixed use) opportunities for buildings, which overlap into commercial and industrial fire hazard classifications already suitably covered by BS EN 12845, to reflect the fire load and characteristics of the occupancies. While BS 9251 is listed within Approved Document B and is recognised as a life safety standard, there is major concern from UK insurers that this standard does not appropriately consider the implications of the commercial and industrial risks, or the fire loads associated with these risks, which may actually compromise the life safety intent of BS 9251. While BS 9251 has a place within the industry for ‘life safety’ and to help achieve conditions where occupants of a building can escape safely in the event of fire before structural failure or collapse, this is generally the only obligation government legislation requires. The standard is limited in its robustness and resilience in terms of providing an element of ‘property protection’ associated with the sprinkler system. Acceptability of sprinkler protection by property insurers is contingent on the application of commercial and industrial design standards. This is confirmed by UK insurers, where sprinkler-protected buildings to BS 9251 are considered effectively un-sprinklered for property-underwriting purposes. Table 4 of BS 9251 is misleading in that it lists commercial areas of multi-occupancy buildings where sprinkler heads should be used, and the density of discharge’s suitability for Ordinary Hazard commercial and industrial applications. However, it then goes on to list ‘Areas of Operation’, such as in, but limited to: car parking within or beneath a block of flats retail shop units bar/restaurant/café plant rooms bin store located within or beneath the flats These are significantly less than the Areas of Operation specified in the current LPC Rules: BS EN 12845:2015 Fixed firefighting systems – automatic sprinkler systems – design, installation and maintenance (+A1:2019) (Incorporating corrigenda December 2015 and January 2016). There appears to be no justification or explanation for these reductions in areas of operation. Where buildings are multi-occupancy – which has become more common in recent years – the requirement for the correct selection of sprinkler protection should be based on the highest risk classification within the building in question. This is covered within BS 9251 clause 4.1 note 3, and further clarified in clauses 4.2.3.2 sub clauses a) and i), and clause 4.2.4 sub clause f), where the requirement of the sprinkler system should be discussed and agreed with the ‘insurer(s) of the building and its contents.’ Where property insurers are one of the Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ), in addition to building control, the standard or level of sprinkler protection is typically specified as the LPC Rules for Automatic Sprinkler Installations 2015 incorporating BS EN 12845. This standard is based on research and testing, resulting in a more robust and comprehensive sprinkler system that covers both property protection and the life safety requirement which is fully backed by the UK insurance industry. For example, car parking facilities within BS 9251 have an assumed fire area of 100m². The same fire hazard within BS EN 12845 has an assumed fire area of 144m² with a sprinkler discharge design density of 5mm/minute. However, it should be noted that modern car parking facilities now encompass vehicles which are larger, heavier, contain more plastics (including fuel tanks), and may have lithium-ion batteries and electrical charging stations. In addition to this, the building structure configuration – sloped ramps, denser parking, and poor fire service access – all add to the complexity of fire control. Fire hazards associated with these increased risks are higher fire loads, fire spread due to radiation and convection, fuel leakage resulting in running fuel fires, shielded fires, thermal runaway within lithium-ion batteries, lower ceilings, and higher temperatures. These all require further consideration for increased sprinkler protection from beyond current LPC Rules and BS EN 12845 requirements, rather than a reduced allowance as specified in the new release of BS 9251. It has been recently advised, for insurance purposes, that the risk for car parks should be based on the core guidance for hazard classification assessments, which considers: presence of plastics the likelihood of a shielded fire, where the vehicle obstructs the sprinkler from a fire either below or within the vehicle presence of flammable liquids possibility of pool fires or running flammable liquid fires presence of other hazards such as li-ion batteries or charging stations This would fall into category HHP3 of BS EN 12845, with a sprinkler design requirement of a 12.5mm/minute design density over the fire area to protect against these risks. Insurer losses and recently published car park fires support this approach. NFPA has undertaken a research project on this matter, and NFPA 13 has already made adjustments for the next edition, which is due imminently in light of known and recognised concerns to the new risk profile. Retail shop units are also included in table 4 of the new BS 9251, which implies the sprinkler design criteria, based on an assumed fire area of 100m², would be adequate. BS EN 12845 however requires a much larger assumed fire area of up to 216m², with a design density of 5mm/minute to control fires in storage areas. This allows for storage typically found in retail units (either in sales area displays, stock rooms, or both), which can be expected to consist of a range of stored products on different storage configurations to various storage heights also benefiting from a water supply duration of 60 minutes. Plant rooms are another commercial and industrial risk, which are usually located either below ground or on the top floor of the building. These fire risks are classified within BS EN 12845
A recent blog written by the Department for Education (DfE) highlighted some key points about fire safety in schools. While the article stressed the importance of ensuring all students and staff are safe at school, the author made some interesting claims which were misleading and need clarification. As we head towards the long-awaited revised Building Bulletin 100: Design for Safety in Schools, it begs the question as to why the government is looking to make a backwards step towards fire safety and not require sprinklers in all schools? The Department of Education blog post made two interesting claims, firstly that “Fires in schools are very rare and fewer than 1 in 1,000 school buildings are damaged by fire each year”. In the second statement, it said that ‘Home Office Data showing there are fewer than 500 school fires per year, with 90% of fires limited to one room or causing no damage.” So just how accurate are these figures? In the first statement, let’s look at how many fires in school premises cause damage. Using the fire incident data presented in the publicly available dataset there were 5,120 fires over the 10-year period 2010/11 to 2019/20 in schools reported to be Usually Occupied or Under Construction. Looking at the fires where the reported “Total Damage Extent” is anything other than zero square metres, there are 3,743 incidents. This would lead to an average of 374 fire incidents each year where fire damage is reported. How many school buildings? Based on the first statement, this would mean there are over 350,000 school buildings in the English Schools Estate. There does not appear to be any publicly figures published on the number of school buildings. An article from the Construction index talks to 70,000 school buildings. This aligns to the government report on the condition of schools[1]. Although this report refers to “teaching blocks” to highlight that it collected data on 22,031 schools, comprising 63,942 teaching blocks. Based on these figures it is hard to determine that there are over 100,000 buildings let alone 350,000 buildings in the English school estate. Therefore, without a clearer explanation of how they calculated this I cannot find figures to support the first statement. How many fires in schools are reported as not spreading beyond the room of origin? As noted above, there are 5,120 fire incidents recorded in the period of 2010/2011 to 2019/20. Fire impact is recorded based on the observation of the spread of fire in square metres of damage and based on a description of how much of the building is impacted. Looking at those latter descriptors for fire incidents, they indicate 4,600 incidents as not spreading beyond the room of origin. This would be 89.8% of incidents. Based on these figures the second statement is based on the fire incident data. However, having said this the room of origin could be rather bigger than one imagined. It is surprising to note that at least 5% of these incidents reported as being limited to the room of origin cause damage to an area greater than an average classroom area of 50 square metres. Impact of school fires The article states that fires in schools are rare but I cannot find evidence that convinces me of that. It doesn’t talk about the impact of a fire on a child’s education and the ripple effect. Fifteen days of a school term is 5% of a child’s learning lost for that academic year. The government acknowledges that missing lessons has an impact on attainment at key stages. They track attendance and have commissioned reports, which confirm the harmful impact. Indeed, fines of between £60 to £120 can be levied for a child missing a single day of education. The disruption caused by school fires will adversely affect the results of students, and the government’s own statistics confirm this. The BSA has always highlighted that BB100 sets the right expectations around the protection of schools and the continuity of education. It sets an expectation that the school should be fully functional within 24 hours of a fire, apart from the room where the fire occurred. The BSA wants the government to explicitly maintain these objectives and enhance the “sprinkler expectation” in the revised BB100 so that fewer schools are damaged and destroyed by fire. Fewer than one-in-six new schools have been built with a sprinkler system installed. It is time we changed that. 1Condition of School Buildings Survey – Key findings – May 2021, Department of Education
New planning requirements on fire safety for high-rise residential buildings came into force on August 1st and require developers to consider fire safety at the earliest stages of planning. While we understand this is a starting point on the road to a safer built environment, what does this mean for other buildings such as those in the industrial and commercial sector which have similar challenges when it comes to fire safety? Planning Gateway One is the first of a series of ‘gateway points’ and a key measure to ensure high-rise developments consider fire safety at the earliest stages of planning. It comes in response to Dame Judith Hackitt’s Review of Building Regulations, which was commissioned by the government following the Grenfell tragedy. As part of this, developers of higher risk buildings will need to submit a fire statement which sets out fire safety considerations specific to the development before planning permission can be granted. A higher risk building is classed as any building which is 18 metres or more in height and contains two or more dwellings or educational accommodation. The concept of a fire statement within the new planning gateways is a positive step, as it ensures that the thinking on fire safety is included at an early stage. Whilst we understand government wanting to be proportionate, the BSA’s view has always been that this should happen for a range of buildings. It ties to the thinking on being clear on outcomes in the event of a fire. It is also an opportunity for clarity and to avoid a gap between the parties involved. However, as we view this change, as we have stated before, our long-term concern is that this fosters a two-tier system. The implication being that those outside the scheme perhaps need less attention and this will pose challenges as it will offer opportunities to play the system. Clearly fire safe design should not be an afterthought and is essential for all building types. While the intention is for hotels and care homes to be added down the line, the risk of loss of life and property inherent in many other building types is also too high. It is also important to point out that the system is predicated on the existing (i.e. old) classification of buildings and we are building differently now, both in techniques and materials, and using buildings differently too. Bluntly, the nature of risk will continue to evolve as will the hazards these buildings will pose, especially as they age, so we should ensure that all buildings are safe throughout their lifespan. Whilst we understand these changes are a starting point, all buildings, including high-rise will need such a strategy. This will be important to all people seeking to understand the direction the design is taking. Similarly, it will inform those seeking to manage the building when it is in use. I understand government wants to focus in a certain area, but do we really think we do not have similar challenges in other buildings?
Experts are calling for more to be done to stop fire protection systems from failing, after figures from the Home Office revealed that over half a million fire-related incidents were recorded last year with hundreds of deaths resulting. All non-domestic buildings are legally required to have several safety features implemented to reduce the effects of fires, such as alarms and doors. Fire doors work by stopping the spread of deadly smoke and fire; yet over three quarters of fire doors in 2019 failed inspections and were condemned as unfit for purpose. Reasons for failure of these doors range from ‘excessive gaps’ that allow smoke to pass, to ‘poorly adjusted door closers’ that prevent the door from staying in its default closed position in order to hold back the spread of fire. Director of Combined Fire Protection, Ellie McKay, says: “It’s staggering how many landlords are still not compliant despite the recent changes in regulation. Putting aside the hefty fines they can incur; the graver concern is the potential loss of life that can happen when corners are cut.” “There is so much to advise landlords and developers on when buildings are going up. The importance of working with professional organisations to ensure that stringent requirements are met cannot be underestimated.” Lessons from a tragedy This lack of building safety features has been all but spotlighted since the tragic fire at Grenfell Tower which took the lives of over 70 people in 2017. An investigation following the fire found several shortcomings from the fire protection equipment including the doors, alarms and exit signs. It was found that the fire doors were replaced six years prior and, during an inquiry were reported to have had their self-closing mechanisms either broken or missing, meaning many were left open during the night of the fire and allowed poisonous smoke to pour through the lobbies of the tower. It was also found that the door could only hold back fire for half as long as it was supposed to; at just 15 minutes. Following an intense inquiry four years later, the government has now published proposals for what it calls “the biggest change in building safety for a generation”, placing greater responsibility on those designing and constructing buildings to explain how they are managing risks and demonstrating that a building is safe for occupants. A lesson to be learned from Grenfell is the importance of thorough operational checks on vital equipment is paramount. Now accountability has been heightened we are experiencing a high volume of ‘catch up’ across the industry to hit compliance targets. In my opinion this proves the lack of stringent surveys over the past decades but at least things are heading in the right direction at a good speed. Mark Frain of Combined Fire Protection believes a lesson to be learned from the disaster is thorough operational checks on vital equipment. “Now accountability has been heightened, we are experiencing a high volume of ‘catch up’ across the industry to compliance targets. This proves the lack of stringent surveys over past decades but at least things are heading in the right direction.” “We welcome the proposed changes and hopefully this will force landlords and business owners to be more compliant and take preventative measures to ensure that we don’t see the likes of the Grenfell disaster recurring”, added McKay. To understand more on how you can update your building’s fire safety, get in touch with Combined Fire Protection at social@combinedfireprotection.co.uk
Construction technology specialists, Waterguard and Ramtech, have announced plans to interlink their leak and fire detection systems in a bid to improve efficiencies on construction sites across the globe. The complete solution will enable Waterguard’s series 7 leak detection device to ‘talk’ to Ramtech’s REACT platform – a cloud-based solution which raises alerts in real time, sending notifications straight to the people who can act on them. When combined with Ramtech’s range of wireless emergency alarms, the technology will provide a cost-effective solution for commercial and residential construction projects – as well as adding a level of accountability throughout various stages of development. Popular on multi-residential and commercial schemes, the technology forms an integral part of the construction phase – often specified by the developer or insurance company. Adam Jurka, UK Sales Manager at Ramtech, explained: “Construction sites are, by their very nature, dangerous places to work, and with the complex demands of modern projects, it’s vital to safeguard staff, property and equipment. By partnering with Waterguard, we have extended our service portfolio to offer a holistic monitoring system which delivers genuine peace of mind – and protection.” Claire Mason, general manager at Waterguard, added: “Incoming leak detection and fire safety is a stipulation of any construction project and Waterguard exists to shield every building – and its owner – from the damage and expense which comes with burst and leaking pipes. “Offering both firms’ technology in a single interface – and one which is proven within our marketplace – saves developers time and money, Construction Insurance Risk Engineers Group (CIREG) compliance, as well as providing an opportunity to develop unique systems to meet clients’ specific requirements.” Ramtech is a £12 million turnover company with offices in the Nottingham and the US, while Yorkshire-headquartered Waterguard is the UK’s leading manufacturer and supplier of affordable water leak detection systems.
