Cladding

[ik9000]

I think the thread has ended up with an excess of cladding!!

well, I guess that just about wraps it up then!

[Corky34]

I'm afraid there's no mention of the word modifications in the supplied article. To add it in is tad misleading, don't you think?

Okay, so you saying it's not sheer lunacy to run a mains gas pipe through the ONLY means of escaping a fire?

What do you think 'new' and 'modification' means then because the OED defines 'modification' as a change made and 'new' as produced, introduced, or discovered recently or now for the first time; not existing before, so please do enlighten me how installation of new gas risers and pipes in landings and stairways is achieved without making a change.

So no i don't think adding the word modification is a tad misleading as anyone who can read and has a modicum of understanding of the English language knows full well that it was the newly installed (the changes introduced) to the gas risers and pipes in landings and stairways that were not clad in “fire-rated” boxing and that you're taking a single sentence out of the context of the entire paragraph in an attempt to sensationalise the topic.

And no i don't think it's sheer lunacy to run a mains gas pipe through the 'ONLY' means of escaping a fire, for starters one would assume we're talking about welded steel gas pipes that were clad in “fire-rated” boxing, that's if we're still talking about the original gas risers and pipework and not the changes that were introduced, or are you saying no changes were made?

[Top_gun]

you're taking a single sentence out of the context of the entire paragraph in an attempt to sensationalise the topic.

Actually, it was a quote from the author who clearly thought having gas pipes running through the only fire escape route was a very bad idea.

Lunacy is right term to describe the installation of gas pipes in the only gas escape route. To say otherwise is normalising 'lunacy'.

[peterb]

Well a resident from Grenfell Tower had said otherwise:

"Gas pipes should never have been installed in these crucial fire safety zones in which no combustible material should have been allowed."

Source <Grenfell Action Group>

What qualifications in fire safety engineering did that resident have?

The original design was such that fires would be contained in one flat, and the escape route would be for the occupants of that flat. The escape route was a safety zone, so it is the logical place to put services so they are protected from fire - and the pipes themselves would be fire resistant.

The lunacy was in the modifications which allowed the fire to spread so quickly so it wasn’t contained, which as I understand it, was further compromised by the incomplete boxing of the pipes. That lack of boxing may have aided the spread of the smoke, heat and flames, even if the pipes themselves weren’t breached. The boxing is part of the fire safety system.

I should add that I am not a fire engineer, but I do have experience of fire fighting in confined spaces in restricted visibility.

[Corky34]

Actually, it was a quote from the author who clearly thought having gas pipes running through the only fire escape route was a very bad idea.

No you were not, you were quoting out of context (aka: quote mining).

And just because someone thinks something is a bad idea doesn't magically make it so, Catholics think contraception is a bad idea, does that mean we should all follow suit? Hitler (Godwin's law had to come into it at some point ) clearly thought killing Jews was a good idea so does that mean we should all go around thinking the same?

Lunacy is right term to describe the installation of gas pipes in the only gas escape route. To say otherwise is normalising 'lunacy'.

Are you being deliberately obtuse as i find it hard to believe anyone is capable of such a fundamental lack of understanding, not only are all the point peterb raised entirely logical reasons why what you're claiming is actually the lunatic thing to say but you've taken a single sentence totally out of the context from which it belongs.

The boxing is part of the fire safety system.

Don't try that at home kids, having a boxing match with a fire is no way to put it out.

[Top_gun]

No you were not, you were quoting out of context (aka: quote mining).

And just because someone thinks something is a bad idea doesn't magically make it so, Catholics think contraception is a bad idea, does that mean we should all follow suit? Hitler (Godwin's law had to come into it at some point ) clearly thought killing Jews was a good idea so does that mean we should all go around thinking the same?

The same could easily be applied to you. Let's throw in confirmation bias.

Are you being deliberately obtuse as i find it hard to believe anyone is capable of such a fundamental lack of understanding, not only are all the point peterb raised entirely logical reasons why what you're claiming is actually the lunatic thing to say but you've taken a single sentence totally out of the context from which it belongs.

I find this word deeply insulting but also a reflection of your arrogance to anyone who doesn't share your view of the world. I'm perfectly entitled to my view. Especially as engineering is prone to failure. The Titanic is a great example when engineers proclaimed the ship was unsinkable with its 16 water compartments but it still sank. I'm going to say it again, it is sheer lunacy to put the mains piping in the only fire escape route.

I could easily make the argument that the Grenfell victims were murdered by lazy engineering.

At the end of the day, the pipes were merely fire resistant which is not the same as fire proof. Putting mains pipe in the only fire escape route meant fire fighters were unable to get to the trapped residents or allow all of the residents to escape.

There's a case not to install mains gas given the Ronan Point gas explosion. So we know from history that mixing gas with tall buildings isn't a particularly bright idea.

[Butcher]

Actually, it was a quote from the author who clearly thought having gas pipes running through the only fire escape route was a very bad idea.

Lunacy is right term to describe the installation of gas pipes in the only gas escape route. To say otherwise is normalising 'lunacy'.

Asking random people for their opinion on things they don't have a good understanding of is not going to give good answers though. Ask such a person whether gluing the wings on aircraft is a good plan and they're tell you you're mad and that planes would all crash, and yet it is commonplace.

To somewhat flip it on its head, what's a better routing for the gas mains? Should they run through the flats, so that in the event of a serious fire in a flat you are pretty much guaranteed a major gas explosion? Surely if the fire has reached the stairwell it's game over anyway, so the fact that the gas main is there doesn't really exacerbate the situation. Also, the stairwell should be largely non-combustible (being primarily steel, concrete and plaster board) so it less likely to support a fire hot enough to breach gas mains.

[Corky34]

The same could easily be applied to you. Let's throw in confirmation bias.

Even if i was exhibiting confirmation bias, I'm not but lets just run with that spurious accusation, confirmation bias is not an informal fallacy and a type of false attribution, it's simply a tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs and as i have no beliefs one way or the other on the subject of gas pipes in fire escape routes (can you even have a belief on such a thing?) it's impossible to exhibit confirmation bias.

I find this word deeply insulting. If it was me using that word I would have been suspended on this forum.

The report buttons there for a reason you know, although i do admire your attempt at back seat moderating.

And besides i didn't say you were obtuse, i asked if you were being obtuse deliberately, there's a difference but I'm happy to go with whatever you decide.

I'm perfectly entitled to my view. Especially as engineering is prone to failure. The Titanic is a great example when engineers proclaimed the ship was unsinkable with its 16 water compartments but it still sank. I'm going to say it again, it is sheer lunacy to put the mains piping in the only fire escape route.

Yes you're perfectly entitled to your view, however having a view doesn't automatically mean it's a valid or reasonable one.

And yes engineering is prone to failure just like everything else in life, as the phrase goes to err is human; to forgive, divine, nothing is perfect and we often learn more from failures however just because something is prone to failure also doesn't mean your view is either reasoned or logical, for example you're quick to criticise the placement of gas pipes in the only fire escape route but you've not mentioned what should, in your view, have been done instead.

I could easily make the argument that the Grenfell residents were murdered by lazy engineering.

If you could then why don't you?

At the end of the day, the pipes were merely fire resistant which is not the same as fire proof. Putting mains pipe in the only fire escape route meant fire fighters were unable to get to the trapped residents or allow all of the residents to escape.

So what, in your view, is the difference between 'fire resistant' and 'fire proof' because obviously you think you know better than engineers and the people whose job it is to carry out tests on these materiel's.

There's a case not to install mains gas given the Ronan Point gas explosion. So we know from history that mixing gas with tall buildings isn't a particularly bright idea.

You've laid bare your complete lack of understanding to the world right there, if you don't even know that there's different construction methods then I'm afraid there's no talking to you.

[TheAnimus]

To somewhat flip it on its head, what's a better routing for the gas mains? Should they run through the flats, so that in the event of a serious fire in a flat you are pretty much guaranteed a major gas explosion? Surely if the fire has reached the stairwell it's game over anyway, so the fact that the gas main is there doesn't really exacerbate the situation. Also, the stairwell should be largely non-combustible (being primarily steel, concrete and plaster board) so it less likely to support a fire hot enough to breach gas mains.

Shouldn't gas be automatically isolated if the fire alarms go off?

That would be my hope.

As for the routing of pipes, are people also forgetting the need to be able to inspect, repair and replace them. It might work well enough in a small flat to have a riser, but once you're above a few stories I can't imagine how you would replace a pipe that say had a rat colony decide to nest on it.

[g8ina]

OK, final warning for the personal comments, be nice to each other or Admin may be forced to bring peterb back and get him to do something, or even worse, Saracen !

Now, be nice.

[Top_gun]

And besides i didn't say you were obtuse, i asked if you were being obtuse deliberately, there's a difference but I'm happy to go with whatever you decide.

No I wasn't deliberately being obtuse. It's certainly not the case I didn't understand your points. I merely took the bigger picture approach in terms of absolute safety for residents in tall buildings. Once you add gas mains to emergency exits then it creates an additional layer of vulnerability to safety.

Yes you're perfectly entitled to your view, however having a view doesn't automatically mean it's a valid or reasonable one.

And likewise to yours.

You've laid bare your complete lack of understanding to the world right there, if you don't even know that there's different construction methods then I'm afraid there's no talking to you.

Thank you but I don't think so. In fact I don't think I seen anything in any of your previous posts to even suggest I should fear ignorance on my part.

And for the record what I said is that tall buildings and gas hasn't mix historically and this is beyond dispute. You chose to make a statement about the construction methods of tall buildings, something entirely different, in a very poor attempt to cast me in a different light.

[g8ina]

OK, locked. I think it's run it's course anyway.