On 05/10/2020 20:40, newshound wrote:
On 05/10/2020 16:48, nightjar wrote:
On 05/10/2020 13:20, newshound wrote:
On 05/10/2020 12:05, nightjar wrote:
On 05/10/2020 11:38, newshound wrote:
On 04/10/2020 22:21, JohnP wrote:
newshound wrote in


Grenfell should have had a Dry Riser.

No, Grenfell should *not* have had that disastrous cladding.

A fire resistant window to the flat where the fire started would
have avoided it getting to the cladding.

True, though I am not sure how easy that is to engineer. OK, wired
glass would work, but that's not so nice for residential
accomodation. I guess "bulletproof" glass would provide 30 minute or
better resistance, but would standard sealed double glazing work even
in metal frames? (I'm not sure exactly what did fail).

AIUI the plastic frames melted, allowing the glass to drop out.

Fire rated windows are commercially available in 30 mins 60 mins, 120
mins and even 180 mins ratings. This is one company offering fire
rated windows:

https://www.fireratedwindows.co.uk/

There are various ways to get fire resistant glass. This is one:

https://www.vetrotech.com/en-gb/contraflam

Very interesting, thanks. Not cheap, though, I guess. And I'm sure it
will come out in the enquiry how the whole refurb was based on minimum
quotes.

Does this perhaps mean that for blocks still insulated with "dangerous"
panels one option would be just to replace the windows with fire
resistant ones?

From a technical point of view, it probably would. However, it is
unlikely it would allay the residents' fears.

--
Colin Bignell