On 06/10/2020 11:17, Paul wrote:
JohnP wrote:
"Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)" wrote in
:
Thing is, I went to school in the 1960s and my secondary school had
sprinklers all over it. Seems a bit odd if some still do not have them
to me, maybe it was very old.
Â*Brian


Many modern schools are such flimsy buildings that they probably
wouldn't support the pipes!

We had a brick-clad school here burn to the ground years ago.
Around 1974 or so.

It turns out the wall insulation was flammable. Oops.

No amount of water could put out that fire. It raced
through the walls and false ceiling at breakneck speed.
The firemen mounted a roof attack, but they had to retreat
because their estimate of what would be a safe place to
saw open the roof, was way off. They got off the roof
before it collapsed, so they were well clear of that
fortunately. No close call. But once they did the maths,
there was no place to mount a second attack.

The school might well have had sprinklers, but all they
would do is wet the sheetrock walls, and not touch the
fire inside the walls at all.

The next day, all they had left to do, was knock down the
few remaining sections of intact brick wall.

Just as important as sprinklers, is enforcing some kind
of building code. I guess nobody had a look inside
the walls, to see what was in there.

They built a school to replace it (they don't always do that).
The new school had brick cladding, because, you know, it
doesn't burn :-/

Â*Â* Paul

There have been more than one total-loss fires in the UK
involving quite new blocks of flats. Either they had
incorrect fire-stopping where pipes pass through floors
or missing/inadequate cavity fire barriers, or both.

Plasterboard/sheetrock should have 60 minute fire resistance
(depending on construction), so it comes back to ****-poor
supervision of people making holes for pipes and cables,
notably works done long after construction. The best
building codes in the world won't stop an electricion or
network installer destroying the fire integrity long after
it was built.