FireNet Community
FIRE SERVICE AND GENERAL FIRE SAFETY TOPICS => Fire Investigation => Topic started by: Tom W on April 11, 2017, 09:22:57 AM
-
(https://ichef-1.bbci.co.uk/news/660/cpsprodpb/21B1/production/_95552680_c85f6yuw0aerdiw.jpg)
A "fierce fire" at a care home has left two people dead - with a further 33 having to be rescued from the collapsing building.
The blaze gutted Newgrange Care Home in Cadmore Lane, Cheshunt, after it broke out at about 06:00 BST.
Despite firefighters launching a "challenging" rescue operation, they were unable to save everyone inside.
Three more residents needed hospital treatment for minor burns and smoke inhalation, the fire service said.
Richard Hammond, an executive director at Princess Alexandra Hospital, said two of the three patients were still being treated but their condition was not known.
Chief fire officer for Hertfordshire, Darryl Keen, said the fire "had spread inside the roof all the way along the entire property".
"We had a number of people that were unable to get themselves out, you know, physically would not have been able to move even under normal circumstances," he said.
-
Tragic and very worrying.
It appears to have been a modern purpose-built building and the latest inspection found it 'safe' (http://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-121787163/inspection-summary#safe)
Plans and guidance had been drawn up to help staff deal with unforeseen events and emergencies. The environment and equipment used were regularly checked and well maintained to keep people safe.
-
That's a CQC report finding. CQC reports do not focus on fire safety, and in practice rarely even mention it. The key report here will be the fire risk assessment, and possibly, depending on the age of the building or the date of any conversion/change of use, followed by a review of any building control approvals to see whether or not the use of the premises as a care home and the dependency levels of the residents were considered as part of that approval process.
-
If the reports about the fire service having to carry out the number of rescues are true, the FRA in relation to article 15 (1)(b) will be interesting.
-
The description of the fire spread screams 'compartmentation!' but of course we will need to wait for the official report and inquest and if there are any charges resulting under various legislation.
With it being relatively modern and purpose built the number of rescues and casualties suggest something went very wrong.
-
Looks like the fire was spreading in the roof void to me. Had a similar incident a few years ago (prior to RRO fire regs) separation had been provided but was not sealed effectively at underside of roof and access doors through the separation indicated Fire Door but were not.
Fortunately no one hurt bot 95% of roof lost.
How many assessors would have inspected the roof void ? I always made a point of checking them after the fire I atteded.
-
O
.
How many assessors would have inspected the roof void ? I always made a point of checking them after the fire I atteded.
How many assessors!
How many inspecting officers go in the roof? Haven't seen one yet.
-
I can understand why assessors and inspectors don't access the roof space, many drive cars with no room for any kind of step ladders and like to go to work dressed as if they were off to the opera. In any event there may well be justified and invented health and safety reasons. So they are unlikely to access voids above suspended ceilings where compartmentation issues often abound.
When carrying out inspections on the electrical engineering services in a building I go to the job in a van, have appropriate industrial-grade access equipment, lighting and method statements prepared. I look in roof spaces and in voids, I have overalls on and I am prepared to get dirty.
Perhaps time that the FRA guys and gals had a look in their wardrobes for some different attire?
-
The issue of large non-compartmented voids in roof spaces and the associated risks is well documented. However, we are still coming across this on new builds, that have been "passed" by building control or Approved Inspector. They would argue that a 60min ceiling in the top floor flats provides an equivocal standard to that provided in ADB, but it does not. Neither does cavity barriers.
All FRAs should be mentioning access to roof voids and spaces and if no access gained this should be clearly stated in the Limitations section of the FRA.
-
Forgive my ignorance as I only design FDA systems ... but what is the argument behind the "60 min ceiling" versus properly compartmented voids?
Is it simply that once a fire has found its way to the void the expectation is that the roof will "quickly" collapse through the ceiling?
Therefore the less compartmentation there is the quicker the spread the more roof is liable to collapse?
-
Forgive my ignorance as I only design FDA systems ... but what is the argument behind the "60 min ceiling" versus properly compartmented voids?
Is it simply that once a fire has found its way to the void the expectation is that the roof will "quickly" collapse through the ceiling?
Therefore the less compartmentation there is the quicker the spread the more roof is liable to collapse?
From my experience fires spread into the roof void via windows and through the soffit.
A 60 minute ceiling won't stop the fire from spreading once it gets in the roof void. Compartmentation will keep the fire to a manageable size allowing staff or firefighters time to evacuate or carry out rescues.
The chance of this happening is low, but the consequences are ........
-
Forgive my ignorance as I only design FDA systems ... but what is the argument behind the "60 min ceiling" versus properly compartmented voids?
Is it simply that once a fire has found its way to the void the expectation is that the roof will "quickly" collapse through the ceiling?
Therefore the less compartmentation there is the quicker the spread the more roof is liable to collapse?
The 60 min ceiling option has a major weakness. It will not provide the same protection from a fire originating in the roof void, or from a flat fire breaking through a window and attacking the roof externally. Also fire resistance is not measured in a downwards direction so the 60 min ceiling will only provide 60mins FR from the flat side, not from the void.
These type of fires are becoming more frequent I am afraid.
-
Forgive my ignorance as I only design FDA systems ... but what is the argument behind the "60 min ceiling" versus properly compartmented voids?
Is it simply that once a fire has found its way to the void the expectation is that the roof will "quickly" collapse through the ceiling?
Therefore the less compartmentation there is the quicker the spread the more roof is liable to collapse?
The 60 min ceiling option has a major weakness. It will not provide the same protection from a fire originating in the roof void, or from a flat fire breaking through a window and attacking the roof externally. Also fire resistance is not measured in a downwards direction so the 60 min ceiling will only provide 60mins FR from the flat side, not from the void.
A bit geeky, but under the BS EN testing (BS EN 1364-2) you can actually fire resistance test a ceiling membrane from above , which you couldn't really do under BS 476-22. This then allows you to specify fire-resisting ceilings that are classified as providing protection either with a fire from above, or below, or both (under BS EN 13501-2), using a cryptic combination of numbers, 'E's, 'I's 'a's, 'b's and arrows! So, you could specify a ceiling construction that was fire resisting from both directions. Whether anyone has actually bothered to do the tests and you could actually buy one is a rather different matter of course...
-
Forgive my ignorance as I only design FDA systems ... but what is the argument behind the "60 min ceiling" versus properly compartmented voids?
Is it simply that once a fire has found its way to the void the expectation is that the roof will "quickly" collapse through the ceiling?
Therefore the less compartmentation there is the quicker the spread the more roof is liable to collapse?
The 60 min ceiling option has a major weakness. It will not provide the same protection from a fire originating in the roof void, or from a flat fire breaking through a window and attacking the roof externally. Also fire resistance is not measured in a downwards direction so the 60 min ceiling will only provide 60mins FR from the flat side, not from the void.
A bit geeky, but under the BS EN testing (BS EN 1364-2) you can actually fire resistance test a ceiling membrane from above , which you couldn't really do under BS 476-22. This then allows you to specify fire-resisting ceilings that are classified as providing protection either with a fire from above, or below, or both (under BS EN 13501-2), using a cryptic combination of numbers, 'E's, 'I's 'a's, 'b's and arrows! So, you could specify a ceiling construction that was fire resisting from both directions. Whether anyone has actually bothered to do the tests and you could actually buy one is a rather different matter of course...
Good info! But as you say I doubt anyone has done this as an option or even knows about it? It still wouldn't stop uncontrolled fire spread over the roof void though.
-
I'd forgotten about this test procedure. Its a German thing apparently. I doubt its been used in the UK and I suspect there aren't many systems that'll give you an hour.
-
Yes - extremely geeky that I knew about it, but I did once burn things for a living & I've tried to keep up to speed on these things. I'm conscious that we should all really be specifying the BS EN classifications, rather than continuing to use the BS 476 terminology. As WB says, unlikely that you'd be able to find a product readily available in the UK, though someone like Knauf (German) might just have a detail?
Might see it used more as it could be really useful for ceilings over protected corridors, if (for any reason) the F/R walls don't go up to the soffit (I know they should, but it happens...)
-
In my experience, the modern systems used for the construction of structural compartmentation are extremely intolerant of inaccurate and /or poor workmanship. This, combined with the gradual and continuous deskilling of many construction workers, and the demise of the clerk of the works, results in fire compartments in buildings which are significantly less effective and robust than those created using traditional construction methods.
We also need to remember that BCO's and AI's are not there to quality control the work. They simply make judgments on design proposals, plans, and what they can see without the aid of tools or access equipment.
-
Hmmm .... interesting stuff .... thank you .....
-
Just take the walls through the void like wot ADB says and dont mess about. And if an AI says you dont need to, send them to talk to Oor Wullie, who talks a lot of sense on the subject (albeit with a Northern accent).
-
Another fire where a full evacuation took place.
https://www.staffordshire.police.uk/article/7428/Residents-safely-evacuated-following-fire-at-Tamworth-elderly-care-home?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SocialSignIn&utm_source=Twitter (https://www.staffordshire.police.uk/article/7428/Residents-safely-evacuated-following-fire-at-Tamworth-elderly-care-home?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SocialSignIn&utm_source=Twitter)
Caused by smoking.
-
Another fire where a full evacuation took place.
https://www.staffordshire.police.uk/article/7428/Residents-safely-evacuated-following-fire-at-Tamworth-elderly-care-home?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SocialSignIn&utm_source=Twitter (https://www.staffordshire.police.uk/article/7428/Residents-safely-evacuated-following-fire-at-Tamworth-elderly-care-home?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SocialSignIn&utm_source=Twitter)
Although two residents are 'seriously' ill, it looks like a successful evacuation took place. Interestingly, Standon House looks like a former domestic residence with a number of add-ons rather than purpose-built.
Photos here
http://www.tamworthherald.co.uk/firefighters-remain-at-tamworth-care-home-blaze/story-30273726-detail/story.html
-
"Fire barriers within roof spaces", eh
https://www.crisis-response.com/forum/index.php?topic=3251.msg77402#msg77402
(Posted by Dinnertime Dave)
-
Just take the walls through the void like wot ADB says and dont mess about. And if an AI says you dont need to, send them to talk to Oor Wullie, who talks a lot of sense on the subject (albeit with a Northern accent).
;D
-
Interesting thing with ADB, is that not every bedroom is enclosed in a compartment wall. so you've got compartment walls for the progressive Horizontal evac (up through the roof void) and FR walls for the bedrooms and corridors (with cavity barriers in the roof void).
So an ADB compliant care home will have more cavity barriers than you can shake a stick at, plus a few compartment walls....
-
Taking up all the walls / fitting barriers around the bedrooms is expensive because AFD is needed to each space formed in the roof.
Most modern construction uses trussed rafters. If the barrier passes through the truss then the barrier is, in theory, ineffective because the truss is a frame and needs all parts of the truss to be intact for structural stability. Even if the barrier is parallel and fixed to the truss, then the barrier will be penetrated by the bracing timbers, with a potential weakness at the penetration.
The difficulty of fixing an effective barrier where trussed rafters are used means that the designer chooses the option in ADB to use a fire resistant ceiling. Then there is the problem of fitting a hatch in the fire resistant ceiling to maintain the AFD in the loft.
You also have to take up the walls around the protected shaft (stairway) as well as the compartment walls.
-
Taking up all the walls / fitting barriers around the bedrooms is expensive because AFD is needed to each space formed in the roof.
The difficulty of fixing an effective barrier where trussed rafters are used means that the designer chooses the option in ADB to use a fire resistant ceiling. Then there is the problem of fitting a hatch in the fire resistant ceiling to maintain the AFD in the loft.
Why would you fit AFD as well? Are you thinking the over 800mm clause 5839?
Once the FR is in place and there is no need to enter the loft, would you need to do maintenance inspections? The RP just needs to make sure once FR is in place any contractor or trades person is aware not to breach any FR walls or if they do, how to make them good.
-
Were possible I always inspect the roof voids when carrying out a risk assessment and indeed recently found a lack of compartmentalisation in one that since has been rectified.
-
Taking up all the walls / fitting barriers around the bedrooms is expensive because AFD is needed to each space formed in the roof.
The difficulty of fixing an effective barrier where trussed rafters are used means that the designer chooses the option in ADB to use a fire resistant ceiling. Then there is the problem of fitting a hatch in the fire resistant ceiling to maintain the AFD in the loft.
Why would you fit AFD as well? Are you thinking the over 800mm clause 5839?
Once the FR is in place and there is no need to enter the loft, would you need to do maintenance inspections? The RP just needs to make sure once FR is in place any contractor or trades person is aware not to breach any FR walls or if they do, how to make them good.
Yes, void more than 800mm.
-
Were possible I always inspect the roof voids when carrying out a risk assessment and indeed recently found a lack of compartmentalisation in one that since has been rectified.
When the roof insulation quilt is laid over the ceiling joists, is it considered a safe working procedure to walk in the loft?, view only from the top of a ladder or lay access boards?
-
Taking up all the walls / fitting barriers around the bedrooms is expensive because AFD is needed to each space formed in the roof.
The difficulty of fixing an effective barrier where trussed rafters are used means that the designer chooses the option in ADB to use a fire resistant ceiling. Then there is the problem of fitting a hatch in the fire resistant ceiling to maintain the AFD in the loft.
Why would you fit AFD as well? Are you thinking the over 800mm clause 5839?
Once the FR is in place and there is no need to enter the loft, would you need to do maintenance inspections? The RP just needs to make sure once FR is in place any contractor or trades person is aware not to breach any FR walls or if they do, how to make them good.
Yes, void more than 800mm.
That would only be if you are applying Cat L1 or L2 coverage? Not sure that would provide any benefit for the property types we are discussing?
-
From BS 5839:
"An L1 system might be appropriate in buildings in which there is a significant number of
occupants at special risk in the event of fire"
"We had a number of people that were unable to get themselves out, you know, physically would not have been able to move even under normal circumstances," he said.
-
From BS 5839:
"An L1 system might be appropriate in buildings in which there is a significant number of
occupants at special risk in the event of fire"
"We had a number of people that were unable to get themselves out, you know, physically would not have been able to move even under normal circumstances," he said.
If we are talking care homes, then fine. This debates extends to sheltered schemes and general needs though as well. :)
-
Taking up all the walls / fitting barriers around the bedrooms is expensive because AFD is needed to each space formed in the roof.
The difficulty of fixing an effective barrier where trussed rafters are used means that the designer chooses the option in ADB to use a fire resistant ceiling. Then there is the problem of fitting a hatch in the fire resistant ceiling to maintain the AFD in the loft.
Why would you fit AFD as well? Are you thinking the over 800mm clause 5839?
Once the FR is in place and there is no need to enter the loft, would you need to do maintenance inspections? The RP just needs to make sure once FR is in place any contractor or trades person is aware not to breach any FR walls or if they do, how to make them good.
Yes, void more than 800mm.
That would only be if you are applying Cat L1 or L2 coverage? Not sure that would provide any benefit for the property types we are discussing?
Not quite true .... it would apply to any Category ....
22.2 d)
If the system Category is such that automatic fire detection should be provided in any area that contains a horizontal void of 800 mm or more in height, automatic fire detection should also be provided in the void. Voids less than 800 mm in height need not be protected, unless either:
1)
the void is such that extensive spread of fire or smoke, particularly between rooms and compartments, can take place before detection; or
2)
on the basis of a fire risk assessment, the fire risk in the void is such as to warrant protection of the void.
and Note 4 goes on .....
If the fire risk within a void of 800 mm or more is considered to be low, consideration might be given to omission of fire detection from the void, subject to the agreement of the interested parties (see Clause 6), but this ought to be recorded as a variation on the relevant system certificate. This might arise, for example, if the probability of ignition and development of fire in the void were very low, or if the void were limited in extent so that spread of fire beyond the room of origin, via the void, were unlikely.
-
Lofts have Solar Panel electrics in them these days - so plenty of opportunity for ignition
-
Try not to confuse care homes with sheltered housing or general needs flats. Care homes do not have stay put, they have PHE, and need afd in roof voids. If flats are compartmented as per ADB (and by the way it does not offer a FR ceiling as an alternative), the roof void above each flat is like a loft space in a hosue, where you would not put AFd, unless as the wee tyrant says there is PV equipment up there, in which case you would do as per a house- put an interlinked smoke alarm up there.
-
I can understand why assessors and inspectors don't access the roof space, many drive cars with no room for any kind of step ladders and like to go to work dressed as if they were off to the opera. In any event there may well be justified and invented health and safety reasons. So they are unlikely to access voids above suspended ceilings where compartmentation issues often abound.
When carrying out inspections on the electrical engineering services in a building I go to the job in a van, have appropriate industrial-grade access equipment, lighting and method statements prepared. I look in roof spaces and in voids, I have overalls on and I am prepared to get dirty.
Perhaps time that the FRA guys and gals had a look in their wardrobes for some different attire?
Not many fire risk assessors carry a torch and step ladder in the car Lyle. Might I suggest if they don't they are not carrying out a fire risk assessment?
I don't think a comment in the assessment saying they didnt or won't look above head height is adequate. Is that not what they are being paid to do?
-
The day before this happened I spoke to a Care home provider and told him that a fire involving a Care home with a loss of life was just around the corner. And it was. When will the government bite the bullet and commit to legislation that all Care homes in UK must have a sprinkler system installed. Expensive yes but a compliance time of even 10 or 20 years would at least mean that by then our Care homes are a much safer places.
-
When will the government bite the bullet and commit to legislation that all Care homes in UK must have a sprinkler system installed.
Should the sprinkler system cover the ceiling voids?
But I agree with you, there are serious problems with speed of spread of fire vs speed of evacuation in many sorts of premises with vulnerable people.
-
Yes, if the sprinkler code says it should i.e. over 800mm.
-
Almost, when you say THE Government, clearly you are not talking about THE Government (namely that in Scotland), but that in the remainder (and less important) parts of the UK, nor are you talking about Wales (wherever that is).
All new care homes in Scotland have had sprinklers since 2004, which is a very long time ago-you were probably double declutching all the way to Derry in those days. Admittedly only new build, but one must start somewhere. Of course, this will not save those directly involved in a fire (e.g. on their bed). So, if you persuade the nice chaps at Stormont ( is it working currently, I never know whether it is still doing anything or not, cos it keeps changing), then the English will be isolated (not for the first time).
In England, wee B thinks you can cast all other measures to the wind if you sprinkler a care home and have a million people in a sub-compartment with 2 staff on duty and all million doors standing open all day and all night.
-
Almost, when you say THE Government, clearly you are not talking about THE Government (namely that in Scotland), but that in the remainder (and less important) parts of the UK, nor are you talking about Wales (wherever that is).
All new care homes in Scotland have had sprinklers since 2004, which is a very long time ago-you were probably double declutching all the way to Derry in those days. Admittedly only new build, but one must start somewhere. Of course, this will not save those directly involved in a fire (e.g. on their bed). So, if you persuade the nice chaps at Stormont ( is it working currently, I never know whether it is still doing anything or not, cos it keeps changing), then the English will be isolated (not for the first time).
In England, wee B thinks you can cast all other measures to the wind if you sprinkler a care home and have a million people in a sub-compartment with 2 staff on duty and all million doors standing open all day and all night.
That double clutching nearly broke my wee arm. Yes new homes have Dot but it imight be a bit too long to wait until existing buildings need to be replaced.
No we don't have an assembly as of this evening but who cares. We seem to be getting along quite nicely without it.
-
Double declutching may have broken your arm, but parting with the 4 pennies you needed to put in the phone box to send back the stop message broke your heart. Were you not of the seniority to get a Range Rover to drive?
Anyhow, I better say something relevant in reply or wee B, in continuation of the best traditions of Kurnal (God rest his soul) will chide me. Rome wasn't built in a day. Indeed, if the project manager for the building of the city had come from Norn Iron, they would have spent the first day making sure that there were as many construction workers kicking with the left foot as kick with the right. Starting off 13 years ago with new build care homes has made an impact. All care homes in Scotland get an augmented first attendance to a call (as opposed to no attendance in some areas of Englandshire until they promise on their mother's life that there is really a fire). All new build are also required to have an ARC connection.
Until the circumstances of the fire to which this thread relates are known, the possible impact of sprinklers cannot be determined, though I agree you would expect sprinklers to at least have saved everyone beyond the room of origin from injury.
-
Double declutching may have broken your arm, but parting with the 4 pennies you needed to put in the phone box to send back the stop message broke your heart. Were you not of the seniority to get a Range Rover to drive?
Anyhow, I better say something relevant in reply or wee B, in continuation of the best traditions of Kurnal (God rest his soul) will chide me. Rome wasn't built in a day. Indeed, if the project manager for the building of the city had come from Norn Iron, they would have spent the first day making sure that there were as many construction workers kicking with the left foot as kick with the right. Starting off 13 years ago with new build care homes has made an impact. All care homes in Scotland get an augmented first attendance to a call (as opposed to no attendance in some areas of Englandshire until they promise on their mother's life that there is really a fire). All new build are also required to have an ARC connection.
Until the circumstances of the fire to which this thread relates are known, the possible impact of sprinklers cannot be determined, though I agree you would expect sprinklers to at least have saved everyone beyond the room of origin from injury.
Next time you get caught in a hail storm Dot be sure it's Kurnal just reminding you he hasn't gone away you know.
-
I would love to think that Big Al is looking down at us all and shaking his head disapprovingly in his schoolmaster mode. And who knows? Maybe he is.
-
How many assessors would have inspected the roof void ? I always made a point of checking them after the fire I atteded.
How many assessors!
How many inspecting officers go in the roof? Haven't seen one yet
very judgmental
well I have been in roof voids and cellars!!, and always inspect theses hidden areas where I can, every time I inspect but I am not provided with any ladders by the authority to gain access. I have always asked for this equipment, but to no avail!!, as the response coming back is that we are only sample auditing a premises, and findings should be recorded in the fire risk assessment.
100% agreed, more inspection has to be taken of void areas loft spaces etc., and having fire authority inspectors fit and able and willing enough to get up there and inspect!(not frightened of spiders, bad knees,blah blah blah hence why they were retied early from the fire service, >:( because what you see written in a fire risk assessment is not always what you see in the void areas, that's where the problems area!!
(ps and I am civilian inspector)
-
How many assessors would have inspected the roof void ? I always made a point of checking them after the fire I atteded.
How many assessors!
How many inspecting officers go in the roof? Haven't seen one yet
very judgmental
well I have been in roof voids and cellars!!, and always inspect theses hidden areas where I can, every time I inspect but I am not provided with any ladders by the authority to gain access. I have always asked for this equipment, but to no avail!!, as the response coming back is that we are only sample auditing a premises, and findings should be recorded in the fire risk assessment.
100% agreed, more inspection has to be taken of void areas loft spaces etc., and having fire authority inspectors fit and able and willing enough to get up there and inspect!(not frightened of spiders, bad knees,blah blah blah hence why they were retied early from the fire service, >:( because what you see written in a fire risk assessment is not always what you see in the void areas, that's where the problems area!!
(ps and I am civilian inspector)
Me. How many Assessors carry a set of steps? Me anyway. How many Assessors carry a torch? Again me.
I don?t do this general ?out of reach? carry on. If you can?t reach it when up a set of 6ft steps it?s then out of reach.
It?s usually a different building when you poke your head above the suspended ceiling.
-
I think a lot of assessors don't have much more than a tablet or checklist, the amount of kit I carry all the time plus have in the van in case a specific job needs it is quite extensive, built up over 20 years bit by bit as the need for it to do a thorough job came to light via gaining experience.
-
It?s usually a different building when you poke your head above the suspended ceiling.
And if you don't want or can't poke your head up there, cameras on poles, USB borescopes etc are quite cheap now. (And if you need long poles in a hurry, try borrowing a window-cleaner's water-fed telescoping pole).