64 Clarendon road London

[lyledunn]

It appears that this fire started in a piece of electrical equipment in an electrical riser and then followed the electrical cabling in to the roof area before eventually breaking through fire doors. Two things amaze me; one is how a fire can be propagated in a shaft  that is generally low in fire load ( although I do not know the circumstances) and 2 how there was enough intensity to breach the fire doors on the shaft. Why is there not a requirement for suppression and / or more than 30 minutes fire protection.

[kurnal]

wiring insuation? misuse of shaft for storage? "firestopping" using flammable pu foam?

[lyledunn]

Kurnal,
The question may seem naive but let me explain. Some 30 years ago a building of significant historic interest was burned down, thankfully with no loss of life or injury. The cause cited was an electrical fault. I was the young electrical contractor who had just re-wired the building. I was in the embryonic stages of trying to build my business and I was very much dependent on the firm of architects that had supervised the refurbishment. They dropped me like a lead weight with the result that my work load dried up almost completely. A difficult time when you are bringing up a wee family.
Paradoxically, that is when I became interested in fire safety. I was unhappy with the almost glib conclusion that the fire was caused by a fault in the fixed electrical installation. I set about trying to prove that a properly designed and maintained fixed electrical installation on its own could not be the cause of fire. There were always other contributory factors. In my case was it reasonable that the consultant electrical engineer on the project permitted the mounting of relatively heavy current distribution equipment on a wooden backboard? Should he have relied on the awareness of a relatively inexperienced electrical contractor? Should the builder, architect or any other party not have drawn attention to it? Was the faulty piece of switch gear acknowledged as the ignition source subject to appropriately rigorous production testing? Was it reasonable that the building caretaker stored cardboard boxes full of various cleaning products in the electrical intake cupboard? Was it reasonable that large quantities of cardboard boxes containing all kinds of stuff were stored in an area just outside the intake cupboard? Was it reasonable that the door to the intake cupboard was just some old door with supalux nailed to the back of it? Was it reasonable that the fire alarm was not connected to a monitoring station? Etc.etc.
Cause of fire reads electrical fault. Ignition source yes, but not the cause. Thus I find it incredulous that in the case of 64 Clarendon Street that an electrical fault in a protected shaft could have produced a self-sustaining fire that put the lives of over 90 firefighters at risk.
No doubt the forensic teams will be more expansive in their determinations but I bet when ordinary folk talk about it, the cause will be cited as an electrical fault. But they will be wrong!

[kurnal]

Thanks for sharing that insight with us and I am glad you were able to create a positive outcome from it.

The rate of growth of the fire, the crass summary of the cause, the finger pointing and sloping of shoulders aren't any surprise and becoming more and more common.

I am horrified by many of the buildings going up today and the lack of competent oversight of fire precautions caused by the demise of the clerk of works and the advent of the approved inspectors who are, it seems to me, more and more in the pockets of the developers. Poor standards of fire door installation, so often I see door frames set in holes 100mm too big and infilled with expanding foam, PU foam being used for fire stopping, improper finishing of protected shafts very often open to the whole roofspace at the top, cause and effects that don't stack up, incredible fire engineering claims that don't stack up but the reports never seem to be read or challenged by the fire service or the AI. Hydraulic lifts with 200l of very flammable hydraulic oil in the base of the shaft but lift doors are only tested for fire exposure from the outside.

 The whole attitude of the industry illustrated to me by one developer this week with whom I am in dispute " all parties involved have PI insurance so whats the problem?"

Clarendon road type incidents will become more common.

[BLEVE]

Combustible maybe, but very flammable hydraulic oil Prof?

[kurnal]

Yes I think so when you consider the potential for  high pressure pinhole leaks and that these are likely to create an oil mist.