Author Topic: New Building Trends - use of combustible materials  (Read 15891 times)

Offline Brian Catton

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 150
New Building Trends - use of combustible materials
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2005, 07:08:30 PM »
Yes OK chaps I do know that the subject is about materials burning in air. That was just an extreme example. After all air is 1/5th O2. On a serious note I have not seen a fire barrier in a roof that does not have gaps or holes, some you can shake hands through and some that you could even climb through. I do not think that the contractors that run cables or pipes through them understand the significance of repairing them afterwards.

ian gough

  • Guest
New Building Trends - use of combustible materials
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2005, 09:43:54 AM »
Brian,
You are so right re fire barriers! A subject that deserves far more attention than it gets by either building control officers or fire officers - or others. I'm suggesting to the ABE that we run a course on this topic so any suggestions/encouragement would be valued.
Regards
Ian

Offline jayjay

  • New Member
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 278
New Building Trends - use of combustible materials
« Reply #17 on: July 26, 2005, 12:24:02 PM »
I have been informed that Insurance companies are now asking for higher premiums for building that are using combustible insulation material such as polystyrene in walls. These cases were for new buildings and althought I have not been able to determine what exactly the characteristics of the polystyrene was I would be interested to know if this is a regular occurance?.

The fire risk assessments I suspect will not have considerd the risk of fire spread within cavity walls, as with new build they would presumibly complied with Part B.

Any observations would be welcome.

Offline Mark Newton

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 16
New Building Trends - use of combustible materials
« Reply #18 on: July 26, 2005, 12:45:51 PM »
Polystyrene is a thermoplastic, so when heated melts and runs (and to some extent degrades back to its building blocks of styrene monomer, an HFL).
End result is that a small contents fire can get very rapidly out of control, as demonstrated by the near-endless list of food factories that have burnt uncontrollably.
Other factors involved are that the panels are mainly used internally, with simple butt joints, which have no mechanical integrity. Compare these with the complex joints used for external cladding panels.
Insurers are generally quite happy with polyisocyanurate panels approved under LPS1181. Much better performance! For convenience, we tend to regard these panels as being non-combustible (OK, not technically true, but this is only one of many issues our underwriters have to consider, and simplification is necessary).
But given large enough volume/fire load, the choice of panel becomes less significant, and sprinklers will be necessary.

Fire Risk assessments? Yet to see one which takes polystyrene into account, but I live in hope......... Some dreadful reports from various other countries of deaths related to the stuff.

And in relation to Ian Gough's comments above, I can but agree! The standard of so-called fire-stopping insurers see is generally dreadful: so we ask for 3PC to LPS 1132 whenever we get the chance.

Plenty of perfectly good uses for polystyrene, but composite panels are not on that list!

Chris Houston

  • Guest
New Building Trends - use of combustible materials
« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2005, 02:53:48 PM »
Some insurers will charge more, some will simply refuse to insure buildings using expanded polystyrene as insulation either in a panel or as part of a built up system.

LPS 1181 has two grades A and B, only a Grade A panel has a determined amount of fire resistance.  

Going back to my original post, what do fire fighters think of these systems, I didn't want a sandwich panel debate, that's been done enough, it's the other odd things that I am interested in views on.

Offline Apollo_SG

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 26
New Building Trends - use of combustible materials
« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2005, 01:36:37 PM »
Quote from: Chris Houston
Modern buildings are increasing incorporating combustible materials.  Timber cladding, composite panels, use of expanded polystyrene external insulation, plastic flexible roofs and other plastic are being used more and more frequently.

I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of fire fighters about this, especially external insulation finish systems, where it can be difficult to differentiate between combustible and non combustible inuslation by a visual inspection alone.

I'd also be interested to see what other trends are being observed.

I'm no fire-fighter but bearing in mind that the setback distance from the boundary is usually based on the sizes of unprotected openings. if combustible material are used, the amount of "unprotected openings" is increased and will pose a thread to adjacent properties.

Doug Drysale has a section on alternate means of calculating "unprotected openings" using configuration factor. Some of the international codes like NFPA, International Fire Engineering Guidelines, etc specify the amount of heat generated from such opening based on occupancies/ etc. An industrial building will have 168kW/m2 as compared to office occupancies of 84 kW/m2.

Margaret law has conducted research on cellulosic material (timber) and suggested that the heat intensity of < 12.5kW/m2 at the boundary.

hth