Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 5 replies
  • Subscribers 17 subscribers
  • Views 778 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Asbestos

Legh Richardson
I have been watching the parliamentary select committee regarding the independent review of building regulations which included specifically cladding of buildings to provide suitable insulation and fire proection. It appears from the statements given by the witnesses called that all cladding known materials do not provide the necessary protection against combustion and toxic release under certain or even most circumstances.

Do you think there is a place now for the reintroduction of asbestos as a cladding on high rise buildings being non combustible as this appears to offer reasonable insulation as long as protection can be provided against damage and flaking ?


Legh
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member
    I'm surprised at that, given that steel and mineral wool cladding is pretty well totally incombustible (and provides pretty good thermal insulation)


    Regards


    OMS
  • 0
    Just do what some of the housing associations do, use MDF board to replace asbestos on fire resistant soil pipe boxing installed in the 1970's after the men in space suits removed the asbestos following all the protocols. 


    Andy B.
  • 0

    HardieBacker might be a better choice - apart from not using asbestos,  it is very similar in looks and fire performance to asbestos cement sheet.


  • 0
    I didn't see the whole affair, just the last lot of witness statements. None seemed to be too confident about any technique or material used in building cladding but none would be specific about the failure of any material. So I suppose nobody is to blame and no public horse whipping.


    "steel and mineral wool cladding is pretty well totally incombustible" --- I witnessed a building collapse while on fire due to the failure of the steel RSJs. So although steel may be fire resistant it will buckle under the heat generated from a full scale blaze.


    Concerning risk. We know that the loose fibres of asbestos are leathal when imbibed over a period of time, but when measured against the risk of immediate incineration, which one would you prefer?


    The committee meeting was on 7th July and was broadcast on the parliament channel yesterday.


    Legh
  • Former Community Member
    0 Former Community Member

    Legh Richardson:



    "steel and mineral wool cladding is pretty well totally incombustible" --- I witnessed a building collapse while on fire due to the failure of the steel RSJs. So although steel may be fire resistant it will buckle under the heat generated from a full scale blaze.


    Legh




     

    Sure - but we were discussing cladding rather than the building frame 


    Structural steel framing can be readily provided with material cover such that they don't suffer premature or disproportionate collapse in fire - ranging from over-boarding products to paint or spray on intumescent coatings (some of which can be applied at manufacture to ensure consistency and quality)


    I would be fairly happy to take a concrete structure such as Grenfell and apply steel and mineral wool cladding to improve thermal performance and aesthetics (coupled with appropriate cavity barriers) and be reasonably assured of it's ongoing safety in fire conditions.


    Regards


    OMS

Community Rules & Guidelines