The Grenfell Tower Fire

TenEightyOne
The police have launched a criminal investigation therefore any published claims against individuals have to be removed while the incident is sub judice.

I'm pretty sure that in return for the blog coming down there'll be a fat pack of information going to the police/parliament/press.
Click to expand...

That letter's dated 2013. Did Mr O'Connor survive?
 
Last edited:
Liquid
They might not have any legal responsibility if they have followed all rules and procedures which may (or may not) have allowed such a flammable material to be used, I agree with you on that, but as with any company in any industry in a free society the tenants, and to a lesser extent the public at large, are within their rights to criticise, lambast and pillory the company for not doing as sound a job as they could have.

Want to use flammable materials? Go ahead, the law isn't stopping you.
Should you? That's your decision. But the firm shouldn't cry innocence when people pick you up on your decisions.
Click to expand...
Normally, in order to get a job, you have to be the lowest bidder. You're given a set of specs, you meet the specs, you submit the bid with the lowest possible profit margin meaning the cheapest possible materials and labour that meet the specs. The definition of "as sound a job as they could have" is meeting those specs. You can't survive as a business by cutting your profit margins on a quote, winning the bid, and then use higher cost materials in construction because it's the "right" thing to do. Everyone would go bankrupt if that was the case. The onus is 100% on the person or organization paying for the work to create the proper specs that meet the existing fire regulations and approve the materials being used. Blaming anyone else is illogical and just looking for convenient scapegoats.

mustafur
Business have a Legal responsibility and a social one, afterall they don't exist without the customer.

It might not be Illegal to treat a customer bad but don't go crying when they turn on you for doing so.
Click to expand...
If the contract was fulfilled as written, how was the customer treated bad? The customer is whomever pays the bill, not the tenants, they are customers of the landlord. And, as a business owner, I don't have a social responsibility at all, my only responsibility is to follow the law. I can exercise social responsibility because I'm socially responsible, I can use it to promote my business, but it's not a requirement.
 
Johnnypenso
The definition of "as sound a job as they could have" is meeting those specs. You can't survive as a business by cutting your profit margins on a quote, winning the bid, and then use higher cost materials in construction because it's the "right" thing to do. Everyone would go bankrupt if that was the case.
Click to expand...

There is however a "duty of care" - if it can be shown that a builder is reasonably aware that a material may be hazardous (in this case combustible) in a certain scenario then they can very likely also be shown to have been negligent in their use of such a material regardless of their interpretation of the standard or regulation around its use.. Following the rules to the letter can be an idiotic course of action at times.
 
Johnnypenso
Normally, in order to get a job, you have to be the lowest bidder. You're given a set of specs, you meet the specs, you submit the bid with the lowest possible profit margin meaning the cheapest possible materials and labour that meet the specs. The definition of "as sound a job as they could have" is meeting those specs. You can't survive as a business by cutting your profit margins on a quote, winning the bid, and then use higher cost materials in construction because it's the "right" thing to do. Everyone would go bankrupt if that was the case. The onus is 100% on the person or organization paying for the work to create the proper specs that meet the existing fire regulations and approve the materials being used. Blaming anyone else is illogical and just looking for convenient scapegoats.

If the contract was fulfilled as written, how was the customer treated bad? The customer is whomever pays the bill, not the tenants, they are customers of the landlord. And, as a business owner, I don't have a social responsibility at all, my only responsibility is to follow the law. I can exercise social responsibility because I'm socially responsible, I can use it to promote my business, but it's not a requirement.
Click to expand...
I'm not in construction so I don't know who signs off the safe design and construction of the building.

In most instances it's good practice to apply ALARP principles, and if that means only spending a few thousand more on a better material across a million pound contract then you should make that decision.

Yes that might mean going beyond your bid proposal, but that is often contradicted by other parts of a contract (i.e. stipulation to complete a safety evaluation with ALARP principles). Any good Programme Manager puts some fat (or risk) in the bid to cover these issues.

Again, I don't know how this works in construction. I assume the Architect remains the design authority throughout the build and signs off any variation to blue print? Does he have responsibility for cost too? Would the builder have responsibility for materials sourced?
 
TenEightyOne
There is however a "duty of care" - if it can be shown that a builder is reasonably aware that a material may be hazardous (in this case combustible) in a certain scenario then they can very likely also be shown to have been negligent in their use of such a material regardless of their interpretation of the standard or regulation around its use.. Following the rules to the letter can be an idiotic course of action at times.
Click to expand...
I don't see how that could possibly apply in this case, again, assuming that all the regulations were followed. Over here, few things have garnered more attention in the last half century from bureaucrats than fire regulations. All materials used in any project in Canada must pass CSA and other relevant certification before they'd ever be approved for usage or sale in Canada. It would be a requirement written right into the contract. Any bid designed and approved by any government body is going to be funneled through an army of lawyers and bureaucrats before it ever makes it's way into the hands of a contractor for the bidding process. If the materials used were approved by the appropriate regulators I don't see how the onus can fall on the contractor. Even if the material ultimately proved hazardous, as it may be in this case, the testing and approval process that allowed it to be used, falls within government perview.

Of course, there may be a lot more going on here than is known at this point. We'll have to wait and see how the inevitable inquiry pans out.
 
Johnnypenso
I don't see how that could possibly apply in this case, again, assuming that all the regulations were followed. Over here, few things have garnered more attention in the last half century from bureaucrats than fire regulations. All materials used in any project in Canada must pass CSA and other relevant certification before they'd ever be approved for usage or sale in Canada. It would be a requirement written right into the contract. Any bid designed and approved by any government body is going to be funneled through an army of lawyers and bureaucrats before it ever makes it's way into the hands of a contractor for the bidding process. If the materials used were approved by the appropriate regulators I don't see how the onus can fall on the contractor.
Click to expand...

This didn't happen in Canada, we're talking about the fire in London.
 
Call me thick, I have never bean in a tower block like this one, but surely isn't the solution when a big fire is happening that the authorities should surround the ground with massive mattress-like springs, or trampolines, and then get people to jump out of the windows. There will still be injuries if one is jumpin from a very high up window but it's gotta be worth a shot?
 
MCFerocious
Call me thick, I have never bean in a tower block like this one, but surely isn't the solution when a big fire is happening that the authorities should surround the ground with massive mattress-like springs, or trampolines, and then get people to jump out of the windows. There will still be injuries if one is jumpin from a very high up window but it's gotta be worth a shot?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind jumping into one of them huge stunt air bag things they use but I think it would be difficult to get it close enough to land on without touching the walls. Id absolutely refuse to jump onto a trampoline from 20 floors up, who knows where I'd get catapulted to :lol:
 
prisonermonkeys
Only in a relatively low-rise building. After a certain height (I'm not sure how high), any fall becomes fatal.
Click to expand...
Only due to the risk of being taken off course I believe. There are many stories of people falling from as high as 7k meters and surviving given the right circumstances on landing. I would think a large pillow for lack of better words could help them, it's knowing how to land which would be the problem.
 
HELLAFLUSH240SX
There are many stories of people falling from as high as 7k meters and surviving given the right circumstances on landing.
Click to expand...
Don't overstate the possibility of surviving that. If ten thousand people jumped from that height, one might survive.

HELLAFLUSH240SX
given the right circumstances on landing
Click to expand...
Which are too complex to safely engineer.

HELLAFLUSH240SX
I would think a large pillow for lack of better words could help them
Click to expand...
The higher the height they would have to jump from, the larger the pillow of air would need to be. Eventually, the pillow would be so big that the height a person would fall once caught in the pillow would be so great as to be fatal itself. Of course, by that point it would have passed the point where it was so big that it would take too long to extract a person and reset it to make it viable to save another person, much less hundreds.
 
HELLAFLUSH240SX
Only due to the risk of being taken off course I believe. There are many stories of people falling from as high as 7k meters and surviving given the right circumstances on landing. I would think a large pillow for lack of better words could help them, it's knowing how to land which would be the problem.
Click to expand...

The "pillow" would likely need to be the height of the entire ground floor - which in this case was Very On Fire. It would also need to avoid being filled with burning debris that's falling from the upper floors. I don't see that it might have given any benefit in this situation.
 
BobK
Not true at all. Once you've reached terminal velocity it doesn't matter how high you were when you jumped.
Click to expand...

That's about 450 metres though, iirc? Few buildings reach that height, many of those that do taper as they rise giving no clear "fall" line to the big pillows.
 
I've just done some rough calculations using these assumptions to make it simpler:
  • There's no air resistance.
  • The air bag will maintain pressure when it is compressed and won't break.
  • The person landing on it will land lying down with a rough surface area of 0.56m2 (0.33m wide and 1.7m tall) and weighs 70kg.
So based on those assumptions, to slow a person down with an acceleration of 30g, probably the maximum you could get away with, jumping from the top of Gernfell Tower (67m) would require a bag 2.33m high pressurized at 5.33psi, full calculations are below.

A giant foam block would probably be better, I'd imagine the bag would break fairly easily. Also, at terminal velocity the distance needed to slow a person down at 30g deceleration is 4.8m.

For velocity at impact;
s(distance)=67m, u(initial velocity)=0m/s, a(acceleration)=9.8m/s2, v(final velocity)=?

v2=u2+2as, v=36.2m/s

For deceleration distance;
u=36.2m/s, v=0m/s, a=30gm/s2, s=?

s=2.23m

Forced required to slow person down;
m(mass)=70kg, a=30gm/s2, F(force)=?

F=ma, F=20,580N

Pressure of bag;
A(area)=0.56m2, F=20,580N

P=F/A, P=36,750N/m2=5.33psi
 
Although this entire discussion is utterly ridiculous, the highest freefall jump from a building onto an airbag is held by the stuntman Dar Robinson at exactly the height of the top of the Grenfell Tower. He's also jumped from 95m from a helicopter onto an airbag.

Although the stuntman last year who jumped 25,000ft into a 100m x 100m net with no chute should probably get a mention.


But since the outside of the building was on fire and the people in it weren't stuntmen, it's kinda moot.
 
Famine
Although this entire discussion is utterly ridiculous, the highest freefall jump from a building onto an airbag is held by the stuntman Dar Robinson at exactly the height of the top of the Grenfell Tower. He's also jumped from 95m from a helicopter onto an airbag.

Although the stuntman last year who jumped 25,000ft into a 100m x 100m net with no chute should probably get a mention.


But since the outside of the building was on fire and the people in it weren't stuntmen, it's kinda moot.
Click to expand...

Let us not forget Nicholas Alkemade and Alan Magee, both of whom survived after falling 18,000 feet and 22,000 feet respectively without parachutes and without netting or anything of the sort.
 
Famine
Or Vesna Vulovic - though like the others, she wasn't doing it on purpose.


Imagine if Kensington's new MP, Emma Dent Coad, was on the board of the Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation, and present in meetings in 2014/15 when the tower's refurbishment was discussed, scrutinised and approved.
Click to expand...
It's not like she had experience of architecture or building design, how could you expect her to contribute to such a meeting? You'd have to have authored a book or something to be any use.
 
Spurgy 777
I've just done some rough calculations using these assumptions to make it simpler:
  • There's no air resistance.
  • The air bag will maintain pressure when it is compressed and won't break.
  • The person landing on it will land lying down with a rough surface area of 0.56m2 (0.33m wide and 1.7m tall) and weighs 70kg.
So based on those assumptions, to slow a person down with an acceleration of 30g, probably the maximum you could get away with, jumping from the top of Gernfell Tower (67m) would require a bag 2.33m high pressurized at 5.33psi, full calculations are below.

A giant foam block would probably be better, I'd imagine the bag would break fairly easily. Also, at terminal velocity the distance needed to slow a person down at 30g deceleration is 4.8m.

For velocity at impact;
s(distance)=67m, u(initial velocity)=0m/s, a(acceleration)=9.8m/s2, v(final velocity)=?

v2=u2+2as, v=36.2m/s

For deceleration distance;
u=36.2m/s, v=0m/s, a=30gm/s2, s=?

s=2.23m

Forced required to slow person down;
m(mass)=70kg, a=30gm/s2, F(force)=?

F=ma, F=20,580N

Pressure of bag;
A(area)=0.56m2, F=20,580N

P=F/A, P=36,750N/m2=5.33psi
Click to expand...
That's what I said, memory foam pillows ftw.:sly:
 
The PM has announced that the cladding of Grenfell Tower was indeed combustible. An ongoing review of cladding on 600 similar structures has found that others have the same type.

It remains to be seen if this exposes flaws in the regulations or a deliberate circumventions of them.
 

Similar threads

Dennisch
Skyscraper on fire in Dubai
2 3
Replies
81
Views
5K
TenEightyOne
TenEightyOne
F
Has there been any official word on whether or not The Crew 2 has cops yet?
Replies
5
Views
2K
MroczMR
MroczMR
wheelhp
There was a guy who got the toyota MR2 to pop wheelies... how exactly?
Replies
10
Views
3K
wheelhp
wheelhp
Danoff
Misinformation (the internet mirror)
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Scaff
Scaff
T
London Bridge/Borough Market Terror Incidents
8 9 10
Replies
282
Views
16K
UKMikey
UKMikey

Latest Posts

Back