Experts urge building construction officials to ‘remove hidden risks’
September 9th, 2007 - Posted in General NewsBad materials used in building construction are the primary reason for loss of property and human lives during an emergency, fire experts reiterated at the Civil Defence Exhibition and Conference organised by Dar Al Sharq at the Diplomatic Club yesterday.
Speaking on the topic ‘The Hidden Risk’ Philip Field, Technical Director of Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB), UK, said “Bad building materials are the prime cause for loss of lives and property.” In his presentation Field, who has been Chairman and Director of the Fire Test Study Group, UK, reminded the assembly of fire experts to “remove the hidden risks” that could endanger infrastructure and lives in an emergency.
One particular material used in building constructions, the sandwich panel, came under sharp focus for its high risk highly inflammable properties. This kind of sandwich panel has aluminium sheets on the outside and the inside layers comprise polymers or polyurathene foam. This panel is an excellent insulation material, but highly inflammable which emits poisonous gas fumes while burning. This puts the occupants of any premises under high risk in case of an emergency. Since the 1990s premises that were fitted with such sandwich panels have faced major losses in an emergency, it has been noted.
These types of panels are mainly used by large warehouses, many industrial premises, airports and food processing units. These are hidden risks which should be removed because such materials would fail safety code standards applicable in some countries. Worse, inspectors from insurance companies will certainly make a note of the materials used in a building whose owners make a claim following an accident.
“No insurance company exists to pay out more money than what they take in,” said Field. “We are not anti polymer. It is not the polymer that is causing the problem but it is the design.” A viable solution would be using non-inflammable materials. “Mineral wool is a much safer option,” said R K Dhawan, Section Head, Fire and Safety, Qatar Electricity and Water Company.
“It is imperative that professionals engaged in building construction activity choose appropriate materials that minimise or substantial reduce the risk of loss of property and people,” said Colonel Abdullah Jassim Fakhroo of Civil Defence Qatar. “We have seen in the recent past here in Doha that some apartments that suffered major fire could have reduced the risk had appropriate materials been used,” he added.
In his presentation, Field showed on the overhead projector a sequential annihilation of a factory in Leicester. Photographs of the factory showed small clouds of smoke that progressively become dark and expand into a huge mushroom cloud over the locality. The entire factory was reduced to ashes in just eight minutes. Nobody died, but the business never re-established itself and 200 employees were rendered jobless. “One in three big industrial businesses affected by a major fire never opens again,” said Field. “The insurer sued the architect for deliberately not choosing a LPCB approved sandwich panel system. The architect lost £16m.”
Such cases only reaffirm the need to follow use safe materials while constructing residential or commercial buildings and reduce the risk of loss.