Table 2

A categorization of the defects in the Grenfell Tower facade project

Product information
  • ACP manufacturer provided outdated classification reports for its cladding panels (Lane, 2018c, 11.6.25)

  • PIR insulation manufacturer provided test results irrelevant to the Grenfell Tower facade system (Lane, 2018c, Table 11.11)

  • Phenolic insulation manufacturer provided the test results of an old product to market the new product with different thermal properties (Opus 2 International - Official Court Reporters, 2020a)

  • Test documents, including installation methods provided for cavity barriers, were irrelevant to the application at the Grenfell Tower (Lane, 2018c, 11.23.11)

Design and procurement processes, designers' expertise and digital interfaces
  • Designers failed to apply the required level of responsibility and skill (Hyett, 2020a, 2.3.60)

  • Design work contained design and specification errors, false information in drawings, and failure in documentation control (Hyett, 2020b, 6.1.9)

  • Selected materials were not compliant with the fire safety requirements of Approved Document B (ADB) as follows

    • 1.Cassette panels (Lane, 2018c, 11.6.31–11.6.34)

    • 2.PIR insulation installed on the spandrels and columns (Lane, 2018c, Table 11.8)

    • 3.Phenolic insulation installed on the spandrels (Lane, 2018c, 11.14.12)

  • PIR insulation fixed behind window reveals (Lane, 2018c, Table 11.10)

  • Cavity barriers at the bottom and top of the windows (Opus 2 International - Official Court Reporters, 2020b, column 29) and in the facade columns (Opus 2 International - Official Court Reporters, 2020b, column 31) were not installed

  • The constructability of the cavity barriers in the facade columns was neglected (Opus 2 International - Official Court Reporters, 2020b, column 34)

  • Construction drawings provided a noncompliant specification of cavity barriers (Lane, 2018c, 11.20.104)

  • Some of the cavity barriers required by ADB were not installed, specifically those required around window openings (Lane, 2018c, 11.23.9)

  • Installation of several cavity barriers was defective (Lane, 2018e, 10.3.44)

  • PIR insulations installed on the window reveals were not shown in the drawings (Lane, 2018c, 11.15.6, 11.15.7)

  • Styrofoam insulated core panels around the kitchen vents were not according to the documented specifications (Lane, 2018c, 11.16.15)

  • The design information deleted from a design manager's laptop was lost because no record was stored on the company's server (Anketell-Jones, 2019)

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal