A categorization of the defects in the Grenfell Tower facade project
| Product information |
|
| Design and procurement processes, designers' expertise and digital interfaces |
|
ACP manufacturer provided outdated classification reports for its cladding panels ( PIR insulation manufacturer provided test results irrelevant to the Grenfell Tower facade system ( Phenolic insulation manufacturer provided the test results of an old product to market the new product with different thermal properties ( Test documents, including installation methods provided for cavity barriers, were irrelevant to the application at the Grenfell Tower ( |
Designers failed to apply the required level of responsibility and skill ( Design work contained design and specification errors, false information in drawings, and failure in documentation control ( Selected materials were not compliant with the fire safety requirements of Approved Document B (ADB) as follows 1.Cassette panels ( 2.PIR insulation installed on the spandrels and columns ( 3.Phenolic insulation installed on the spandrels ( PIR insulation fixed behind window reveals ( Cavity barriers at the bottom and top of the windows ( The constructability of the cavity barriers in the facade columns was neglected ( Construction drawings provided a noncompliant specification of cavity barriers ( Some of the cavity barriers required by ADB were not installed, specifically those required around window openings ( Installation of several cavity barriers was defective ( PIR insulations installed on the window reveals were not shown in the drawings ( Styrofoam insulated core panels around the kitchen vents were not according to the documented specifications ( The design information deleted from a design manager's laptop was lost because no record was stored on the company's server ( |
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.