On New Year’s Eve, amidst the fireworks, millions of people were drawn to the fire that spread at cinematic speed from a room in the Address hotel in Dubai to at least 20 floors of the 300-meter-high building. The spectacular scenes of the devastating blaze reminded us once again of the crucial role that facades play in the spread of fire, which, if made of combustible materials, pose a danger and serve as a fantastic medium for the fire to spread from one part of the building to another.
As reported by numerous foreign media, the facade of that 63-story building was constructed from aluminum composite panels consisting of combustible foam sandwiched between aluminum sheets. This type of cladding is used in many buildings in the city of the future, as many call Dubai. Following numerous fires, local regulations changed in 2012 and became stricter, particularly regarding facade cladding. However, unfortunately, many buildings constructed before that already have panels made of combustible materials. And not just in Dubai.
What does this have to do with us This fire shows us how legal regulations not only do not keep pace but also do not follow the rapid development of new construction materials and technologies in construction. Unfortunately, we have often seen how laws and regulations change only after tragedies occur. Even governments have fallen due to catastrophic fires; let us recall the major fire in a nightclub in Bucharest that resulted in 53 fatalities at the end of last year.
Therefore, it is surprising to see discussions at the European Union level, where fire safety laws in buildings are completely uncoordinated. Namely, last year discussions began in Brussels, and thus in Croatia, about testing methods for facade systems in fire. We are witnessing certain efforts also in Croatia to ease the legal regulations or testing methods for fire testing, all to allow for a greater presence of combustible materials on building facades. Should we allow market interests to be more important than the safety of building users?
Harmonizing methods It should be noted that having multiple testing methods for one area poses an obstacle to free trade and business in the EU. Namely, this means that a manufacturer, if they want to market their product (system) in one of the EU markets, will have to test their product according to multiple testing methods. Therefore, this is one of the reasons why the European Commission needs to harmonize the testing method as soon as possible, which will correspond to both the type of facade system and the possible fire load during testing. We hope that our representatives in the Commission will significantly contribute to this work.
As part of the harmonization process, the European Commission proposed that member states can choose between the small German test and the large British test. The latter has numerous tests. In short, the two tests differ in size, geometry, and, most importantly, according to the so-called fire load or the intensity of the fire to which facade systems are exposed during testing. The large test provides a realistic picture of a fire, while the other does not because the fire strength in the German test is approximately 10 times lower. Tests conducted by EURIMA (the European Association of Mineral Wool Producers) have shown that these two tests yield significantly different results for the same facade system. Precisely because of the large, fast, and deadly fires that have spread over facades, several EU members have opted for the so-called large scale test.
The old German testing method for facades never became established as a DIN standard, and it has been shown that it does not provide adequate fire protection even in Germany. If this method were to be declared a European standard, it would fulfill the wishes of those advocating for the use of combustible materials in facades across Europe.
