Burning behaviour of rainscreen façades.

Four reduced-height (5 m) BS 8414-1 façade flammability tests were conducted, three having mineral-filled aluminium composite material (ACM-A2) with polyisocyanurate (PIR) and phenolic (PF) foam and stone wool (SW) insulation, the fourth having polyethylene-filled ACM (ACM-PE) with PIR insulation. Each façade was constructed from a commercial façade engineer's design, and built by practising façade installers. The ACM-PE/PIR façade burnt so ferociously it was extinguished after 13.5 min, for safety. The three ACM-A2 cladding panels lost their structural integrity, and melted away from the test wall, whereupon around 40% of both the combustible PIR and PF insulation burnt and contributed to the fire spread. This demonstrates why all façade products must be non-combustible, not just the outer panels. For the three ACM-A2 tests, while the temperature in front of the cavity was independent of the insulation, the temperatures within it varied greatly, depending on the insulation. The system using PF/A2 allowed fire to break through to the cavity first, as seen by a sharp increase in temperature after 17 min. For PIR/A2, the temperature increased sharply at 22 minutes, as the panel started to fall away from the wall. For SW/A2, no rapid temperature rise was observed.

Smoke toxicity of rainscreen façades.

The toxic smoke production of four rainscreen façade systems were compared during large-scale fire performance testing on a reduced height BS 8414 test wall. Systems comprising 'non-combustible' aluminium composite material (ACM) with polyisocyanurate (PIR), phenolic foam (PF) and stone wool (SW) insulation, and polyethylene-filled ACM with PIR insulation were tested. Smoke toxicity was measured by sampling gases at two points - the exhaust duct of the main test room and an additional 'kitchen vent', which connects the rainscreen cavity to an occupied area. Although the toxicity of the smoke was similar for the three insulation products with non-combustible ACM, the toxicity of the smoke flowing from the burning cavity through the kitchen vent was greater by factors of 40 and 17 for PIR and PF insulation respectively, when compared to SW. Occupants sheltering in a room connected to the vent are predicted to collapse, and then inhale a lethal concentration of asphyxiant gases. This is the first report quantifying fire conditions within the cavity and assessing smoke toxicity within a rainscreen façade cavity.

N-alkylated linear heptamethine polyenes as potent non-azole leads against Candida albicans fungal infections.

In this study, eighteen heptamethine dyes were synthesised and their antifungal activities were evaluated against three clinically relevant yeast species.. The eighteen dyes were placed within classes based on their core subunit i.e. 2,3,3-trimethylindolenine (5a-f), 1,1,2-trimethyl-1H-benzo[e]indole (6a-f), or 2-methylbenzothiazole (7a-f). The results presented herein imply that the three families of cyanine dyes, in particular compounds 5a-f, show high potential as selective scaffolds to treat C. albicans infections. This opens up the opportunity for further optimisation and investigation of this class compounds for potential antifungal treatment.

Fire behaviour of modern façade materials - Understanding the Grenfell Tower fire.

The 2017 Grenfell Tower fire spread rapidly around the combustible façade system on the outside of the building, killing 72 people. We used a range of micro- and bench-scale methods to understand the fire behaviour of different types of façade product, including those used on the Tower, in order to explain the speed, ferocity and lethality of the fire. Compared to the least flammable panels, polyethylene-aluminium composites showed 55x greater peak heat release rates (pHRR) and 70x greater total heat release (THR), while widely-used high-pressure laminate panels showed 25x greater pHRR and 115x greater THR. Compared to the least combustible insulation products, polyisocyanurate foam showed 16x greater pHRR and 35x greater THR, while phenolic foam showed 9x greater pHRR and 48x greater THR. A few burning drips of polyethylene from the panelling are enough to ignite the foam insulation, providing a novel explanation for rapid flame-spread within the facade. Smoke from polyisocyanurates was 15x, and phenolics 5x more toxic than from mineral wool insulation. 1 kg of burning polyisocyanurate insulation is sufficient to fill a 50m3 room with an incapacitating and ultimately lethal effluent. Simple, additive models are proposed, which provide the same rank order as BS8414 large-scale regulatory tests.

Flame retardants in UK furniture increase smoke toxicity more than they reduce fire growth rate.

This paper uses fire statistics to show the importance of fire toxicity on fire deaths and injuries, and the importance of upholstered furniture and bedding on fatalities from unwanted fires. The aim was to compare the fire hazards (fire growth and smoke toxicity) using different upholstery materials. Four compositions of sofa-bed were compared: three meeting UK Furniture Flammability Regulations (FFR), and one using materials without flame retardants intended for the mainland European market. Two of the UK sofa-beds relied on chemical flame retardants to meet the FFR, the third used natural materials and a technical weave in order to pass the test. Each composition was tested in the bench-scale cone calorimeter (ISO 5660) and burnt as a whole sofa-bed in a sofa configuration in a 3.4 × 2.25 × 2.4 m3 test room. All of the sofas were ignited with a No. 7 wood crib; the temperatures and yields of toxic products are reported. The sofa-beds containing flame retardants burnt somewhat more slowly than the non-flame retarded EU sofa-bed, but in doing so produced significantly greater quantities of the main fire toxicants, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide. Assessment of the effluents' potential to incapacitate and kill is provided showing the two UK flame retardant sofa-beds to be the most dangerous, followed by the sofa-bed made with European materials. The UK sofa-bed made only from natural materials (Cottonsafe®) burnt very slowly and produced very low concentrations of toxic gases. Including fire toxicity in the FFR would reduce the chemical flame retardants and improve fire safety.