Analysis of the Human Factors in Fire Catastrophes - Case Study Example

Case study - Report part A Introduction Fire catastrophes are common around the world having destroyed many famous buildings in the near past. This paper has two case studies of two different fire accidents that took place in Madrid on the Windsor building and on Shanghai high rise building in China respectively. The paper presents a discussion about the two incidents as well as the analysis of the human factors leading to the accidents. In conclusion it is recommended that fire catastrophes as the ones described in this paper should serve as lessons to be learnt so that similar accidents are avoided in future. Shanghai high-rise fire in china 2010 The Shanghai high-rise fire is a fire that destroyed a 28 high rise building in Shanghai China on 15th November 2010. The fire started at 2:15 pm Chinese time on the tenth floor and was contained at 6: pm local time as reported on Xinhua News Agency. The building was under renovation when the fire started. According to witnesses the fire began on construction materials before spreading to the other parts of the building. More than 80 fire engines were involved in fighting the fire in an exercise that took several hours. The smoke from the fire could be seen by residents many kilometers away (Agence France Presse 2011). Because of the tall height of the building fire fighters had difficulty hosing water from the ground to the top of the 85m tall building (BBC 2010). It was revealed later on that the true cause of the fire was the activities of unlicensed welders operating their equipment improperly prompting the arrest of several welders. However the fire could have resulted from the ignition of polyurethane foam insulation on the outer walls of the building. Fire fighters saved 100 people from the burning building. Three helicopters came to help in rescue operations but were hindered by the thick smoke from the building. Fire fighters succeeded in containing the fire when they started working from the top of an adjacent building. People were shown on television holding on to the scaffolding on the building with some managing to climb down safely (Aljazeera 2010). Losses incurred 440 people most of them retired teachers were being housed in the building. Out of these, the fire claimed the lives of 58 people among them children and most of them adults of over 50 years. More than 71 others were injured and 36 were missing by 28th December 2010. More than 20 people among the injured were suffering from asphyxia which resulted from inhalation of smoke. Besides the deaths and injuries the 28 storey apartment building was destroyed by the fire completely leaving behind a charred frame since it had been burning for a long time. The buildings close to it were inspected and renovation recommended to help them become more fire resistant (Wikipedia 2010). Consequences of the catastrophe The accident resulted in heavy losses of property and life and casualties as well. Many of those who had their relatives involved in the accident had to undergo emotional suffering because of the deaths and injuries sustained. They also had to spend money of the treatment of their relatives who survived the catastrophe. Compensation for the victims cost a lot of money since all the affected had to receive something. Following the accident a number of people were arrested and forced to spend time behind bars for various mistakes. Three government employees were arrested for allowing illegal construction practices. Certain people among them 8 welders were also put behind bars. The inhabitants of the building may have undergone trauma and stress from the accident and the relocation to other places such as schools, stadium and hotels before getting a solution to their housing problem (Agence France Presse 2011). It was decided that adjacent buildings must be renovated with fire proofing on the walls. This resulted in unplanned for costs. Generally the entire city and the society in Shanghai suffered in one way or another. There is a possibility that the huge smoke that was produced affected the people around because of the heavy air pollution caused. Many people would have to battle with and spend money on both high scale and small scale infection of their respiratory systems caused by obnoxious gases from the fire. The accident put the image of the construction industry and the reputation of the contractor and the company that worked on the building at stake and this could possibly mean a bad reputation and spoiled business (Wikipedia 2010). Windsor tower Madrid fire 2005 The Windsor tower in Madrid caught fire on the Saturday of February 12, 2005 at midnight. The fire started on floor 21 and burned at 800 degrees for a long time. The fire then spread very quickly to other floors of the building. This caused the outermost steel structures on the upper floors to collapse (NAMC worldwide newsroom 2005). Fire fighters required about 24 hours in order to put out the fire. The spread of the fire upwards happened through some internal openings created during refurbishment of the building. The whole building was badly affected but the frame structure did not fall. This was attributed to the strong core of the tower. The structure was tall and the fire was massive. This forced fire fighters to focus on containing the fire so that the buildings nearby could not be affected. The fire was put off after 26 hours. The building was still under refurbishment for fire proofing when the accident occurred. The cause of the fire was believed to be an electric fault (BBC 2005). Losses incurred The Windsor tower underwent total destruction from the fire and had to be demolished totally afterwards. A big part of the slabs of the floors above floor 17 collapsed in the course of the fire when the upper level steel columns collapsed. The structure that remained standing was damaged beyond repair. The loss of property for the fire was estimated at €72m without renovation costs. There were no fatalities reported although seven fire fighters sustained injuries in this fire that was rated as the worst in the history of Madrid. Money was therefore spend on the treatment of the injured fire fighters. The fire totally destroyed the steel glass façade. Insurance value for the damage was estimated at €122 million (NAMC worldwide newsroom 2005) Consequences of the catastrophe Seven fire fighters had their relatives in agony because of the injuries sustained by the fire fighters. The fire fighters and their family members and even friends suffered physical and emotional trauma resulting from the scaring incident that left them injured. Losses were incurred because of the destruction of the building as a lot of money was used in demolishing the remaining structure and bringing up a new building. The local government was reported to have spend over USD $1.2million to demolish the remaining structure. To add to this the construction industry, fire fighters, the government and the authorities concerned may have had to suffer a bad image because of failing to prevent the occurrence of this accident or even preventing damage by successfully putting out the fire (Bailey 2005). Investigation into the incidents On November 16 one day after the incident, an investigation was announced to take place under the PRC State Council to probe into what caused the fire. The investigation was led by the State Administration of Work Safety. Investigators found that sparks produced by welding works going on in the building and carried by unlicensed workers set scaffolding on the building on fire. This resulted in the destruction of the apartment. The municipal government blamed illegal multi-layered sub-contracting for the accident. In the Windsor fire accident investigations by fire experts revealed a possible fault in the installation of electric systems (Bailey 2005). Similarities and differences of the two catastrophes Similarities: Comparisons can be drawn between the two incidents based on a number of factors. Both the buildings were under renovation when the accidents took place. The two were high-rise structures in major cities. Both of them involved massive losses of property. Differences: The fire in the Windsor case was believed to have been caused by an electric fault while the one in Shanghai resulted from welding sparks that made he scaffolding on the building to start burning. In the Shanghai case there were many deaths and causalities as opposed to the Windsor case. The former had over 58 fatalities and more than 71 injuries while the latter had no fatalities and only 7 injuries reported. The fire at Windsor took longer (26 hours) while the one in Shanghai took a shorter time of only 4 hours (BBC 2005). Case Study - Report Part B Human factors that contributed to loss of life, similarities and differences Windsor fire accident: In the case of the accident at Windsor in Madrid there was a long delay from the time the fire was detected to the time the fire brigade intervened. Nevertheless no life was lost. This delay made it possible for the fire to increase substantially. The renovators of the building did not observe compartmentation measures between the floor and façade detail. This would have prevented fire from spreading vertically. Sprinklers had not been installed in the building. These would have been used by the inhabitants to control the fire. There was no protection on the original steel work. There was also no fire stopping of the gap between the floor slabs and the original cladding (Bailey 2005). Shanghai high-rise fire: In the case of the Shanghai fire accident there was negligence on the side of the welders doing renovations on the building. Since it was clear the building lacked fire proofing they could have exercised care in their operations. Incompetence on the side of the building contractors, Shanghai city authorities and fire fighters contributed to the losses that occurred. The first two groups failed to ensure proper standards of construction since the welders who caused the accident were described as inexperienced and incompetent. The fire fighters were lax in their work and delayed to arrive on the scene giving the fire time to grow big (Wikipedia 2010). In both the cases the fire fighters were a bit relaxed hence the delays in tackling the fire. Since both buildings were under renovation blame can be placed on the workers for having failed to consider the factor of fire in their renovations. They did not observe fire safety regulations on the two buildings. Lessons learned and not learned In the Windsor building the fire was massive but the building did not collapse. It was constructed with a strong core. This is a lesson that has been mastered since any building should have strong points to help it maintain its stability in the event of fire. Nevertheless building regulations should be adhered to so that buildings are constructed by competent and experienced people who can foresee problems such as electric faults happening in the future (Bailey 2005). The fire on Shanghai high-rise apartment in China had fatalities as opposed to the one in Madrid that had no fatality. It can be concluded that in the Shanghai case more lessons need to be learned than the in the Windsor case. In the two cases the observation of fire safety regulations and requirements needs to be stepped up. Everyone working or staying in such a building should be aware of these rules. Workers should also learn to obey the law because since the welders responsible for the fire were found to be unlicensed meaning they were operating illegally. Contractors and construction engineers must also learn to value the lives of people and take safety seriously. As a result they should learn to assign work to builders that are experienced and competent. Fire fighters should also learn to respond quickly to fire alarms without delay. This can help to control fires in their early stages (Dave 2005 pp. 45) The high-rise building lacked sprinklers for fire fighting. This should be taken into consideration by the contractors during the early stages of designing the building. People panic during fire incidents and such facilities can assure them of safety whenever there is fire Recurrence of fire incidences Definitely the latter incident could have been avoided if the lessons from the first incident were acted upon. This is because the causes of these two fires may have been different but both of them took place in similar circumstances. Both of them affected high-rise buildings that were under renovation. If the workers on the second building took into consideration the fire safety regulations during renovation then the second building would not have been affected. The fire in the first building can be attributed to the recklessness of the contractor same to the second fire incident which happened because of an electric fault. This could be avoided if the engineers responsible for electric installations were competent and keen enough to do their work in the best way possible (Dave 2005, pp. 24). There is a likelihood that this disaster can happen again in the countries affected or anywhere else in the world. This is possible especially if people do not learn their lessons. If no lesson is learned from these two incidents then more fires are on their way. If players in the construction industries of various countries will become strict with their work then this possibility is greatly diminished. Fire will then occur only in cases of natural disasters (Xinhua 2010). Conclusion In conclusion, fire accidents are very dangerous happenings that lead to heavy losses of property, deaths and permanent injuries. It is important that building regulations be adhered to at all times to avoid such occurrences. Any fire catastrophe that has occurred should serve as an example whereby lessons are drawn from it to avoid future accidents. Bibliography Bailey Colin (2005) The one stop shop in structural engineering, Mnchester University, (online) available at: (http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/CaseStudy/HistoricFires/BuildingFires/default.htm ) viewed on 16-03-2012 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Shanghai_fire ) Agence France-Presse (12 January 2011)."China tightens building rules after deadly fire". Yahoo! Finance (Yahoo! Inc.). Retrieved 2012-03-16. Xinhua (16 November 2010). "Death toll of Shanghai fire climbs to 53". Sina (SINA Corporation). Retrieved 2012-03-16. Al Jazeera. (16 November 2010) Scores killed in China blaze". Al Jazeera . Retrieved 2012-03-15. NAMC Worldwide Newsroom, Horrific Fire at the Windsor Tower in Madrid Spain Shakes the Capital. BBC News Online / World / Europe - UK Edition (13 Feb 2005) retrieved on 2012-03-16 Dave, P. (2005). “Madrid tower designer blames missing fire protection for collapse”. New Civil Engineer, 2 June 2005. Read More