sistemas de paneles aislados...portafolio de producto sistemas de paneles aislados 2 presentamos ,...

28
Sistemas de Paneles Aislados No todos los aislamientos son iguales… Sistemas de paneles aislados Presentamos la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan. Protección superior contra incendios.

Upload: others

Post on 06-Apr-2020

27 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Sistemas de Paneles Aislados

No todos los aislamientos son iguales…

Sistemas de paneles aislados

Presentamos la nueva tecnología en aislamientode Kingspan. Protección superior contra incendios.

Page 2: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

2

Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea una barrera contra el fuego. Aislamiento térmico incomparable y protección superior contra incendios, creando lugares más seguros para trabajar y vivir.

El propósito principal de una edificación es proveer las condiciones óptimas para el desarrollo de diferentes actividades, además de dar protección contra riesgos comunes como el fuego. Por esta razón la tecnología surge como la mejor alternativa en aislamiento.

La tecnología de aislamiento ya está disponible en los sistemas de paneles aislados y toda la gama de KingRoof®, KingWall® y KingFrigo®.

Con los paneles aislados de Kingspan se obtienen todas las ventajas de un sistema ideal para la ingeniería fabricado de manera industrializada:

Velocidad de construcción significativamente más rápida.

Menos tiempo de trabajo en alturas. Calidad de la construcción, más el rendimiento adicional de la tecnología .

Los sistemas de paneles aislados ofrecen un alto rendimiento con los más altos estándares de la industria:

Aislante térmicamente eficiente en paneles tipo sándwich.

Extremadamente resistente a la propagación del fuego.

Baja emisión de humo. Material del núcleo termoendurecible que protege

la edificación de futuros ataques de fuego. no es compatible con el crecimiento

de moho / bacterias. No higroscópico: no absorbe la humedad.

Protección superior contra incendios

Page 3: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Diseño de construcciones más seguras y atractivas.

Índice de conductividad térmica 0.02 W/m.K.

es 100% reciclable y libre de CFC*, HCFC*, HFC* con una eficiencia mejorada en su producción

La tecnología de es una solución de alto desempeño de protección contra el fuego, proporcionando una excelente reacción al fuego y una resistencia superior.

Protección superior contra el FUEGO

La mejor eficiencia TÉRMICA

Cuidado AMBIENTAL

Solución EFICIENTE

Propiedades

*CFC: Clorofluorocarbonos. HCFC: Hidroclorofluorocarburos. HFC: Hidrofluorocarbonos.

Page 4: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

La tecnología ofrece una gama única de mejoras en el rendimiento del fuego.

El uso de productos con un alto desempeño contra el riesgo de incendios ayuda a optimizar las pólizas de seguros para la construcción, beneficiando a propietarios y usuarios.

Alto desempeño frente a la resistencia al fuego con baja emisión de humo, probado con los más altos estándares internacionales.

Clasificaciones de resistencia al fuego mejoradas La protección de las vidas y la propiedad es una parte crucial del diseño de los paneles aislados.

Protección superior contra el fuego

Las imágenes son de una prueba comparativa EN11925-3 que utiliza como fuente de combustión un soplete. Las menores emisiones de humo de se pueden ver claramente.

Atributos clave de resistencia contra el fuego, que hacen de los sistemas de paneles aislados superiores en comparación a otros sistemas convencionales:

Menor desarrollo de humo

(ASTM E84)

Mayor temperatura de ignición (astm

d1929)

Menos calor liberado

(ASTM 1354)

1 2 3

PiR no asegurado. Tecnología con el respaldo de Kingspan.

Page 5: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Protección superior contra el fuego

La comparación de resistencia térmica supone el mismo grosor del material de aislamiento.

Eficiencia térmica

HASTA UN

RESISTENCIATÉRMICA

KingspanPIRR 7.2 por pulgada2

Punto de referencia Poliuretano PURR 5.0 = R 7.1por pulgada2

EPSR 3.8 = R 4.3por pulgada2

Lana mineral de rocaR 3.6 = R 4.3por pulgada2

Fibra de vidrioR 3.2 = R 4.3por pulgada2

MAYOR44%

HASTA UN

RESISTENCIATÉRMICA

MENOR24%

HASTA UN

RESISTENCIATÉRMICA

MENOR28%

HASTA UN

RESISTENCIATÉRMICA

MENOR36%

Page 6: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

La tecnología se está abriendo camino como el único panel aislado en Latinoamérica con un núcleo capaz de lograr una gama confiable de certificaciones de salud y bienestar.

Cuidado AMBIENTAL

Se trata del entorno humano, no solo del entorno construido.

Page 7: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

La ingeniería detrás de la tecnología y las pruebas independientes

realizadas por consultores en fuego, le han brindado a la industria un incomparable desempeño térmico.

En Kingspan, implementamos un estricto control de calidad sobre los procesos productivos y acabados, con el objetivo de aumentar la velocidad de construcción y minimizar cualquier retraso en los proyectos.

Solución EFICIENTE

El máximo rendimiento en la industria.

Page 8: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

8

La ingeniería contra incendios es una parte crucial del diseño y evaluación de edificaciones para proteger vidas y propiedades.

Pruebas de fuego

Page 9: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

9

Sistemas de paneles contra incendios

Reacción contra el fuego

Los sistemas de paneles aislados de Kingspan pueden alcanzar altos estándares de reacción al fuego en pruebas especificadas para propósitos regulatorios, pruebas a gran escala desarrolladas por la industria de seguros, y pruebas a gran escala desarrolladas por otras organizaciones (iso, Astm, ul).

Estudios de casos de incendios reales investigados, han demostrado el rendimiento de los sistemas . Kingspan ha documentado casos de incendios reales en las últimas décadas, realizados por consultoras de ingeniería y expertos en fuego alrededor del mundo incluyendo ISO, BSI y la NFPA:

Clasificación europea: EN 13501-1, particularmente B-s1,d0. El rating s1, es el mejor (baja emission de humo).

Clasificación Norteamericana: Astm E-84 Características de quemado de superficies.

Page 10: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Los casos de estudio cubren el desempeño de los Sistemas de paneles aislados en diferentes aplicaciones, incluyendo incendios premeditados externos, y ataques.

En esta publicación encontrará los casos de estudio, donde se ha comprobado un alto desempeño, sin evidencia de contribución a la propagación del fuego.

Para más información, por favor contacte al equipo técnico de Kingspan.

LANA DE ROCA

PUR

Clase 1 o A

Clase 1 o A

Clase 2 o B

0-25

0-25

26-75

450 Max

450 Max

450 Max

Tipo aislante

Norteamericana (ASTM E 84)

Clasificación Norteamericana Índice propagación de la llama Índice desarrollo humo

LANA DE ROCA

PUR

A2,S1,D0

B, S1, D0

B, S2, D0

No combustible

Dificultad para incendiarse

Dificultad para incendiarse

S1 = Ninguna o casi ninguna producción de humo

S1 = Ninguna o casi ninguna producción de humo

S2 = Producción limitada de humo

Tipo aislante

Europea (EN 13501-1, EN 13823)

Clasificación europea A/B S

D0 = No gotea

D0 = No gotea

D0 = No gotea

D

Page 11: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

11Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

Test enclosure

Steiner tunnel test apparatus

Test room

UBC 26-3. Room test.

ASTM E84. Surface burning characteristics. Class A can be achieved on panel and panel core.

ISO 13784 Part 1. Small room test for sandwich panels.

Test in progress - note burner adjacent to vertical panel joints

Panels at end of test with metal facings removed showing protective char formation on surface of insulation

Panel core showing protective char formation after test

End of test showing limited internal damage

Reacción contra el fuego – Pruebas de fuego

Test enclosure

Steiner tunnel test apparatus

Test room

UBC 26-3. Room test.

ASTM E84. Surface burning characteristics. Class A can be achieved on panel and panel core.

ISO 13784 Part 1. Small room test for sandwich panels.

Test in progress - note burner adjacent to vertical panel joints

Panels at end of test with metal facings removed showing protective char formation on surface of insulation

Panel core showing protective char formation after test

End of test showing limited internal damage

Test enclosure

Steiner tunnel test apparatus

Test room

UBC 26-3. Room test.

ASTM E84. Surface burning characteristics. Class A can be achieved on panel and panel core.

ISO 13784 Part 1. Small room test for sandwich panels.

Test in progress - note burner adjacent to vertical panel joints

Panels at end of test with metal facings removed showing protective char formation on surface of insulation

Panel core showing protective char formation after test

End of test showing limited internal damage

Preparación del test. Caja de madera en fuego.

Aparato de prueba.

Sala de pruebas.

Monitoreo del test.

Prueba en curso - quemador adyacente a juntas de paneles verticales.

Núcleo del panel que muestra carbón protector formación después de la prueba.

Fin de la prueba con muestra de daños internos limitados.

Paneles al final de la prueba con revestimientos metálicos, mostrando la formación de carbonos protectores en superficie de aislamiento.

Page 12: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

12

Resistencia - pruebas de fuego

La resistencia al fuego representa la capacidad de un elemento para mantener su estabilidad mecánica, no propagar la llama y conservar el aislamiento térmico por un cierto período de tiempo.

Los elementos más comunes a considerar en resistencia al fuego para los paneles aislados son:

Integridad es el período de tiempo que los sistemas de paneles aislados conservan su integridad contra llamas o gases calientes en un incendio estándar. Por ejemplo, si las llamas atravesaran el sistema después de 100 minutos o 90 minutos.

Aislamiento es el tiempo que se tarda en producir un aumento promedio en temperatura de 140 ° C (250 ° F en Astm E119) por encima de la temperatura inicial o un aumento de la temperatura en un punto de 180 ° C (325 ° F en Astm E119) por encima de la temperatura inicial en el lado no expuesto (frío) del sistema de panel aislado. Este aumento de temperatura se mide con múltiples termopares. Cada termopar es monitoreado cuidadosamente durante la prueba de resistencia al fuego.

Radiación de calor se refiere a la capacidad del sistema de panel aislado para reducir la transmisión de fuego como resultado del calor irradiado desde la superficie no expuesta a materiales adyacentes. La radiación de calor se limita a un máximo de 15kW / m2.

Capacidad de carga se refiere a la capacidad estructural de un piso o Sistema de cubiertas para resistir el ataque de fuego.

El grado de resistencia al fuego de un producto puede obtenerse por medio de un ensayo convencional realizado en laboratorios acreditados mediante un método normalizado. Las pruebas de resistencia al fuego se refieren a pruebas de sistemas diseñados para contener o resistir el fuego durante un período de tiempo específico. Ellos son muy diferentes a la reacción a las pruebas de fuego, pero a veces se confunden. las clasificaciones a menudo se expresan como un período de tiempo como ‘1 hora resistencia al fuego “o dos números como 30/30 o una combinación de letras y números como EI30 o FR60. Es importante entender qué significa cada clasificación.

Los sistemas de paneles Kingspan se prueban ampliamente para determinar la resistencia al fuego con una variedad de métodos de prueba que incluyen Astm E119, EN 1364 Partes 2 y 3. EN 1365 Parte 2 y EN 1366 Parte 3.

Page 13: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

13

Fire resistance tests to EN 1364 (also applicable to LPS 1208). Up to EI60 on vertical walls and ceilings / roofs panel systems.

Vertical walls (3m x 3m furnace) Ceilings / roofs (4m x 3m furnace) Horizontal wall panels (5m x 6m furnace)

Fire resistance tests to EN 1364 (also applicable to LPS 1208). Up to EI60 on vertical walls and ceilings / roofs panel systems.

Vertical walls (3m x 3m furnace) Ceilings / roofs (4m x 3m furnace) Horizontal wall panels (5m x 6m furnace)

Fire resistance tests to EN 1364 (also applicable to LPS 1208). Up to EI60 on vertical walls and ceilings / roofs panel systems.

Vertical walls (3m x 3m furnace) Ceilings / roofs (4m x 3m furnace) Horizontal wall panels (5m x 6m furnace)

Los sistemas de paneles Kingspan pueden lograr:

Hasta 60 minutos de aislamiento e integridad contra incendios (EI60) según EN 1364 Partes 2 y 3 y Astm E119.

Hasta FR60 según el estándar de la industria de seguros del Reino Unido LPS 1208.

Integridad del fuego de hasta 180 minutos y radiación de calor (E180 y EW180) según EN 1364 Parte 2.

Hasta 30 minutos de aislamiento, integridad y capacidad de carga (REI30) según EN 1365 Parte 2 en sistemas de paneles X-Dek.

Hasta 90 minutos de aislamiento, integridad y capacidad de carga.

(REI90) según EN 1365 Parte 2 en sistemas de paneles Op-Deck.

El uso de la tecnología puede ofrecer una resistencia al fuego mejorada y un gran rendimiento, generando la mayor estabilidad del aislamiento cuando se expone al fuego.

EN 1365 Part 2. Fire resistance tests for loadbearing elements. Floors and roofs.

ASTM E119 Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. Fire resistance test.

Op-Deck after 1 hour demonstrating no failure of insulation, integrity and load bearing capacity.

External face of QuadCore ™ panel assembly after completion of 60 minute exposure.

EN 1365 Part 2. Fire resistance tests for loadbearing elements. Floors and roofs.

ASTM E119 Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials. Fire resistance test.

Op-Deck after 1 hour demonstrating no failure of insulation, integrity and load bearing capacity.

External face of QuadCore ™ panel assembly after completion of 60 minute exposure.

Fachadas verticales (horno de 3m x 3m)

EN 1365 Parte 2. Pruebas de resistencia al fuego para elementos de carga. Pisos y techos.

Op-Deck después de 1 hora se demuestra que no falla el aislamiento, la integridad y la capacidad de la carga.

Cara externa del ensamblaje del panel después de completar la exposición de 60 minutos.

Métodos de prueba estándar ASTM E119 para pruebas de incendio de construcción de edificios y materiales. Prueba de resistencia al fuego.

Cielo raso / cubiertas (hornos de 4m x 3m) Paneles de fachada horizontales (hornos de 5m x 6m)

Page 14: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

14

Los siguientes casos reales de incendio, involucran sistemas de paneles aislados .

La reacción y resistencia mejorada al fuego proporcionan rendimiento equivalente o mejor en situaciones de incendio real con menos humo y disminución de daños y riesgos.

Casos reales de incendios

Page 15: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

15

Uno de los argumentos más convincentes para el uso de Kingspan en un proyecto de construcción es el de visibilizar su reacción al

fuego en situaciones de incendios reales. Hemos construido una biblioteca de estudios de casos reales que incluyen investigaciones de las principales consultoras de ingeniería contra incendios y expertos en incendios de todo el mundo:

Tienda de saldos del ejército, Holanda.

Hospital Wharfedale, Reino Unido.

Spider Transport, Irlanda.

Crude Oil Pool Fire, Reino Unido.

Clifton Comprehensive School, Reino Unido.

Instalación de preparación de alimentos, aeropuerto de Heathrow, Reino Unido.

suffolk Food Hall, Reino unido.

Conclusiones generales

Núcleos PIR carbonizados en las inmediaciones del fuego.

Los incendios no se propagaron dentro del núcleo PIR.

los paneles PiR no se carbonizaron significativamente fuera del área del fuego principal.

la influencia dominante en la gravedad del incendio fue el contenido de la edificación: la gravedad del incendio no está significativamente influenciada por el panel PiR.

No hay evidencia que indique que los paneles PIR aumentaron el riesgo de fuego extendido.

Page 16: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

16

Tienda de saldos del ejército, Holanda.

Se produjo un incendio aproximadamente a la 1 a.m., lunes 18 de abril de 2016, en una tienda de saldos militares ubicada dentro de un edificio tipo almacén en Kootwijkerbroek en Holanda.

El almacén está ocupado por tres negocios: la tienda de saldos del ejército, una tienda de máquinas metalúrgicas y un almacén de suministros de materiales de construcción. Las tres ocupaciones están separadas por paredes resistentes al fuego.

Los paneles de muro arquitectónicos que forman la parte superior de las paredes externas del edificio son Paneles de muro KS1000 AWP de 80 mm de espesor aprobados por LPCB y FM con núcleos de aislamiento PIR ECOsafe. El techo estaba construido con una cubierta de metal, con aislamiento de poliestireno y una membrana bituminosa.

El incendio en la tienda de saldos militares fue extremada-mente intenso y duró más de 4 horas. Esto fue debido, en

parte, al almacenamiento de can-tidades significativas de materia-les combustibles en el edificio y la presencia reportada de cantida-des apreciables de aceleradores como el líquido para encende-dores para cigarrillos y latas de pintura en aerosol.

Conclusiones:

La gravedad del incendio fue al menos equivalente a una prueba de resistencia al fuego estándar de dos horas, que es el rendimiento teórico de resistencia al fuego del muro de bloques de piedra caliza de 300 mm.

Los paneles de muro con la tecnología de Kingspan estaban unidos a través de los extremos de la pared del compartimiento entre los 3 almacenes: Contrario a las especificaciones del arquitecto, no se habían instalado para proporcionar resistencia al fuego en las zonas de muros cortafuegos/muros exteriores.

A pesar de esto, la carbonización exhibida por el núcleo de aislamiento PIR al panel en el punto de intersección con la pared del compartimento indicaba que una carbonización suficientemente estable dentro del panel se había formado para proporcionar una detención efectiva contra incendios y mantener así la compartimentación dentro del edificio.

La omisión de una banda de material no combustible en los puntos de intersección con el muro del compartimento no resultó en una ruptura de la compartimentación contra incendios.

Los resultados proporcionan evidencia que el núcleo del panel puede proporcionar suficiente resistencia a la propagación del fuego y la erosión de tal manera que cumplen con la intención de las regulaciones locales informadas donde los paneles KS1000 AWP cruzan el fuego del compartimento de muros.

12 13

Real Fire Case StudiesWharfedale Hospital, UK

A fire occurred at a hospital under construction during the summer of 2003. The building was steel framed with concrete floors. The first and second floors were clad with Kingspan PIR insulated panels approved by LPCB to EXT-B of LPS 1181 Part 1.

At the date of the fire, the ground floor cladding had not yet been installed and the ground level was open sided.

It was thought that the fire was started deliberately by adhesive being poured over slabs of insulating material which were stored on the ground floor. Photograph 1 shows the fire area.

The fire was discovered by on-site security staff and a call was made to the fire service who brought the fire under control within 40 minutes.

The heat generated by the fire was significant, as evidenced by cracking of the concrete floor above the fire and the distortion of steel beams that had been protected by a fire resisting intumescent coating.

The fire service found light smoke but no fire spread on the upper floors of the building. They also reported that although the joint between the floor and first floor walls had not been fire stopped there was no fire spread within the PIR core material. Photograph 2 shows where the flame damaged outer skin of the bottom panel has been lifted to inspect the slight charring of PIR core beneath.

The main image above shows where the insulated cladding panels on the external face of the building had been attacked by flames.

Conclusions

In spite of a very severe fire at ground level (sufficient to damage the concrete floors and distort fire protected steel beams) the cores of the insulated panels:

– did not ignite; and

– did not promote fire spread.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Real Fire Case StudiesArmy Surplus Store, Netherlands

A fire occurred at approximately 1am, Monday 18th April 2016, in an army surplus store located within a warehouse type building in Kootwijkerbroek in The Netherlands.

The warehouse is occupied by three businesses: the army surplus store, a metalworking / machine shop and a building materials supply warehouse. The three separate occupancies are separated by fire resistant walls.

The architectural wall panels that form the upper part of the external walls of the building are LPCB and FM Approved 80mm thick KS1000 AWP wall panels with ECOsafe PIR insulation cores. The roof was constructed of a metal deck, polystyrene insulation and a bituminous membrane.

The fire in the army surplus store was extremely intense and lasted for over 4 hours. This was due, in part, to the storage of significant amounts of combustible materials in the building and the reported presence in appreciable quantities of accelerants such as cigarette lighter fluid and aerosol paint spray cans.

Conclusions

– The severity of the fire was at least equivalent to a two-hour standard fire resistance test, which is the notional fire resistance performance of the 300mm limestone blockwork wall.

– The Kingspan ECOsafe PIR core wall panels bridged across the ends of the compartment wall between the building materials supply warehouse and the army surplus store and machine shop. Contrary to the architect’s details, they had not been installed to provide fire resisting construction at the firewall/external wall locations.

– Notwithstanding this, the charring exhibited by the PIR insulation core to the panel at the point of intersection with the compartment wall indicated that a sufficiently stable char within the panel had formed to provide an effective fire stop and maintain the compartmentation within the building.

– The omission of a band of non-combustible material at the points of intersection with the compartment wall did not result in a break-down of fire compartmentation.

– The findings provide evidence that the PIR core of Kingspan LPCB and FM approved KS1000 AWP panels can provide sufficient resistance to fire propagation and erosion such that they meet the intent of reported local regulations where KS1000 AWP panels bridge across fire compartment walls.

Panel at junction with internal compartment wall.

Panel at junction with steel stripped off demonstrating charring of PIR core but no evidence of fire spread.

Aerial view of the damage showing structural collapse of the army surplus warehouse.

12 13

Real Fire Case StudiesWharfedale Hospital, UK

A fire occurred at a hospital under construction during the summer of 2003. The building was steel framed with concrete floors. The first and second floors were clad with Kingspan PIR insulated panels approved by LPCB to EXT-B of LPS 1181 Part 1.

At the date of the fire, the ground floor cladding had not yet been installed and the ground level was open sided.

It was thought that the fire was started deliberately by adhesive being poured over slabs of insulating material which were stored on the ground floor. Photograph 1 shows the fire area.

The fire was discovered by on-site security staff and a call was made to the fire service who brought the fire under control within 40 minutes.

The heat generated by the fire was significant, as evidenced by cracking of the concrete floor above the fire and the distortion of steel beams that had been protected by a fire resisting intumescent coating.

The fire service found light smoke but no fire spread on the upper floors of the building. They also reported that although the joint between the floor and first floor walls had not been fire stopped there was no fire spread within the PIR core material. Photograph 2 shows where the flame damaged outer skin of the bottom panel has been lifted to inspect the slight charring of PIR core beneath.

The main image above shows where the insulated cladding panels on the external face of the building had been attacked by flames.

Conclusions

In spite of a very severe fire at ground level (sufficient to damage the concrete floors and distort fire protected steel beams) the cores of the insulated panels:

– did not ignite; and

– did not promote fire spread.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Real Fire Case StudiesArmy Surplus Store, Netherlands

A fire occurred at approximately 1am, Monday 18th April 2016, in an army surplus store located within a warehouse type building in Kootwijkerbroek in The Netherlands.

The warehouse is occupied by three businesses: the army surplus store, a metalworking / machine shop and a building materials supply warehouse. The three separate occupancies are separated by fire resistant walls.

The architectural wall panels that form the upper part of the external walls of the building are LPCB and FM Approved 80mm thick KS1000 AWP wall panels with ECOsafe PIR insulation cores. The roof was constructed of a metal deck, polystyrene insulation and a bituminous membrane.

The fire in the army surplus store was extremely intense and lasted for over 4 hours. This was due, in part, to the storage of significant amounts of combustible materials in the building and the reported presence in appreciable quantities of accelerants such as cigarette lighter fluid and aerosol paint spray cans.

Conclusions

– The severity of the fire was at least equivalent to a two-hour standard fire resistance test, which is the notional fire resistance performance of the 300mm limestone blockwork wall.

– The Kingspan ECOsafe PIR core wall panels bridged across the ends of the compartment wall between the building materials supply warehouse and the army surplus store and machine shop. Contrary to the architect’s details, they had not been installed to provide fire resisting construction at the firewall/external wall locations.

– Notwithstanding this, the charring exhibited by the PIR insulation core to the panel at the point of intersection with the compartment wall indicated that a sufficiently stable char within the panel had formed to provide an effective fire stop and maintain the compartmentation within the building.

– The omission of a band of non-combustible material at the points of intersection with the compartment wall did not result in a break-down of fire compartmentation.

– The findings provide evidence that the PIR core of Kingspan LPCB and FM approved KS1000 AWP panels can provide sufficient resistance to fire propagation and erosion such that they meet the intent of reported local regulations where KS1000 AWP panels bridge across fire compartment walls.

Panel at junction with internal compartment wall.

Panel at junction with steel stripped off demonstrating charring of PIR core but no evidence of fire spread.

Aerial view of the damage showing structural collapse of the army surplus warehouse.

12 13

Real Fire Case StudiesWharfedale Hospital, UK

A fire occurred at a hospital under construction during the summer of 2003. The building was steel framed with concrete floors. The first and second floors were clad with Kingspan PIR insulated panels approved by LPCB to EXT-B of LPS 1181 Part 1.

At the date of the fire, the ground floor cladding had not yet been installed and the ground level was open sided.

It was thought that the fire was started deliberately by adhesive being poured over slabs of insulating material which were stored on the ground floor. Photograph 1 shows the fire area.

The fire was discovered by on-site security staff and a call was made to the fire service who brought the fire under control within 40 minutes.

The heat generated by the fire was significant, as evidenced by cracking of the concrete floor above the fire and the distortion of steel beams that had been protected by a fire resisting intumescent coating.

The fire service found light smoke but no fire spread on the upper floors of the building. They also reported that although the joint between the floor and first floor walls had not been fire stopped there was no fire spread within the PIR core material. Photograph 2 shows where the flame damaged outer skin of the bottom panel has been lifted to inspect the slight charring of PIR core beneath.

The main image above shows where the insulated cladding panels on the external face of the building had been attacked by flames.

Conclusions

In spite of a very severe fire at ground level (sufficient to damage the concrete floors and distort fire protected steel beams) the cores of the insulated panels:

– did not ignite; and

– did not promote fire spread.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Real Fire Case StudiesArmy Surplus Store, Netherlands

A fire occurred at approximately 1am, Monday 18th April 2016, in an army surplus store located within a warehouse type building in Kootwijkerbroek in The Netherlands.

The warehouse is occupied by three businesses: the army surplus store, a metalworking / machine shop and a building materials supply warehouse. The three separate occupancies are separated by fire resistant walls.

The architectural wall panels that form the upper part of the external walls of the building are LPCB and FM Approved 80mm thick KS1000 AWP wall panels with ECOsafe PIR insulation cores. The roof was constructed of a metal deck, polystyrene insulation and a bituminous membrane.

The fire in the army surplus store was extremely intense and lasted for over 4 hours. This was due, in part, to the storage of significant amounts of combustible materials in the building and the reported presence in appreciable quantities of accelerants such as cigarette lighter fluid and aerosol paint spray cans.

Conclusions

– The severity of the fire was at least equivalent to a two-hour standard fire resistance test, which is the notional fire resistance performance of the 300mm limestone blockwork wall.

– The Kingspan ECOsafe PIR core wall panels bridged across the ends of the compartment wall between the building materials supply warehouse and the army surplus store and machine shop. Contrary to the architect’s details, they had not been installed to provide fire resisting construction at the firewall/external wall locations.

– Notwithstanding this, the charring exhibited by the PIR insulation core to the panel at the point of intersection with the compartment wall indicated that a sufficiently stable char within the panel had formed to provide an effective fire stop and maintain the compartmentation within the building.

– The omission of a band of non-combustible material at the points of intersection with the compartment wall did not result in a break-down of fire compartmentation.

– The findings provide evidence that the PIR core of Kingspan LPCB and FM approved KS1000 AWP panels can provide sufficient resistance to fire propagation and erosion such that they meet the intent of reported local regulations where KS1000 AWP panels bridge across fire compartment walls.

Panel at junction with internal compartment wall.

Panel at junction with steel stripped off demonstrating charring of PIR core but no evidence of fire spread.

Aerial view of the damage showing structural collapse of the army surplus warehouse.

Page 17: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

17

Conclusiones:

A pesar de haber sido un incendio muy severo al nivel del suelo (suficiente para dañar los pisos de concreto y distorsionar las vigas de acero con protección contra incendios) los núcleos de paneles aislados:

No se encendieron.

No se promovió la propagación del fuego.

Se produjo un incendio en un hospital en construcción durante el verano de 2003. El edificio era de acero enmarcado con pisos de concreto. El primer y segundo piso fueron revestidos con Paneles aislados Kingspan PIR aprobados por LPCB para EXT-B de LPS 1181 Parte 1.

A la fecha del incendio, el revestimiento de la planta baja aún no había sido instalado y el nivel del suelo es-taba abierto. Se supuso que el fuego se inició delibera-damente por un adhesivo vertido sobre losas de mate-rial aislante que se almacenaron en la planta baja. La fotografía 1 muestra el área del incendio. El fuego fue descubierto por el personal de seguridad en el lugar y se hizo una llamada al servicio de bomberos que controló el incendio en 40 minutos.

El calor generado por el fuego fue significativo, como lo demuestran las grietas del piso de concreto y la distorsión de las vigas de acero que había sido protegido por un revestimiento intumescente resistente al fuego.

El servicio de bomberos encontró humo ligero, pero no se propagó fuego en los pisos superiores del edificio. también se informó que aunque la articulación entre el piso y las paredes del primer nivel no habían sido detenidos, el fuego se había extendido dentro del material del núcleo PIR. La fotografía 2 muestra dónde la piel exterior dañada por las llamas del panel inferior se ha levantado para inspeccionar la ligera carbonización del núcleo PIR.

La imagen principal muestra dónde están los paneles de revestimiento aislados donde la cara externa del edificio había sido atacada por las llamas.

12 13

Real Fire Case StudiesWharfedale Hospital, UK

A fire occurred at a hospital under construction during the summer of 2003. The building was steel framed with concrete floors. The first and second floors were clad with Kingspan PIR insulated panels approved by LPCB to EXT-B of LPS 1181 Part 1.

At the date of the fire, the ground floor cladding had not yet been installed and the ground level was open sided.

It was thought that the fire was started deliberately by adhesive being poured over slabs of insulating material which were stored on the ground floor. Photograph 1 shows the fire area.

The fire was discovered by on-site security staff and a call was made to the fire service who brought the fire under control within 40 minutes.

The heat generated by the fire was significant, as evidenced by cracking of the concrete floor above the fire and the distortion of steel beams that had been protected by a fire resisting intumescent coating.

The fire service found light smoke but no fire spread on the upper floors of the building. They also reported that although the joint between the floor and first floor walls had not been fire stopped there was no fire spread within the PIR core material. Photograph 2 shows where the flame damaged outer skin of the bottom panel has been lifted to inspect the slight charring of PIR core beneath.

The main image above shows where the insulated cladding panels on the external face of the building had been attacked by flames.

Conclusions

In spite of a very severe fire at ground level (sufficient to damage the concrete floors and distort fire protected steel beams) the cores of the insulated panels:

– did not ignite; and

– did not promote fire spread.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Real Fire Case StudiesArmy Surplus Store, Netherlands

A fire occurred at approximately 1am, Monday 18th April 2016, in an army surplus store located within a warehouse type building in Kootwijkerbroek in The Netherlands.

The warehouse is occupied by three businesses: the army surplus store, a metalworking / machine shop and a building materials supply warehouse. The three separate occupancies are separated by fire resistant walls.

The architectural wall panels that form the upper part of the external walls of the building are LPCB and FM Approved 80mm thick KS1000 AWP wall panels with ECOsafe PIR insulation cores. The roof was constructed of a metal deck, polystyrene insulation and a bituminous membrane.

The fire in the army surplus store was extremely intense and lasted for over 4 hours. This was due, in part, to the storage of significant amounts of combustible materials in the building and the reported presence in appreciable quantities of accelerants such as cigarette lighter fluid and aerosol paint spray cans.

Conclusions

– The severity of the fire was at least equivalent to a two-hour standard fire resistance test, which is the notional fire resistance performance of the 300mm limestone blockwork wall.

– The Kingspan ECOsafe PIR core wall panels bridged across the ends of the compartment wall between the building materials supply warehouse and the army surplus store and machine shop. Contrary to the architect’s details, they had not been installed to provide fire resisting construction at the firewall/external wall locations.

– Notwithstanding this, the charring exhibited by the PIR insulation core to the panel at the point of intersection with the compartment wall indicated that a sufficiently stable char within the panel had formed to provide an effective fire stop and maintain the compartmentation within the building.

– The omission of a band of non-combustible material at the points of intersection with the compartment wall did not result in a break-down of fire compartmentation.

– The findings provide evidence that the PIR core of Kingspan LPCB and FM approved KS1000 AWP panels can provide sufficient resistance to fire propagation and erosion such that they meet the intent of reported local regulations where KS1000 AWP panels bridge across fire compartment walls.

Panel at junction with internal compartment wall.

Panel at junction with steel stripped off demonstrating charring of PIR core but no evidence of fire spread.

Aerial view of the damage showing structural collapse of the army surplus warehouse.

12 13

Real Fire Case StudiesWharfedale Hospital, UK

A fire occurred at a hospital under construction during the summer of 2003. The building was steel framed with concrete floors. The first and second floors were clad with Kingspan PIR insulated panels approved by LPCB to EXT-B of LPS 1181 Part 1.

At the date of the fire, the ground floor cladding had not yet been installed and the ground level was open sided.

It was thought that the fire was started deliberately by adhesive being poured over slabs of insulating material which were stored on the ground floor. Photograph 1 shows the fire area.

The fire was discovered by on-site security staff and a call was made to the fire service who brought the fire under control within 40 minutes.

The heat generated by the fire was significant, as evidenced by cracking of the concrete floor above the fire and the distortion of steel beams that had been protected by a fire resisting intumescent coating.

The fire service found light smoke but no fire spread on the upper floors of the building. They also reported that although the joint between the floor and first floor walls had not been fire stopped there was no fire spread within the PIR core material. Photograph 2 shows where the flame damaged outer skin of the bottom panel has been lifted to inspect the slight charring of PIR core beneath.

The main image above shows where the insulated cladding panels on the external face of the building had been attacked by flames.

Conclusions

In spite of a very severe fire at ground level (sufficient to damage the concrete floors and distort fire protected steel beams) the cores of the insulated panels:

– did not ignite; and

– did not promote fire spread.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Real Fire Case StudiesArmy Surplus Store, Netherlands

A fire occurred at approximately 1am, Monday 18th April 2016, in an army surplus store located within a warehouse type building in Kootwijkerbroek in The Netherlands.

The warehouse is occupied by three businesses: the army surplus store, a metalworking / machine shop and a building materials supply warehouse. The three separate occupancies are separated by fire resistant walls.

The architectural wall panels that form the upper part of the external walls of the building are LPCB and FM Approved 80mm thick KS1000 AWP wall panels with ECOsafe PIR insulation cores. The roof was constructed of a metal deck, polystyrene insulation and a bituminous membrane.

The fire in the army surplus store was extremely intense and lasted for over 4 hours. This was due, in part, to the storage of significant amounts of combustible materials in the building and the reported presence in appreciable quantities of accelerants such as cigarette lighter fluid and aerosol paint spray cans.

Conclusions

– The severity of the fire was at least equivalent to a two-hour standard fire resistance test, which is the notional fire resistance performance of the 300mm limestone blockwork wall.

– The Kingspan ECOsafe PIR core wall panels bridged across the ends of the compartment wall between the building materials supply warehouse and the army surplus store and machine shop. Contrary to the architect’s details, they had not been installed to provide fire resisting construction at the firewall/external wall locations.

– Notwithstanding this, the charring exhibited by the PIR insulation core to the panel at the point of intersection with the compartment wall indicated that a sufficiently stable char within the panel had formed to provide an effective fire stop and maintain the compartmentation within the building.

– The omission of a band of non-combustible material at the points of intersection with the compartment wall did not result in a break-down of fire compartmentation.

– The findings provide evidence that the PIR core of Kingspan LPCB and FM approved KS1000 AWP panels can provide sufficient resistance to fire propagation and erosion such that they meet the intent of reported local regulations where KS1000 AWP panels bridge across fire compartment walls.

Panel at junction with internal compartment wall.

Panel at junction with steel stripped off demonstrating charring of PIR core but no evidence of fire spread.

Aerial view of the damage showing structural collapse of the army surplus warehouse.

12 13

Real Fire Case StudiesWharfedale Hospital, UK

A fire occurred at a hospital under construction during the summer of 2003. The building was steel framed with concrete floors. The first and second floors were clad with Kingspan PIR insulated panels approved by LPCB to EXT-B of LPS 1181 Part 1.

At the date of the fire, the ground floor cladding had not yet been installed and the ground level was open sided.

It was thought that the fire was started deliberately by adhesive being poured over slabs of insulating material which were stored on the ground floor. Photograph 1 shows the fire area.

The fire was discovered by on-site security staff and a call was made to the fire service who brought the fire under control within 40 minutes.

The heat generated by the fire was significant, as evidenced by cracking of the concrete floor above the fire and the distortion of steel beams that had been protected by a fire resisting intumescent coating.

The fire service found light smoke but no fire spread on the upper floors of the building. They also reported that although the joint between the floor and first floor walls had not been fire stopped there was no fire spread within the PIR core material. Photograph 2 shows where the flame damaged outer skin of the bottom panel has been lifted to inspect the slight charring of PIR core beneath.

The main image above shows where the insulated cladding panels on the external face of the building had been attacked by flames.

Conclusions

In spite of a very severe fire at ground level (sufficient to damage the concrete floors and distort fire protected steel beams) the cores of the insulated panels:

– did not ignite; and

– did not promote fire spread.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Real Fire Case StudiesArmy Surplus Store, Netherlands

A fire occurred at approximately 1am, Monday 18th April 2016, in an army surplus store located within a warehouse type building in Kootwijkerbroek in The Netherlands.

The warehouse is occupied by three businesses: the army surplus store, a metalworking / machine shop and a building materials supply warehouse. The three separate occupancies are separated by fire resistant walls.

The architectural wall panels that form the upper part of the external walls of the building are LPCB and FM Approved 80mm thick KS1000 AWP wall panels with ECOsafe PIR insulation cores. The roof was constructed of a metal deck, polystyrene insulation and a bituminous membrane.

The fire in the army surplus store was extremely intense and lasted for over 4 hours. This was due, in part, to the storage of significant amounts of combustible materials in the building and the reported presence in appreciable quantities of accelerants such as cigarette lighter fluid and aerosol paint spray cans.

Conclusions

– The severity of the fire was at least equivalent to a two-hour standard fire resistance test, which is the notional fire resistance performance of the 300mm limestone blockwork wall.

– The Kingspan ECOsafe PIR core wall panels bridged across the ends of the compartment wall between the building materials supply warehouse and the army surplus store and machine shop. Contrary to the architect’s details, they had not been installed to provide fire resisting construction at the firewall/external wall locations.

– Notwithstanding this, the charring exhibited by the PIR insulation core to the panel at the point of intersection with the compartment wall indicated that a sufficiently stable char within the panel had formed to provide an effective fire stop and maintain the compartmentation within the building.

– The omission of a band of non-combustible material at the points of intersection with the compartment wall did not result in a break-down of fire compartmentation.

– The findings provide evidence that the PIR core of Kingspan LPCB and FM approved KS1000 AWP panels can provide sufficient resistance to fire propagation and erosion such that they meet the intent of reported local regulations where KS1000 AWP panels bridge across fire compartment walls.

Panel at junction with internal compartment wall.

Panel at junction with steel stripped off demonstrating charring of PIR core but no evidence of fire spread.

Aerial view of the damage showing structural collapse of the army surplus warehouse.

Hospital Wharfedale, Reino Unido.

Page 18: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

18

Spider Transport, Irlanda.

Este incendio tuvo lugar en las primeras horas de la mañana del 17 de septiembre de 2008, fuera del edificio Spider Transport que fue utilizado como almacén y punto de distribución, en Wicklow, Irlanda.

El incendio, que fue capturado en CCTV, fue iniciado maliciosamente por dos personas vertiendo un líquido inflamable sobre el interior de un vehículo estacionado en el frente del edificio. las llamas incidieron en el edificio y hubo una explosión de escombros desde los costados y la parte superior del vehículo haciendo que se proyecte una bola de fuego y restos ardientes sobre el revestimiento, capturado por la imagen de CCTV (fotografía 1).

La imagen principal de arriba muestra las secuelas del incendio. La parte superior tenía paneles aislados de cubiertas Kingspan, que cumplen con LPCB Grado EXT-B a LPS 1181 Parte 1, mientras que las partes inferiores fueron construidas con bloques (block work).

Aunque la parte inferior del núcleo de los paneles de aislamiento Kingspan estuvieron expuestos directamente al impacto de la llama, por encima del marco de la puerta, no hubo delaminación de las pieles de los paneles y el aislamiento permaneció en su lugar.

La fotografía 1 muestra una imagen de CCTV del incendio del camión. La fotografía 2 muestra que el fuego no entró en el edificio.

Conclusiones:

Se mantuvo la integridad de los paneles aislados de Kingspan, incluso inmediatamente arriba de la puerta donde se encuentra la parte inferior del núcleo aislante que estuvo expuesto al impacto de la llama y sufrió carbonización severa.

No hubo signos de propagación de calor a través de los núcleos de los paneles aislados Kingspan a cualquier punto dentro del edificio y no hubo signos de propagación dentro de los núcleos de esos paneles.

No hay indicios de que los paneles aislados de Kingspan hayan contribuido al daño por calor causado por el fuego.

14 15

Real Fire Case StudiesCrude Oil Pool Fire, Netherlands

The facility at Arnhem in the Netherlands is used for the testing of equipment for the oil industry. On the 18th January 2013 a fire involving crude oil occurred in an external equipment testing area.

The test site was located adjacent to the main test building which was clad with Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated wall panels up to a parapet wall which was constructed from polyurethane core panels.

The fire started at about 5.00pm and continued to burn intensely for about 10 minutes with the flame plume, during this period, ranging from 10m to 30m high. After this initial period the fire died down significantly to form a number of smaller separate pool fires. The available video information ends after about 18 minutes of burning; at which time only small pools of flaming remained.

There appears to have been little or no direct flame impingement on the external cladding of the building. However, the building would have been subject to high levels of radiant heat flux from the fire plume and this has been estimated to be of the order of 24kW/m2.

Conclusions

The intensity of radiation received by the panels caused some surface flaming but this ceased after approximately 30s (presumably after the surface coating had burned away). There was otherwise no evidence of self-sustaining flaming from the panel surface or at joints between panels.

As a result of the intensity of heat radiation the steel facing to the panels became rippled and delaminated from the foam core but there was only limited foam degradation at the core surface.

Despite the intensity of heat radiation being sufficient to cause ignition of the roofing system and being approximately double normal design values there was no evidence of any significant charring of the PIR panel cores or the promotion of fire spread via the panels.

Phot

o: R

olan

d H

eitin

k

Real Fire Case StudiesSpider Transport, Ireland

This fire took place in the early hours of the morning on 17th September 2008, outside the Spider Transport building which was used as a warehouse and distribution point, in Wicklow, Ireland.

The fire, which was caught on CCTV, was started maliciously by two people pouring a flammable liquid over the interior of a vehicle parked across the front of the building. Flames impinged on the building and there was an ‘explosion’ of debris from the sides and top of the vehicle causing a fireball and burning debris to be projected onto the cladding, as captured by the CCTV image (photograph 1).

The main image above shows the aftermath of the fire. The upper parts of the external wall consisted of Kingspan Trapezoidal KS1000 RW insulated panels which complied with LPCB Grade EXT-B to LPS 1181 Part 1, whilst the lower parts were constructed of blockwork.

Although the bottom of the insulating core of the Kingspan insulated panels was directly exposed to flame impingement above the up and over door, there was no delamination of the skins of the panels and the insulation remained in place.

Photograph 1 shows a CCTV image of the truck fire. Photograph 2 shows that the fire did not get into the building.

Conclusions

– The integrity of the Kingspan insulated panels was maintained, even immediately above the up and over door where the bottom of the insulating core was exposed to flame impingement and suffered severe charring.

– There were no signs of any spread of heat via the cores of the Kingspan insulated panels to any point within the building and no signs of spread within the cores of those panels.

– There is no indication that the Kingspan insulated panels contributed to the heat damage caused by the fire.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

14 15

Real Fire Case StudiesCrude Oil Pool Fire, Netherlands

The facility at Arnhem in the Netherlands is used for the testing of equipment for the oil industry. On the 18th January 2013 a fire involving crude oil occurred in an external equipment testing area.

The test site was located adjacent to the main test building which was clad with Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated wall panels up to a parapet wall which was constructed from polyurethane core panels.

The fire started at about 5.00pm and continued to burn intensely for about 10 minutes with the flame plume, during this period, ranging from 10m to 30m high. After this initial period the fire died down significantly to form a number of smaller separate pool fires. The available video information ends after about 18 minutes of burning; at which time only small pools of flaming remained.

There appears to have been little or no direct flame impingement on the external cladding of the building. However, the building would have been subject to high levels of radiant heat flux from the fire plume and this has been estimated to be of the order of 24kW/m2.

Conclusions

The intensity of radiation received by the panels caused some surface flaming but this ceased after approximately 30s (presumably after the surface coating had burned away). There was otherwise no evidence of self-sustaining flaming from the panel surface or at joints between panels.

As a result of the intensity of heat radiation the steel facing to the panels became rippled and delaminated from the foam core but there was only limited foam degradation at the core surface.

Despite the intensity of heat radiation being sufficient to cause ignition of the roofing system and being approximately double normal design values there was no evidence of any significant charring of the PIR panel cores or the promotion of fire spread via the panels.

Phot

o: R

olan

d H

eitin

k

Real Fire Case StudiesSpider Transport, Ireland

This fire took place in the early hours of the morning on 17th September 2008, outside the Spider Transport building which was used as a warehouse and distribution point, in Wicklow, Ireland.

The fire, which was caught on CCTV, was started maliciously by two people pouring a flammable liquid over the interior of a vehicle parked across the front of the building. Flames impinged on the building and there was an ‘explosion’ of debris from the sides and top of the vehicle causing a fireball and burning debris to be projected onto the cladding, as captured by the CCTV image (photograph 1).

The main image above shows the aftermath of the fire. The upper parts of the external wall consisted of Kingspan Trapezoidal KS1000 RW insulated panels which complied with LPCB Grade EXT-B to LPS 1181 Part 1, whilst the lower parts were constructed of blockwork.

Although the bottom of the insulating core of the Kingspan insulated panels was directly exposed to flame impingement above the up and over door, there was no delamination of the skins of the panels and the insulation remained in place.

Photograph 1 shows a CCTV image of the truck fire. Photograph 2 shows that the fire did not get into the building.

Conclusions

– The integrity of the Kingspan insulated panels was maintained, even immediately above the up and over door where the bottom of the insulating core was exposed to flame impingement and suffered severe charring.

– There were no signs of any spread of heat via the cores of the Kingspan insulated panels to any point within the building and no signs of spread within the cores of those panels.

– There is no indication that the Kingspan insulated panels contributed to the heat damage caused by the fire.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Page 19: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

19

Conclusiones:

La intensidad de la radiación recibida por los paneles causó cierta superficie flameante pero esto cesó después de aproximadamente 30 s (presumiblemente después que el revestimiento de la superficie se habría quemado). De lo contrario no habría evidencia de llamas auto sostenibles desde la superficie del panel o en las juntas entre paneles.

Como resultado de la intensidad de la radiación de calor, las láminas de acero de los paneles que estuvieron más expuestas se ondularon y se delaminaron desde el núcleo de espuma, pero solo hubo una degradación muy mínima de la espuma en la superficie del núcleo.

A pesar de que la intensidad de la radiación de calor es suficiente para causar ignición del sistema de techo y siendo aproximadamente el doble de los valores de diseño no hubo evidencia de carbonización significativa del panel de núcleos PIR o la promoción de la propagación del fuego a través de los paneles.

Las instalaciones de Arnhem en los Países Bajos se utilizan para pruebas de equipos para la industria petrolera. El 18 de enero de 2013 se produjo un incendio con petróleo crudo en un área de prueba de equipos externos.

El sitio de prueba estaba ubicado adyacente al edificio de prueba principal que estaba revestido con paneles de muro con aislamiento PiR certificado por Kingspan insurer hasta un parapeto que se construyó con paneles de núcleo de poliuretano.

El incendio comenzó alrededor de las 5.00 p.m. y continuó ardiendo intensamente durante aproximadamente 10 minutos con la columna de llamas, durante este período, que van desde 10m a 30m de altura. Después de este período inicial, el fuego se apagó significativamente para formar una serie de empozamientos de fuego separados más pequeños. La información de video disponible muestra que el fuego termina después de aproximadamente 18 minutos de arder; hasta el momento que quedaron pequeños charcos de llamas.

Parece haber habido poco o ningún impacto directo de la llama en el revestimiento exterior del edificio. sin embargo, el edificio habría estado sujeto a altos niveles de flujo de calor radiante de la columna de fuego y se ha estimado que esto es del orden de 24kW / m2.

Crude Oil Pool Fire,Reino Unido.

14 15

Real Fire Case StudiesCrude Oil Pool Fire, Netherlands

The facility at Arnhem in the Netherlands is used for the testing of equipment for the oil industry. On the 18th January 2013 a fire involving crude oil occurred in an external equipment testing area.

The test site was located adjacent to the main test building which was clad with Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated wall panels up to a parapet wall which was constructed from polyurethane core panels.

The fire started at about 5.00pm and continued to burn intensely for about 10 minutes with the flame plume, during this period, ranging from 10m to 30m high. After this initial period the fire died down significantly to form a number of smaller separate pool fires. The available video information ends after about 18 minutes of burning; at which time only small pools of flaming remained.

There appears to have been little or no direct flame impingement on the external cladding of the building. However, the building would have been subject to high levels of radiant heat flux from the fire plume and this has been estimated to be of the order of 24kW/m2.

Conclusions

The intensity of radiation received by the panels caused some surface flaming but this ceased after approximately 30s (presumably after the surface coating had burned away). There was otherwise no evidence of self-sustaining flaming from the panel surface or at joints between panels.

As a result of the intensity of heat radiation the steel facing to the panels became rippled and delaminated from the foam core but there was only limited foam degradation at the core surface.

Despite the intensity of heat radiation being sufficient to cause ignition of the roofing system and being approximately double normal design values there was no evidence of any significant charring of the PIR panel cores or the promotion of fire spread via the panels.

Phot

o: R

olan

d H

eitin

k

Real Fire Case StudiesSpider Transport, Ireland

This fire took place in the early hours of the morning on 17th September 2008, outside the Spider Transport building which was used as a warehouse and distribution point, in Wicklow, Ireland.

The fire, which was caught on CCTV, was started maliciously by two people pouring a flammable liquid over the interior of a vehicle parked across the front of the building. Flames impinged on the building and there was an ‘explosion’ of debris from the sides and top of the vehicle causing a fireball and burning debris to be projected onto the cladding, as captured by the CCTV image (photograph 1).

The main image above shows the aftermath of the fire. The upper parts of the external wall consisted of Kingspan Trapezoidal KS1000 RW insulated panels which complied with LPCB Grade EXT-B to LPS 1181 Part 1, whilst the lower parts were constructed of blockwork.

Although the bottom of the insulating core of the Kingspan insulated panels was directly exposed to flame impingement above the up and over door, there was no delamination of the skins of the panels and the insulation remained in place.

Photograph 1 shows a CCTV image of the truck fire. Photograph 2 shows that the fire did not get into the building.

Conclusions

– The integrity of the Kingspan insulated panels was maintained, even immediately above the up and over door where the bottom of the insulating core was exposed to flame impingement and suffered severe charring.

– There were no signs of any spread of heat via the cores of the Kingspan insulated panels to any point within the building and no signs of spread within the cores of those panels.

– There is no indication that the Kingspan insulated panels contributed to the heat damage caused by the fire.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

14 15

Real Fire Case StudiesCrude Oil Pool Fire, Netherlands

The facility at Arnhem in the Netherlands is used for the testing of equipment for the oil industry. On the 18th January 2013 a fire involving crude oil occurred in an external equipment testing area.

The test site was located adjacent to the main test building which was clad with Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated wall panels up to a parapet wall which was constructed from polyurethane core panels.

The fire started at about 5.00pm and continued to burn intensely for about 10 minutes with the flame plume, during this period, ranging from 10m to 30m high. After this initial period the fire died down significantly to form a number of smaller separate pool fires. The available video information ends after about 18 minutes of burning; at which time only small pools of flaming remained.

There appears to have been little or no direct flame impingement on the external cladding of the building. However, the building would have been subject to high levels of radiant heat flux from the fire plume and this has been estimated to be of the order of 24kW/m2.

Conclusions

The intensity of radiation received by the panels caused some surface flaming but this ceased after approximately 30s (presumably after the surface coating had burned away). There was otherwise no evidence of self-sustaining flaming from the panel surface or at joints between panels.

As a result of the intensity of heat radiation the steel facing to the panels became rippled and delaminated from the foam core but there was only limited foam degradation at the core surface.

Despite the intensity of heat radiation being sufficient to cause ignition of the roofing system and being approximately double normal design values there was no evidence of any significant charring of the PIR panel cores or the promotion of fire spread via the panels.

Phot

o: R

olan

d H

eitin

k

Real Fire Case StudiesSpider Transport, Ireland

This fire took place in the early hours of the morning on 17th September 2008, outside the Spider Transport building which was used as a warehouse and distribution point, in Wicklow, Ireland.

The fire, which was caught on CCTV, was started maliciously by two people pouring a flammable liquid over the interior of a vehicle parked across the front of the building. Flames impinged on the building and there was an ‘explosion’ of debris from the sides and top of the vehicle causing a fireball and burning debris to be projected onto the cladding, as captured by the CCTV image (photograph 1).

The main image above shows the aftermath of the fire. The upper parts of the external wall consisted of Kingspan Trapezoidal KS1000 RW insulated panels which complied with LPCB Grade EXT-B to LPS 1181 Part 1, whilst the lower parts were constructed of blockwork.

Although the bottom of the insulating core of the Kingspan insulated panels was directly exposed to flame impingement above the up and over door, there was no delamination of the skins of the panels and the insulation remained in place.

Photograph 1 shows a CCTV image of the truck fire. Photograph 2 shows that the fire did not get into the building.

Conclusions

– The integrity of the Kingspan insulated panels was maintained, even immediately above the up and over door where the bottom of the insulating core was exposed to flame impingement and suffered severe charring.

– There were no signs of any spread of heat via the cores of the Kingspan insulated panels to any point within the building and no signs of spread within the cores of those panels.

– There is no indication that the Kingspan insulated panels contributed to the heat damage caused by the fire.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

14 15

Real Fire Case StudiesCrude Oil Pool Fire, Netherlands

The facility at Arnhem in the Netherlands is used for the testing of equipment for the oil industry. On the 18th January 2013 a fire involving crude oil occurred in an external equipment testing area.

The test site was located adjacent to the main test building which was clad with Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated wall panels up to a parapet wall which was constructed from polyurethane core panels.

The fire started at about 5.00pm and continued to burn intensely for about 10 minutes with the flame plume, during this period, ranging from 10m to 30m high. After this initial period the fire died down significantly to form a number of smaller separate pool fires. The available video information ends after about 18 minutes of burning; at which time only small pools of flaming remained.

There appears to have been little or no direct flame impingement on the external cladding of the building. However, the building would have been subject to high levels of radiant heat flux from the fire plume and this has been estimated to be of the order of 24kW/m2.

Conclusions

The intensity of radiation received by the panels caused some surface flaming but this ceased after approximately 30s (presumably after the surface coating had burned away). There was otherwise no evidence of self-sustaining flaming from the panel surface or at joints between panels.

As a result of the intensity of heat radiation the steel facing to the panels became rippled and delaminated from the foam core but there was only limited foam degradation at the core surface.

Despite the intensity of heat radiation being sufficient to cause ignition of the roofing system and being approximately double normal design values there was no evidence of any significant charring of the PIR panel cores or the promotion of fire spread via the panels.

Phot

o: R

olan

d H

eitin

k

Real Fire Case StudiesSpider Transport, Ireland

This fire took place in the early hours of the morning on 17th September 2008, outside the Spider Transport building which was used as a warehouse and distribution point, in Wicklow, Ireland.

The fire, which was caught on CCTV, was started maliciously by two people pouring a flammable liquid over the interior of a vehicle parked across the front of the building. Flames impinged on the building and there was an ‘explosion’ of debris from the sides and top of the vehicle causing a fireball and burning debris to be projected onto the cladding, as captured by the CCTV image (photograph 1).

The main image above shows the aftermath of the fire. The upper parts of the external wall consisted of Kingspan Trapezoidal KS1000 RW insulated panels which complied with LPCB Grade EXT-B to LPS 1181 Part 1, whilst the lower parts were constructed of blockwork.

Although the bottom of the insulating core of the Kingspan insulated panels was directly exposed to flame impingement above the up and over door, there was no delamination of the skins of the panels and the insulation remained in place.

Photograph 1 shows a CCTV image of the truck fire. Photograph 2 shows that the fire did not get into the building.

Conclusions

– The integrity of the Kingspan insulated panels was maintained, even immediately above the up and over door where the bottom of the insulating core was exposed to flame impingement and suffered severe charring.

– There were no signs of any spread of heat via the cores of the Kingspan insulated panels to any point within the building and no signs of spread within the cores of those panels.

– There is no indication that the Kingspan insulated panels contributed to the heat damage caused by the fire.

Photograph 1 Photograph 2

Page 20: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

20

Clifton Comprehensive School, Reino Unido.

En el momento del incendio, la construcción de Clifton Comprehensive School en Rotherham acababa de completarse. una cantidad significativa de equipo (computadoras y equipos de laboratorio, etc.) se habían instalado, pero el edificio aún no estaba en uso por la escuela.

El techo del edificio fue construido con paneles para cubierta con aislamiento PiR certificado por Kingspan insurer.

La fotografía 1 muestra el área donde comenzó el incendio, en un pasillo cerrado que une dos áreas de plantas de aire en el techo. Había andamios en la parte trasera de las instalaciones que daban acceso al techo y se pensó que la causa fue la ignición accidental o maliciosa del sellador de techo.

La fotografía 1 también muestra el tambor vacío que se cree que contenía el sellante del techo, y agujeros hechos en el sistema de partición por el servicio de bomberos para verificar que el fuego había sido completamente extinguido. Los componentes de plástico y vidrio de la alarma contra incendios y los accesorios de iluminación se habían roto / derretido y aunque hubo delaminación de la capa interna de los paneles de aislamiento, el núcleo y la capa externa permanecieron sin distorsión. La deformación de las correas inmediatamente encima del lugar del incendio, indica que se trataba de un fuego bastante intenso.

Las aulas estaban separadas del pasillo por las paredes del compartimento. El fuego no se extendió a las aulas y los bomberos observaron solo humo ligero en algunas de estas.

No hubo indicios de ninguna migración de calor o humo a través del aislamiento del techo. Los reportes y el servicio de bomberos comentaron que los paneles de techo no contribuyeron al incendio propagado.

La fotografía 2 muestra la cumbrera de la cubierta, con cierta decoloración en el área sujeta al ataque directo de la llama, pero no hay evidencia de propagación del fuego.

Conclusiones:

Los paneles de cubierta con aislamiento Kingspan no contribuyeron a la causa del incendio.

Los paneles de cubierta con aislamiento Kingspan no contribuyeron a la propagación del fuego a cualquier otra área del edificio y ayudó a contener el fuego.

Si el techo hubiera sido de una construcción más tradicional (por ejemplo, baldosas en listones de madera con una membrana de fieltro), el fuego hubiera sido lo suficientemente grave como para encender el techo de la construcción y hacer que el fuego se extendiera sobre las paredes del compartimento.

16 17

Real Fire Case StudiesFood Preparation Facility, UK

The building provides in-flight food preparation facilities for airlines operating out of Heathrow. The fire occurred in a corner of the first floor men’s changing room which contained rows of steel lockers fitted with clear plastic doors.

The room construction comprised of a timber floor incorporating ply-web engineered joists supported off a steel frame. The walls consisted of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR core panels. The ceiling above the room was of timber joist construction which was under-drawn with two layers of fire resisting plasterboard.

During their operations the fire service cut open the wall panels. This is standard practice to ensure that there is no continuing burning within the construction or voids. It was evident that where the fire service had opened up the panels there was only evidence of very limited charring of the PIR core with no suggestion of any fire propagation within the core material.

Conclusions

The fire that occurred in the locker room of the food preparation facility was confined to a relatively small area but generated a localised severity equivalent to over 30 minutes exposure in a standard fire resistance test.

The sections of the Kingspan wall panels that were subject to direct contact with the fire suffered surface distortion and superficial charring of the PIR core material. However, there was no evidence of fire propagation within the core material.

Whilst there was some fire spread beyond the room of fire origin this was via the void in the timber floor. The Kingspan panels appear to have provided an effective barrier to fire spread, i.e. there was no fire spread through the panels into adjacent areas.

Real Fire Case StudiesClifton Comprehensive School, UK

At the time of the fire, the construction of Clifton Comprehensive School in Rotherham had just been completed. A significant quantity of equipment (computers and laboratory equipment, etc.) had been installed, but the building was not yet in use by the school.

The roof of the building was constructed of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated roof panels.

Photograph 1 shows the area where the fire started, in an enclosed passageway linking two open air plant areas on the roof. There was scaffolding at the rear of the premises which gave access to the roof and the fire was thought to have been caused by the accidental or malicious ignition of roof sealant.

Photograph 1 also shows the empty drum thought to have contained the roof sealant, and holes made in the partition system by the fire service to check that the fire had been completely extinguished. The plastic and glass components of the fire alarm and light fittings had shattered / melted and although delamination of the inner skin of the insulated panels occurred, the core and outer skin remained undistorted. The deformation of the purlins immediately above the seat of the fire indicated that this was a very hot fire.

The classrooms were separated from the passageway by compartment walls. The fire did not spread to the classrooms and fire fighters observed only light smoke in some of these rooms. There was no indication of any heat or smoke migration through the insulation of the roofing sheets and the fire service commented that the roofing panels did not contribute to the fire spread.

Photograph 2 shows the apex of the roof, with some discolouration in the area subject to direct flame attack, but no evidence of fire spread.

Conclusions

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to the cause of the fire.

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to fire spread to any other area of the building and assisted in containing the fire.

– Had the roof been of a more traditional construction (e.g. tiles on timber battens with a felt membrane), the fire may have been severe enough to ignite the roof construction and cause the fire to spread over the compartment walls.

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

16 17

Real Fire Case StudiesFood Preparation Facility, UK

The building provides in-flight food preparation facilities for airlines operating out of Heathrow. The fire occurred in a corner of the first floor men’s changing room which contained rows of steel lockers fitted with clear plastic doors.

The room construction comprised of a timber floor incorporating ply-web engineered joists supported off a steel frame. The walls consisted of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR core panels. The ceiling above the room was of timber joist construction which was under-drawn with two layers of fire resisting plasterboard.

During their operations the fire service cut open the wall panels. This is standard practice to ensure that there is no continuing burning within the construction or voids. It was evident that where the fire service had opened up the panels there was only evidence of very limited charring of the PIR core with no suggestion of any fire propagation within the core material.

Conclusions

The fire that occurred in the locker room of the food preparation facility was confined to a relatively small area but generated a localised severity equivalent to over 30 minutes exposure in a standard fire resistance test.

The sections of the Kingspan wall panels that were subject to direct contact with the fire suffered surface distortion and superficial charring of the PIR core material. However, there was no evidence of fire propagation within the core material.

Whilst there was some fire spread beyond the room of fire origin this was via the void in the timber floor. The Kingspan panels appear to have provided an effective barrier to fire spread, i.e. there was no fire spread through the panels into adjacent areas.

Real Fire Case StudiesClifton Comprehensive School, UK

At the time of the fire, the construction of Clifton Comprehensive School in Rotherham had just been completed. A significant quantity of equipment (computers and laboratory equipment, etc.) had been installed, but the building was not yet in use by the school.

The roof of the building was constructed of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated roof panels.

Photograph 1 shows the area where the fire started, in an enclosed passageway linking two open air plant areas on the roof. There was scaffolding at the rear of the premises which gave access to the roof and the fire was thought to have been caused by the accidental or malicious ignition of roof sealant.

Photograph 1 also shows the empty drum thought to have contained the roof sealant, and holes made in the partition system by the fire service to check that the fire had been completely extinguished. The plastic and glass components of the fire alarm and light fittings had shattered / melted and although delamination of the inner skin of the insulated panels occurred, the core and outer skin remained undistorted. The deformation of the purlins immediately above the seat of the fire indicated that this was a very hot fire.

The classrooms were separated from the passageway by compartment walls. The fire did not spread to the classrooms and fire fighters observed only light smoke in some of these rooms. There was no indication of any heat or smoke migration through the insulation of the roofing sheets and the fire service commented that the roofing panels did not contribute to the fire spread.

Photograph 2 shows the apex of the roof, with some discolouration in the area subject to direct flame attack, but no evidence of fire spread.

Conclusions

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to the cause of the fire.

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to fire spread to any other area of the building and assisted in containing the fire.

– Had the roof been of a more traditional construction (e.g. tiles on timber battens with a felt membrane), the fire may have been severe enough to ignite the roof construction and cause the fire to spread over the compartment walls.

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

16 17

Real Fire Case StudiesFood Preparation Facility, UK

The building provides in-flight food preparation facilities for airlines operating out of Heathrow. The fire occurred in a corner of the first floor men’s changing room which contained rows of steel lockers fitted with clear plastic doors.

The room construction comprised of a timber floor incorporating ply-web engineered joists supported off a steel frame. The walls consisted of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR core panels. The ceiling above the room was of timber joist construction which was under-drawn with two layers of fire resisting plasterboard.

During their operations the fire service cut open the wall panels. This is standard practice to ensure that there is no continuing burning within the construction or voids. It was evident that where the fire service had opened up the panels there was only evidence of very limited charring of the PIR core with no suggestion of any fire propagation within the core material.

Conclusions

The fire that occurred in the locker room of the food preparation facility was confined to a relatively small area but generated a localised severity equivalent to over 30 minutes exposure in a standard fire resistance test.

The sections of the Kingspan wall panels that were subject to direct contact with the fire suffered surface distortion and superficial charring of the PIR core material. However, there was no evidence of fire propagation within the core material.

Whilst there was some fire spread beyond the room of fire origin this was via the void in the timber floor. The Kingspan panels appear to have provided an effective barrier to fire spread, i.e. there was no fire spread through the panels into adjacent areas.

Real Fire Case StudiesClifton Comprehensive School, UK

At the time of the fire, the construction of Clifton Comprehensive School in Rotherham had just been completed. A significant quantity of equipment (computers and laboratory equipment, etc.) had been installed, but the building was not yet in use by the school.

The roof of the building was constructed of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated roof panels.

Photograph 1 shows the area where the fire started, in an enclosed passageway linking two open air plant areas on the roof. There was scaffolding at the rear of the premises which gave access to the roof and the fire was thought to have been caused by the accidental or malicious ignition of roof sealant.

Photograph 1 also shows the empty drum thought to have contained the roof sealant, and holes made in the partition system by the fire service to check that the fire had been completely extinguished. The plastic and glass components of the fire alarm and light fittings had shattered / melted and although delamination of the inner skin of the insulated panels occurred, the core and outer skin remained undistorted. The deformation of the purlins immediately above the seat of the fire indicated that this was a very hot fire.

The classrooms were separated from the passageway by compartment walls. The fire did not spread to the classrooms and fire fighters observed only light smoke in some of these rooms. There was no indication of any heat or smoke migration through the insulation of the roofing sheets and the fire service commented that the roofing panels did not contribute to the fire spread.

Photograph 2 shows the apex of the roof, with some discolouration in the area subject to direct flame attack, but no evidence of fire spread.

Conclusions

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to the cause of the fire.

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to fire spread to any other area of the building and assisted in containing the fire.

– Had the roof been of a more traditional construction (e.g. tiles on timber battens with a felt membrane), the fire may have been severe enough to ignite the roof construction and cause the fire to spread over the compartment walls.

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

Page 21: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

21

Conclusiones:

El incendio que ocurrió en el vestuario de la instalación de preparación de alimentos estaba confinado a un área relativamente pequeña pero generaba una gravedad localizada equivalente a más de 30 minutos de exposición en una prueba estándar de resistencia al fuego.

Las secciones de los paneles de pared de Kingspan que estaban sujetas al contacto directo con el fuego sufrieron distorsión de la superficie y carbonización superficial del material del núcleo PIR. Sin embargo, no hubo evidencia de propagación del fuego dentro del material del núcleo.

Si bien hubo un poco de fuego extendido más allá de la sala de origen del fuego, este fue a través del vacío en el piso de madera. Los paneles Kingspan parecen haber proporcionado una barrera efectiva contra la propagación del fuego, es decir, no hubo propagación del fuego a través de los paneles en áreas adyacentes.

El edificio ofrece instalaciones de preparación de alimentos para los vuelos de aerolíneas que operan desde Heathrow. El fuego ocurrió en una esquina del vestuario de hombres del primer piso que contenía hileras de armarios de acero equipados con puertas de plástico claras.

La construcción de la sala consta de un piso de madera que incorpora viguetas laminadas soportadas en un marco de acero. Los muros consistían en paneles centrales Kingspan con núcleo PIR. El techo encima de la sala tenía un cielo falso con dos capas de cartón de yeso resistente al fuego.

Durante sus operaciones, el servicio de bomberos cortó los paneles de la pared. Esta es una práctica estándar para garantizar que no haya una combustión continua dentro de la construcción o vacíos. En el área en dónde el servicio de bomberos había abierto los paneles solo había evidencia de muy limitada carbonización del núcleo PIR sin propagación del fuego dentro del material del núcleo.

Instalación de preparación de alimentos, aeropuerto de Heathrow, Reino Unido.

16 17

Real Fire Case StudiesFood Preparation Facility, UK

The building provides in-flight food preparation facilities for airlines operating out of Heathrow. The fire occurred in a corner of the first floor men’s changing room which contained rows of steel lockers fitted with clear plastic doors.

The room construction comprised of a timber floor incorporating ply-web engineered joists supported off a steel frame. The walls consisted of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR core panels. The ceiling above the room was of timber joist construction which was under-drawn with two layers of fire resisting plasterboard.

During their operations the fire service cut open the wall panels. This is standard practice to ensure that there is no continuing burning within the construction or voids. It was evident that where the fire service had opened up the panels there was only evidence of very limited charring of the PIR core with no suggestion of any fire propagation within the core material.

Conclusions

The fire that occurred in the locker room of the food preparation facility was confined to a relatively small area but generated a localised severity equivalent to over 30 minutes exposure in a standard fire resistance test.

The sections of the Kingspan wall panels that were subject to direct contact with the fire suffered surface distortion and superficial charring of the PIR core material. However, there was no evidence of fire propagation within the core material.

Whilst there was some fire spread beyond the room of fire origin this was via the void in the timber floor. The Kingspan panels appear to have provided an effective barrier to fire spread, i.e. there was no fire spread through the panels into adjacent areas.

Real Fire Case StudiesClifton Comprehensive School, UK

At the time of the fire, the construction of Clifton Comprehensive School in Rotherham had just been completed. A significant quantity of equipment (computers and laboratory equipment, etc.) had been installed, but the building was not yet in use by the school.

The roof of the building was constructed of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated roof panels.

Photograph 1 shows the area where the fire started, in an enclosed passageway linking two open air plant areas on the roof. There was scaffolding at the rear of the premises which gave access to the roof and the fire was thought to have been caused by the accidental or malicious ignition of roof sealant.

Photograph 1 also shows the empty drum thought to have contained the roof sealant, and holes made in the partition system by the fire service to check that the fire had been completely extinguished. The plastic and glass components of the fire alarm and light fittings had shattered / melted and although delamination of the inner skin of the insulated panels occurred, the core and outer skin remained undistorted. The deformation of the purlins immediately above the seat of the fire indicated that this was a very hot fire.

The classrooms were separated from the passageway by compartment walls. The fire did not spread to the classrooms and fire fighters observed only light smoke in some of these rooms. There was no indication of any heat or smoke migration through the insulation of the roofing sheets and the fire service commented that the roofing panels did not contribute to the fire spread.

Photograph 2 shows the apex of the roof, with some discolouration in the area subject to direct flame attack, but no evidence of fire spread.

Conclusions

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to the cause of the fire.

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to fire spread to any other area of the building and assisted in containing the fire.

– Had the roof been of a more traditional construction (e.g. tiles on timber battens with a felt membrane), the fire may have been severe enough to ignite the roof construction and cause the fire to spread over the compartment walls.

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

16 17

Real Fire Case StudiesFood Preparation Facility, UK

The building provides in-flight food preparation facilities for airlines operating out of Heathrow. The fire occurred in a corner of the first floor men’s changing room which contained rows of steel lockers fitted with clear plastic doors.

The room construction comprised of a timber floor incorporating ply-web engineered joists supported off a steel frame. The walls consisted of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR core panels. The ceiling above the room was of timber joist construction which was under-drawn with two layers of fire resisting plasterboard.

During their operations the fire service cut open the wall panels. This is standard practice to ensure that there is no continuing burning within the construction or voids. It was evident that where the fire service had opened up the panels there was only evidence of very limited charring of the PIR core with no suggestion of any fire propagation within the core material.

Conclusions

The fire that occurred in the locker room of the food preparation facility was confined to a relatively small area but generated a localised severity equivalent to over 30 minutes exposure in a standard fire resistance test.

The sections of the Kingspan wall panels that were subject to direct contact with the fire suffered surface distortion and superficial charring of the PIR core material. However, there was no evidence of fire propagation within the core material.

Whilst there was some fire spread beyond the room of fire origin this was via the void in the timber floor. The Kingspan panels appear to have provided an effective barrier to fire spread, i.e. there was no fire spread through the panels into adjacent areas.

Real Fire Case StudiesClifton Comprehensive School, UK

At the time of the fire, the construction of Clifton Comprehensive School in Rotherham had just been completed. A significant quantity of equipment (computers and laboratory equipment, etc.) had been installed, but the building was not yet in use by the school.

The roof of the building was constructed of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated roof panels.

Photograph 1 shows the area where the fire started, in an enclosed passageway linking two open air plant areas on the roof. There was scaffolding at the rear of the premises which gave access to the roof and the fire was thought to have been caused by the accidental or malicious ignition of roof sealant.

Photograph 1 also shows the empty drum thought to have contained the roof sealant, and holes made in the partition system by the fire service to check that the fire had been completely extinguished. The plastic and glass components of the fire alarm and light fittings had shattered / melted and although delamination of the inner skin of the insulated panels occurred, the core and outer skin remained undistorted. The deformation of the purlins immediately above the seat of the fire indicated that this was a very hot fire.

The classrooms were separated from the passageway by compartment walls. The fire did not spread to the classrooms and fire fighters observed only light smoke in some of these rooms. There was no indication of any heat or smoke migration through the insulation of the roofing sheets and the fire service commented that the roofing panels did not contribute to the fire spread.

Photograph 2 shows the apex of the roof, with some discolouration in the area subject to direct flame attack, but no evidence of fire spread.

Conclusions

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to the cause of the fire.

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to fire spread to any other area of the building and assisted in containing the fire.

– Had the roof been of a more traditional construction (e.g. tiles on timber battens with a felt membrane), the fire may have been severe enough to ignite the roof construction and cause the fire to spread over the compartment walls.

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

16 17

Real Fire Case StudiesFood Preparation Facility, UK

The building provides in-flight food preparation facilities for airlines operating out of Heathrow. The fire occurred in a corner of the first floor men’s changing room which contained rows of steel lockers fitted with clear plastic doors.

The room construction comprised of a timber floor incorporating ply-web engineered joists supported off a steel frame. The walls consisted of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR core panels. The ceiling above the room was of timber joist construction which was under-drawn with two layers of fire resisting plasterboard.

During their operations the fire service cut open the wall panels. This is standard practice to ensure that there is no continuing burning within the construction or voids. It was evident that where the fire service had opened up the panels there was only evidence of very limited charring of the PIR core with no suggestion of any fire propagation within the core material.

Conclusions

The fire that occurred in the locker room of the food preparation facility was confined to a relatively small area but generated a localised severity equivalent to over 30 minutes exposure in a standard fire resistance test.

The sections of the Kingspan wall panels that were subject to direct contact with the fire suffered surface distortion and superficial charring of the PIR core material. However, there was no evidence of fire propagation within the core material.

Whilst there was some fire spread beyond the room of fire origin this was via the void in the timber floor. The Kingspan panels appear to have provided an effective barrier to fire spread, i.e. there was no fire spread through the panels into adjacent areas.

Real Fire Case StudiesClifton Comprehensive School, UK

At the time of the fire, the construction of Clifton Comprehensive School in Rotherham had just been completed. A significant quantity of equipment (computers and laboratory equipment, etc.) had been installed, but the building was not yet in use by the school.

The roof of the building was constructed of Kingspan Insurer Certified PIR insulated roof panels.

Photograph 1 shows the area where the fire started, in an enclosed passageway linking two open air plant areas on the roof. There was scaffolding at the rear of the premises which gave access to the roof and the fire was thought to have been caused by the accidental or malicious ignition of roof sealant.

Photograph 1 also shows the empty drum thought to have contained the roof sealant, and holes made in the partition system by the fire service to check that the fire had been completely extinguished. The plastic and glass components of the fire alarm and light fittings had shattered / melted and although delamination of the inner skin of the insulated panels occurred, the core and outer skin remained undistorted. The deformation of the purlins immediately above the seat of the fire indicated that this was a very hot fire.

The classrooms were separated from the passageway by compartment walls. The fire did not spread to the classrooms and fire fighters observed only light smoke in some of these rooms. There was no indication of any heat or smoke migration through the insulation of the roofing sheets and the fire service commented that the roofing panels did not contribute to the fire spread.

Photograph 2 shows the apex of the roof, with some discolouration in the area subject to direct flame attack, but no evidence of fire spread.

Conclusions

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to the cause of the fire.

– The Kingspan insulated roof panels did not contribute to fire spread to any other area of the building and assisted in containing the fire.

– Had the roof been of a more traditional construction (e.g. tiles on timber battens with a felt membrane), the fire may have been severe enough to ignite the roof construction and cause the fire to spread over the compartment walls.

Photograph 1

Photograph 2

Page 22: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

22

Casos de éxito

Page 23: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

23

Casos de éxito

Institucional: Estación de Policia Avon & Somerset, Reino Unido.

Educación: Universidad de la Sabana, Colombia. Comercial: Parque Acuatico Plopsaqua, Bélgica.

Comercial: Zona Franca Bodega Central, Colombia.

Educación: Colegio Louis Blériot, Francia.

Page 24: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

24

Institucional: Parque Derby the iHub at infinity, Reino unido.

Comercial: Planta de fabricación de cemento Nostra, Hungría.

arquitectura: Apartamentos 1611 West Division, USA.Institucional: Parroquia de Nuestra Señora del Perpetuo Socorrro, Colombia.

Page 25: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

25

Comercial: Instalaciones de energía procedente de residuos, Reino unido.

Institucional: Museo Marítimo Nacional Pavellón Buques de Guerra, Australia.

Comercial: Cervecería Bale Breaker, USA.Comercial: Hospital Royal North Shore, Australia.

Comercial: Jabonería Hada, Colombia.

Page 26: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

26

Eficiencia energética y puntos LEED

En Kingspan, somos pioneros en el uso de mejores tecnologías y métodos de construcción para un mundo que genere bajas emisiones de carbono. Los sistemas de paneles aislados de Kingspan son más eficientes en términos de energía, seguridad contra el fuego y durabilidad. Además, son compatibles con proyectos que buscan certificación LEED, (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design, por sus siglas en inglés), el cual fue desarrollado en 1998 por el U.S Green Building Council (USGBC) para proporcionar construcciones que briden un mejor ambiente y recursos, ahorrando energía. El uso de productos Kingspan ayuda a su organización a lograr la certificación lEED.

La clave de nuestra oferta es el enfoque centrado en un servicio excepcional, poniendo a su disposición nuestra asistencia técnica en la etapa de diseño, construcción, postventa y capacitación continua sobre nuestros productos.

Servicio

Atención al Cliente

Nuestros clientes son la principal motivación para todo lo que hacemos. Buscamos la excelencia permanentemente en el servicio y mejora continua. Kingspan acompaña todo el proceso administrativo-comercial, antes y después de realizar los pedidos. Consultas: diseño, especificación, cuantificación, propuestas de precio.

Durante la obra: revisión de planos de instalación, requerimientos de materiales y componentes.

Capacitación para contratistas e instaladores especializados.

Page 27: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Portafolio de Producto

Sistemas de paneles aislados

27

Términos y CondicionesNuestras transacciones se basan en condiciones estándar de venta. Para obtener mayor información favor de consultar a su Representante de Ventas.

Equipo de VentasNuestro representante de ventas le asesora en el proyecto de inicio al fin de la obra, acompañando cualquier requerimiento que surja en el trayecto.

Tenemos presente que en la industria hay que responder eficientemente a los requerimientos de cotizaciones para todo tipo de proyectos. Nuestro compromiso es ser proveedores de ágil reacción para facilitar las actividades de nuestros clientes.

Servicio TécnicoNuestro equipo técnico asesora y brinda apoyo a diseñadores, especificadores y contratistas en la integración de soluciones de productos. Contamos con una amplia experiencia que ponemos a sus órdenes, desde una recomendación de diseño hasta el análisis del desempeño técnico de las soluciones envolventes.

¿Cómo podemos ayudar?Contacte a nuestros asesores especializados

[email protected]

(+57) 3173636796 – (+57-5) 6930156

www.kingspan.com.co

Page 28: Sistemas de Paneles Aislados...Portafolio de Producto Sistemas de paneles aislados 2 Presentamos , la nueva tecnología en aislamiento de Kingspan con una formulación única que crea

Se ha buscado que los contenidos de esta publicación sean precisos, sin embargo, Kingspan no acepta responsabilidad por errores o información engañosa. Recomendaciones, descripciones, sugerencias de uso de productos y métodos de instalación son solamente con fines informativos y Panelmet SAS no podrá aceptar responsabilidad del uso que se le dé.

Para la oferta de productos en otros mercados de la región, por favor contáctese con el representante de ventas local o visite Kingspancolombia.com/exportaciones

¿Cómo podemos ayudar?

Nuestro Sistema de Paneles Aislados Kingspan, es fácilmente integrado a los proyectos de construcción.

Charlas técnicas y capacitaciones

El área técnica ofrece capacitaciones a solicitud los interesados en protección contra el fuego. Para realizar cualquier solicitud de capacitaciones o asesoría envíe un correo electrónico a [email protected]

Contacte a nuestro equipo de ventas

(+57) 317 363 67 96 - (+57-5) 693 01 56

[email protected]

www.kingspan.com.co

CalidadInnovaciónServicio

Sistemas de paneles aislados