Reader's Response Draft

In the article “Use of cladding in buildings here have grown in recent times: Experts” from Faris Mokhtar, states that although there are benefits of cladding on a building, cladding is still a fire hazard.

Mokhtar (2017) states that the usage of cladding has shown to provide many benefits for the building. According to Assistant Professor Fadeyi (2017), cladding has shown to benefit in the reduction of energy consumption and increases the sustainability of the building.  According to Assistant Professor Budig (2017), he mentions that Singapore practices another style of cladding which enhances the shade of the building.

However, usage of cladding has been contributing in the rapid spreading of fire as it endangers the fire safety in the building as the oxygenation could escalate the fire (Mokhtar, 2017). According to Mokhtar (2017), cladding may have contributed to the fire that struck the Grenfell Tower, which led to multiple fatalities.

Although there are strict regulations regarding fire safety, there are existing buildings in Singapore which fail to meet the guidelines. As the fault lies within construction, a clearer process should be implemented to ensure proper installation of cladding.

Despite the strict fire safety regulations imposed in Singapore along with the governance from BCA, there are existing buildings in Singapore with cladding that failed to meet the set guidelines. From the article “36 buildings may have combustible cladding that doesn't meet safety standards; police investigating”, (Loh, 2017), it has been reported that 36 buildings were subjected to scrutiny, out of which 14 building were found to have cladding which failed to comply with the class ‘0’ regulations. These 14 buildings evidently show that the strict regulations and governance were unable to oversee the entire spectrum of the process.

Reported in the article “How did cladding woes happen despite layers of checks?”, (Ng, 2017), several parties were involved in the construction process, with checks done by 6 different parties throughout the construction process. However, even with the stringent checks, the material used was found to be non-compliant. From the article, it was found that the main cause for the non-compliance was directly from the source material, where the main material used for cladding was mixed with another material, which was not graded compliant.

A change in the construction process will be able to resolve these underlying issues. By having one main principal architect to oversee the entire construction process from the birth to completion of the cladding helps provide consistency through monitoring if there are any changes to the material. With certification at every check conducted by the various parties with acknowledgement from the main principal architect, ensures that there will be no compromise to the material. Even though this incident occurred due to the fault of a distributor, a change to the process should still be implemented to improve the existing system.

References: 
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/use-cladding-buildings-here-have-grown-recent-times-experts
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/36-buildings-may-have-combustible-cladding-that-doesn-t-meet-9153588
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/distributor-placed-two-models-of-cladding-in-one-stock


Comments

Popular posts from this blog