In the construction industry, safety is a primary concern. Safety extends far beyond the activities of constructing a building. Most companies are aware of the immediate dangers that exist during the construction process. Fall protection, hard hats, lockout/tagout practices – these are all safety measures commonly found on today’s construction sites. But, how do the materials used on the building contribute to safety in post-construction?
Recently an accidental fire started in one unit of a large apartment building and destroyed the entire complex built out of wood framing allowed by the current codes. Total destruction would have been avoided if compartmentalized construction methods using non-combustible building materials such as concrete or masonry were required to be used by the building code. The fire chief pointed to the wooden structure as a key element in the fire getting out of hand so quickly and noted, “If it was made out of concrete and cinder block, we wouldn’t have this sort of problem.”
Let’s contrast this story with a fire that began in the Rees Hall Dormitory in Geneva, New York. This fire reached temperatures of 1800° F and melted light fixtures, smoke detectors, metal hinges, and steel doors. However, firefighters were able to contain the fire within 20 minutes due to the dorms concrete construction. Damages were reported to be only $100,000. Had the building been destroyed, replacing the entire structure would have cost nearly $5 million.
Concrete not only helps compartmentalize a fire, it allows the building to remain structurally sound during the fire. This not only protects firefighters as they combat the blaze, it also allows for a safer evacuation. Concrete doesn’t combust, doesn’t produce smoke or toxic gas, and it doesn’t lose it’s structural integrity during a fire.
It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback. But, it raises an important question in how buildings are constructed. How much does using wood-frame construction save over using concrete? A study prepared by Haas Architects Engineers found that the additional cost in Albany, New York for using a precast concrete plank floor and a masonry wall system only adds an additional 3% on an apartment using a single-bedroom scheme when compared to using conventional wood framing. For a mixed bedroom scheme, the premium was less than 1%. These costs don’t even take into account the maintenance, risk, and insurance benefits.
But, perception is a huge challenge to the industry. Many developers, architects, and GCs assume that wood framing is much cheaper and, since it meets code in most municipalities, any other framing method is nothing more than an afterthought. Hopefully, it won’t take lives lost for the industry to begin realizing that using concrete not only saves lives, but it also reduces financial risk and comes at an almost negligible premium.
Learn more about precast, including how it can help make a smarter project.
