Alternate theories
Jeffrey T. Manson
Captain
Amherst (NH) Fire Department
I have a couple of alternative thoughts on two articles in the March 1996 Fire Engineering.
1. “Struck By Lightning: An Investigation” by Arthur L. Jackson and Peter S. Vallas. I have a slightly different thought here on the evidence presented. The lightning hits the pole; the surge travels to the house, does most of the damage attributed to it, then shorts out the main breaker. From this point the fire may not even be there or may go out because the electrical overcurrent protection device does exactly as it is designed to do and shuts off all the electricity (the heat source). The homeowner comes home and turns the electricity back on (reenergizing the heat source to all the broken electrical devices). The homeowner goes to work, and the new (reenergized electrical) heat sources eventually start the fire.
The point I am trying to make is that when we find a great deal of physical evidence to prove a theory, we tend to overlook the human contributions to the situation. In this case, I can easily be convinced that the human factor had a great deal to do with the resultant accident.
2. “A `Two-Story` House” by Ray McCormack. I`m sorry, but I think the real issue here has been misunderstood. All this talk about balloon construction and ribbons! I believe the real issue here is the fire wall that was totally misbuilt and unacceptable. The gypsum board that has been placed between the two walls is supposed to be properly fastened to the studs and all the seams taped. Once the same thing is done to the other sides of the studs, assuming the wallboard is run all the way to the exterior sheathing and assuming the integrity of the wall is maintained, there is an approved fire wall.
The real problem is twofold.
First, builders who opt for this solution, instead of a masonry fire wall, do so because they feel it is faster and cheaper for them to build. As long as they can get away with what is pictured, it is. But if they are forced to do it properly, they often realize that the cost is far closer to that of a proper (masonry) wall.
Second, regardless of the quality and intent of the workmanship, we as fire department and code enforcement officers bear just as much of the burden to make sure the job is done to code. It is also not appropriate for inspectors to OK substitutes for fully tested and approved assemblies.
The bottom line is that the assembly pictured, if constructed properly, eliminates all the problems discussed in the article. However, if we allow substandard construction to be built, we are as much to blame as the builder if something goes wrong.
