Grenfell Tower – an engineer’s take

This is from the inimitable Microdave:

You will (I’m sure) remember me talking about working on various electrical problems at my friends chicken farms – well that got me thinking the other day when I had a look at the Grenfell Tower Residents Action Blog.

I noted the reports of “Power Surges” in 2013, and it reminded me of a specific fault at one of the two farms. This manifested itself when several of the emergency vents didn’t work properly during power cuts. The chickens in large commercial sheds aren’t as hardy as the ones you might see in small paddocks and the like – they keel over very quickly if the temperature gets too high, so various emergency measures are provided to try and keep some natural ventilation going if the power goes off, and the genny doesn’t kick in (it happens!).

I discovered the motors which operate these vents were showing a short circuit on the input, in one direction (but not in the other). I found that a simple diode inserted got them going again, which saved several replacements at £600 each!

Further investigation found (to my horror) that said emergency genset was putting out in the order of 270 volts instead of the usual 235-240. How long this state of affairs had persisted nobody knows, but it could have been getting worse gradually since it was installed some 4 years previously. I was able to make adjustments to restore normal voltage, but it was replaced by a newer unit not long afterwards.

Now to the reason for this message – we have been told that the fire started in a fridge/freezer, and then spread, with devastating consequences. Reading today that the model in question – a Hotpoint FF175BP fridge freezer – was made between 2006 and 2009, had me wondering if the same excessive voltage scenario could have been the cause. Due to its age, this model would have to have been present in the flat when these “Surges” occurred.

The blog didn’t go into much detail about the nature of these, but reported that monitoring equipment was installed in various flats, and that many appliances had suffered catastrophic failures. It also reported that the problem was traced to a burnt out cable. Now at risk of getting technical, I am going to postulate that the cable damage had resulted in a “floating neutral” situation.

All mains generation and distribution is done with 3 phase equipment – it’s far more efficient than single phase. Generators are built with 3 sets of windings spaced at 120 degree intervals, and all the main distribution wiring and transformers have 3 cables – effectively one for each “phase”. Only at local distribution level will this be separated into individual phases for residential and small commercial use.

In this case, the substation transformer has a “Centre Tap”, where one end of each winding is connected, and this is brought out in addition to the 3 phase wires. Such overhead 4 wire distribution is visible in rural areas (but buried in towns/cities) and the normal practice is for the individual phases to be fed to properties in turn, to (try) and balance the overall load. The centre tap (known as “neutral”) is also earthed at the source, and is what allows RCDs to protect you in the event of a damaged cable.

There is a mathematical relationship between the phase to phase, and phase to neutral voltages – in the UK you will normally see 415/240 volts talked about, in any situation where three & single phase supplies are involved.

This all works fine UNLESS the neutral ever breaks between the transformer and the connected equipment(s). Then any imbalance of the loads from one phase to the next will cause the neutral voltage to “float” above that of ground. This, in turn, will lead to individual phases going both below AND ABOVE the standard voltage. I had to do “Vector Diagrams” and calculations at skool 45+ years ago, but I would be struggling now.

It’s the higher voltages which do the damage – voltage swings from below 150 to above 300 are quite possible, and in extremes could approach the phase to phase voltage of 415! Clearly any electronic domestic appliances and lamps etc would simply “blow”, but motors are pretty robust, and can often survive in such situations.

In view of this I am going to postulate that the reason the fridge/freezer caught fire is not necessarily due to any inherent fault, but that it could very well have suffered some damage during the surges, which didn’t initially affect its operation – specifically, the motor starting capacitor. All domestic fridges have hermetically sealed motor/compressor units, and the refrigerant gasses are usually very similar to that used in fire extinguishers, so even if it “blew up” internally, it’s unlikely to start a fire.

BUT the capacitors are usually mounted outside the motor body, and all such devices have a maximum voltage rating – usually 10-20% over normal rated supply. The insulating layers inside can be strained by excess voltage, but not necessarily fail there and then.  A fridge/freezer of that age would have a simple mechanical thermostat – no electronics, and the motor & capacitor would only be connected to the mains when called upon by the thermostat.

If this fridge was running when subjected to high voltage surges, the capacitor could have suffered, even though the actual motor windings escaped unscathed. Then some years later the capacitor finally says “enough” and ruptures – only now the fire is not contained, and is directly underneath the expanded polystyrene insulation, and plastic liner of the fridge… The plug-top fuse would be of no help, as this needs to be a fairly high amperage rating to cover the start-up surge of the motor.

I stress this is only my theory, and there will probably be the usual “knee-jerk” reaction, condemning perfectly serviceable appliances, but it’s worth bearing in mind. The GTRAB doesn’t appear to have any contact details, or I would be sending them this.

Just wondered what you think?

JH adding this – saw it on Twitter:

6 comments for “Grenfell Tower – an engineer’s take

  1. Robbo
    June 29, 2017 at 14:40

    “refrigerant gasses are usually very similar to that used in fire extinguishers”

    Are you sure? I have read that isobutane is used in some domestic fridges, because the CFC’s have been banned, to save the ozone layer.

  2. ivan
    June 29, 2017 at 14:44

    A couple of comments.

    I assume the refrigerant in that unit was one of those that used an inflammable gas (usually butane) in place of the inert CFCs that were banned because of supposed damage to the ozone layer (the greens got that wrong, it’s the solar wind that changes the ‘hole’ in the ozone layer). Overheating of the compressor, caused by possible over-voltage, could well have produced a diesel effect and the resultant fuel air explosion would not only ignite the insulation but anything else flammable the advancing flash fire front reached.

    Fuel air explosives are very nasty things to play with and would be easily able to ignite the insulation on the cladding especially since it was not the FR (fire retardant) type because that has a lower insulation value and the greens insist on the highest insulation value putting that above fire safety.

    See https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2017/06/27/the-road-to-grenfell-hell-was-clad-with-green-intentions/ for some discussion on that.

    Most, if not all, the blame can be laid at the feet of the green environmentalist lobby and their putting the green agenda before peoples safety.

  3. microdave
    June 29, 2017 at 16:05

    My apologies for not checking the refrigerant issue – I was looking at this from the over-voltage (and delayed effect) angle. Considering that fridge/freezer compressors usually only run for a few minutes at a time I doubt that much overheating would occur unless the voltage was really high, and if it did you would expect the fireworks to occur there and then. But the dielectric (insulating layers) in capacitors could be damaged without actually failing at the time. If these subsequently give up they can make quite a mess…

    If (as I suspect) these reported “power surges” were due to the neutral floating well above ground voltage, there must be a case for all such incidents to require a thorough inspection of every property connected to the faulty supply. Naturally replacing large numbers of appliances won’t be cheap (and who’s going to pay?), but is a subsequent disaster worth the risk?

    • ivan
      June 29, 2017 at 17:42

      Considering the over-voltage angle there are other things to consider like the shorting out of the motor phase capacitor discharge resistor. There is also the possibility of the thermostat contacts arcing and welding closed, if that happened then all bets are off.

      From what I have read the initial fire has all the hallmarks of a fuel air explosion. A normal fire, however started, would be limited to its surroundings for a reasonable amount of time and unless the room turned into a raging inferno there would be little likelihood of it getting to the cladding in the way this appears to have.

      If there was the raging inferno situation it would be very difficult to pinpoint the seat of the fire as almost all evidence would be burned.

      With a fuel air explosion the flame front and pressure wave moves too fast to do much burning and it is the heating that forces flammable materials to burn. The fact it was the insulation under the cladding that started burning supports that view. The pressure wave would have forced the flame front under the metal of the cladding and into the insulation. Once there the chimney effect take over.

      As you say it is not going to be cheap to undertake the necessary inspections, in fact it might be cheaper to just junk all the electrical appliances and install new, discount for quantity anyone.

      Unfortunately, these are the types of hazards that we get when the green environmental agenda takes precedence over real engineering standards. Stir in politicians and the EU and then wonder what sort of chance real standards have.

    • Edward Lyman
      July 1, 2017 at 22:57

      These are interesting points being raised.
      One possible solution to the floating neutral problem as well the capacitor problem would be to provide Flats inside tower blocks with 3 phase power.
      Then require fridge manufacturers to offer 3 phase Fridges. I understand Germany already does offer 3 phase to residences. Could the Importance of the Grenfell tragedy bring about such far reaching changes.

      Edward Lyman
      Westford Massachusetts USA

  4. Mark in Mayenne
    June 30, 2017 at 08:12

    3 phase with floating neutral. Interesting.

    If someone tried to save money by making the neutral return thinner on the basis that the load is mostly balanced, it could fry with an unbalanced load.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *