Essentially, there is no situation in which a glass risk assessment shouldn't be undertaken for glass used in a building envelope or similar.
The aim of a glass risk assessment is not to check whether or not a particular glass specification is acceptable or unacceptable, but to judge the risk of different glass make ups and select the most appropriate in terms of safety, risk, cost, energy requirements etc.
Guidance for undertaking glass risk assessments on glazing that has a potential to fall on breakage, causing safety or other concerns is provided in the CIRIA document; ‘Guidance on Glazing at Height’. Further guidance on risk assessment, glass types and testing are provided in CWCT Technical Notes 61, 66, 67, 69, 99 and 112.
It is important to consider that any individual that makes a decision regarding the selection of glass, whether that is limiting the glass type by appearance, cost, environmental impact or other requirement, becomes a designer under the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations and should be aware of their duties and obligations under this legislation.
Further to the above, many stakeholders in the project are involved in the process and it is important not to rely on individual companies or entities to provide risk assessments in isolation, in regards to this Technical Note 112 states;
‘Where possible, all parties involved in the design, construction, use and ownership of the building should be consulted when preparing a risk assessment. The design team should carry out the initial risk assessment which should be reviewed and if appropriate amended by the main contractor and specialist contractor. A risk assessment should establish any residual risk and who is responsible for the risk.’
Revision 1, 25 May 2023
Duncan Grover - November 14, 2024
Glass is a complex material, and the demands placed on its performance in buildings is constantly evolving. Risk assessments for the safe and appropriate selection of glass must be integrated early in the design phase; however, these assessments should not be regarded as a singular evaluation. Instead, they should be a repetitive process, continuously informing design decisions throughout the entire process.
While assessments offer valuable insights for selecting glass, it is worth considering whether alternative building designs that incorporate different materials could be more suitable. Rather than solely focusing on reducing risks associated with glass selection, exploring options that leverage alternative materials may provide a more effective and safer solution in the overall design strategy.
Robert Simcock - October 25, 2024
These TN’s are great guidance from the CWCT and they are some of the key TN’s which my technical team continually refer back to. Quite often, especially for Tier 2 and lower projects, we inherit a Stage 3 or 4 completed design (as a Main Contractor) and Glass Risk Assessments have not been considered although glass constructions have been specified (sometimes very loosely) – often driven by cost or aesthetics without any appreciation of the risk – in terms of safety risk and warranty costs (such as NiS failure risk) – probably as the choice to go with the cheapest glass construction is often welcomed by the early stakeholders – who may consider the risk is passed onto the Main and Facade Contractor/s if they consider to need to make a change (at their cost). Quite often we have to have late stage 4 or early stage 5 discussions with the stakeholders regarding both these risks and have to re-evaluate the glass constructions – which ultimately then affects the cost plan, and who bears this cost? It is a topic which really needs to be considered by the design teams at an early stage