CROSS Safety Report
Inadequate design of cantilever glass barriers
This report is over 2 years old
A reporter has observed a growing number of cases where cantilever glass balustrades in public buildings are, in their view, inadequately designed.
Key Learning Outcomes
For civil and structural design engineers:
Where specialist systems such as glass barriers are used, it is beneficial to have a close working relationship with the supplier from the earliest opportunity to ensure design requirements are met
The reporter highlights that the use of an interlayer may not always be the solution as it can deteriorate under UV light, or debond if water sits on top and works its way into the make-up
It is good practice to undertake a risk assessment to ensure that if the glass fails the risk to public safety is minimised
If you are involved in the design of glass panels barriers it is good practice to consult The Centre for Windows and Cladding Technology (CWCT) standards and guidelines
Find out more about the Full Report
The Full Report below has been submitted to CROSS and describes the reporter’s experience. The text has been edited for clarity and to ensure anonymity and confidentiality by removing any identifiable details. If you would like to know more about our secure reporting process or submit a report yourself, please visit the reporting to CROSS-UK page.
A reporter has observed a growing number of cases where cantilever glass balustrades in public buildings are, in their view, designed inadequately. They believe the underlying cause for this is contradictions both within and between current design standards - clarity is required. Monolithic toughened glass is sometimes adopted, and laminated toughened glass is often adopted - neither are appropriate.
Monolithic toughened glass
Monolithic glass shatters into both dice and large clumps of glass, which can cause serious injury to occupants below. Monolithic glass leaves a gap in the barrier when it shatters. Even where a handrail is retained to span between adjacent glass panes, small children, buggies and wheelchairs may fall through the resulting gap.
Laminated toughened glass
Toughened laminated glass is often specified, because toughened glass is the strongest form of glass and the interlayer is assumed to prevent it from falling from its support. In fact, deflection tends to govern glass barrier design meaning that achieving the highest possible strength is generally not important. Furthermore, when both plies fail, laminated toughened glass loses its out of plane stiffness and collapses. In such circumstances, a standard polyvinyl butyral (PVB) layer is at risk of tearing, which would permit the entire sheet of glass to fall en masse.
In fact, deflection tends to govern glass barrier design meaning that achieving the highest possible strength is generally not important
For occupants below, this is more dangerous than clumps of monolithic toughened glass. Such failures can occur despite the presence of a handrail. As with monolithic toughened glass, an unacceptable gap would be left in the barrier. Cantilever glass barriers should be designed with laminated glass that has at least one ply [preferably two] made of heat strengthened glass. Heat strengthened glass fractures in large pieces, which when combined with a PVB interlayer, can span vertically between the base support and handrail.
The following design criteria are proposed for cantilever glass balustrades made with laminated glass:
Design for strength using standard barrier loads; assume both plies contribute to resistance
Design for serviceability using standard barrier loads and deflection limits; assume that both plies contribute to resistance
Specify glass suitable for standard impact resistance
Assume that an accident occurs and 1 ply breaks
Design for strength using standard barrier loading; assume 1 ply contributes to resistance
Ignore the serviceability criteria
Assume that both plies break
Design the handrail to span between adjacent panes using standard barrier loading
Specify glass plies suitable for spanning between the handrail and base support after they have fractured
Submit a report
Your report will make a difference. It will help to create positive change and improve safety.
Our secure and confidential safety reporting system gives professionals the opportunity to share their experiences to help others.
I'm not sure that SCOSS is the appropriate venue for such a discussion. As noted in the editor's comments, there will be disagreement regarding the interpretation, particularly as pretty much every cantilever glass balustrade I have seen would not meet the reporter's recommendations. That is not to say they are incorrect, but a general report like this should take place in a way that there could be discussion within the industry. If there is a problem then it needs to be talked about openly. A letter in Verulam say might provide more opportunity for response and reflection.
Thank you for the feedback. We have several reports about glass elements in buildings and there is certainly a diversity of views about how these should be designed. This has already been raised within IStructE for further consideration. Your feedback will be published and, of course, please do write to Verulam if you want take the discussion forward. We are always keen to promote debate and are also careful not to be prescriptive but to raise safety awareness for practitioners.
Expert Panel Comments
Expert Panels comment on the reports we receive. They use their experience to help you understand what can be learned from the reports. If you would like to know more, please visit the CROSS-UK Expert Panels page.
This is an interesting report. There might be designers who disagree with the suggestions, but the report nevertheless highlights a key design task of looking at modes of failure first. It also highlights the need to consider the real possibility of failure but then to question what failure means and to assess an appropriate design offering least risk. The report addresses cantilever barriers, but the topic would be equally relevant to many other glass designs where different conclusions might be drawn about the best type of glass to use.
It also highlights the need to consider the real possibility of failure but then to question what failure means and to assess an appropriate design offering least risk
A useful reference is Structural use of glass in buildings (second edition) published by The Institution of Structural Engineers (IStructE) in 2014. The Centre for Window and Cladding Technology (CWCT) based at Bath University is a source of guidance in respect to the type of glass to be used and in what combination in different situations. Within this is a requirement to undertake a risk assessment to ensure that if the glass fails the risk to the public is minimised. A further source is C632 - Guidance on Glazing at Height published by the Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA).
As the reporter says the use of an interlayer is not always the solution as it can deteriorate under UV light, or debond if water sits on top and works its way into the make-up. Glass configurations can also be subjected to impact testing for hard and soft bodies to mimic the effects of cleaning cradles or body impact.