Industry body guide on rooflight fragility published
The National Association of Rooflight Manufacturers (NARM) has published a guide with practical specification advice on non-fragile rooflights.
The document is intended to inform specifiers of the ‘hazards’ which can be caused by using undefined terms such as “man-safe” and “walkable” when referring to rooflight specification. The document offers practical recommendations for specification as well as typical load capacities for walk-on rooflights.
NARM also includes general guidance for safety on roofs in its new document.
The document entitled NARM NTD 11 – Understanding the differences between “non-fragile” rooflights and “walk-on” rooflights for deliberate foot traffic can be downloaded from the Technical Documents section of the NARM website.
Document prepared to clarify confusion
The introduction to the document states:
“Non-fragility of rooflights is a complex subject which can be influenced by many different factors, including material selection, design and the competence of the installer. For this reason, over the years, NARM has advocated that whatever the non-fragility rating or age of a rooflight, it should be considered as if it may be fragile and foot traffic on rooflights should always be avoided.
This advice does require a caveat, as there is a very specialised class of rooflights which are specifically designed for foot traffic. These are very high specification glass structures designed to floor loadings and installed in-plane with external floors on roof decks and roof terraces where pedestrian access is unrestricted. This type of specialist product has been available for many years, with notable examples providing tourist attractions on towers and other structures. In recent years these ‘walk-on’ rooflights have become more widely used, with many now providing a means by which homeowners are able to improve space utilisation offered by roof areas.
This document has been prepared to clarify confusion resulting from terms used to describe these products, and the hazards that can result from incorrect use of undefined and ambiguous terms such as ‘man-safe’ and ‘walkable’.”