Home / Bengaluru India
The façade system comprised heat-strengthened ET425 coated glass and toughened units in both laminated and double-glazed (DGU) configurations.
We were instructed to inspect six representative panels across two towers to assess reported defects and determine whether the issue was isolated or indicative of broader quality concerns.
During the construction phase, visible defects began appearing across sections of the installed façade.
The concerns were not limited to a single type of issue.
Several panels showed edge chipping and corner damage. In multiple locations, breakage had already occurred.
Other units displayed noticeable optical distortion that was clearly visible from over 50 metres away well within normal viewing distance for a residential tower of this scale.
In addition to glass-related concerns, installation quality issues were observed. These included:
At this stage of construction, the developer needed clear answers to two questions:
Were these defects originating from manufacturing, or were they caused during handling and installation?
And more importantly, how extensive was the problem?
A full replacement programme would significantly affect cost and schedule. However, leaving defective panels in place would impact both performance and visual quality in a premium residential development.
The project required an independent technical assessment before any corrective action was decided.
The Glass Company was appointed to conduct a structured on-site inspection and provide an unbiased evaluation of:
The objective was not simply to list defects, but to determine responsibility, quantify risk, and define the extent of necessary remediation.
We systematically inspected six panels at different locations and documented:
Beyond mechanical damage, we identified systematic installation issues:
During the inspection, we observed significant optical distortion on installed façade panels:
Root Cause Analysis – Roller Wave Distortion:
The distortion likely resulted from:
We conducted on-site fragmentation tests:
Primary Cause - External mechanical impact during construction
Secondary Factors - None identified (glass quality acceptable)
Primary Cause - High-velocity impact on edge zone
Secondary Factors - Edge vulnerability inherent to tempered/heat-strengthened glass
Primary Cause -Incomplete gasket application, debris entrapment
Secondary Factors - Quality control failure during installation phase
Primary Cause - Tempering furnace process parameters
Secondary Factors - Reflective coating thermal effects
Primary Cause - Manufacturing defect in inner glass ply
Secondary Factors - Float glass production quality issue
By identifying defects early and distinguishing between manufacturing, installation, and post-installation damage, the developer was able to:
