mark handler
SAWHORSE
I have allowed it as an alternate means, but required a manufacture's certified installer.
But it's not an alternative. Nothing in the code requires tempered glass for safety glazing. Tempered glass is not the "prescriptive benchmark" for which an alternative must be weighed against. The code requires the standards be met, that's it. A product meeting the IRC referenced standards is NOT an alternate means. It's code.I have allowed it as an alternate means, but required a manufacture's certified installer.
Yes, when it comes to "identification" to verify compliance of said "products" tested to referenced standards, the BO's discretion is required. This is made clear in exception 1 to 308.1. This is where your follow through with verification of the install is perfect.Glenn,
I think what Mark was saying was that we are a little more comfortable when stuff comes from a factory than when JimBob puts it on in the field....Sometimes even if that factory has no oversight in another country and JimBob is an excellent craftsman....
I can't remember all of the details, but I had a 200 unit apartment building where they missed the "tempered" glass next to a lot of doors...I suggest they could do field applied but wanted the product info. When I got it, I told them what i wanted to witness per the install instructions in the field and they decided to swap the glass....
First of all I said nothing about Tempered glass.But it's not an alternative. Nothing in the code requires tempered glass for safety glazing. Tempered glass is not the "prescriptive benchmark" for which an alternative must be weighed against. The code requires the standards be met, that's it. A product meeting the IRC referenced standards is NOT an alternate means. It's code.
Like preservative treated lumber. There might be a common type sold in your area, but that's not code. Code just says any product that complies with AWPA U1. Same thing as this subject.
It does if it meets the test standards. The code doesn't offer any "options" for safety glazing. It just provides a test standard. It doesn't put any compliant safety glazing above any other or suggest any type to anyone.Adding after the fact film to a window does not suddenly make it safety glazing.
What is requiring the upgrade of the old window?I Have a bathroom that has an old window that the clients don't want to touch but inspector wants it to be safety glass or the protective film that meets building code, does anyone know of a product i can buy and install myself? the inspector is going to check that it complies obviously.
i did get a 3M dealer to quote, but when i came to delivery he ghosted me. probably because its too smaller job.
The film satisfies the test standard by not collapsing (as you mention) and prohibiting a body from going through it. This is similar to why glass block and continuously backed mirrors are exceptions. In some locations, simply a bar in front is all it takes to be back to plain glass. The glass still breaks all over you, but you won't go through it. If the hazardous location is on the inside, and the inside pane is unbreachable, the outer pane is a non issue. Just like if there was a pane of glass on the other side of a glass block wall. I lean to looking at the code as a minimum standard and really seeking out the intent of the words. I would have a hard time explaining to the public why the outer pane needs something when the inner pane can't be breached.It has been awhile since I dealt with these films but I do remember most being required to be installed by a certified (by the MFR) installer, and I think most ESR reports have the same language.
On another note, many windows are double pane or triple pane. Per code each pane must be meet the safety standards. I have always understood this to be because a "tempered" glass will shatter, but not shard, but wouldn't prevent the next pane in the assembly from breaking and sharding. If memory serves, a lot of the films are not approved when exposed to the exterior, which presents a problem. Maybe products have improved since I had this happen, but it is something to watch out for. Not sure how a laminated glass or if a film that prevents collapse would apply to this logic. It is not as simple as just a peel and stick...unless things have really changed.
Really? I would argue that there's a window facing, and within five feet of, a bathtub.Ask the inspector if the would allow the window to be boarded up on the inside?
I would argue if there is no exposed glazing, there is no exposed glazing......
So...if there is an intervening wall? I can get through drywall easier than plywood....Really? I would argue that there's a window facing, and within five feet of, a bathtub.
I can't recall a time when someone "made me" approve something. It probably happened but as I grew into the job I came to realize that my decisions were my own. I suppose that not working "for" someone made a difference.The good news is, if you worked for me, I wouldn't "make you" approve it if you were uncomfortable with an alternative...I would....
I thought I remembered several comments you made about your office manager overriding your inspection decisions.I can't recall a time when someone "made me" approve something.
That was commonplace. Managers came up with all manner of strange things. Managers told me that I was not allowed to write corrections. What they did not succeed in doing was to get me to go along with it. I could be overridden by assigning another inspector or their signature but if I didn't want to approve something there was damned little that they could do about it.I thought I remembered several comments you made about your office manager overriding your inspection decisions.
3M Window filmso, is a drop test better than a "swing " test of the weight?