2012 IBC - "Smoke" Corridor

[Code]

Unrated corridors for an E (when sprinkled) with egress through intervening spaces, we didn't adopt the 2009, but this seems like a huge jump. I have an addition to a school that is adding a cafeteria and kitchen that has the outer walls of the cafeteria double as corridors to multiple exits. Exits that through the rest of the building used to have a rating and now are unprotected and I feel lack continuity. We must have got some really good data back on Fire Sprinklers.

All eggs in the Fire sprinkler basket.

 

[steveray]

It is now a corriteria....It's the hottest thing......

 

[jdfruit]

Code;

Would be interesting to see the floor plan. Have one to post?

 

[cda]

Unrated corridors for an E (when sprinkled) with egress through intervening spaces, we didn't adopt the 2009, but this seems like a huge jump. I have an addition to a school that is adding a cafeteria and kitchen that has the outer walls of the cafeteria double as corridors to multiple exits. Exits that through the rest of the building used to have a rating and now are unprotected and I feel lack continuity. We must have got some really good data back on Fire Sprinklers. All eggs in the Fire sprinkler basket.

So than what code are you currently under ??

We added an amendment to require smoke detection in non rated corridors

 

[cda]

What state are you in?

Is the exiting only for the kitchen employees or does it include the people in the dining area?

 

[Code]

We are under the 2006 IBC, our code adoption of the 2012 got delayed. In preliminary meetings we were forecasting out and allowing larger projects to design to the 2012, thinking it would ease the transition. (Ha) I like the smoke detection amendment. I'll see if I can post an image.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Exits that through the rest of the building used to have a rating and now are unprotected and I feel lack continuity

The existing corridors are still rated unless doors have been changed and holes knocked through the walls

Historically schools are pretty safe when it comes to fires. I don't like all the trade offs of reducing passive systems and compartmentalization for installing sprinklers.

 

[Code]

Addition

View attachment 1173

Corridors from the existing building come from the left and bottom.View attachment 1173

/monthly_2015_04/A-1.jpg.53b9a988002f356c05ab9c27bd99810c.jpg

 

[jdfruit]

Code,

I share your concern about continuity and maintaining fire rating. Code provision for maintaining fire rating should be considered for this project.

 

[cda]

Unrated corridors for an E (when sprinkled) with egress through intervening spaces, we didn't adopt the 2009, but this seems like a huge jump. I have an addition to a school that is adding a cafeteria and kitchen that has the outer walls of the cafeteria double as corridors to multiple exits. Exits that through the rest of the building used to have a rating and now are unprotected and I feel lack continuity. We must have got some really good data back on Fire Sprinklers. All eggs in the Fire sprinkler basket.

But 2006 also allows non rated corridor in an "E"

Seperate the old from the new?

 

[mtlogcabin]

3401.2 Maintenance.

Buildings and structures, and parts thereof, shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. Devices or safeguards which are required by this code shall be maintained in conformance with the code edition under which installed.

If rated corridors are no longer required for this structure/occupancy then how do you use the code to justify maintaining a fire rating that is no longer required?

If this was a brand new project would rated corridors be required? I don't think so from the info provided. Do not overstep your authority. JMHO

 

[cda]

3401.2 Maintenance.Buildings and structures, and parts thereof, shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. Devices or safeguards which are required by this code shall be maintained in conformance with the code edition under which installed.

If rated corridors are no longer required for this structure/occupancy then how do you use the code to justify maintaining a fire rating that is no longer required?

If this was a brand new project would rated corridors be required? I don't think so from the info provided. Do not overstep your authority. JMHO

That is the dollar question

Code changes, but the building was built under an older code.

Do you just throw out all the old code requirements, because the new code does not require them?

Can they go back into the building and remove all the rated doors?

Code normally does not work the opposite way, if the new code adopted requires sprinklers, an existing building is not retrofitted.

 

[cda]

3401.2 Maintenance.Buildings and structures, and parts thereof, shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. Devices or safeguards which are required by this code shall be maintained in conformance with the code edition under which installed.

If rated corridors are no longer required for this structure/occupancy then how do you use the code to justify maintaining a fire rating that is no longer required?

If this was a brand new project would rated corridors be required? I don't think so from the info provided. Do not overstep your authority. JMHO

That is the dollar question

Code changes, but the building was built under an older code.

Do you just throw out all the old code requirements, because the new code does not require them?

Can they go back into the building and remove all the rated doors?

Code normally does not work the opposite way, if the new code adopted requires sprinklers, an existing building is not retrofitted.

 

[mtlogcabin]

We have a few buildings that where evaluated under the new codes and the rated corridors went away. Usually it revolves around the sprinkler and notification system meeting current standards and not a 1970's NFPA standard when the building was constructed.

I still do not see how new construction can be required to meet an older code provision

3403.1 General.

Additions to any building or structure shall comply with the requirements of this code for new construction. Alterations to the existing building or structure shall be made to ensure that the existing building or structure together with the addition are no less conforming with the provisions of this code than the existing building or structure was prior to the addition. An existing building together with its additions shall comply with the height and area provisions of Chapter 5

The new part only has to comply with the current code. The existing part that may be modified only has to comply with the existing code.

 

[Code]

Existing building doesn't make exception 1 as classrooms don't have doors directly leading outside. So a 1hr w/20min doors would be required under the 2006. mtlogcabin "3401.2 safeguards shall be maintained in conformance with the code edition under which installed." Points to protection the old, while allowing the new corridors to be unrated under the 2012. cda's seperating the old from new might be the way to go. I think I need to discuss this with the design prof.

Thanks all, great forum!!

 

[cda]

We have a few buildings that where evaluated under the new codes and the rated corridors went away. Usually it revolves around the sprinkler and notification system meeting current standards and not a 1970's NFPA standard when the building was constructed.I still do not see how new construction can be required to meet an older code provision

3403.1 General.

Additions to any building or structure shall comply with the requirements of this code for new construction. Alterations to the existing building or structure shall be made to ensure that the existing building or structure together with the addition are no less conforming with the provisions of this code than the existing building or structure was prior to the addition. An existing building together with its additions shall comply with the height and area provisions of Chapter 5

The new part only has to comply with the current code. The existing part that may be modified only has to comply with the existing code.

I agree that you do not have the new meet the old.

Just a decision to make if the old has to be maintained under the code it was built.

Or does the BO decide no it doesn't

Or does the BO decide that some documentation has to be submitted requesting the old to be allowed to meet present code.

Besides corridors what else does not have to be maintained, fire stop, dampers, etc?

 

[Paul Sweet]

If I remember correctly, the current code requires quick-response sprinkler heads to have unrated corridors. We recently did major HVAC renovations on a building built under the 1981 BOCA code, and had to change the sprinkler heads from conventional to quick-response to remove the requirement for rating the corridor. Otherwise we would have had to add fire & smoke dampers at new penetrations of the corridor walls.

 

[mtlogcabin]

If I remember correctly, the current code requires quick-response sprinkler heads to have unrated corridors. We recently did major HVAC renovations on a building built under the 1981 BOCA code, and had to change the sprinkler heads from conventional to quick-response to remove the requirement for rating the corridor. Otherwise we would have had to add fire & smoke dampers at new penetrations of the corridor walls.

That is why the sprinkler system would have to meet today's current design standard. Not just the quick response heads heads but is the system designed to support the quick response heads water amounts.

[F] 903.3.2 Quick-response and residential sprinklers.

Where automatic sprinkler systems are required by this code, quick-response or residential automatic sprinklers shall be installed in the following areas in accordance with Section 903.3.1 and their listings:

1. Throughout all spaces within a smoke compartment containing care recipient sleeping units in Group I-2 in accordance with this code.

2. Throughout all spaces within a smoke compartment containing treatment rooms in ambulatory care facilities.

3. Dwelling units and sleeping units in Group I-1 and R occupancies.

4. Light-hazard occupancies as defined in NFPA 13.