• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Electrical Panel inset between studs of garage

mtlogcabin said:
Simple answer. No.The IRC is prescriptive and a thermal barrier is only required to protect the interior of the building from foam plastics

What you are trying to accomplish is good I just do not see the code lanquage to achieve it.

BTW I agree a gypsum door installed over the panel would provide the extra protection you are seeking
Click to expand...
I don't want extra protection, I want to understand what this section expects. 1/2" gyp or equivalent is called for, I can't make a metal cabinet equivalent no matter how hard I try.Thanks for the discussion, it will be a "closet" in this case with instruction that any future panel must be mounted after the gyp/equivalent has been installed.
 
= o =



"BTW I agree a gypsum door installed over the panel would provide the extra protection you are seeking"
Click to expand...
Until it is accidently left open.....IMO, the intent & letter of the requirementis for there to be a passive level of protection installed.....Any door would

require an active participation, however compliant......Also, if a gyp. board

door is installed over the existing panel door, would that door be installed

with springs?....Not to say that it hasn't occurred in other places [ **ICE'**

contractors come to mind ], but an afterthought, springloaded, gyp. board

fabricated door over an existing elec. panel door may not look the best.

I would vote for a compliant, passive solution now!



= o =
 
north star said:
= o =Until it is accidently left open.....IMO, the intent & letter of the requirement

is for there to be a passive level of protection installed.....Any door would

require an active participation, however compliant......Also, if a gyp. board

door is installed over the existing panel door, would that door be installed

with springs?....Not to say that it hasn't occurred in other places [ **ICE'**

contractors come to mind ], but an afterthought, springloaded, gyp. board

fabricated door over an existing elec. panel door may not look the best.

I would vote for a compliant, passive solution now!



= o =
Click to expand...
I think it would be reasonable to accept a door that meets the requirements for the door from garage into the house (20 min or solid wood etc etc). Better than a gyp door in most ways.
 
= : =

Yankee,

After all of the discussion, have you come to a decision as to what

you will do?

Besides, ...we have only put in 99 reponses so far, and I just had

to make it 100 ! :D

Don't know if this horse is completely dead yet or not !

= : =
 
north star said:
= : =Yankee,

After all of the discussion, have you come to a decision as to what

you will do?

Besides, ...we have only put in 99 reponses so far, and I just had

to make it 100 ! :D

Don't know if this horse is completely dead yet or not !

= : =
Click to expand...
Yes, I am going to have them build out another interior wall with a 20 min or solid wood door and gyp the garage side of that wall. Keeping in mind the clearances required for the panels. I think I will also send an inquiry to ICC for an opinion on this topic.
 
Yankee said:
I think it would be reasonable to accept a door that meets the requirements for the door from garage into the house (20 min or solid wood etc etc). Better than a gyp door in most ways.
Click to expand...
That door is required to be self closing and latching...No?

Just to clarify for my own selfish reference......Living space over attached garage....exterior bearing wall not adjacent to dwelling, but holding up "bonus room"....is there anyone out there requiring garage doors, windows, etc, to have the rough openings wrapped with drywall prior to finishes being installed? To protect headers and jack studs, Etc....
 
steveray said:
That door is required to be self closing and latching...No?Just to clarify for my own selfish reference......Living space over attached garage....exterior bearing wall not adjacent to dwelling, but holding up "bonus room"....is there anyone out there requiring garage doors, windows, etc, to have the rough openings wrapped with drywall prior to finishes being installed? To protect headers and jack studs, Etc....
Click to expand...
No, to both.
 
This topic is a good example of why pictures would be of great assistance to

the Forum viewers and responders.

Thanks "Yankee" for the topic!

.
 
steveray said:
So...the vinyll windows and Azek at the garage doors are protecting the structure?
Click to expand...
I know what you are saying but I don't know your point (if you have one).
 
My point would be that if you accept the windows and doors.....you must accept the panel....and just making sure I am not missing something that the rest of the world is enforcing....and agree it has been a good discussion...
 
steveray said:
My point would be that if you accept the windows and doors.....you must accept the panel....and just making sure I am not missing something that the rest of the world is enforcing....and agree it has been a good discussion...
Click to expand...
I see. . . well, I think windows and doors happen in every garage and I somehow think they are never protected under this section so that is kind of status quo. Typically I see the panels installed on a sheet that is on the gyp. So the installation of a panel between the studs in this location is unusual for around here, and I don't wish to allow that to become the status quo, until I understand that it is not a detrimental penetration of the separation required.
 
ICE said:
Where is the code that says that the panel can't be installed in the wall?Nobody can come up with a code so Yankee is left with his opinion. Common sense isn't being applied.
Click to expand...
The codes are in general a permissive code. If it is not permitted it would state that but there is no way that it can state every possible means that may be allowed. You cannot expect to find a code section that explicitly states that a panel may be allowed in a fire wall. It appears there is no wording that states directly that a panel cannot be installed in a fire wall either.
 
Dennis said:
The codes are in general a permissive code. If it is not permitted it would state that but there is no way that it can state every possible means that may be allowed. You cannot expect to find a code section that explicitly states that a panel may be allowed in a fire wall. It appears there is no wording that states directly that a panel cannot be installed in a fire wall either.
Click to expand...
Actually, if this was a rated wall, there would be more code language as to how to install or not install a membrane penetration such as this.
 
I also assumed a wall between an attached garage and the dwelling would be a fire rated wall. So what my comments have been about is drivng into a garage. Park the car and walk directly into the house via a door between the garage and the home. So the door and panel would be on the same wall.

I have never seen anyone get red tagged on it but that does not mean much as many inspectors may not be aware of it as a problem. Obviously we seem to run the course on possibilities here. Needless to say it still is not clear to me if it is a violation. I will call our state engineers and get their take on it.
 
Dennis said:
I also assumed a wall between an attached garage and the dwelling would be a fire rated wall. So what my comments have been about is drivng into a garage. Park the car and walk directly into the house via a door between the garage and the home. So the door and panel would be on the same wall.I have never seen anyone get red tagged on it but that does not mean much as many inspectors may not be aware of it as a problem. Obviously we seem to run the course on possibilities here. Needless to say it still is not clear to me if it is a violation. I will call our state engineers and get their take on it.
Click to expand...
It isn't fire rated as far as the IRC is concerned. Maybe you have a local regulation? I would be interested in what your engineers have to say, although I am not sure engineers are necessarily adept at reading code language that does not fall under their area of expertise (but maybe you have fire protection engineers or some-such that have a handle on this issue)
 
They call them engineers but they are the state code interpreters. It is part of the NC department of Insurance. I will try and call them tomorrow- today was crazy and I am worn out now.
 
:banghd:banghd

steveray said:
The garage seperation is not fire rated......at least in straight IRC land....and here in CT....if you can use 26 GA duct R309.1.1 (with no protection), why could you not have a panel? Electric guys want to say panel housing thickness? How many receptacles can I have on that wall?
Click to expand...
:banghd I dont think there listening
 
Now, look what I found today! Word sure travels quick. . . a junction box in a wall between the garage and the house, all boxed out with gyp. . . made me smile : )

View attachment 680

View attachment 680

/monthly_2013_03/572953c6eb477_Junctionbox.jpg.13094637e02687bbeed1e53145b346c5.jpg
 
I derive from the IBC exact language for this an exception to 3 story R3/U to be a non-separated mixed use provided the gypsum is installed. Again I don't see this as a rated penetration.

Albeit the technical committee is apparently unclear about the separation; quote on page 5: "Concerns remain with the separation requirements."

G59 – 12 (Work Group 3)

Francis
 
When it comes to recessed can lights and other penetrations; this seems as a good place to post this formal code interpretation that relates to the discussion about penetrations;


SECTION R302.6 2015 Edition IRC Interpretation 04-16 Issued 5-19-2016


Q: The separation from habitable rooms above the garage is to be 5/8" Type X gypsum board. Are membrane penetrations through the 5/8" Type X gypsum board required to be fire-resistance rated?

A: No.


The separation is not a fire-resistance rated assembly. Section R302.6 simply requires a layer of 5/8" Type X gypsum board on the garage side.

Openings and penetrations through walls or ceilings separating the dwelling from the garage are to be in accordance with Sections R302.5.1 through R302.5.3. These provisions are also prescriptive requirements.

Section R302.5.1 addresses openings, Section R302.5.3 addresses duct penetrations, and Section R302.5.3 addresses "all other penetrations" of the separation between the garage and dwelling.

Section R302.5.3 requires such "other penetrations" to be protected in accordance with Section R302.11, Item 4. Even though Section R302.11, Item 4 specifically mentions only vents, pipes, ducts, cables, and wires, the intent is that penetrations of the 5/8" Type X gypsum board membrane by such items, as well as other similar items, be fireblocked by simply filling the annular space around "the penetration" with an approved material to resist the free passage of flame and products of combustion. The material filling the annular space is not required to meet the ASTM E136 requirements.
 
Thanks for the info FV! OK.....So now say my 16' garage door header is not 2 18" LVL's exposed on the bottom....It's a girder truss with a 2x4 bottom chord....Not so much a membrane penetration,(but I do agree with that part) as an overlooked piece of structure at times....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top