• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Existing elevator shaft not to code?

Coder

Coder

REGISTERED
Joined
Nov 15, 2011
Messages
306
Location
Colorado
First of all happy holidays! Hopefully you are still enjoying a break from work. I unfortunately, am not. Another problem to solve arose over Christmas day and looking for advice from you guy's and gal's. Scenario is: A fairly new (2007)Holiday Inn Express here has suffered a sprinkler pipe burst that pretty much damaged 3 entire floors with water including an elevator shaft. The existing elevator shaft was designed to be a UL listed 1- hour assembly of wood framing with one layer of type "C" 5/8" sheetrock on each side of the shaft wall. The actual finished product that was approved by my predecessor was 2 layers of 5/8" type "X" on the inner wall of the shaft. The restoration company is questioning the sheetrock replacement and whether or not they can just put it back the way it was or if they need to do more to physically achieve a 1-hour fire- rated assembly. My question to the group: Is there a listed 1 hour assembly out there that is comprised of two layers type X on one side that I can provide as documented acceptance of the original installation so they can put it back the way it was? Or if not how would you proceed? Thanks in advance. Eric
 
Hopefully have enough clearance

Does the shaft have to be rated? Not near the books sorry
 
If there is a CO...there is documented acceptance......if that is un acceptable to you, you might be able to find a 1hr rated assembly, I have seen it for hard ceilings in stairwells...Drywall manufacturers usually have good easy assemblies to find (USG, Lefarge, etc...)
 
cda said:
Hopefully have enough clearance Does the shaft have to be rated? Not near the books sorry
Click to expand...
Three story hotel building of type vb construction.

708.4 Fire-resistance rating. Shaft enclosures shall have a fire-resistance rating of not less than 2 hours where connecting four stories or more, and not less than 1 hour where connecting less than four stories. The number of stories connected by the shaft enclosure shall include any basements but not any mezzanines. Shaft enclosures shall have a fire-resistance rating not less than the floor assembly penetrated, but need not exceed 2 hours. Shaft enclosures shall meet the requirements of Section 703.2.1.

With commentary for meeting the requirements of 703.2.1 Nonsymmetrical wall construction: The reference to Section 703.2.1 is a 2009 revision to this section. The intent is that fire-resistance-rated shaft-enclosure walls must be rated from fire exposure from both sides; that is, they must be symmetrical assemblies or assume the rating of the least rated side. This has always been the case, but this makes it abundantly clear.

Sounds to me like the one sided shaft liner doesn't work? Thanks for the replies. For the record, my initial response to all this was for them to put it back the way it was.
 
School me. I thought rated assemblies were rated with an airspace, meaning it has to be protected on both sides of the framing. If not it's just rated on one side.

Brent.
 
That is all good information. Thanks for the input gang. The problem with attempting to do anything to the back side of the shaft wall is that it is inaccessible. Would require major de-construction of the entire surrounding building in order to attempt to place any type of wall board against the back side. Another problem is that space on the interior of the shaft wall is limited due to the existing configuration of elevator components. The third scenario is there is another elevator that was not affected by the water damage that was built the same way so if they redo one they would have to do the other. sounds like I am going to just tell them to re-install the two layers on the inside like it was and be done with it.
 
With the understanding you have to do something, what is the point of two layers?

I ask this as we had the same problem in San Francisco with row houses. Just doubling up, even if you do it to both properties, does not create an assembly. Fire can attack the framing because of free flowing air sources, and therefor burn what holds the gyp board up. Basically it turned into an inspector want instead of a code requirement.

If you can't protect the framing in both sides then why bother doubling up the drywall ?

Brent
 
Disagree on both shafts would tell them if they touch the other shaft at any time

Fix it.

The dens glass system is just H channel and the two sheets slip in

Even with the Sheetrock redo it will not be perfect
 
I believe it can be done from the inside, but it needs to be structurally independent from the studs. eg 1" shaft board with steel channels. Definitely cannot be done by just doubling up GWB on one side.

Tim
 
In the event of a fire, the intent of the shaft protection is to keep the fire from reaching other floors via the shaft. The intent isn't to protect the elevators. So keeping the fire out of the shaft isn't as important as keeping the fire in the shaft. Since it was built with no legitimate firewall, it is really difficult to make them start over.

The bottom line is that this call shouldn't fall on an inspector. Hand it to the BO. If you are the BO, this is why you get paid the big bucks.
 
Ice, if fire starts on floor one, eats the framing in the shaft causing it to fail, does that not compromise the whole system? Especially if There are clear draft ways in the frame behind the shaft?

Or are you saying the 2 layers protect the rest of the shaft adequately once compromised ?

Brent
 
I went back over there to re-evaluate the situation. It appears that there was sheetrock on the back sides of the shaft wall as well. However, I also noticed that the sheet rock stops and starts at each floor being separated by a beam of the floor ceiling assembly. Having the interior of the shaft doubled up and the exterior of the shaft sheetrocked continuous between each floor ceiling assembly which is a sheetrocked lid and gypcrete floor seems adequate in meeting the intent of the code. ICE, I am the Building Official/inspector/other duties as assigned so typically, it is solely up to me and occasionally the City attorney. As far as making the big bucks, that is another story.:-D
 
Rated shafts in wood frame platform construction are rarely done properly (the first time), which is why I try to beat the hell out of the details on a plan review.....IMO
 
cda said:
Do the shafts have a sprinkler head in them?
Click to expand...
Required at the bottom to extinguish a fire that may be fueled by debris that collect in the bottom. Not required at the top.

Tim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top