Existing Non-Rated Door Assemblies in Rated Corridor

[indyarchyguy]

I have a project that involves an existing building (school). The building is an existing, non-sprinklered building with 1-hour corridors. The doors leading to the classrooms are solid-wood core doors that are not labeled, nor are the frames. There is a wood transom above each door. There is no door frame header between the top of the door and the wood transom. My client wants to replace the doors with 20-min rated doors. My interpretation is that if you replace the door, then you have modified the assembly and therefore would need to replace the door frames and transom to correct the assembly. The Owner's rep is arguing back that if you only replace the door, then you haven't modified the assembly so you wouldn't have to replace the frame and transom. This is in a jurisdiction using amended 2015 IBC. Thoughts?

 

[mtlogcabin]

The doors leading to the classrooms are solid-wood core doors that are not labeled, nor are the frames.

Then the existing doors and frames are not a tested listed assembly

There is a wood transom above each door.

Are you protecting that opening?

 

[indyarchyguy]

Then the existing doors and frames are not a tested listed assembly

Are you protecting that opening?

Yes, I am aware the existing door and frame is not a tested listed assembly....hence my question. And as per the statement, there is no sprinkler system in the building. This is the conundrum. Technically they are not removing the existing frame or elements of the opening....if this fell under maintenance, they could replace the door with a rated door.....they are not altering the path of egress, the door hardware, etc. It would all be replaced like for like. My concern is that the door and frame "should be"....but it never was and has existing for many years like it is.

In my interpretation, I think you are stuck with replacing the entire assembly....however, that was not called out in the documents. I think we are in a murky gray area and that is why I am looking for thoughts on this. They are not going to install a sprinkler system. They could say they won't replace the door and hardware at all and it could remain as is....however, the Owner's want the new doors. My thought is it could be under maintenance since technically you are not altering anything and it is making is better (in some really weird aspect).

 

[princeofpen]

1104.17.1 of the IFC does permit a 1 3/4 solid door where 20 min doors are required. Although I'll add that in all the existing schools the company I work for designs a proper door opening w/protection is SOP including the rated glazing and frame for transom and sidelights

 

[Paul Sweet]

Did the code that the school was built under require rated doors? 1 3/4" solid-core wood doors in metal frames were the basis for 20 minute doors.

 

[RLGA]

IEBC Section 602.1 allows existing materials already in use to remain. Obviously, the doors and frames are not considered tested assemblies since they have no labels, and their performance during a fire is questionable.

I suggest asking the building official what they would be willing to accept before taking any action.

Some manufacturers provide 20-minute-rated doors with transoms, so replacing the existing doors with 20-minute-rated doors would be an improvement over the existing doors and transoms, even if the door frames are not replaced.

However, you can get field labeling of a door frame, but only from an accredited source (e.g., DH Pace Compliance Services.). Thus, there should be no issue if you can get the frames field-labeled for 20 minutes and replace the doors and transoms with new, 20-minute-rated doors.

 

[indyarchyguy]

1104.17.1 of the IFC does permit a 1 3/4 solid door where 20 min doors are required. Although I'll add that in all the existing schools the company I work for designs a proper door opening w/protection is SOP including the rated glazing and frame for transom and sidelights

I do not disagree with you at all. Typically, and especially in this instance, I would have designed based on new frames, transom and door to be a rated assembly. So weird this got by the DOR.

 

[steveray]

I would agree with what Ron said and add that generally....Only what you replace would have to meet "new" without having to upgrade what you are not affecting...As long as you don't make it less safe...There are several sections that say this different ways...

702.7 Materials and Methods​

New work shall comply with the materials and methods requirements in the International Building Code, International Energy Conservation Code, International Mechanical Code and International Plumbing Code, as applicable, that specify material standards, detail of installation and connection, joints, penetrations and continuity of any element, component or system in the building.

701.2 Conformance
An existing building or portion thereof shall not be altered such that the building becomes less safe than its existing condition.

302.4 New and Replacement Materials​

Except as otherwise required or permitted by this code, materials permitted by the applicable code for new construction shall be used. Like materials shall be permitted for repairs and alterations, provided that unsafe conditions are not created. Hazardous materials shall not be used where the code for new construction would not permit their use in buildings of similar occupancy, purpose and location.