Fire / Smoke Damper Requriments in a Rated Corridor

[liarchitect]

I have a building that is 2 stories, 5000 sf per floor for a total of 1000 sf no cellar, slab on grade.

It is a "b" occupancy for people of special needs, Type IIb construction.

Full Sprinkler

The exit corridors are required to be a min of 1 hour, but the owner has requested the wall be 2 hour rated.

Each section in the code i read, there are conflicts that they are required, and other section they state that based on an exception they are not required.

Thank you in advance for your help

 

[cda]

are you asking if the dampers are required??

so why do they want to do two hour walls???

if the building is sprinkled can be non rated

what edition of IBC is this under??

and we are talking corridor and not passageway??

 

[liarchitect]

rated corridor

 

[liarchitect]

The 2008 New York City Building Code is based on the 2003 International Building Code.

 

[cda]

so why do they want to do two hour walls???

if the building is sprinkled can be non rated corridor

I guess if they want a true rated corridor , then they need to do true dampers, unless they meet an exception

 

[north star]

+ +

If they put in 2 hr. rated, "non-required" fire barriers, then

it seems like the fire dampers would not be required [ see

Section 716.5.2, Exception # 3, `06 IBC ].......Also, see

Section 716.5.4.1 for smoke dampers in Corridors.

= =

 

[Yankee]

+ +If they put in 2 hr. rated, "non-required" fire barriers, then

it seems like the fire dampers would not be required [ see

Section 716.5.2, Exception # 3, `06 IBC ].......Also, see

Section 716.5.4.1 for smoke dampers in Corridors.

= =

but there would be no point not putting in eqivilant dampers . . . .

 

[north star]

= =

If dampers are not required, why would someone want

to spend the extra money to install something that is

not required......Just saying that the unwarranted costs

are a factor.

& &

 

[Yankee]

= =If dampers are not required, why would someone want

to spend the extra money to install something that is

not required......Just saying that the unwarranted costs

are a factor.

& &

Why would someone want to spend the money building two hour walls when, with a "weak link" like no protection of penetrations through the two hour wall, makes the wall essentially worthless. . .

 

[Gregg Harris]

I think at times people tend to forget that our codes are a minimum standard and can be exceeded to have a more substantial outcome.

 

[lunatick]

Occassionally the codes, whether model or jurisdiction, will have requirements that increaes if you do more than is required.

See this with ADA and parking.

I have seen this with some jurididctions versions of the family unisex for A and M occupancies.

Now why would you want a 2 hour wall.

1. Perhaps it is an underwriter thing.

2. it could be they really want to use a specific UL listed wall that is 2 hour.

3. They are going for a higher STC rating, associated with a specific wall design that is 2 hour.

4. They want more durability, and think by stating 2 hour, they are getting 2 layers each side of the stud wall.

5. security. more layers to cut through, harder to conceal. break ins.

Question is, why do they want a 2 hour wall and what is their expecation for doing it.

I don't think that would be an insulting question.

 

[AegisFPE]

The exit corridors are required to be a min of 1 hour, but the owner has requested the wall be 2 hour rated.Each section in the code i read, there are conflicts that they are required, and other section they state that based on an exception they are not required.

Sounds like a great project to involve a fire protection engineer or code consultant.It's unclear to me if the "Exit Corridor" might really be an "Exit Passageway."

 

[kilitact]

I think at times people tend to forget that our codes are a minimum standard and can be exceeded to have a more substantial outcome.

I agree. if they want a two hour fire barrier they need to meet all of the requirements for a two hour fire barrier.