Framed Header Type IIA Construction Fire Sprinklered

[jar546]

An existing building has an opening for a slider. During restoration of the exterior of the building, the slider to a condo must be removed. When removed it is determined that the opening was reduced with a framed header of unknown timeframe. It could have been during construction or sometime afterwards. It is a Type IIA construction.

The condition of the wood framed header has deteriorated and has to be replaced. Must they by code:

1) Form and pour a new header in place of the rotted wood frame.
2) Be allowed to reframe a new header so they don't have to buy a larger slider to fit the opening.

 

[classicT]

2020 FBC - IEBC 801.3 Compliance
All new construction elements, components, systems, and spaces shall comply with the requirements of the Florida Building Code, Building.
Exceptions:

1. Windows may be added without requiring compliance with the light and ventilation requirements of the Florida Building Code, Building.
2. Newly installed electrical equipment shall comply with the requirements of Section 808.
3. The length of dead-end corridors in newly constructed spaces shall only be required to comply with the provisions of Section 805.6.
4. The minimum ceiling height of the newly created habitable and occupiable spaces and corridors shall be 7 feet (2134 mm).

However, what I would also consider is...

2020 FBC - IBC 603.1 Allowable Materials
Combustible materials shall be permitted in buildings of Type I or II construction in the following applications and in accordance with Sections 603.1.1 through 603.1.3:

1. Fire-retardant-treated wood shall be permitted in:
   
   1. 1.1. Nonbearing partitions where the required fire-resistance rating is 2 hours or less.
   2. 1.2. Nonbearing exterior walls where fire-resistance-rated construction is not required.
   3. 1.3. Roof construction, including girders, trusses, framing and decking.
      
      Exception: In buildings of Type IA construction exceeding two stories above grade plane, fire-retardant-treated wood is not permitted in roof construction where the vertical distance from the upper floor to the roof is less than 20 feet (6096 mm).
2. continues...

14. Blocking such as for handrails, millwork, cabinets and window and door frames.​

15. continues...​

​

Assuming this is a masonry or concrete wall, the wood framing encountered is not supporting the structure of the building, so the risk of a structural failure during a fire is not a consideration point here. Fire loading of the building is possibly a concern, so require FR treated wood and move along.

 

[steveray]

If it were a structural header here it would likely be getting replaced...Was the building built under "modern codes or do you know when the violation was installed?

 

[jar546]

If it were a structural header here it would likely be getting replaced...Was the building built under "modern codes or do you know when the violation was installed?

All other buildings that have this issue require the headers to be replaced with concrete or install a larger, taller slider. This is an ocean facing condo in a 175mph wind zone, exposure D. This is the first time a contractor is trying to replace the rotted framing and not fill with steel and concrete.

 

[classicT]

All other buildings that have this issue require the headers to be replaced with concrete or install a larger, taller slider. This is an ocean facing condo in a 175mph wind zone, exposure D. This is the first time a contractor is trying to replace the rotted framing and not fill with steel and concrete.

What are your thoughts on FR treated wood? I'd require both architectural review and engineering given the construction type, wind zone and exposure

 

[steveray]

What are your thoughts on FR treated wood? I'd require both architectural review and engineering given the construction type, wind zone and exposure

FRTW only non-bearing....

 

[classicT]

FRTW only non-bearing....

Agree, as per the code I posted above. However, the FRTW would be non-bearing for gravity loads. The only load would be for the wind exposure. Non-FRTW would already be allowed for blocking at the windows anyways per 603.1 #14.

Given that the opening has had a non-compliant wood frame for who knows how long, a reasonable solution may be in order.

 

[steveray]

Yeah....guess I should have clarified structural vs. bearing....But if it is a "bearing wall" technically no FRTW even if the header is non-bearing or only resisting wind....Gets a little funky....

 

[Paul Sweet]

This sounds more like blocking for door frames than a structural header. It needs to be well attached to the structural header to be able to transfer wind loads directly into the structural header.

 

[jar546]

This sounds more like blocking for door frames than a structural header. It needs to be well attached to the structural header to be able to transfer wind loads directly into the structural header.

It is not vertical load bearing but it is certainly a wind load consideration for the exterior envelope.

 

[steveray]

It is not vertical load bearing but it is certainly a wind load consideration for the exterior envelope.

Is the wall bearing or is it a "primary frame" type building with no true bearing wall?