Hallway vs corridor

[allis_ch]

I looked all around for this previous post, as I know (100% certain)

I have seen it before, but maybe it was on the old ICC forum site (before they improved it-ha).

So I guess I will open this can up again.

Its the age old question about if every hallway is required to be a corridor.

I ran across someone the other day who seems to believe that every hallway is required to be a corridor.

As I understand it (and as several ICC sponsored commentaries point out),

corridors are not required by the IBC; they are a choice available to the designer.

The root issue on deciding if you need a corridor (which is a form of EXIT PASSAGEWAY)

is all about the exit travel distance.

The age old question:

If I meet the required number of exits and the exit travel distance, etc., then can a hallway be a hallway

(see intervening room accessory to the main use per 1014.2) without having to be a corridor?

Note: in order to get the most out of this question, review the definitions in Sec 1002 of an EXIT- it is not the same as EXIT DISCHARGE,

and people frequently get two items those mixed up.

Thanks for renewing the discussion.

 

[cda]

Its the age old question about if every hallway is required to be a corridor::: NO

corridors are not required by the IBC:::: not required, but if they meet the defintion and serve a given occupant load, than they need to meet corridor provisions

The root issue on deciding if you need a corridor (which is a form of EXIT PASSAGEWAY)

is all about the exit travel distance :::: no see second response

If I meet the required number of exits and the exit travel distance, etc., then can a hallway be a hallway

(see intervening room accessory to the main use per 1014.2) without having to be a corridor? ::::: depends???

hallway ::: have to check to see what editions it was in and what editions it is not in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[RLGA]

A hallway was originally provided for in the 1997 UBC. The IBC got away from that. It is now either a rated corridor or an unrated corridor.

A corridor is defined as "an enclosed exit access component that defines and provides a path of egress travel to an exit. A hallway fits that definition, therefore, a hallway is a corridor.

Depending on the occupancy group, occupant load, and whether the building is sprinklered throughout or not will determine the protection requirements of the corridor.

 

[Coug Dad]

Hallway was introduced into the UBC in an attempt to clarify rated corrodors, non rated corridors and other pathways designated at "hallways". Didn't work out so well and created as much confusion as it hoped to clarify.

 

[permitguy]

The root issue on deciding if you need a corridor (which is a form of EXIT PASSAGEWAY) is all about the exit travel distance.

You receive no benefit in terms of exit access travel distance by adding a corridor to the design. A corridor is an exit access component (leading you to an exit), and an eixt passageway is an exit component (leading you to the exit discharge). Big difference. The root issues in deciding if you need a rated corridor (as RLGA pointed out) are occupancy classification, occupant load, and sprinklers.

 

[allis_ch]

Thank you to all- Its the "depends" answer that I am trying to nail down.

I realize that they can be useful tools. 2006 IBC

And I realize that if it is labeled as a corridor that there are certain rules that apply to corridors.

I will rephrase my generic question in a different manner:

Does someone have a code reference that indicates corridors are required at some point?

Assume the travel distances comply with 1016.1,

Assume that the egress width meets Table 1005.1.

Assume a loop configuration where we are not dealing with dead-end issues.

Assume multiple building exits complying with 1019.1

Can a nonrated intervening room have egress abilities for 50 occupants? 100 occupants? 200 occupants? etc?

(Please cite code section reference with your answers)

RGLA- thanks- however a room such as an office also is an enclosed exit access component but we don't call an office a corridor. (Technically all parts of the building -except possibly the attic or the crawlspace- are typically considered as part of the exit access.)

 

[RLGA]

RGLA- thanks- however a room such as an office also is an enclosed exit access component but we don't call an office a corridor. (Technically all parts of the building -except possibly the attic or the crawlspace- are typically considered as part of the exit access.)

I disagree. The operative word in the definition is "defines." A room may "provide" a path of travel, but it is not definitive like a corridor.

As to your question, there is no criteria that determines when a corridor is required. Intervening rooms are permitted and shall comply with Section 1014.2 (2006 IBC). The intervening room must be accessory to the room or space served, cannot be a high-hazard occupancy, and must provide a discernable path of egress to an exit.

 

[Mule]

Seems like I remember in the old day, UBC, something about occupant load of over 30 made it a corridor....... Just thinking~

 

[cda]

If someone has a code definition corridor built into the plans

Than you look at the corridor section to see what construction requirements there are

A typical place you would find a corridor would be a multi level building, but not always

You coul have a multi story building and have one floor with a open office concept an no corridors

 

[imhotep]

Seems like I remember in the old day, UBC, something about occupant load of over 30 made it a corridor....... Just thinking~

IBC 2009 Table 1018.1. B Occupancy > 30 = 1 hr. 0 hr if sprinkled.

 

[imhotep]

I looked all around for this previous post, as I know (100% certain) I have seen it before, but maybe it was on the old ICC forum site (before they improved it-ha).

So I guess I will open this can up again.

Its the age old question about if every hallway is required to be a corridor.

I ran across someone the other day who seems to believe that every hallway is required to be a corridor.

As I understand it (and as several ICC sponsored commentaries point out),

corridors are not required by the IBC; they are a choice available to the designer.

The root issue on deciding if you need a corridor (which is a form of EXIT PASSAGEWAY)

is all about the exit travel distance.

The age old question:

If I meet the required number of exits and the exit travel distance, etc., then can a hallway be a hallway

(see intervening room accessory to the main use per 1014.2) without having to be a corridor?

Note: in order to get the most out of this question, review the definitions in Sec 1002 of an EXIT- it is not the same as EXIT DISCHARGE,

and people frequently get two items those mixed up.

Thanks for renewing the discussion.

As discussed below the question really is whether or not the corridor is rated. IBC 2006 Table 1017.1 determines when a rating is required for a corridor in buildings both with and without sprinklers.

If you have exits that meet travel distances and the occupant load served by the corridor does not exceed the tabular value then no rating is required.

 

[Big Mac]

I think, as imhoptep, that the question really boils down to when a corridor is rated, or permitted to be unrated. Table 1018.1 answers the question of whther or not a corridor is required to be rated. As previously mentioned by others, the IBC does not use the tern hallway. Therefore a non-rated corridor is the least level of protection required and is in some ways synonomous with the term Hallway, used int he UBC.

Corridor is defined in Section 1002.2 as "An enclosed exit access component that defines and provides a path of egress travel to an exit." Therfore, the corridor is neither an exit or an exit discharge. In that way it is similar to a room whihc is also part of the exit access.

However, as opposed to a room, there are more instances where the corridor is required to be constructed as a rated portion of the exit access. See Section 1018. Woops, I was citing the 2009IBC, it probaly is Section 1017 in the 2006.

 

[IJHumberson]

(Tossing a wrench into the works...) So, within the bounds of a tenant space, where no corridor rating is required (because it's fully sprinklered or meets one of the other exceptions), if they decide to build walls and create hallways, do the dead-end corridor restrictions apply?

I've always maintained that the dead-end corridor limits only apply within the common corridors, and within tenant spaces that have no rated corridors the common path of travel applies. My rationale is that if they are not required to have walls at all, why should the rules be different for offices and hallways that are formed by cubicles than those that are formed by ceiling-height walls? Furthermore, the intent of the dead-end corridor restriction is to limit the distance travelled in case someone goes the wrong way down a corridor - within a tenant space it is usually assumed that the occupants are there day after day and know the way(s) out of their own tenant space - whereas, in the common corridor, they might only know where the elevators are, and might not be as familiar with the locations of the exit stairs.

I had to research NFPA 101 and IBC on this recently, and the language in the codes (and the IBC commentary) doesn't really help - It's almost like cda said: It depends. So what is the general consensus on this one??

Thanks for your input.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Ivan...all corridors are corridors, the difference being that some are rated and some are unrated, thus a dead-end corridor is a dead-end corridor.

2006 IBC 1002. Corridor. An enclosed exit access component that defines and provides a path of egress travel o an exit.

 

[gbhammer]

If you have the existing building code then there are some exceptions for the length of dead end corridors.

 

[IJHumberson]

Papio...I've heard it argued that, because the definition of corridor says it is a "component that defines and provides a path of egress travel TO AN EXIT", then corridors/hallways in tenant spaces do not fall within that definition because they provide a path to an EXIT ACCESS, not an EXIT. Personally, I'm not so sure that argument holds water, but...

 

[RLGA]

If the occupant load of a tenant space is less than 50, then the space is permitted to have one exit or exit access doorway (provided all spaces to the single exit or exit access doorway does not exceed the common path of egress travel distance), thus, dead end limitations do not apply.

Pathways created by cubicle panels of a modular furniture system are not corridors (nor are they hallways--even though that term no longer exists in the code).

 

[RLGA]

Papio...I've heard it argued that, because the definition of corridor says it is a "component that defines and provides a path of egress travel TO AN EXIT", then corridors/hallways in tenant spaces do not fall within that definition because they provide a path to an EXIT ACCESS, not an EXIT. Personally, I'm not so sure that argument holds water, but...

corridors and hallways (see my comment above about hallways) within a tenant space are a part of the exit access. Whether rated or not, corridors will lead, eventually, to an exit. You may start in a nonrated corridor and then pass through a door into a rated corridor that leads to an exit.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

Pathways created by cubicle panels of a modular furniture system are not corridors (nor are they hallways--even though that term no longer exists in the code).

We don't have a definition for pathways, however we call those aisles or aisle accessways. Is that not the correct nomenclature?

 

[texasbo]

(Tossing a wrench into the works...) So, within the bounds of a tenant space, where no corridor rating is required (because it's fully sprinklered or meets one of the other exceptions), if they decide to build walls and create hallways, do the dead-end corridor restrictions apply? I've always maintained that the dead-end corridor limits only apply within the common corridors, and within tenant spaces that have no rated corridors the common path of travel applies. My rationale is that if they are not required to have walls at all, why should the rules be different for offices and hallways that are formed by cubicles than those that are formed by ceiling-height walls? Furthermore, the intent of the dead-end corridor restriction is to limit the distance travelled in case someone goes the wrong way down a corridor - within a tenant space it is usually assumed that the occupants are there day after day and know the way(s) out of their own tenant space - whereas, in the common corridor, they might only know where the elevators are, and might not be as familiar with the locations of the exit stairs.

I had to research NFPA 101 and IBC on this recently, and the language in the codes (and the IBC commentary) doesn't really help - It's almost like cda said: It depends. So what is the general consensus on this one??

Thanks for your input.

Whether it's a common corridor, or within a tenant space, whether it's formed by cubicle walls or full height, whether it's rated or not, if two exits are required, then the corridor shall be arranged such that a dead end does not exceed 20 feet (there are of course, 3 exceptions).

 

[Big Mac]

Hallways do not exist. There are only corridors. There are rated corridors and non-rate corridors. Corridors are an element in the means of egress. They are defined as an access element in the means of egress system. Any element that is not defined as an exit, or an exit discharge is an exits access. This includes rooms, open areas, spaces, corridors, etc.

This is why rooms can interrupt corridors. The stipulation however, is that if a room interups a corridor it must maintain the same fire resistive construction elements as the corridor proper. If the corridor can be non-rated, the room that interupts it can also be non-rated. If the corridor is required to be rated, then the room that interupts it must also be rated.

 

[RLGA]

Papio: Yeah, I guess you would call them that. However, aisle accessways are only used in the context of Group M and A. So I guess all pathways created by furniture in a Group B are aisles per Section 1017.2 (2009 IBC).

 

[RLGA]

This is why rooms can interrupt corridors. The stipulation however, is that if a room interups a corridor it must maintain the same fire resistive construction elements as the corridor proper. If the corridor can be non-rated, the room that interupts it can also be non-rated. If the corridor is required to be rated, then the room that interupts it must also be rated.

Yes, but only certain types of rooms for rated corridors: foyers, lobbies, or reception rooms(Section 1018.6).

 

[cda]

Papio...I've heard it argued that, because the definition of corridor says it is a "component that defines and provides a path of egress travel TO AN EXIT", then corridors/hallways in tenant spaces do not fall within that definition because they provide a path to an EXIT ACCESS, not an EXIT. Personally, I'm not so sure that argument holds water, but...

dead end only applies if two different ways out are required