IBC section 703.3 alternative method for determining fire resistance

[syarn]

#4 under section 703.3 IBC says, "...Engineering analysis based on a comparison of building element, component or assemblies designs having fire-resistance ratings as determined by the test

procedures set forth in ASTM E 119 or UL 263..."

has anyone ever had to submit this to a building official OR have to review it as a building official?

if so can you please point me towards an example of such an "analysis" on line (weblink) somewhere?

thank you

 

[Coug Dad]

I have done calculated fire resistance in the past that was submitted for approval, but not sure if I still have any examples. Try Aegis FPE on this board. He may be able to help.

 

[mjesse]

I believe the intent is that the building official can accept testing results from any certified testing lab, as long as the methods used conform to those listed by ASTM or UL.

This allows a company to get their components or assemblies tested without having to pay the big UL costs.

The building official should have the ability to determine the difference between "certified test lab" and "Billy-Bobs test shack"

mj

 

[syarn]

mjesse

thx u.

would the intent also include just a letter from a licensed engineer who specializes in fire science & engineering as part of a large engineering firm and that certifies a unique assembly where no project specific lab testing of that exact assembly is done but the engineer makes a judgment with description of the expected reaction progress during a fire exposure?

 

[FM William Burns]

Try this Syarn, it should assist you:

http://www.fpemag.com/archives/case_study.asp?issue_id=21&i=101

 

[syarn]

thx FM burns....

 

[Architect1281]

Way back in the BOCA days they had a section called untested assemblies and provide an acceptable or justifed system was submitted you did not necessarily have to submit a UL FM or other NRTL assembly.

In the US we tend to have manufacturers submit product for listing and testing of assemblies they want to market.

In the land just north to the Arctic Circle the tended to use an addative or cumulative rating system to justify assembly times

I wuold use those "Other Accepted Means" and submit the data as required to the State Commission for "Alternate Acceptance" never having one denied