• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Intent of 2018 IFC 915.1.3 & CO alarm placement?

dchomeinspection

REGISTERED
Joined
Oct 15, 2020
Messages
11
Location
DC
First time post!

When you read 2018 IFC 915.1.3, what is the intent behind this provision? I don't have a copy of the IFC with commentary. Is the intent to prevent CO exposure from leakage around ductwork penetrations through the wall or CO that may enter duct work through a deteriorated heat exchanger? If the intent is to prevent CO exposure from leaks around furnace ductwork, wouldn't CO exposure be possible from leaks around radiator piping in a dwelling unit/sleeping room adjacent to a boiler room? However, this section specifies furnaces and not boilers.

If the intent of this IFC section is to address deteriorated heat exchangers in furnaces, I've heard several mechanical engineers state in CE classes the pressure differentials between the return air/plenum and the combustion air in the heat exchangers prevent this from happening. The other reason this section may not be addressing heat exchangers is that if there were a CO leak into the duct work from the heat exchanger, CO would leak through all available duct openings, not just the duct openings in the first adjacent room after the furnace plenum.

Thanks in advance for clarifications you may have on this section.
 
Thats interesting because it does not specifically call out heat exchanger related issues, but could be generally applied to multiple indirect CO issues. The omission of boilers in this section made it difficult to get at the intent. A reasonable person could make the case that boilers should be added here.
 
Thats interesting because it does not specifically call out heat exchanger related issues, but could be generally applied to multiple indirect CO issues. The omission of boilers in this section made it difficult to get at the intent. A reasonable person could make the case that boilers should be added here.


Which occupancy type are you asking about???
I, R or E??????
 
Resolved??
Not really. Reached out to some other code processionals I know throughout the country and they all have different interpretations of the intent. The interpretation of this across the country will affect public housing since congress mandated use of IFC for CO alarm placement.
 
Not really. Reached out to some other code processionals I know throughout the country and they all have different interpretations of the intent. The interpretation of this across the country will affect public housing since congress mandated use of IFC for CO alarm placement.

I am guessing that is why I asked the setting.

If single units like apartment

And individual a/c heat. And gas fired units,

I would expect to see them in each unit.

Have only done a school where required.
 
Back
Top