Correct. And being both certified to and having done SI on thin-film intumescent materials, I am confounded on how the testing would be done. Following AWCI Tech Manual 12-B, the testing apparatus only work with ferrous substrate. I am positive that there are other means and methods for testing on non-ferrous substrates, but I lack familiarity and would suspect that SI was not performed in this application, otherwise a report could be provided to the building inspector and likely assuage his concerns.
-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
Introduction and quick question
- Thread starter latees40
- Start date
Inspector Gadget
Registered User
Not a UL(C) assembly.
UL / UL(C) is not required. UL is just one of the many testing/accreditation agencies.
While I do not have the utmost confidence in a number of ICC-ES reports I have seen, the code requires testing per ASTM E119 or UL 263. It is up to the code official if the testing/accreditation agency (UL, GA, ICC-ES, etc.) is approved, which should be contingent on following the appropriate test procedures.
2021 IBC 703.2.1 Tested Assemblies
A fire-resistance rating of building elements, components or assemblies shall be determined by the test procedures set forth in ASTM E119 or UL 263. The fire-resistance rating of penetrations and fire-resistant joint systems shall be determined in accordance with Sections 714 and 715, respectively.Inspector Gadget
Registered User
That makes things ... murky, doesn't it?
We're limited to - for small buildings, assemblies outlined in the small buildings section of code, ULC-listed assemblies, and calculations made under the dark part of Canadian Code that deals with general "A plus B plus C" calculations called appendix D.
For large/complex buildings, Appendix D or ULC are the only acceptable options.
steveray
SAWHORSE
Just because the plan checker and the first inspector did not identify a code violation what makes you believe that you do not have a code violation?
Inspector Gadget
Registered User
This appears like you're trying to make a point. If so, you need to do a better job.
Yankee Chronicler
Registered User
Yes. And the fire-resistance rating is a function of the applied dry-film thickness. That's what the special inspector has to verify, just as with any spray-applied fire-resistive material.
Paul Sweet
Sawhorse
60 mils is about 1/16". That will take more than a couple coats. $20.50 per quart at 27 SF per gallon = $3 per square foot + labor.
I was involved on a project where the A/E specified an intumescent coating on exposed steel to get a 2 hour fire rating. It wasn't a very smooth finish.
I was involved on a project where the A/E specified an intumescent coating on exposed steel to get a 2 hour fire rating. It wasn't a very smooth finish.
Plus, these thin-film intumescent products must be maintained (i.e. damage such as scratches, dings, etc. are a problem) and often cannot be exposed to moisture/humidity, UV light, or other degrading elements. This can be further complicated if the manufacturer does not permit further coatings, such as paint or adhereed finishes, on top of these coatings.
ICE
Oh Well
I am currently researching intumescent coatings. The plans call for a product call Nullifire SC902. It is (or was) manufactured in the UK and has a CE approval but no North American Listing. I have not been able to contact them and I am not convinced that they are still in business.
I have found other UL and ICC listed products. So far, none are allowed exposed to the elements but several can accept a polyurethane topcoat. The product that steveray posted is not one of them.
walker.t
Registered User
I investigated using intumescent paint in a project a number of years ago, owner of the company talked to me about the product and process. He said they have data for the painters regarding spray nozzles and the amount of product to be applied for the given area to achieve the required thickness. The application had to be inspected by a third-party inspector then their company issued a document regarding the rating. Owner didn’t use the product so I can’t comment on how things went.
ICE
Oh Well
There are a bunch of manufacturers of intumescent coatings. I talked to three. The required coating thickness varied from 26mil to 100mil. One would not allow it outdoors and the other two had a topcoat that would allow it outdoors. All required a proprietary primer. They all required a certain paint sprayer and one could be trowel applied.
The material comes in five gallon containers and the cost would vary from $600 to $1100 for primer, paint and topcoat. Add the special inspector and it climbs $350.
My role is as an advisor. The contractor opted to use a stucco wrap instead of the intumescent coating. I figure that cost wise, there wasn't a huge difference.
One bit of information that I found to be interesting is that the coating will expand 200 times when exposed to fire.
The material comes in five gallon containers and the cost would vary from $600 to $1100 for primer, paint and topcoat. Add the special inspector and it climbs $350.
My role is as an advisor. The contractor opted to use a stucco wrap instead of the intumescent coating. I figure that cost wise, there wasn't a huge difference.
One bit of information that I found to be interesting is that the coating will expand 200 times when exposed to fire.
Last edited: