Loads see a need or not?

[tbz]

Good morning to all,

I am currently working on a study group putting together information for recomendations to the barrier section of the NEW Swimming Pool Code being put together by the ICC.

The current code requirements within the IBC & IRC Apendix, provide decriptive limits for barriers. However these are limited to height, opening sizes, gate swings and latching devices.

The one item I see missing is a load requirement, call me different, but to require that something be put in place but have no requirements for loads makes no sense to me, however it is this way currently.

I have been met with some other side of the fence notations, with questions like is there a problem out there that the code needs to add this additional limit.

So I guess I am writing to all on this board looking for a little insight, do you feel there is a need or there is no need for loads in the building code/new pool code for barriers?

Also if you have any other recomendations you feel should be looked at please either post them here or you can send them to me at tbz@artisticrail.com

I thank you all for your input in advance.:-D

 

[syarn]

vote NO (nay) need for loads in the new pool code for barriers.

thx u.

 

[TimNY]

It's a legitimate question. I see a lot of "turkey wire" and just saw some "chicken wire". A top wire is routinely provided. I don't see where this is required. Should the wire fence posts be 6' OC or 20' OC?

There should be some deflection criteria. A lot of words are expended in the code to prevent an enclosure that can be climbed. There is nothing to prevent the enclosure from being bent down. I don't know that this is a "load" issue per se, something to the effect of when x gauge wire is used, posts shall be x feet on center and be furnished with a x gauge top wire would be good, but I doubt that would fly. I would like a solution that doesn't require an engineer to verify. A prescriptive wire fence, if you will.

 

[Jobsaver]

How 'bout, "The fence must be sturdy enough and installed so that an average full grown man cannot push in down or bend it over".

I'm just kidding. But, it is too bad that we have to have discussion about requiring an engineering calc. or prescriptive language for yet another item where common sense ought to already prevail.

I am okay in this case with some vague language that says the fence should be rigid and sturdy. If you want to throw in some calcs or language, fine.

 

[north star]

* * * *

I vote "yes" to adding the language requiring a minimum strength /

load capabilities to the pool barriers.

We have minimums on guard railing, hand rails, etc. Why not extend

this to include the pool barriers as well? Besides, we all know

that eventually; if not already, some attorney is going to ask

"Why weren't there some type of code minimums in place for the

Jones' pool barriers before little Johnny was able to access the

pool area. They didn't do enough to prevent this horrible

accident from occurring. It's not poor little Johnny's fault!

It's those [ evil ] Jones' fault for not protecting the kids in

this community. Shame on them! Now pay up!"

In our VERY litigious world, ...a CYA Factor has to be

considered / built-in to this component in the "built environment".

Jobsaver stated:

" ...for yet another item where common sense ought to already prevail."

Whose common sense? ...mine, ...yours, ...the pool contractor,

...an attorney? I agree that ' common sense ' SHOULD be applied.

Unfortunately, common sense is not a universally applied /

understood concept where everyone agrees on all of the requirements.

* * * *

 

[TimNY]

How 'bout, "The fence must be sturdy enough and installed so that an average full grown man cannot push in down or bend it over".I'm just kidding. But, it is too bad that we have to have discussion about requiring an engineering calc. or prescriptive language for yet another item where common sense ought to already prevail.

I am okay in this case with some vague language that says the fence should be rigid and sturdy. If you want to throw in some calcs or language, fine.

Hey just throw an "or other fencing approved by the AHJ" in there.

Seriously, of common sense applied we wouldn't need 95% of the code. Like don't give your kids a set of car keys and an unprotected receptacle.

To be clear, I would like to get away from calcs, but have some simple language to assure the fence is adequate. Nobody will go for it because it gives the inspector too much "power"

 

[jpranch]

Follow the "KISS" acronym. Keep is simple stupid. To days codes are way to complicated!View attachment 551 Do not feed the cow.

View attachment 244

View attachment 244

/monthly_2010_08/572953ba27a38_madcow.jpg.936e1f3980898194c300da33dcb39f73.jpg

 

[TimNY]

Yes on fire sprinklers, no on pool enclosures!

Too late for KISS.

 

[jpranch]

Tim, I'm an optomist by nature. It's never too late. Pool enclosures are a tough issue. Delt with that back east. Thank goodness I do not have that cluster fornacation to deal with in Wyoming. Kids die in pools. This is a real issue. Beats the heck out of me why the codes have to be so complicated on any issue.

 

[Mark K]

I am not convinced that there is a need for loads for a fence to keep people out. Any body who is determined will either get over the wall or will cut it down. All you do is to make it difficult for people to wander into the space and to discourage others from trying to gain access. Suggest that normal fences are effective in doing that. If you want loads you have the wind loads and the guardrail loads in the code.

We could invent a methodology to determine the loads on pool enclosures. This would involve weight of individuals, difficulty in climbing fence, strength of individuals, acceptable failure rate etc. We would then undertake a testing program and have a committee of experts agree on the final loads.

We could also electrify the fence, put barbed wire on top, install motion sensors, and install a dog run with viscous dogs to discourage people. How far do you want to go? What is an acceptable failure rate? There is no such thing as a perfect fence. At what point will the public push back and say we have gone over the top?

 

[TimNY]

I don't want to go too far off-topic, but pool enclosures does not seem like the best place for drawing a line for "going over the top".

We have loads for guards, because when somebody falls 30", they'll die. We have dimensions for stair treads, because somebody will die if one tread is just a little bigger than the next. We have arc fault breakers because..

Heck we have dual drain separation AND vacuum protection on the same line.

Can I put my 4' chicken wire with posts 20' apart next to the backyard where your children/grandchildren play? Nothing against it in the code. People here are going to sue because their office is considered a bedroom, but when it comes to defending a pool enclosure we all play nice, right?

I am not advocating that some sort of ASTM requirement be in there. In the openings from home into the pool enclosure they put "or other method acceptable by the AHJ". Why can't we have some simple wording in there about the barrier.

 

[north star]

* * * *

TimNY asked:

Why can't we have some simple wording in there about the barrier.

"IF" something were to happen, some attorney would play the sympathy card [ and every other card ]to win his clients case. Being right or wrong isn't necessarliy the issue......Of course having

protection in place to not allow unauthorized access [ by little Johnny ] is paramount, but

also, protecting yourself against litigation is also important.

IMO, I believe that having a code compliant type barrier installed would provide some

measure of protection "if" a law suit were ever filed. Pool owners simply have to be aware

of the risks and potential liabilities they are taking on when having a pool installed on their

property.

* * * *

 

[peach]

It's a guard rail.. treat it as such.

 

[TJacobs]

Pool code should not be a separate document.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

The Virginia Graeme Baker Pool & Spa Safety Act defines the term "barrier" includes a natural or constructed topographical feature that prevents unpermitted access by children to a swimming pool, and, with respect to a hot tub, a lockable cover.

In other words barriers for pools, spas and hot tubs are obstructions to restrict children's access, not designed as fall and impact protection as required of guards. It would suffice to reference existing standards such as ASTM F567 for chain link fences. Install per manufacturers installation are standards of practice is enforced.

As far as unconventional means such as temporary fence and erosion control fence being installed as pool barriers is not the intent and design but may be permitted at the desecration of AHJ as always been the case.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

As far as unconventional means such as temporary fence and erosion control fence being installed as pool barriers is not the intent and design but may be permitted at the desecration of AHJ as always been the case.

Spell check doesn't alway make sense, last sentence corrected;

"As far as unconventional means such as temporary fence and erosion control fence being installed as pool barriers are not the intent and design but may be permitted at the descretion of AHG has usually been the case.

 

[jim baird]

Pool code should not be a separate document.

Jake has it right, but is sort of beside the point. Remember the ICC is in the publishing biz.

I agree with Peach, in that guards are guards.

 

[peach]

No one can prevent the occassional 70 pound hellion from scaling a pool barrier... (even if you require plate glass and barbed wire)... if they are motivated, they'll get in the pool. Please don't add yet more untestable "requirements" into the code... it's a parenting issue.. CONTROL YOUR DAMN KIDS.. don't put unreasonable controls on the owner of the pool.

 

[peach]

correction... darn little angels... sorry

 

[tbz]

New Pool code wording for barriers, comments please:

Okay - here is the proposed new wording in the pool code, take a look and comment please:

SECTION 307

BARRIER REQUIREMENTS

At SPCDC Meeting #2, the committee held extensive discussions on the Compliance Work Group Report. The WG Report included a review of both the IBC and IRC and concluded that the barrier provisions should start with the IBC text. This text of Version 2 includes aspects of the report, with revisions, with the exception of the proposed “isolation barriers”. The committee raised concerns with a requirement that all residential pools be fully isolated, however, the committee further noted the need for additional options in residential applications. This text will be undergoing further review and revision in the WG for consideration at Meeting #3 of the SPCDC.

307.1 General. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to the design of barriers for all swimming pools, spas and hot tubs. These design controls are intended to provide protection against the potential drowning and near drowning by restricting access to aquatic vessels. The purpose of these requirements is to provide an integrated level of protection against potential swimming pool drowning through the use of physical barriers and warning devices.

307.2 Definitions. The following words and terms shall, for the purposes of this section and as used elsewhere in this code, have the meaning shown herein.

SWIMMING POOLS Any structure intended for swimming, bathing, or wading with a designed water depth over 24 inches (610 mm) or that is connected to filtration equipment. This includes in-ground, above-ground and on-ground pools; hot tubs; spas and wading pools.

WG to review:

• Need to clarify that it applies to permanent and temporary

• Check with manufacturers as to terminology

• Don’t call it “in ground”,” above ground”, or “on ground”

• Delete minimum 24” depth. Drowning incidents occur in less than 24 inches

• Application to inflatable water parks?

BARRIERS A permanent fence, wall, building wall, or combination thereof which completely surrounds the swimming pool and obstructs the access to the swimming pool. As used within this section, permanent shall mean “not being able to be removed, lifted, or relocated without the use of a tool.

307.3 Outdoor Swimming Pools. An outdoor aquatic vessel shall be surrounded by a barrier which shall comply with Sections 307.3.1 through 307.8.

Exception: Spas or hot tubs with a lockable safety cover which complies with ASTM F 1346.

307.3.1 Barrier height and clearances. The top of the barrier shall be at least 60 inches (1524 mm) above grade measured on the side of the barrier that faces away from the aquatic vessel around the entire perimeter of the vessel and for a distance of three (3) feet measured horizontally from the required barrier. The maximum vertical clearance between grade and the bottom of the barrier shall be 2 inches (51 mm) from surfaces that are not solid, such as grass and/or gravel, and measured on the side of the barrier that faces away from the vessel. Where the top of the vessel structure is above grade, the barrier is authorized to be at ground level or mounted on top of the vessel structure, and the maximum vertical clearance between the top of the vessel structure and the bottom of the barrier shall be 4 inches (102 mm). The maximum vertical clearance between a surface below the barrier to a solid surface, such as concrete, and the bottom of the required barrier shall be four (4) inches (102 mm) measured on the side of the required barrier which faces away from the vessel.

307.3.2 Openings. Openings in the barrier shall not allow passage of a 4-inch-diameter (102 mm) sphere at the maximum barrier deflection.

307.3.3 Solid barrier surfaces. Solid barriers which do not have openings shall not contain indentations or protrusions that form handholds and footholds, except for normal construction tolerances and tooled masonry joints.

307.3.4 Mesh restraining barrier/fence. Mesh fences, other than chain link fences in accordance with Section 307.3.5, shall be installed per the manufacturer’s instructions and shall comply with the following:

1. The bottom of the mesh restraining barrier/fence shall not be more than 1 inch (25 mm) above the deck or installed surface (grade).

2. The maximum vertical clearance from the bottom of the mesh fence and the solid surface shall not be lifted more than four (4) inches (102 mm) from grade or decking at its maximum deflection.

3. The fence shall be designed and constructed so that it does not allow passage of a 4-inch sphere under any mesh panel when an upward force is exerted on the bottom of the panel at its maximum deflection. The maximum vertical clearance from the bottom of the mesh fence and the solid surface shall not be lifted more than four (4) inches (102 mm) from grade or decking.

4. An attachment device shall attach each barrier section at a height no lower than 45 inches (1143 mm) above grade. Common attachment devices may include, but are not limited to, devices that provide the security equal to or greater than that of a hook-and-eye-type latch incorporating a spring-actuated retaining lever which is commonly referred to as a safety gate hook.

5. Where a hinged gate is used with a mesh barrier, the gate shall meet the provisions of Section 307.4.

6. Patio deck sleeves (vertical post receptacles) placed inside the patio surface shall be of a nonconductive material.

9. Mesh fences shall not be used on top of above ground pools.

Need to coordinate “above ground” with revised definition of swimming pool.

307.3.5 Closely spaced horizontal members. Where the barrier is composed of horizontal and vertical members and the distance between the tops of the horizontal members is less than 45 inches (1143 mm), the horizontal members shall be located on the swimming pool side of the fence. Spacing between vertical members shall not exceed 1.75 inches (44 mm) in width. Where there are decorative cutouts within vertical members, spacing within the cutouts shall not exceed 1.75 inches (44 mm) in width.

307.3.6 Widely spaced horizontal members. Where the barrier is composed of horizontal and vertical members and the distance between the tops of the horizontal members is 45 inches (1143 mm) or more, spacing between vertical members shall not exceed 4 inches (102 mm). Where there are decorative cutouts within vertical members, spacing within the cutouts shall not exceed 1.75 inches (44 mm) in width.

307.3.7 Chain link dimensions. The maximum opening formed by a chain link fence shall be no more than 1.75 inches. Where the fence is provided with slats fastened at the top and bottom which reduce the openings, such openings shall be no more than 1.75 inches.

The 1.75” dimension is referenced in the US Consumers Product Safety Commission handbook (Pub. No. 362. CABO did recognized 1.75. Both the IBC and the IRC use 2 ¼”. Anthropometrics confirm that 2.25” is too large of an opening.

307.3.8 Diagonal members. Where the barrier is composed of diagonal members, the maximum opening formed by the diagonal members shall be no more than 1.75 inches (44 mm).

307.3.10 Clear Zone. There shall be a clear zone of no less than 36 inches (914 mm) between the barrier for or on a pool, spa, or hot tub and any permanent structures or pool equipment such as pumps, filters, heaters, etc. that can be used to climb the barrier.

This 36” needs to be measured from the outside of the required barrier. The Clear Zone must be present and measurable. It protects against using equipment, etc. to defeat the barrier.

307.3.11 Poolside Barrier Setbacks. The poolside of the required barrier shall not be less than twenty (20) inches from the water’s edge.

307.4 Gates. Access gates shall comply with the requirements of Sections 307.3.1 through 307.3.7 and shall be equipped to accommodate a locking device. Pedestrian access gates shall open outward away from the pool and shall be self-closing and have a self-latching device.

307.4.1 Double or Multiple Gates. Gates with four (4) feet or greater leafs must be secured with a self-latching device and be kept locked. Double gates or multiple gates shall have at least one leaf secured in place and the adjacent leaf shall be secured with a self-latching device. 8.2. The gate and barrier shall have no opening larger than 1/2 inch (12.7 mm) within 18 inches (457 mm) of the release mechanism.

307.4.2 Latches. Where the release mechanism of the self-latching device is located less than 54 inches (1372 mm) from grade, the release mechanism shall be located on the pool side of the gate at least 3 inches (76 mm) below the top of the gate, and the gate and barrier shall have no opening greater than 1/2 inch (12.7 mm) within 18 inches (457 mm) of the release mechanism.

The 54” height requirements needs to be reconciled with accessibility requirements. Exception 7 to IBC Section 1109.12 allows for a 48” - 54” height.

 

[tbz]

Balance of proposed barrier code, to long to post in one post

307.5 Structure wall as a barrier.

This section requires development. Review IBC and IRC text and provide text which is easily understood and which provides the necessary options in order to balance a practical solution with safety considerations.

307.6 Pool structure as barrier. Where an aboveground pool structure is used as a barrier or where the barrier is mounted on top of the pool structure the following applies:

1. An aboveground/on-ground pool wall, itself, shall be permitted to be the barrier where the pool structure is on grade and the wall is at least 48 inches (1219 mm) above grade for the entire perimeter of the pool and complies with the requirements of Section 307.3.

2. Where the means of access is a ladder or steps, then the ladder or steps either shall be capable of being secured, locked or removed to prevent access or the ladder or steps shall be surrounded by a barrier which meets the requirements of Section 307.3.

3. When the ladder or steps are secured, locked or removed, any opening created shall not allow the passage of a 4-inch-diameter (102 mm) sphere.

4. The barrier shall be installed in accordance with the manufactures instructions.

307.7 Natural Barriers. In the case where the pool area abuts the edge of a lake or other natural body of water and where no public access is permitted or allowed along the shoreline, and where required barriers extend to and beyond the water’s edge a minimum of eighteen (18) inches, a barrier is not required between the natural body of water shoreline and the swimming pool.

307.8 Natural topography. Natural topography that prevents direct access to the swimming pool, spa, or hot tub area shall include but not be limited to mountains and natural rock formations. A natural barrier approved by the governing body shall be acceptable so long as the degree of protection is not less than the protection afforded by manufactured or constructed means.

307.9 Indoor swimming pools. Walls surrounding indoor swimming pools shall comply with Section 307.5.

307.10 Additional layers of protection. The following shall not be considered alternatives to the provisions of Sections 307.1 through 307.9.

1. Pool area entry. Devices that detect unsupervised entry into the backyard pool or spa area. Where provided as an additional layer of protection, such devices shall comply with ASTM F2208.

2. Water motion sensors. Devices that detect unsupervised or accidental entry into the pool, spa, or hot tub. Where provided as an additional layer of protection, such devices shall comply with ASTM F2208.

3. Pool Covers. Where provided as an additional layer of protection, such devices shall comply with ASTM F1346.

Exception: Lockable pool covers provided for spas and hot tubs in accordance with Section 307.3.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Wow no more access from a house thru a door. I always hated to tell the owner that they need an alarm on both the sliding glass door and the sliding screen door. There was never any place to put the alarm on the sliding screen door so they usually took the screen door off for the inspection.