• 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.

Refuse Chute

IMC 401.5 . . . Outdoor air intake openings located in exterior walls shall meet the provisions for exterior wall opening protectives in accordance with the International Building Code.
 
# ~ #

Francis,

What is your concern ?......Exterior wall penetrations,
...water intrusion, ...exhausts or other from the chute
itself, ...fire protection of the opening, ...distance from
property lines, other ?......Maybe I can search the
other codes; besides the ones you have listed, for
something

Thanks !

# ~ #
 
Basically I'm not sure how the chute vent should be defined. The problem is the design of a new 6 story apt. located in a historic district won't allow the chute vent to extend above the roof that is about 1 ft. from the property line. (Note plans haven't been submitted for review)

I suggested the architect make a well in the roof behind the exterior wall and provide a scupper for rain water. From there will need an approved fire barrier behind the scupper opening from exposure or come up with an approved heat shield (Ref. 705.7). Your thoughts?
 
$ ~ $

What purpose does a roof mounted, Refuse Vent opening
serve ?......Actual refuse, ...is it a functioning vent opening
now, or is this a combusted product exhaust vent ?

Also, if the RDP will not allow anything above the roof line,
is it possible to create a vent exhaust location down below,
thru an exterior wall, and terminate or remove completely
the existing roof termination vent, or re-route the exhaust
duct, vent termination location to another suitable location ?

I'm thinking more along the lines of altering the existing
exhaust ducting to another location...

$ ~ $
 
north star, presumably all trash chutes are to be vented in accordance to NFPA 82 but the codes (IBC 713.13 exception 2 & IMC 601.1) only reference that for group I-2 and incinerators.
 
It's within the historic district that won't allow it to extend above the roof; the RDP is asking for alternatives.

Cannot terminate it through the exterior wall because it is too close to the property line (T 705.8)

Up the road a hotel put a type 1 hood exhaust in a well or pit below the top of the roof line and I suggested the same.

Admittedly this is not of ordinary design and I'm wondering what other code provision to consider looking at for further guidance.
 
Perhaps my question at this point is a vent required in accordance with the 2012 section 713.13?

The NFPA 82 is being incrementally required; the 2009 IBC does not reference NFPA 82 (except IN the IMC 601.1 for incinerators).

2015 says the chute shall meet the requirements of Sections 713.13.1 through 713.13.6 and NFPA 82!

713.13 Refuse and laundry chutes. In other than Group I-2, refuse and laundry chutes, access and termination rooms and incinerator rooms shall meet the requirements of Sections 713.13.1 through 713.13.6.

Exceptions:

1. Chutes serving and contained within a single dwelling unit.

2. Refuse and laundry chutes in Group I-2 shall comply with the provisions of NFPA 82, Chapter 5.
 
It sounds like it is a problem whether it is "turtle in" or "Turtle out" the opening is still the same lateral distance from the prop line...
 
% # %

Francis,

Does the chute currently serve as an exhaust vent for combusted
products ?......If no combusted exhaust vapors, gases, fumes or
hazardous products are being exhausted at the roof, the exhaust
vent [ chute ] will need to be sealed to prevent weather, pests
& varmints intrusion, or removed.

Also, if your RDP is requiring some type of vent \ chute, can you
ask him \ her for a Code reference ?

% # %
 
north star, thanks for re-iterating my suspicion.

The RDP reference NFPA 82 for venting chutes, but the IBC and IMC does not reference NFPA except for incinerators (2009 & 2015).

Just wanted to be certain there's not a requirement to vent in the IBC in accordance with NFPA that I may be missing. It would really help if a vent can be in a pit or well below the main roof line to work around the historic zoning ordinance.

Thanks for your guidance.
 
Do you folks use ASHRAE 62? The area would need ventilation as per this standard and the easiest way to do it is to provide natural ventilation up through the chute. Otherwise, mechanical means must be provided and it would usually be needed at the top of the chute anyway. If placed somewhere else in the building, the space the ductwork would be run in may need to be negatively pressurized as well based on the interpretation of the AHJ if the air in this area is holding "harmful contaminants"
 
Francis Vineyard said:
north star, thanks for re-iterating my suspicion.

The RDP reference NFPA 82 for venting chutes, but the IBC and IMC does not reference NFPA except for incinerators (2009 & 2015).

Just wanted to be certain there's not a requirement to vent in the IBC in accordance with NFPA that I may be missing. It would really help if a vent can be in a pit or well below the main roof line to work around the historic zoning ordinance.

Thanks for your guidance.
Click to expand...
I have been installing trash chutes in high rises for 30 years.
When we vent a chute it is always full diameter or the equivalent area in rectangular duct. The rules are different for under 4 stories as far as chute size goes but we won't do anything under 15 stories so I don't know the current rules. We use 24" as a minimum diameter and keep the vent the same. We will often go from round to square below the roof to fit the full diameter in. We use 4' above the roof as a guide and that can be a cap or often we use a louver.If yo are doing a Landmark building you have a much better chance of getting a louver approved and hidden than a 24" diameter vent body and cap.It is also very easy to keep the duct in a 2 hour enclouser rather than a round duct where space is so tight.
People die from chute fires from smoke not heat. There is the rare case like Schumberg Plaza where the sprinklers were shut off and the grease got to 2000 degrees in a matter of a few minutes but that is rare because of the sprinkler in the compactor and then on every other floor. The reason for the full diameter vent is to allow smoke to exit the building quickly. Chutes are not air tight and never could be because of the expansion joint. It is the two hour rating that keeps the tenants safe. The chute itself offers no protection. If you keep the square area the same you should not have a problem with an inspection but some housing authorities and other government agencies make up their own rules.
Hopefully this helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top