Rooftop Chiller Replacement & Guarding IMC 304.11

[jar546]

When it’s time to replace this chiller on the roof of this 10 story high-rise, will IMC 304.11 apply? What is your opinion?

 

[ICE]

The expectation is that the IMC applies to replacements of such things as a chiller. Fall protection is part of the IMC. The walking path is less than safe although the workman can access the chiller by a door on the left. The contractor might create fall protection for the workmen.

When I was young some guys built a catapult on the roof of a Chicago high rise adjacent to Lake Michigan. Bowling balls went a long way.

 

[steveray]

It is an IEBC Level 1 alteration:

701.2 Conformance​

An existing building or portion thereof shall not be altered such that the building becomes less safe than its existing condition.
Exception: Where the current level of safety or sanitation is proposed to be reduced, the portion altered shall conform to the requirements of the International Building Code.

If it were ever "approved" and it is not getting 1" closer to the edge, then its good.......

If they use prescriptive, that is a whole different ballgame....But it is not like any Building department is actually requiring them to cite the compliance method on the plans....Well, one is....

 

[ICE]

​

​

CS304.10 (IMC 304.11)Guards.​

Guards shall be provided where various components that require service and roof hatch openings are located within 10 feet (3048 mm) of a roof edge or open side of a walking surface and such edge or open side is located more than 30 inches (762 mm) above the floor, roof, or grade below. The guard shall extend not less than 30 inches (762 mm) beyond each end of components that require service. The top of the guard shall be located not less than 42 inches (1067 mm) above the elevated surface adjacent to the guard. The guard shall be constructed so as to prevent the passage of a 21-inch-diameter (533 mm) sphere and shall comply with the loading requirements for guards specified in the International Building Code.

Exception: Guards are not required where permanent fall arrest/restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are affixed for use during the entire lifetime of the roof covering. The devices shall be re-evaluated for possible replacement when the entire roof covering is replaced. The devices shall be placed not more than 10 feet (3048 mm) on center along hip and ridge lines and placed not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) from roof edges and the open sides of walking surfaces.

If this is how your code reads, it appears that there isn't an issue.

 

[mtlogcabin]

It is not an IEBC permit it is a mechanical permit and I would ask for the fall restraint as a minimum requirement.

IMC 2018
Exception: Guards are not required where fall arrest/ restraint anchorage connector devices that comply with ANSI/ASSE Z 359.1 are installed.

 

[steveray]

IBC

[A] 101.4.7 Existing Buildings​

The provisions of the International Existing Building Code shall apply to matters governing the repair, alteration, change of occupancy, addition to and relocation of existing buildings.

IMC

[A] 102.2.1 Existing Buildings​

Additions, alterations, renovations or repairs related to building or structural issues shall be regulated by the International Existing Building Code.

[A] 102.4 Additions, Alterations or Repairs​

Additions, alterations, renovations or repairs to a mechanical system shall conform to that required for a new mechanical system without requiring the existing mechanical system to comply with all of the requirements of this code. Additions, alterations or repairs shall not cause an existing mechanical system to become unsafe, hazardous or overloaded.

Your Ch 1 may vary, void where prohibited.....

 

[mtlogcabin]

A guard or attachment for fall protection is not part of a mechanical system. It is required for worker safety.

MECHANICAL SYSTEM. A system specifically addressed and regulated in this code and composed of components, devices, appliances and equipment.

 

[steveray]

A guard or attachment for fall protection is not part of a mechanical system. It is required for worker safety.

MECHANICAL SYSTEM. A system specifically addressed and regulated in this code and composed of components, devices, appliances and equipment.

So it's a building structural system for worker safety as it has loading requirements in Ch.16 of the IBC so we use the IEBC per IMC102.2.1....

 

[mtlogcabin]

Not all codes have the same intent that is why I would not use the IEBC for when a permit is strictly for the replacement of mechanical rooftop equipment.
The IEBC is more for public safety not worker safety.

IEBC
[A] 101.3 Intent.
The intent of this code is to provide flexibility to permit the use of alternative approaches to achieve compliance with minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare insofar as they are affected by the repair, alteration, change of occupancy, addition and relocation of existing buildings.

IMC
[A] 101.3 Intent.
The purpose of this code is to establish minimum standards to provide a reasonable level of safety, health, property protection and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation and maintenance or use of mechanical systems.

IBC
[A] 101.3 Intent.
The purpose of this code is to establish the minimum requirements to provide a reasonable level of safety, public health and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, sanitation, adequate light and ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire, explosion and other hazards, and to provide a reasonable level of safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations.

 

[steveray]

Not all codes have the same intent that is why I would not use the IEBC for when a permit is strictly for the replacement of mechanical rooftop equipment.
The IEBC is more for public safety not worker safety.

IEBC
[A] 101.3 Intent.
The intent of this code is to provide flexibility to permit the use of alternative approaches to achieve compliance with minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare insofar as they are affected by the repair, alteration, change of occupancy, addition and relocation of existing buildings.

IMC
[A] 101.3 Intent.
The purpose of this code is to establish minimum standards to provide a reasonable level of safety, health, property protection and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction, installation, quality of materials, location, operation and maintenance or use of mechanical systems.

IBC
[A] 101.3 Intent.
The purpose of this code is to establish the minimum requirements to provide a reasonable level of safety, public health and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, sanitation, adequate light and ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire, explosion and other hazards, and to provide a reasonable level of safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations.

I get you....and I think it is a good thing, just not how we see it (how it is interpreted) around here....