• 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.

Should an Architect or Engineer Spec Out The Fix?

I actually had a very similar situation happen on one of my projects a few years ago. Both the architect and engineer worked together to come up with a solution. That's the way we typically do things.
 
It depends on the fix. If the fix is limited to spray-applied fire-resistive material on the truss and it's supports plus firestopping the opening, then it would be the architect. If the fix is to change the structure, then it would have to involve both the architect and the engineer.
 
If the drawings were prepared by an architect or engineer and the Plan review of the drawings indicated a code issue then of course the design professional should be involved.
 
Might need an engineered opinion from a fire-stop company, too.

Though on the surface, filling with mortar might be sufficient - uncertain, because I'm not familiar with U.S. codes/procedures etc.
 
Both are licensed to provide the fix.

Not really.

Each state's laws are different. In my state, architects are allowed to practice engineering when it is incidental to their architecture work, and engineers are allowed to practice architecture when it is incidental to their engineering.

If this building is still under construction, and if there is an architect of record and an engineer of record, the architect is NOT legally authorized to modify the engineer's work and the engineer is not legally authorized to modify the architect's work unless those design professionals are prepared to assume liability for the whole ball of wax. No sane licensed design professional would willingly assume full liability for the work of another licensed design professional who has already been paid to design his/her portion of the work in compliance with the applicable codes.

However, if it's in an existing building that has a C of O, is occupied, and the issue was discovered by a fire inspector during an annual inspection, then the owner could engage whichever disciple he wants to design remediation.
 
Here in California, Architects are licensed to perform structural engineering, with few exceptions: hospitals, bridges, etc. The OP did not state the type of building.
The original question was, who provides the fix?
Perhaps the OP could have been worded differently: is the preferred / easiest / most economical fix an architectural (fire protection) or structural solution?

Not knowing any more about the problem than what was described in post #1, it appears the most economical and expedient is to provide fire protection on the truss, perhaps wrap it in type X gyp board for membrane protection to separate it from exposure to the stairwell, similar to YC’s suggestion in post #5. That would not require structural engineering, assuming only a nominal additional dead load of the membranes.
 
We officially have a fix. We have a specific fix with a detail from the architect. This is the generic fix from Hilti for this. Apparently this situation is covered.


That's less than half a fix. All that does is firestop the penetration.

Does the joist support any of the stair inside the stair enclosure? If so, fire impinging on the truss on the outside of the stair enclosure will heat up the truss, which could result in weakening the part holding up the exit stair. If the truss in any way supports the stair or stair landing, the entire length of the truss on the outside of the stair should be fireproofed, as well as the structure that supports the joist.

Oops - never mind. I just saw page 2 of the Hilti literature, and I see that they do call for fireproofing the truss. Sorry.
 
Back
Top