• 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.

Sound Attenuation and Interior Finish Requirements

jar546

jar546

CBO
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
13,097
Location
Not where I really want to be
Just had an issue where another jurisdiction is not allowing a product like Proflex to be used as sound attenuation under tile, which is way, way, way common because it is not the correct class. This will be sandwiched between a concrete slab and tile, so it does not meet the definition of interior floor finish.
What are your thoughts on this? I feel sorry for the contractor.

*NOTE: This is a high-rise Type I or II construction
 
Last edited:
They make the same mistake many other manufacturer's do - there's no testing and listing info on their website substantiating it has been tested for this purpose but I did find a testing report (people should not need to search the web for this info)

https://proflex.us/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/MSC90-STC.pdf (this is outdated and I'm not sure this is even testing the applicable construction components). This lab is IAS Accredited.

I've declined numerous products for use because reports could be found by a permit applicant, only to find there was testing information they had to obtain from the manufacturer by request; instead of it being available, readily, on a website. The result? Delays.
 
jar546 said:
My point is that the Proflex underlayment does not have to meet the requirements because it does not meet the definition of an interior floor finish. I think this is overreach.
Click to expand...
Jeff, I agree with you. The material is not an exposed floor surface; thus, it is not subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.
Codeguy49 said:
Is this something you are viewing with Chapter 12 cause I see no requirement for sound attenuation/reduction in Chapter 8
Click to expand...
Section 804 is for the Class rating of a finish for critical radiant flux, whereas Section 1206 addresses sound attenuation (specifically, Section 1206.3 for impact insulation class).
 
RLGA said:
Jeff, I agree with you. The material is not an exposed floor surface; thus, it is not subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.

Section 804 is for the Class rating of a finish for critical radiant flux, whereas Section 1206 addresses sound attenuation (specifically, Section 1206.3 for impact insulation class).
Click to expand...
I concur.
 
RLGA said:
Jeff, I agree with you. The material is not an exposed floor surface; thus, it is not subject to the requirements of Chapter 8.

Section 804 is for the Class rating of a finish for critical radiant flux, whereas Section 1206 addresses sound attenuation (specifically, Section 1206.3 for impact insulation class).
Click to expand...
Yes, a contractor called me because the BD won't accept Proflex because of a lack of testing data. I think this is ridiculous.
 
I just looked at several underlayment materials marketed for the increase in the IIC rating, and only one manufacturer indicated that some of their products comply with the "pill" test. A couple of manufacturers indicated some products were tested per ASTM E84, but no manufacturer indicated test results for critical radiant flux per ASTM E648 or NFPA 253.

If the AHJ in that area wants IIC compliance with hard surfaces, they are going to have to either change an entire product industry or accept the fact that underlayments are not floor finishes. Otherwise, the AHJ will not have any future residential projects in its jurisdiction since architects cannot achieve the impossible (i.e., comply with IIC and critical radiant flux requirements).
 
RLGA said:
I just looked at several underlayment materials marketed for the increase in the IIC rating, and only one manufacturer indicated that some of their products comply with the "pill" test. A couple of manufacturers indicated some products were tested per ASTM E84, but no manufacturer indicated test results for critical radiant flux per ASTM E648 or NFPA 253.

If the AHJ in that area wants IIC compliance with hard surfaces, they are going to have to either change an entire product industry or accept the fact that underlayments are not floor finishes. Otherwise, the AHJ will not have any future residential projects in its jurisdiction since architects cannot achieve the impossible (i.e., comply with IIC and critical radiant flux requirements).
Click to expand...
The AHJ is in my phone but rarely answers. We were on the same panel for our county together. I don't see how he can stand so firm on this.
 
Just found out they could not prove 603.1

2. Thermal and acoustical insulation, other than foam plastics, having a flame spread index of not more than 25.

Exceptions:
  1. Insulation placed between two layers of noncombustible materials without an intervening airspace shall be allowed to have a flame spread index of not more than 100.
  2. Insulation installed between a finished floor and solid decking without intervening airspace shall be allowed to have a flame spread index of not more than 200.
 
jar546 said:
Just found out they could not prove 603.1

2. Thermal and acoustical insulation, other than foam plastics, having a flame spread index of not more than 25.

Exceptions:
  1. Insulation placed between two layers of noncombustible materials without an intervening airspace shall be allowed to have a flame spread index of not more than 100.
  2. Insulation installed between a finished floor and solid decking without intervening airspace shall be allowed to have a flame spread index of not more than 200.
Click to expand...
The mention of Section 603.1 tells me that the project is of either Type I or II construction. Since most residential projects that I have worked on (other than high-rise) are typically in the Type V area (usually Type V over a Type I podium that is used for mixed uses), there are plenty of products available since neither flame spread nor critical radiant flux is required. However, as I have mentioned, there are products tested per ASTM E84, so they should be able to find a product (albeit limited) for their project.
 
RLGA said:
The mention of Section 603.1 tells me that the project is of either Type I or II construction. Since most residential projects that I have worked on (other than high-rise) are typically in the Type V area (usually Type V over a Type I podium that is used for mixed uses), there are plenty of products available since neither flame spread nor critical radiant flux is required. However, as I have mentioned, there are products tested per ASTM E84, so they should be able to find a product (albeit limited) for their project.
Click to expand...
I edited my OP to clarify that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top