After doing a couple of hypothetical com checks on a commercial mercantile building using the 2009 IECC for one and ASHRAE 90.1 for the other, the differences in the insulation R-values required is ridiculous for this area. For instance, with the ASHRAE standard the building would be permitted to have an R-19 ceiling/attic space. This is pretty much un-acceptable for this area due to the extreme cold winter months. So the powers that be are asking me if we should get rid of the ASHRAE alternative method of compliance all together. Any thought's or suggestions from the crowd?
-
Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades
Thinking of Ammending out the ASHRAE 90.1 alternative
- Thread starter Coder
- Start date
What is your basis for objecting to this option. If your argument is that it is less than the proscriptive option then you are on weak ground.
The question is will a design based on ASHRE 90.1 that results in the insulation levels mentioned provide a habitable building when based on a rational analysis?
The question is will a design based on ASHRE 90.1 that results in the insulation levels mentioned provide a habitable building when based on a rational analysis?
Forgot I posted this thread until just now when My supervisor (who is a planner and not a Building Official) reminded me about him wanting to see the standard go away. Not sure what his rationale is other than he doesn't think R-19 in a roof assembly is adequate. The more I think about it, I like the "give the designer options" approach as well. I personally think that the energy codes have become too strict as it is so why take away another method of compliance.
Keystone
SAWHORSE
Agree with others, keep options available.
Besides the roof insulation, how did the remaining portions of the project pan out?
Besides the roof insulation, how did the remaining portions of the project pan out?
ICE
Oh Well
Options are great...well unless R-19 in a Colorado roof is one of them.
First have an HVAC Mechanical Engineer review your hypothetical analyses. In many cases such results are due to not understanding the program.
What are the qualifications of the planner who finds the method of compliance not to be acceptable?
What are the qualifications of the planner who finds the method of compliance not to be acceptable?
Keystone
SAWHORSE
ASHRAE as I understand is ahead of and partial driver to the IECC. As Mark K stated, reach out to a D.P. Its still worth the option.
I prefer a simple, prescriptive, minimum standard that is easy for all to design, install and inspect. We amended out Rescheck as an option and will do the same with Comcheck next adoption cycle. Not only did we amend out Rescheck we deleted the entire energy code and developed our own one page energy requirements for residential.
Thinking we will end up just getting rid of the ASHRAE option and make folks designing commercial buildings here rely on the IECC for their compliance. No options?? Tough $&@!.... The less of a chance there will be for poorly insulated buildings to be permitted for construction. Can't have that happening here in the ice box of Colorado.
Mr.Inspector said:
As you can see. My mind clearly has not been made up on this topic yet. It all started with the approval of a comcheck using the ASHRAE standard that enabled an R-19 walls and lid metal building for a Family Dollar. It was a piece of crap building on paper and is now a piece of crap building for real.Mr.Inspector said:
Keystone
SAWHORSE
R-19 in a roof is a problem, was this cavity or continuous?