Unused Fire Door

[LGreene]

Many moons ago I was taught that if there is a fire door that is no longer in use as a door, the door had to be removed and the opening filled with construction equivalent to the wall rating. The point was that the rating of an opening protective is typically lower than the rating of the wall construction, so when you close a fire door and push a storage cabinet up against it, the door may not provide enough protection against the increased fuel load. The 2010 edition of NFPA 80 (referenced by the 2012 IBC) says:

5.1.2 Removal of Door or Window. Where a door or window opening is no longer in use, the opening shall be filled with construction equivalent to that of the wall.



I posted something on my blog about this (http://idighardware.com/2014/05/ww-hidden-door/), and someone commented that I was wrong...that the door didn't have to be removed, it could be replaced with another door equal to the wall rating, or somehow "treated" to provide the same protection as the wall. I don't think this is commonly done, and once the storage cabinet is against the door, the door may not be able to be opened for the annual fire door inspection to verify the rating or that it is code-compliant.

My question for you is...if a fire door was no longer used as a door and is not required for egress, what methods would you allow to address it?

a) push the storage cabinet against the door and call it a day

b) replace the door with a door equivalent to the wall rating, even though the door can not be opened for a fire door inspection

c) leave the original door and install something else in the door opening too (like a panel) - again the door would not be openable for a fire door inspection

d) remove the door and fill the opening with something similar to the wall construction to maintain the wall rating

e) another method

 

[cda]

I Guess """ fire door that is no longer in use as a door """ might need to be case by case as to what they mean.

My answer if the door is never going to be opened than """ fire door that is no longer in use as a door """" in case they do put a filing cabinet in front of it or such.

 

[LGreene]

I Guess """ fire door that is no longer in use as a door """ might need to be case by case as to what they mean.My answer if the door is never going to be opened than """ fire door that is no longer in use as a door """" in case they do put a filing cabinet in front of it or such.

So what would you require them to do about the door opening?

 

[cda]

Sorry

My answer if the door is never going to be opened than """ fire door that is no longer in use as a door """" in case they do put a filing cabinet in front of it or such.

d) remove the door and fill the opening with something similar to the wall construction to maintain the wall rating

 

[mtlogcabin]

"No longer in use" is subjective and leaves a lot to be discussed.

Case by case is how it would have to be reviewed.

My understanding of why doors are not required to be rated at the same level as the wall is there is no additional fire loading at the doors unlike a wall which can have furniture, shelving or any number of items next to it that would contribute to the fire loading of the wall.

A metal file cabinet will probably not contribute much but an wood MDF built storage cabinet would.

 

[fatboy]

(D)

If this is no longer an opening, it cannot be afforded the lesser ratings, based on the premise that the fire load on either side is less, based on the actual use of the space. JMHO

 

[tmurray]

I can't imagine that replacing an existing fire door with one with a higher rating would be cheaper than filling the void in most cases. "d" would be my hard and fast rule for this. Anything else would have to be under special circumstances and well documented.

 

[LGreene]

Your responses make me feel better, so thank you! I thought I was losing it for a minute.

 

[Frank]

In most cases putting one layer of 5/8 type X gyp board on both sides of the door covering the opening will restore the fire rating to the full rating of the wall.

 

[fatboy]

Your responses make me feel better, so thank you! I thought I was losing it for a minute.

Well, you hang out here, so the "losing it" might not be too far off base...........

 

[FM William Burns]

(1) If the door is still functional and can be closed and locked.......that would be my first permitted option!

(2) If there were an opening no longer protected by a "required" fire door.......sealing the opening to meet original rating of the wall would be my only other permitted option!

 

[Mech]

It is kind of hard to gain access through a door during an emergency that is blocked by cabinetry and other items.

 

[mstehlin]

"no longer in use" could mean anything. Who says a door with furniture in front of it may not be used tomorrow to move some equipment. If the door is only used once a year, is this "no-longer in use"? What if they only need the door when replacing large equipment? I see where you are coming from, especially with the argument about no combustibles against a rated opening, but if it was me:

I choose:

a) Push the storage cabinet against the door and call it a day.