mark handler
SAWHORSE
I have allowed it as an alternate means, but required a manufacture's certified installer.
-
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
"Window Film" added to glass in hazardous location
- Thread starter Joe.B
- Start date
But it's not an alternative. Nothing in the code requires tempered glass for safety glazing. Tempered glass is not the "prescriptive benchmark" for which an alternative must be weighed against. The code requires the standards be met, that's it. A product meeting the IRC referenced standards is NOT an alternate means. It's code.
Like preservative treated lumber. There might be a common type sold in your area, but that's not code. Code just says any product that complies with AWPA U1. Same thing as this subject.
steveray
SAWHORSE
Glenn,
I think what Mark was saying was that we are a little more comfortable when stuff comes from a factory than when JimBob puts it on in the field....Sometimes even if that factory has no oversight in another country and JimBob is an excellent craftsman....
I can't remember all of the details, but I had a 200 unit apartment building where they missed the "tempered" glass next to a lot of doors...I suggest they could do field applied but wanted the product info. When I got it, I told them what i wanted to witness per the install instructions in the field and they decided to swap the glass....
I think what Mark was saying was that we are a little more comfortable when stuff comes from a factory than when JimBob puts it on in the field....Sometimes even if that factory has no oversight in another country and JimBob is an excellent craftsman....
I can't remember all of the details, but I had a 200 unit apartment building where they missed the "tempered" glass next to a lot of doors...I suggest they could do field applied but wanted the product info. When I got it, I told them what i wanted to witness per the install instructions in the field and they decided to swap the glass....
Yes, when it comes to "identification" to verify compliance of said "products" tested to referenced standards, the BO's discretion is required. This is made clear in exception 1 to 308.1. This is where your follow through with verification of the install is perfect.
The only two times I have approved with in the field, they were professionally installed. JimBob would get more scrutiny, indeed.
mark handler
SAWHORSE
First of all I said nothing about Tempered glass.
Adding after the fact film to a window does not suddenly make it safety glazing.
The code does not offer a film option, you can use film, as long as it complies with xyz.
Instead, For other than tempered glass, manufacturer's designations are not required provided that the building official approves the use of a certificate, affidavit or other evidence confirming compliance with this code.
The Alternate means process allows for additional information on the film and scrutiny of the film applier.
Last edited:
It does if it meets the test standards. The code doesn't offer any "options" for safety glazing. It just provides a test standard. It doesn't put any compliant safety glazing above any other or suggest any type to anyone.
Every single product has to be installed correctly to perform as intended, of course. Whether window film (meets a test standard) or a fall protection device (meets a test standard).
The building official approval you have quoted is not an approval for a product that meets a referenced standard. It's approval for a form of identification to prove said product meets the test standard. That is the discretion provided by the code to the official, and I think the distinction is important for folks with authority over others to realize.
I don't mean to challenge you or put you on the defensive, Mark. My apologies if it ended up that way. The safety glazing provisions are very detailed and complicated in the IRC, and I believe too many building authorities gloss over the details and mis-represent the freedom the code actually allows our fellow Americans. This is my primary goal in my comments here. Not to win any argument.
[EDITED] I read your comment a few more times and I think we are arguing semantics. Pretty sure we agree, after all. Ignore my preaching. Sorry... teacher in me. I'm just dead set on extracting every choice for the free people I possibly can out of the code. That's my bias and it's showing! ha, ha!
BringitBrit
Registered User
I Have a bathroom that has an old window that the clients don't want to touch but inspector wants it to be safety glass or the protective film that meets building code, does anyone know of a product i can buy and install myself? the inspector is going to check that it complies obviously.
i did get a 3M dealer to quote, but when i came to delivery he ghosted me. probably because its too smaller job.
i did get a 3M dealer to quote, but when i came to delivery he ghosted me. probably because its too smaller job.
steveray
SAWHORSE
What is requiring the upgrade of the old window?
BringitBrit
Registered User
Hey! Thanks for the question.
It’s a 1930’s colonial with original sash windows, the room previously was a study and we converted to a bathroom, it was questionable whether the window was close enough to the tub shower to need upgrading and the client preferably wanted to avoid, lead time for the window was 5months and didn’t know what they wanted etc because they are planning at some point on doing all the windows. this is just so permit can get closed out.
It’s a 1930’s colonial with original sash windows, the room previously was a study and we converted to a bathroom, it was questionable whether the window was close enough to the tub shower to need upgrading and the client preferably wanted to avoid, lead time for the window was 5months and didn’t know what they wanted etc because they are planning at some point on doing all the windows. this is just so permit can get closed out.
steveray
SAWHORSE
Ask the inspector if the would allow the window to be boarded up on the inside?
R308.4.5 Glazing and wet surfaces. Glazing in walls,
enclosures or fences containing or facing hot tubs, spas,
whirlpools, saunas, steam rooms, bathtubs, showers and
indoor or outdoor swimming pools where the bottom
exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60 inches (1524
mm) measured vertically above any standing or walking
surface shall be considered to be a hazardous location. This
shall apply to single glazing and each pane in multiple glazing.
I would argue if there is no exposed glazing, there is no exposed glazing......And then they can order the correct window and pull another permit for that...
R308.4.5 Glazing and wet surfaces. Glazing in walls,
enclosures or fences containing or facing hot tubs, spas,
whirlpools, saunas, steam rooms, bathtubs, showers and
indoor or outdoor swimming pools where the bottom
exposed edge of the glazing is less than 60 inches (1524
mm) measured vertically above any standing or walking
surface shall be considered to be a hazardous location. This
shall apply to single glazing and each pane in multiple glazing.
I would argue if there is no exposed glazing, there is no exposed glazing......And then they can order the correct window and pull another permit for that...
BringitBrit
Registered User
we actually did board up one of 2 windows where the tub went which was fine with him, but client wants this window for natural light, its big, 40 x 60 odd. its starting to sound like there just isn't an off the shelf product for this,
Sifu
SAWHORSE
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 2,801
It has been awhile since I dealt with these films but I do remember most being required to be installed by a certified (by the MFR) installer, and I think most ESR reports have the same language.
On another note, many windows are double pane or triple pane. Per code each pane must be meet the safety standards. I have always understood this to be because a "tempered" glass will shatter, but not shard, but wouldn't prevent the next pane in the assembly from breaking and sharding. If memory serves, a lot of the films are not approved when exposed to the exterior, which presents a problem. Maybe products have improved since I had this happen, but it is something to watch out for. Not sure how a laminated glass or if a film that prevents collapse would apply to this logic. It is not as simple as just a peel and stick...unless things have really changed.
On another note, many windows are double pane or triple pane. Per code each pane must be meet the safety standards. I have always understood this to be because a "tempered" glass will shatter, but not shard, but wouldn't prevent the next pane in the assembly from breaking and sharding. If memory serves, a lot of the films are not approved when exposed to the exterior, which presents a problem. Maybe products have improved since I had this happen, but it is something to watch out for. Not sure how a laminated glass or if a film that prevents collapse would apply to this logic. It is not as simple as just a peel and stick...unless things have really changed.
Paul Sweet
Sawhorse
Could you install a clear plastic light (similar to an interior storm sash) inside the existing window?
The film satisfies the test standard by not collapsing (as you mention) and prohibiting a body from going through it. This is similar to why glass block and continuously backed mirrors are exceptions. In some locations, simply a bar in front is all it takes to be back to plain glass. The glass still breaks all over you, but you won't go through it. If the hazardous location is on the inside, and the inside pane is unbreachable, the outer pane is a non issue. Just like if there was a pane of glass on the other side of a glass block wall. I lean to looking at the code as a minimum standard and really seeking out the intent of the words. I would have a hard time explaining to the public why the outer pane needs something when the inner pane can't be breached.
Really? I would argue that there's a window facing, and within five feet of, a bathtub.
The film is a non-starter. In the many dozens of times that safety glazing was not provided not once did anyone suggest fim much less install film. Now I know that some of the forum members have seen it installed. I get that the film is a viable solution....it's just that it sounds so dumb that nearly everyone says "forget the film."
Last edited:
steveray
SAWHORSE
I can't recall a time when someone "made me" approve something. It probably happened but as I grew into the job I came to realize that my decisions were my own. I suppose that not working "for" someone made a difference.
I worked with a few people that referred to me as their inspector as in, "I'll send my inspector." At least I wasn't shining their shoes.
That was commonplace. Managers came up with all manner of strange things. Managers told me that I was not allowed to write corrections. What they did not succeed in doing was to get me to go along with it. I could be overridden by assigning another inspector or their signature but if I didn't want to approve something there was damned little that they could do about it.
I was insulated by civil service rules and more importantly, I was correct. When I did acquiesce it was because I was wrong to begin with. More than once I was threatened with being charged with insubordination..... I rose to that challenge and they folded. You have to understand that the organization was rife with corruption of the soul. There's only so much that anyone can do to me when the entire apparatus is fouled with neglect.
Independence comes with a price. There's 120,000 people working for LA County. I was inspecting a new furnace and AC when the owner asked for my name. Upon hearing my name he said that he has heard about me. I was surprised until he told me that he works for the airrport division of public works. The point being, if you desire to advance in rank it's best if the airport division employees do not know a story that starts with your name.
Last edited:
ADAguy
Registered User
so, is a drop test better than a "swing " test of the weight?