I still remember when Montana had no absolute daytime speed limit (wasn't driving myself then, but was a passenger a few times). Too bad "reasonable and prudent" was too vague according to the state supreme court.
I spent a bit of time working / traveling around Montana and the info I got from the locals was that "reasonable and prudent" all too often depended on whether or not you felt like slipping the officer a few bucks. Especially if you've got out of state plates. A lot of them were happy to see it go.
Not being a local, I can't confirm nor deny that. I do know that for a long time after the federal 55 mph limit was set for fuel saving, the state had a $5 fine for wasting of natural resources when you were caught exceeding 55 mph. Apparently it was common to keep $5 bills in your car to pay the officer when you were pulled over (source).
It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of locals kept slipping bills to officers long after that.
Interesting! I never heard about the $5 thing... that's very clever.
Jun 10, 16 2:28 pm ·
·
Rick a "smoke curtain" is not a physical curtain made out of fabric or neoprene or whatever - it's an air handling strategy, and does not work if there are doors directly to the exterior. You should really stop.
The under 3000 sf thing can get you out of needing vestibules, but only if you don't need them to meet another code requirement. This building, because of the lack of full sprinklers (i.e. none under stage), requires smoke vents and a smoke curtain. You need the vestibules in order for the smoke curtain to work.
The term you are suppose to be using for air handling strategy with regards to smoke is "smoke control". Smoke curtain is a curtain. From a code perspective, they use the term "fire curtain" which refers to a fire resistant proscenium curtain because its a curtain that is fire rated and also would be to control smoke. The code also applies the option for a water curtain which is a strategy of using a 'curtain' of water which would be arresting smoke because the smoke particulates would be caught in the water droplets and fall to the ground. This application of a fire curtain as it maybe called or smoke curtain are under the section of the code that refers to PROSCENIUM CURTAIN. What does 410.3.4 and 410.3.5 of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code or IBC say?
Proscenium curtains are required to be fire rated when a proscenium wall is required to be fire rated. The Olio drop curtain is a type of proscenium curtain. It is probably primarily function more as a smoke curtain than a fire curtain (ie. to resist fire) and was probably made of some fire resistant material but I wouldn't bet my life on it. There is automatic fire sprinklers above the stage.
Olio curtain will function to resist or contain smoke even with the doors. That's because the doors aren't moving enough air to move that curtain enough. There is those centrifugal exhaust fans. 3 of them. One is over the stage. The other two are over the audience seating.
I do agree with you that that the stage should have had sprinklers under the stage from a functional point of view. Lets remember, an engineer was designing the fire sprinkler system. The reason I did not design the system is because the intent would be that the stage would be connected to the rest of the sprinkler system. The engineer should have employed in the plans and specifications for sprinklers under the stage to connect it as part of the system as a whole. Now, it would probably have to be a limited area sprinkler system. Had I been consulted over the matter, I would have worked with the engineers to employ either strategy. While the stage was structurally designed, fire sprinklers were not employed in the structural design because that would be part of the fire sprinkler system plans and specifications. That was my understanding. I am not sure why fire sprinklers weren't implemented under the stage.
It wasn't made clear to me at the time by the client that they were going to not comply with code. If they tell me something like, we'll be talking with the engineer on it. Logic would be that I should have talked to the engineer to follow up. Right. How do you do that if you didn't know who the engineer was so that you know who to contact?
I'm not calling a bunch of engineers to find out they weren't at all involved with the project.
Jun 10, 16 2:35 pm ·
·
Not being a local, I can't confirm nor deny that. I do know that for a long time after the federal 55 mph limit was set for fuel saving, the state had a $5 fine for wasting of natural resources when you were caught exceeding 55 mph. Apparently it was common to keep $5 bills in your car to pay the officer when you were pulled over (source).
It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of locals kept slipping bills to officers long after that.
To fill the piggy bank for their coffee and donuts fund.
The term you are suppose to be using for air handling strategy with regards to smoke is "smoke control". Smoke curtain is a curtain.
The term in the code is "smoke curtain". I believe the specific language was already provided to you at some point in the other thread about the theater. I'm not talking about a proscenium curtain - I'm talking about the code requirement for an air handling strategy to separate strata, so that the smoke stays above a certain height - I believe the code says 7 feet and change. It doesn't work if you have doors directly to the exterior.
Jun 10, 16 3:01 pm ·
·
Do you mean 410.3.7.2 of OSSC ?
The term is SMOKE CONTROL.
Jun 10, 16 3:04 pm ·
·
BTW:
Read 410.3.7.
CMU wall plus a fire rated door assembly between stage and back stage equals a fire barrier. That back wall will serve as a fire barrier with approved fire rated door assembly and installation. 1 hr rating is required. The CMU provides 2 hrs. The backstage is sprinklered. Therefore, the stage can be consider under 1000 sq.ft. as it's dimensions are less than 1000 sq.ft. per 410.3.1.1. CMU is inherent fire rated construction of at least 1 hr. A rated door & assembly would complete such a fire rated construction as a fire barrier (a type of fire rated construction).
Therefore, with that in mind, 410.3.7 and 410.3.7.1 & 410.3.7.2 would not be required with that implementation choice. You have different options with different sets of requirements. What costs more? A fire rated door or a rated vestibule at all exits?
Sneaky - This isn't even close to being on topic, but, fuck it, this thread is another goddamn balkins jerkoff: your post reminded me of a movie that I loved years ago. Might rent it tonight. Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune are the only actors in the film, an American and a Japanese soldier fighting it out on an uninhabited island. I recommend it.
It's very odd how you keep telling me that I mean something else. I mean a smoke curtain.
Jun 10, 16 5:13 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur,
Regardless of the weight of the CMU, 8" thick CMU walls have more than 1 hr rating. Considering there is a wood frame wall with drywall that is at least and you have sprinklers on BOTH sides of the wall. All that wall needs to meet is 1-HOUR rating. You can't tell me the wall has less than 1-hr rating. 2-inches of concrete will be that much.
Every CMU listing in the IEBC, for example, has at least 1-hour rating. The lowest rating for the 6" part of the CMU walls in IEBC for hollow (no facing) is 1hr. 15 minutes. With facing on one side only, it's 2-hr rated. There is facing on one side. So, even if the facing isn't gypsum plaster... but a portland cement plaster, it would probably be around 1 hr. 30 minutes to about 1 hr. 45 minutes. At the least. That portion of the wall is above the roof line of the back stage where the back stage (circa 1980s addition) and the main theater (original CMU building) are connected. Since the CMU's have facing on at least one side and from what I can tell, there is around 55%-60% solid material in the wall. I'm still looking at ratings between 1-hr 30 minutes to over 2-hour rating. However, the rating only needs to be 1-hr rating.
Rick remember that thread where you claimed there's no such thing as a UL directory ("they don't publish those things"), and ended up revealing that you don't know the difference between a UL-listed product and a UL-numbered assembly? Or how about the one where everybody was discussing shadow boxes for curtain wall in an office building, and you jumped in with your "corrections" illustrated with pictures of shadow box picture frames from Michael's craft store? The knowledge gap here with these code issues is as big as those previous examples. We're not speaking the same language. You're not fluent in codes.
And: that wall doesn't have a high enough parapet for an assembly space with combustible roofs. It doesn't make any difference whether it's made of 8" or 2'-0" thick CMU, it doesn't form a compliant barrier.
It's very odd how you keep telling me that I mean something else. I mean a smoke curtain.
Shut up and cite the code section you are explicitly referring to that actually applies to Assembly use buildings in Oregon.
The term "smoke curtain" isn't explicitly used in the building code. Maybe in the commentary.
Now, in regards to a reference standard, NFPA 80 which states about the fabric fire safety in Chapter 20 (not Chapter 21 as that is intended for a more 'engineered' fire protection system) of NFPA 80 (I'm looking at the 2016 edition as it's viewable). It is referred to as Fire safety curtains.
We know what smoke curtains are. However, the code doesn't use the words explicitly.
Balkarinottsky, there is more to a fire rating than saying 8" CMU. You'd know this if you ever designed anything but you have not.
Jun 10, 16 5:47 pm ·
·
Bloopox,
And: that wall doesn't have a high enough parapet for an assembly space with combustible roofs. It doesn't make any difference whether it's made of 8" or 2'-0" thick CMU, it doesn't form a compliant barrier.
I'm going to ask you these following questions and you better answer it correctly.
What are the difference between a prescriptive code compliant Fire Barrier and a prescriptive code compliant Fire Wall?
What are the prescriptive code requirements for Fire Barrier and Fire Wall?
Jun 10, 16 5:53 pm ·
·
Non Sequitur,
Materials have tested fire rating. The only way to test the existing CMU is to take one out and put it in fire per approved testing standards ad procedures. That'll cost a good $100,000 to test.
Balkins you really just said this "Materials have tested fire rating. The only way to test the existing CMU is to take one out and put it in fire per approved testing standards ad procedures."
Jun 10, 16 5:57 pm ·
·
Olaf, if you want to know the exact performance of CMUs used in a particular building, you need to outright test it. If you really want to know that exact performance. Unless you actually test it, you are always going with a little bit of assumptions.
What client is going to have every single CMU block on their CMU building individually fire tested. You're basically going to end up replacing the entire building at that point. Are you guys really going to suggest that?
If that's the case, don't work with existing buildings dated before 1980 because NO EXISTING building from that time and earlier will have the documentation and testing certification records available.
The code allows me to used assumed fire rating values.
The only way I can ascertain EXACT mineral makeup composition of a CMU block, it's going to be a destructive testing. No single CMU is 100% exactly the same. This is because there is microscopic variation of mineral composition and composition densities throughout the geometric form.
The code allows us to apply some general assumptions.
and then you follow it up with two more posts that clearly indicate you have never done this for a living......please keep pointing out the obvious as if it were deep and critical and someone how miss everything while at it.
Jun 10, 16 6:17 pm ·
·
Olaf,
If you are going to send CMU units of the building to be tested to some testing lab to get reports back and all that money spent, you might as well demolish the building and build new because you'll end up spending twice as much on all the tests ALONE.
No one who works with existing buildings has that kind of testing done. Those who do are deliberately fucking over the client outright. Lets just outlaw historic preservation, reusing existing buildings, etc. Lets just demolish any building built more than 30 years old and have mandatory demolition of buildings whenever property is to be transferred to different owners.
Rick I've tried and tried to explain the same thing to you about that "fire barrier". It's NOT continuous, because the ceilings of the two spaces aren't rated, so the parapet needs to be higher. Don't you see that if the roof on one side were to catch on fire, that wall is not a continuous barrier because the fire can continue right one across to the other roof? On the engineer's drawings they flag that issue and show remediating it - it's one of the reasons that they measured the building height and the parapet heights in the first place. You can keep repeating the same thing, and it will continue to be wrong every time.
Rick is not crazy. He just can not think in the abstract. If you do not explain it in discrete, linear, and literal terms he will never understand it. Again, he is not crazy, he just thinks differently from you.
Rick I've tried and tried to explain the same thing to you about that "fire barrier". It's NOT continuous, because the ceilings of the two spaces aren't rated, so the parapet needs to be higher. Don't you see that if the roof on one side were to catch on fire, that wall is not a continuous barrier because the fire can continue right one across to the other roof? On the engineer's drawings they flag that issue and show remediating it - it's one of the reasons that they measured the building height and the parapet heights in the first place. You can keep repeating the same thing, and it will continue to be wrong every time.
Generally, Fire Barrier requirements has no parapet requirements as fire barriers do not typically penetrate through the roof. Fire Walls do and has specific requirements. Are you sure the roof of the backstage section is the same level as the roof section of the CMU building.
Split level roof requirements may apply.
In addition, this building is probably operating under OSSC 2007 Section 3412 (all applicable portion of that section with IEBC as an approved guideline standards to meet requirements of Chapter 34 of the OSSC.
The roofs are not different enough in levels that this would matter. That's obvious from the photos.
Chapter 34 doesn't help you here, because you changed the use group. Essentially the code treats the building as if it was built as a new as a theater.
A fire barrier has to "wrap" with other fire barriers. There are no fire barriers at the ceilings to connect with here - that's why a fire wall is required. How many times do we have to go over this? The roofs are both combustible, and not far enough apart, either vertically or horizontally - therefore as far as the code is concerned you have no separation between the backstage area and the stage and house, and so it is calculated as all one open area, regardless of CMU wall or rated door. I'm tired of explaining this - go talk to the building official or fire inspector yourself.
Jun 10, 16 8:35 pm ·
·
Rick is not crazy. He just can not think in the abstract. If you do not explain it in discrete, linear, and literal terms he will never understand it. Again, he is not crazy, he just thinks differently from you.
Sure I can but laws, rules, regulations and other legally enforced policies are not stuff that you think in abstract. They are discrete, linear and literal because codes, laws, administrative rules, regulations and policies has to be enforced objectively with uniformity and consistency. They are written to be very explicit in what they mean.
It isn't suppose to be loosely interpreted in any ol' way. Otherwise, it is all meaningless. Yes, there are some areas of regulations that are intentionally flexible. There are other areas in regulations where it is less flexible to interpretation. There are reasons for it. For laws, rules, regulations and regulatory policies to be defensible, there has to be consistency of enforcement and control over extent of interpretation.
When law requires A=B+C, it doesn't mean A=D+I+C+K.
The whole legal system development throughout the 1950s to present had been about getting rid of subjectivity and bringing objectivity.
Part of that is to the legal assurance of equal protection and enforcement of the law that is Constitutionally required. That is part of the legal culture with Supreme Court rulings including matters of law and Constitution.
Is that where you look over the Junior Janitor's shoulder when they are cleaning up puke and tell them they missed a spot?
Jun 10, 16 10:52 pm ·
·
In any case, it comes down to whether or not the wall is being classified as a fire barrier (minimum parapet height doesn't apply.... only FIRE WALLS requires the minimum parapet height). Think about it. Most fire barriers don't even penetrate the roof.
You are applying 706.6 of FIRE WALLs when I am not nor need to when I can apply the requirements of Fire Barrier with a fire-resistant parapet.
The wall is being treated as a FIRE BARRIER WITH A PARAPET not a FIRE WALL.
FIRE BARRIERS DO NOT HAVE PARAPET REQUIREMENTS. FIRE BARRIERS MAY HAVE PARAPETS and continue beyond the roof. A FIRE WALL is a type of FIRE BARRIER WALL that has additional requirements and regulated under Section 706 of the building codes.
Other Fire Barriers that are not "FIRE WALLS" are regulated under Section 707 except Fire Partitions.
Jun 11, 16 12:14 am ·
·
Actually Balkins, codes are either prescriptive or performance based.
I never said it isn't performance based or that you can't used performance based solutions but the codes as they are are the PRESCRIPTIVE codes. ICC has an actual performance based code called the ICC PERFORMANCE CODE. All Prescriptive Codes has an underlying performance standard implied. Hmmm...... alternative compliance.
Even PERFORMANCE BASED Code has prescribed performance criteria to be met. That is why it is called a CODE which is shorthand of CODIFIED statutes, rule or regulation. It's CODIFIED which is referring to prescribing a law or rule or regulation in writing.
If the main I-codes were the PERFORMANCE CODE than why is there an ICC PERFORMANCE CODE?
You can certainly infer performance standards from prescriptive level standards. Some of the reference standards are more performance oriented but the building codes itself is prescriptive. Even performance codes are prescriptive but in a different sense. Instead of prescribing the solution to an inferred performance standard, its prescribing the performance standard to be met by non-prescriptive alternative compliance methods.
Job Titles
I'm curious about that spot of "85" in Texas.
and it wouldn't matter if Oregon raised the speed limits because all the local drivers are happy to cruise along in the left lane at 55mph anyway.
I still remember when Montana had no absolute daytime speed limit (wasn't driving myself then, but was a passenger a few times). Too bad "reasonable and prudent" was too vague according to the state supreme court.
I spent a bit of time working / traveling around Montana and the info I got from the locals was that "reasonable and prudent" all too often depended on whether or not you felt like slipping the officer a few bucks. Especially if you've got out of state plates. A lot of them were happy to see it go.
Not being a local, I can't confirm nor deny that. I do know that for a long time after the federal 55 mph limit was set for fuel saving, the state had a $5 fine for wasting of natural resources when you were caught exceeding 55 mph. Apparently it was common to keep $5 bills in your car to pay the officer when you were pulled over (source).
It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of locals kept slipping bills to officers long after that.
Interesting! I never heard about the $5 thing... that's very clever.
Rick a "smoke curtain" is not a physical curtain made out of fabric or neoprene or whatever - it's an air handling strategy, and does not work if there are doors directly to the exterior. You should really stop.
The under 3000 sf thing can get you out of needing vestibules, but only if you don't need them to meet another code requirement. This building, because of the lack of full sprinklers (i.e. none under stage), requires smoke vents and a smoke curtain. You need the vestibules in order for the smoke curtain to work.
The term you are suppose to be using for air handling strategy with regards to smoke is "smoke control". Smoke curtain is a curtain. From a code perspective, they use the term "fire curtain" which refers to a fire resistant proscenium curtain because its a curtain that is fire rated and also would be to control smoke. The code also applies the option for a water curtain which is a strategy of using a 'curtain' of water which would be arresting smoke because the smoke particulates would be caught in the water droplets and fall to the ground. This application of a fire curtain as it maybe called or smoke curtain are under the section of the code that refers to PROSCENIUM CURTAIN. What does 410.3.4 and 410.3.5 of the Oregon Structural Specialty Code or IBC say?
Proscenium curtains are required to be fire rated when a proscenium wall is required to be fire rated. The Olio drop curtain is a type of proscenium curtain. It is probably primarily function more as a smoke curtain than a fire curtain (ie. to resist fire) and was probably made of some fire resistant material but I wouldn't bet my life on it. There is automatic fire sprinklers above the stage.
Olio curtain will function to resist or contain smoke even with the doors. That's because the doors aren't moving enough air to move that curtain enough. There is those centrifugal exhaust fans. 3 of them. One is over the stage. The other two are over the audience seating.
I do agree with you that that the stage should have had sprinklers under the stage from a functional point of view. Lets remember, an engineer was designing the fire sprinkler system. The reason I did not design the system is because the intent would be that the stage would be connected to the rest of the sprinkler system. The engineer should have employed in the plans and specifications for sprinklers under the stage to connect it as part of the system as a whole. Now, it would probably have to be a limited area sprinkler system. Had I been consulted over the matter, I would have worked with the engineers to employ either strategy. While the stage was structurally designed, fire sprinklers were not employed in the structural design because that would be part of the fire sprinkler system plans and specifications. That was my understanding. I am not sure why fire sprinklers weren't implemented under the stage.
It wasn't made clear to me at the time by the client that they were going to not comply with code. If they tell me something like, we'll be talking with the engineer on it. Logic would be that I should have talked to the engineer to follow up. Right. How do you do that if you didn't know who the engineer was so that you know who to contact?
I'm not calling a bunch of engineers to find out they weren't at all involved with the project.
Not being a local, I can't confirm nor deny that. I do know that for a long time after the federal 55 mph limit was set for fuel saving, the state had a $5 fine for wasting of natural resources when you were caught exceeding 55 mph. Apparently it was common to keep $5 bills in your car to pay the officer when you were pulled over (source).
It wouldn't surprise me if a lot of locals kept slipping bills to officers long after that.
To fill the piggy bank for their coffee and donuts fund.
The term you are suppose to be using for air handling strategy with regards to smoke is "smoke control". Smoke curtain is a curtain.
The term in the code is "smoke curtain". I believe the specific language was already provided to you at some point in the other thread about the theater. I'm not talking about a proscenium curtain - I'm talking about the code requirement for an air handling strategy to separate strata, so that the smoke stays above a certain height - I believe the code says 7 feet and change. It doesn't work if you have doors directly to the exterior.
Do you mean 410.3.7.2 of OSSC ?
The term is SMOKE CONTROL.
BTW:
Read 410.3.7.
CMU wall plus a fire rated door assembly between stage and back stage equals a fire barrier. That back wall will serve as a fire barrier with approved fire rated door assembly and installation. 1 hr rating is required. The CMU provides 2 hrs. The backstage is sprinklered. Therefore, the stage can be consider under 1000 sq.ft. as it's dimensions are less than 1000 sq.ft. per 410.3.1.1. CMU is inherent fire rated construction of at least 1 hr. A rated door & assembly would complete such a fire rated construction as a fire barrier (a type of fire rated construction).
Therefore, with that in mind, 410.3.7 and 410.3.7.1 & 410.3.7.2 would not be required with that implementation choice. You have different options with different sets of requirements. What costs more? A fire rated door or a rated vestibule at all exits?
^ what's the weight of the CMU balkins? Not all CMUs are created equal.
Rick,
You're like a Japanese unit on a deserted island. You don't believe anyone who says the conflict is over so you keep fighting your tiny war.
Sneaky - This isn't even close to being on topic, but, fuck it, this thread is another goddamn balkins jerkoff: your post reminded me of a movie that I loved years ago. Might rent it tonight. Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune are the only actors in the film, an American and a Japanese soldier fighting it out on an uninhabited island. I recommend it.
No, I don't mean 410.3.7.2 of OSSC.
It's very odd how you keep telling me that I mean something else. I mean a smoke curtain.
Non Sequitur,
Regardless of the weight of the CMU, 8" thick CMU walls have more than 1 hr rating. Considering there is a wood frame wall with drywall that is at least and you have sprinklers on BOTH sides of the wall. All that wall needs to meet is 1-HOUR rating. You can't tell me the wall has less than 1-hr rating. 2-inches of concrete will be that much.
Every CMU listing in the IEBC, for example, has at least 1-hour rating. The lowest rating for the 6" part of the CMU walls in IEBC for hollow (no facing) is 1hr. 15 minutes. With facing on one side only, it's 2-hr rated. There is facing on one side. So, even if the facing isn't gypsum plaster... but a portland cement plaster, it would probably be around 1 hr. 30 minutes to about 1 hr. 45 minutes. At the least. That portion of the wall is above the roof line of the back stage where the back stage (circa 1980s addition) and the main theater (original CMU building) are connected. Since the CMU's have facing on at least one side and from what I can tell, there is around 55%-60% solid material in the wall. I'm still looking at ratings between 1-hr 30 minutes to over 2-hour rating. However, the rating only needs to be 1-hr rating.
Rick remember that thread where you claimed there's no such thing as a UL directory ("they don't publish those things"), and ended up revealing that you don't know the difference between a UL-listed product and a UL-numbered assembly? Or how about the one where everybody was discussing shadow boxes for curtain wall in an office building, and you jumped in with your "corrections" illustrated with pictures of shadow box picture frames from Michael's craft store? The knowledge gap here with these code issues is as big as those previous examples. We're not speaking the same language. You're not fluent in codes.
And: that wall doesn't have a high enough parapet for an assembly space with combustible roofs. It doesn't make any difference whether it's made of 8" or 2'-0" thick CMU, it doesn't form a compliant barrier.
.
No, I don't mean 410.3.7.2 of OSSC.
It's very odd how you keep telling me that I mean something else. I mean a smoke curtain.
Shut up and cite the code section you are explicitly referring to that actually applies to Assembly use buildings in Oregon.
The term "smoke curtain" isn't explicitly used in the building code. Maybe in the commentary.
Now, in regards to a reference standard, NFPA 80 which states about the fabric fire safety in Chapter 20 (not Chapter 21 as that is intended for a more 'engineered' fire protection system) of NFPA 80 (I'm looking at the 2016 edition as it's viewable). It is referred to as Fire safety curtains.
We know what smoke curtains are. However, the code doesn't use the words explicitly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spo1jK4CCEU
Bloopox,
And: that wall doesn't have a high enough parapet for an assembly space with combustible roofs. It doesn't make any difference whether it's made of 8" or 2'-0" thick CMU, it doesn't form a compliant barrier.
I'm going to ask you these following questions and you better answer it correctly.
What are the difference between a prescriptive code compliant Fire Barrier and a prescriptive code compliant Fire Wall?
What are the prescriptive code requirements for Fire Barrier and Fire Wall?
Non Sequitur,
Materials have tested fire rating. The only way to test the existing CMU is to take one out and put it in fire per approved testing standards ad procedures. That'll cost a good $100,000 to test.
in what context? can we see a drawing? all this code talk without drawings is meaningless.
Balkins you really just said this "Materials have tested fire rating. The only way to test the existing CMU is to take one out and put it in fire per approved testing standards ad procedures."
Olaf, if you want to know the exact performance of CMUs used in a particular building, you need to outright test it. If you really want to know that exact performance. Unless you actually test it, you are always going with a little bit of assumptions.
What client is going to have every single CMU block on their CMU building individually fire tested. You're basically going to end up replacing the entire building at that point. Are you guys really going to suggest that?
If that's the case, don't work with existing buildings dated before 1980 because NO EXISTING building from that time and earlier will have the documentation and testing certification records available.
The code allows me to used assumed fire rating values.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-FmzANq-ag
Every material has assumed fire rating values.
The only way I can ascertain EXACT mineral makeup composition of a CMU block, it's going to be a destructive testing. No single CMU is 100% exactly the same. This is because there is microscopic variation of mineral composition and composition densities throughout the geometric form.
The code allows us to apply some general assumptions.
and then you follow it up with two more posts that clearly indicate you have never done this for a living......please keep pointing out the obvious as if it were deep and critical and someone how miss everything while at it.
Olaf,
If you are going to send CMU units of the building to be tested to some testing lab to get reports back and all that money spent, you might as well demolish the building and build new because you'll end up spending twice as much on all the tests ALONE.
No one who works with existing buildings has that kind of testing done. Those who do are deliberately fucking over the client outright. Lets just outlaw historic preservation, reusing existing buildings, etc. Lets just demolish any building built more than 30 years old and have mandatory demolition of buildings whenever property is to be transferred to different owners.
Is that what you morons want?
this is a great dumpster fire.
Balkins, your ignorance is endless.
rick was i argueing with you about that? did i suggest anything you just said?
Olaf,
It sure the hell feels like you were.
Rick I've tried and tried to explain the same thing to you about that "fire barrier". It's NOT continuous, because the ceilings of the two spaces aren't rated, so the parapet needs to be higher. Don't you see that if the roof on one side were to catch on fire, that wall is not a continuous barrier because the fire can continue right one across to the other roof? On the engineer's drawings they flag that issue and show remediating it - it's one of the reasons that they measured the building height and the parapet heights in the first place. You can keep repeating the same thing, and it will continue to be wrong every time.
https://i.imgflip.com/qxher.jpg
Rick is not crazy. He just can not think in the abstract. If you do not explain it in discrete, linear, and literal terms he will never understand it. Again, he is not crazy, he just thinks differently from you.
^ Nail on the head.
Spontaneous,
Rick I've tried and tried to explain the same thing to you about that "fire barrier". It's NOT continuous, because the ceilings of the two spaces aren't rated, so the parapet needs to be higher. Don't you see that if the roof on one side were to catch on fire, that wall is not a continuous barrier because the fire can continue right one across to the other roof? On the engineer's drawings they flag that issue and show remediating it - it's one of the reasons that they measured the building height and the parapet heights in the first place. You can keep repeating the same thing, and it will continue to be wrong every time.
Generally, Fire Barrier requirements has no parapet requirements as fire barriers do not typically penetrate through the roof. Fire Walls do and has specific requirements. Are you sure the roof of the backstage section is the same level as the roof section of the CMU building.
Split level roof requirements may apply.
In addition, this building is probably operating under OSSC 2007 Section 3412 (all applicable portion of that section with IEBC as an approved guideline standards to meet requirements of Chapter 34 of the OSSC.
The roofs are not different enough in levels that this would matter. That's obvious from the photos.
Chapter 34 doesn't help you here, because you changed the use group. Essentially the code treats the building as if it was built as a new as a theater.
A fire barrier has to "wrap" with other fire barriers. There are no fire barriers at the ceilings to connect with here - that's why a fire wall is required. How many times do we have to go over this? The roofs are both combustible, and not far enough apart, either vertically or horizontally - therefore as far as the code is concerned you have no separation between the backstage area and the stage and house, and so it is calculated as all one open area, regardless of CMU wall or rated door. I'm tired of explaining this - go talk to the building official or fire inspector yourself.
Rick is not crazy. He just can not think in the abstract. If you do not explain it in discrete, linear, and literal terms he will never understand it. Again, he is not crazy, he just thinks differently from you.
Sure I can but laws, rules, regulations and other legally enforced policies are not stuff that you think in abstract. They are discrete, linear and literal because codes, laws, administrative rules, regulations and policies has to be enforced objectively with uniformity and consistency. They are written to be very explicit in what they mean.
It isn't suppose to be loosely interpreted in any ol' way. Otherwise, it is all meaningless. Yes, there are some areas of regulations that are intentionally flexible. There are other areas in regulations where it is less flexible to interpretation. There are reasons for it. For laws, rules, regulations and regulatory policies to be defensible, there has to be consistency of enforcement and control over extent of interpretation.
When law requires A=B+C, it doesn't mean A=D+I+C+K.
The whole legal system development throughout the 1950s to present had been about getting rid of subjectivity and bringing objectivity.
Part of that is to the legal assurance of equal protection and enforcement of the law that is Constitutionally required. That is part of the legal culture with Supreme Court rulings including matters of law and Constitution.
Rick, have you considered accounting?
CPAs make a ton of money and it would be something in which you could excel.
Im gunning for Senior Janitor position.
In any case, it comes down to whether or not the wall is being classified as a fire barrier (minimum parapet height doesn't apply.... only FIRE WALLS requires the minimum parapet height). Think about it. Most fire barriers don't even penetrate the roof.
You are applying 706.6 of FIRE WALLs when I am not nor need to when I can apply the requirements of Fire Barrier with a fire-resistant parapet.
The wall is being treated as a FIRE BARRIER WITH A PARAPET not a FIRE WALL.
FIRE BARRIERS DO NOT HAVE PARAPET REQUIREMENTS. FIRE BARRIERS MAY HAVE PARAPETS and continue beyond the roof. A FIRE WALL is a type of FIRE BARRIER WALL that has additional requirements and regulated under Section 706 of the building codes.
Other Fire Barriers that are not "FIRE WALLS" are regulated under Section 707 except Fire Partitions.
Actually Balkins, codes are either prescriptive or performance based.
I never said it isn't performance based or that you can't used performance based solutions but the codes as they are are the PRESCRIPTIVE codes. ICC has an actual performance based code called the ICC PERFORMANCE CODE. All Prescriptive Codes has an underlying performance standard implied. Hmmm...... alternative compliance.
Even PERFORMANCE BASED Code has prescribed performance criteria to be met. That is why it is called a CODE which is shorthand of CODIFIED statutes, rule or regulation. It's CODIFIED which is referring to prescribing a law or rule or regulation in writing.
Josh,
If the main I-codes were the PERFORMANCE CODE than why is there an ICC PERFORMANCE CODE?
You can certainly infer performance standards from prescriptive level standards. Some of the reference standards are more performance oriented but the building codes itself is prescriptive. Even performance codes are prescriptive but in a different sense. Instead of prescribing the solution to an inferred performance standard, its prescribing the performance standard to be met by non-prescriptive alternative compliance methods.
Stop posting
Keep on going Ricky! I wanna hear more.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.