Since the definition is in Chapter 3; why wouldn't it apply thoughout? David Autry Plans Examiner Nebraska State Fire Marshal's Office 246 S. 14th Street Lincoln, NE 68508 402-471-9659 402-471-3118 fax www.sfm.ne.gov
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Drucker Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 11:53 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Barrier / Partition Definition David, Please correct me but my understanding of the definition of thermal barrier at 3.3.23 applies to 8.14.8.1.1. This definition was included specifically to define the required thermal barrier behind a bath/shower surround. As an inspector I've observed this many times where a sprinkler was installed in the bathroom because a thermal barrier was not installed between the framing and surround excluding use of the provision to omit the sprinkler. Does the definition at 3.3.23 apply throughout the standard ?. Thanks John Drucker -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Autry Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 12:23 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Barrier / Partition Definition John, NFPA 13 (2002) does define thermal barrier. 3.3.23 David Autry Plans Examiner Nebraska State Fire Marshal's Office 246 S. 14th Street Lincoln, NE 68508 402-471-9659 402-471-3118 fax www.sfm.ne.gov -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Drucker Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 8:57 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Barrier / Partition Definition Craig, How about applying the "Room Design" criteria ?. "All rooms shall be enclosed with walls having a fire resistance rating equal to the water supply duration". A thirty minute "wall" (partition in building code speak) could be 2 X 4 with 1/2" Type X on both side, a one hour the same except 5/8" Type X. The annex info (did I really refer to an annex !) explains that the "wall" "can terminate at a substantial (there we go again with subjective language) suspended ceiling and need not be extended to a rated floor slab above for this section to apply" The intent is clearly a thermal barrier as it relates to sprinkler operation and not protection of the building structure or a means of egress. If the intent was otherwise the building code would have said that and not depended on the sprinkler standard to do so. As a matter of fact the building code contains extensive tables that modify (yea that means reduce) the fire ratings of building elements for complete automatic fire sprinkler systems. Guess what a parallam is one hell of a thermal barrier in the context of sprinklers Lastly its apples and oranges. Application of codes and standards is like a recipe, theres a specific order to obtain the end result unlike a stew where everything gets haphazradly thrown into a pot. Now I realize this is the sprinkler forum but let me point out one very real example of this. The Mechanical Code defines the air handling space above a ceiling as a plenum, The Electrical Code defines it as "Other Environmental Air Handling Spaces". From a "permissable" wiring method standpoint that very definition makes a world of difference. Its imperative that the context be applied correctly. In the example I cited the electrical code regulates wiring not the mechanical code. PS- Add a definition to NFPA-13 for thermal barrier and this issue goes away. Hope that helps John Drucker Fire Protection Subcode Official (AHJ) New Jersey -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007 9:08 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: Barrier / Partition Definition Roland, The issue with the code official seems to be more related to the extension of the higher density into the lower density area due to an issue with the appropriate separation (or lack thereof) between the two occupancies. We don't have all the information concerning the building in question and without it , it is hard to render any sort of definitive opinion on the matter other than code definitions and possible scenarios. But it becomes confusing when two distinct documents such as the IBC and NFPA 13 use similar wording but may have different definitions for those words. A separation in the IBC means one thing and it sounds like you're saying that 13 doesn't mean the same. This ought not be or should at least be clarified in the appendix to minimize or hopefully eliminate confusion. I have dealt with this issue many times. Where dissimilar occupancies adjoin and where there is no fire wall/separation/barrier as required by the building code or an installed separation does not meet the requirements of the building code for a fire wall/separation/barrier, the required sprinkler protection for the more demanding occupancy shall extend 15 ft. beyond it perimeter. This is a totally separate issue from draft curtains as pertaining to ESFR sprinklers. This is one of those issues where the sprinkler contractor is at the mercy of the EOR and Arch. If things like fire walls and occupancy separations are not taken into consideration and indicated on the bid drawings by the EOR and the contractor isn't aware of the code issues for an occupancy, it can cost the contractor big time. The sprinkler contractor/designer has got to know more than just NFPA 13. Craig L. Prahl, CET Fire Protection Group -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roland Huggins Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 8:34 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Barrier / Partition Definition this is NOT required or desired to be a RATED partition. It is not attempting to separate fire areas within the building which is the purview of the building code. If the TC wanted a rated partition, it would have said that. The TC said a barrier or partition capable of stopping heat with great intention to avoid those requiring a rated wall. Roland On Aug 20, 2007, at 9:28 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bob, > It comes down to the way the AHJ is interpreting this section of NFPA > 13 and what was type of wall actually constructed versus what may have > been or is required. If the wall is 8" block floor to ceiling but > there are two openings in it that are unprotected then the wall does > not provide for occupancy separation per the building code and is > treated as if it doesn't exist. It sounds like the issue your friend > is dealing with is more of an architectural issue dealing with > dissimilar occupancies. > > The "separation" is very much about the spread of fire from one area > to the next. It is complementary to the sprinkler systems and very > integral in large buildings or buildings with adjacent dissimilar > occupancies. > > While the draft curtain analogy is similar, it's primary function is > to limit the unnecessary activation of sprinklers while the fire > partition/separation/barrier is more of a distinct, complete, physical > separation between to spaces. Two totally different functions from a > building code standpoint. > > But I would be curious why the AHJ does not believe this wall is a > sufficient separation. > > Again, what does the code call for between the two areas? If they did > not meet that requirement then NFPA 13 says to extend the higher > density 15ft into the less demanding adjacent occupancy, end of story. > > Like I said, limitation of sprinkler activation is not the main > purpose for fire barriers. It's to prevent the spread of fire from > one area to another. > > > > Craig L. Prahl, CET > Fire Protection Group > Mechanical Department > CH2MHILL > Lockwood Greene > 1500 International Drive > PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - > 864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lg.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob > Knight > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 12:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Barrier / Partition Definition > > Craig, > I think that you are over analyzing this situation. There is no > mention in > 13 for this to be a "fire" rated anything. This barrier / partition > is merely for heat containment for the purpose of sprinkler activation > or lack thereof, not the spread of fire. > > Thank you, > > Bob Knight > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 7:20 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Barrier / Partition Definition > > The definition of fire wall, fire partition, fire barrier comes from > the > building code. If using the IBC see Chapter 7. Depending on the > occupancies and the level of sprinkler protection you may or may not > be required to provide one of the three. Each one has slightly > different characteristics as defined. The Fire Wall being the most > stringent where the assembly extends from the slab to or even through > the roof and is capable of maintaining its structural integrity even > if the building on either or both sides would collapse. A fire > partition is a physical separation designed with fire resistant > materials whose purpose is to prevent the spread of fire from one area > to the next. A fire partition > is not "rated". The fire barrier is a rated assembly but not to the > extent of the Fire Wall. All have protected openings as well. > > The wall, barrier and partition are designed to protect one occupancy > from fire spread from an adjacent occupancy. They have a different > purpose than a draft curtain. > > As far as the scenario described, if the openings are not protected > with either fire doors or shutters or an accepted (by the AHJ) water > spray curtain, then by definition it does not qualify as a Code > defined separation. It would provide no real separation and his > assessment of requiring the extension of the higher density into the > lesser density protected area would be correct. > > So the question is, do the openings have any kind of automatic > closures, is the wall rated, is the wall required to be rated or just > one of the lesser assemblies? Still a few outstanding questions > needing to be answered in order to make a definitive determination. > > > Craig L. Prahl, CET > Fire Protection Group > Mechanical Department > CH2MHILL > Lockwood Greene > 1500 International Drive > PO Box 491, Spartanburg, SC 29304-0491 Direct - 864.599.4102 Fax - > 864.599.8439 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lg.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bob > Knight > Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 5:22 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Barrier / Partition Definition > > Does anyone have a good definition for what 11.1.2 means by "Barrier" > or "Partition" (NFPA 13 2002 ed). I have a friend who has an AHJ > telling him that an 8" concrete full height wall with two door > openings in it does not qualify. My understanding of this is that this > is a perfectly acceptable barrier since the purpose of the barrier is > to prevent fusing of the sprinklers from one area to another. The > reason the question arises is that this AHJ wants to extend a new .55 > / 2500 sf area through the concrete wall and into an existing .2 / > 1500 sf system. Without being too obvious, the original system has no > possibility of providing this density, let alone the proper spacing of > sprinklers. Anyway, any help will be appreciated. > > Thank you, > > Bob Knight, CET > (208) 495-2057 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.firebyknight.com > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.0/957 - Release Date: > 8/16/2007 > 1:46 PM > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.1/962 - Release Date: > 8/20/2007 > 1:08 PM > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.1/962 - Release Date: > 8/20/2007 > 1:08 PM > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > > To Unsubscribe, send an email to:Sprinklerforum- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject > field) > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list [email protected] http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
