Fire wall

[homebild]

Originally Posted by Richard A. Hetzel

Beg to differ. No specific fire-resistance rating is required, and a fire-rated door is only one of several alternatives permitted in a garage/residence wall, the others of which are not required to be rated at all. The code prescribes the method for constructing this wall, and never mentions a fire-resistance rating at all, when it could have easily done so. Ergo, not technically a fire wall.

Beg to differ also.

It is non sequitur that simply because the Code does not spell out in detail the necessity of fire-rating the walls and doors between a garage and the primary structure that the intent of the Code to have gypsum and doors act in that capcity is missing.

Quite the contrary.

The intent of the Code utilizing 1/2" gypsum and 20-minute doors for fire separation is explicit.

For example, R309.2 2006 IRC requires walls of garage that are not even attached to the primary structure yet comes within 3' of the primary structure to be covered on the interior with a minimum of 1/2" gypsum board to act as 20 minute fire-resistance rating....as does R314.4 requiring a minimum of 1/2" gypsum to act as a thermal barrier over foam insulation that might be exposed to the garage side.

Likewise, it also does not follow that if a 20 minute fire-rated door is required to separate the garage from the primary residence that the fire-resistance rating of those same walls should not also be.

Such construction would defy common sense let alone the intent of the Code, even if not spelled out directly in the Code.

Otherwise why even dictate a minimum of 1/2" of gypsum to separate an attached garage from the primary residence at all, if not for fire-resistance?

No such other reason exists.

Likewise, the fire-rating of the doors is implied by the Code requiring the doors to be solid wood a minimum 1 3/8" thick, solid or honeycombed
steel doors 1 3/8" thick or fire-rated doors for 20 minute ratings. All such doors by TESTING produce a 20 minute fire-resistant rating.

If not for fire-resistance, why are all types of hollow core doors excluded and prohibited from being installed in such locations?

The reason is clear and simple: fire-separation.

The Code does not necessarily have to spell out what is commonly understood.

Placing locks on the outside of an egress door is not specifically prohibited under the Code, but safe egress from a residence is blocked by such a design, so such location of locks is deduced from the Code even when not specifically spelled out.

The very deifinition of 'separation' used in R309.2 of the Code is based on fire-separation and nothing else....with clearances and separation distances in place to prevent ignition of or containment of fire should it occur.

That said, penetrations between a garage and any other part of the house are probited under R309.1 to prevent carobon monoxide or other noxious gases from a fire in the garage from entering the residence and killing the inhabitants.

This is also why windows are prohibited between an attached garage and primary structure, ducts and exhausts from terminating within a garage, and why many local jurisdictions and previous codes require only self-closing doors between a garage and he primary structure.

Fire-resistant construction and fire separation of the garage and the primary structure is the sole intent of separation here, and if one cannot see that, they simply are not looking...

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

Originally Posted by Richard A. Hetzel

If it were truly a fire wall, there would be several other requirements, for example, ducts passing through the wall would be required to have fire dampers, and all opening protectives would be required to be labeled. Since the code does not specify either of those requirements, and since the code does not require a specific fire resistance rating, the wall cannot meet the definition of a fire wall, which would have a specific fire resistance rating.

If you look at the codes Richard, you will see these requirements. . .

[Richard A. Hetzel]

I looked in the code and saw none of them.

A fire wall is required to have a specific fire-resistance rating. Opening protectives in the wall are required to have specific labels and are required to be self-closing. There are restrictions on the amount of glass in rated doors. Fire dampers are required in all duct penetrations. The wall is required to be sealed at its top with specific material. There are many specifications for a true fire wall which are not required for the separation wall between a garage and a residence.

No fire resistance rating is required. Several of the permissible opening protectives are not required to be labeled. Fire dampers are not required in ductwork. No specification is given for the amount of glass in doors. No requirement is made for sealing the top of the wall. Ergo, not a true fire wall.

It is a wall having certain prescribed characteristics, some of which are similar to what would be required in a true fire wall, but more are not similar. It is a separation wall between garage and residence, nothing more, nothing less.

New York recognized that the prescribed wall was not a true fire wall, and inserted additional requirements in their version of the code, including a fire resistance rating for the wall.

A piece of gypsum board does not a fire wall make. A fire wall is a specific assembly, which is tested in a certain configuration, and if an assembly does not match exactly the tested configuration, then it cannot be called a fire wall.

[Jeffrey R. Pope]

There are resistance ratings for doors in the required separation. There are specific materials required for the separation. These materials have been tested, rated, and subsequently approved for use in the separation. Dampers are not needed in steel ducts, which are required by model codes.

All components of the required separation have been rated by some authority. These ratings may not meet the standards of some firewalls (such as in commercial applications), but they most certainly develop a level of resistance deemed appropriate by model codes for residential dwellings.

Is it called a "firewall?" No. But as I've said from the beginning, the intent is crystal clear.

[arussell]

Marcel,
My home is a 40+yr old cape with a one car garage under (formerly, it's now my workshop). There is a service door under the main carrying stick, from the garage to the semi-finished basement for the boiler, water heater, etc. which leads to the finished family room. The wall is sheetrocked on both sides. What supports the wall?.......a 4" concrete gas curb.
They were pretty smart even back then!

alan

[Richard A. Hetzel]

There are resistance ratings for doors in the required separation.

For only one of the several permitted alternatives, not for any of the others.

[arussell]

Richard,

If it were truly a fire wall, there would be several other requirements, for example, ducts passing through the wall would be required to have fire dampers, and all opening protectives would be required to be labeled.

Not true, not in a garage as is currently being discussed (some other application it may be true). Dampers not allowed, no openings allowed either. Ducts penetrating the wall are required to be constructed of #26 gage sheet metal or equivalent and openings are not permitted (2006 IRC R309.1.1)

Although we are splitting hairs in the technical terminology, the intent of R309 is there.

Just curious - what is the rating, what are the requirements, what makes up your fire wall, your separation wall between a garage and a dwelling? What is the exact wording from your code. I'm interested because here in Massachusetts our code differs from the IRC slightly.

alan

[Richard A. Hetzel]

New York revised the IRC to require a true fire wall, obviously because the basic IRC did not require one. New York requires a 3/4-hour fire resistance rating, where the basic IRC requires no rating. For a wall to be rated, any duct penetrations of the wall must be protected by a fire damper, no matter what the duct is made of, and there are several other requirements to achieve a true fire wall and a fire-resistance rating which are not specified in the basic IRC.

[arussell]

Richard
I appreciate your response and thank you for posting your information. It's interesting to see what type of codes different parts of the country use. New York (I don't know if it's city or state), like Massachusetts, which has written its own code book based on the 2003 IRC and enhanced it for their particular requirements, as the ICC states they should. The IRC is minimum code based on technical data gathered and analyzed (sources like ASTM E84-07 and the NFPA), then written into a code form for anyone (city, town or state)to use, adopt and enhance, but the key word is minimum. For instance, N.H. does not have a code book but did recently adopt the 2006 IRC for its cities and town the use as a minimum code. Each city and town may elect to adopt a stricter code or allow the code official the leeway for enforcement.

We may have to disagree on this next point. You state the NY code as:
[QUOTE] For a wall to be rated, any duct penetrations of the wall must be protected by a fire damper, no matter what the duct is made of,[/QUOTE]
which leads me to believe flexible duct would be acceptable in NY. Hmmm,
that does not sound very fire protective to me. Also the NY code allows duct penetrations into a garage wall so long as it has a fire damper?
The IRC states "R309.1.1 Duct penetration. Ducts in the garage and ducts penetrating the walls.......constructed of a minimum No. 26 gage sheet steel.....and shall have NO openings into the garage." for obvious reasons.
IMO this sounds to be a little more strict than what you quoted as the NY code, doesn't it?

The Massachusetts code follows the 2003 IRC to the letter but adds to it such as; all panel doors must be label with a minimum 20-minute fire resistive rating, self-closures and fire rate door frames are not required, all
opening between the garage floor and dwelling must have a 4" raised sill, the garage wall must be separated by not less than 5/8" Type X gypsum board (which is fire rated sheetrock).Although it is not spelled out in exact terms, when all components are put together does this not create a, dare I say.........fire rated wall (or more properly put a life safety wall)? In my opinion and the opinion of every Massachusetts code official I've dealt with, it does! And it's their interpertation of the code when I'm looking for my certificate of occupancy, that matters most to me. As an inspector, what was shown in the first part of this thread, a louvered panel in a garage, I would most certainly call it out as a safety issue, dangerous to the life safety of the occupants due to increase risk of fire, smoke and harmful fume penetration.

Here's another twist to chew on. An electrician installs a GFCI breaker as a circuit for the outlets on the kitchen counter but installs regular outlets. Would you call it out? They're not GFCI outlets and based on the way you interpret things, I would venture to guess you should.

Or..... How does your code book describe the construction of wood walls? Does it call for the construction to be made of studs? What is a stud? How big is a stud? (boy I know these are loaded questions!) What size is a stud?
I know the chart in the book gives sizes, length and spaces but then they are wrong. They describe them as 2 x 4 and 2 x 6 etc. but that's wrong. They're not 2 x 4 they're only 1 1/2" x 3 1/2", so shouldn't the code use the correct sizing?

That's what you're telling us to do with the fire - resistive wall. Call it like it is, don't interpret, don't use common sense, don't use industry standards,
black and white, that's all there is........NOT!

I don't know if any of the great NACHI inspectors out there has a copy of ASTM E84 - 07 or NFPA but I'd like to see exactly what is the rating of 1/2" and 5/8" drywall and other materials. If anyone has access to this info I'd think it would benefit us all.

Thanks
alan