dumb, really dumb question, but is not the IFC more of a maintenance code and the IBC the new construction code?
if the IFC applies to this construction project, it would appear to be the trump prescription. the intent, as i read it, is to put detectors where there are no sprinklers. the elevator shaft is a fire and smoke compartment unto itself, albeit one not well defined due to the large gaps at the elevator doors, that are remedied if there is an elevator lobby. Usually elevator lobbies get smoke detectors. Can you not make the case for the elevator lobby smoke detector serving the intent? if they want a smoke in the shaft, it is dusty, they false alarm, require frequent maintenance and it is fun hanging out over the top of the shaft changing them out, unless they were cleverly installed. scot deal excelsior fire engineering On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Chris Russel < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > I have a disagreement with the fire marshal and I would like another > opinion. I have a prefabed metal building framed with sheet metal studs in > all areas but the elevator shaft which is a 2 hour fire wall made of wood > and sheetrock. > > > > We omitted sprinklers in the area above the t-bar lid per NFPA 13/2002 > 8.14.1.2.1 because this area is of noncombustible construction and limited > combustible construction. > > > > The fire marshal has stated that limited combustible construction is not > allowed per the IFC per the following code. > > IFC section 903.3.1.1 - NFPA 13 sprinkler systems. > > Where the provisions of this code require that a building or portion of > thereof be equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in a > accordance with section 903.3.1.1, sprinklers shall be installed throughout > in accordance with NFPA 13 except as provided in Section 903.3.1.1.1. > > 903.3.1.1.1 - Exempt locations > > Automatic sprinklers shall not be required in the following rooms or areas > where such rooms or areas are protected with an approved automatic fire > detection system in accordance with section 907.2 that will respond to > visible or invisible particles of combustion. Sprinklers shall not be > omitted from any room merely because it is damp, of fire-resistance rated > construction or contains electrical equipment. #4 In rooms or areas that > are > of noncombustible construction with wholly noncombustible contents. > > > > It is my opinion that 903.3.1.1.1 addresses areas exempt from 903.3.1.1 > i.e. > exceptions to the requirement of an NFPA 13 system. This does not mean that > areas exempt from coverage in NFPA 13 must conform to IFC 903.3.1.1.1. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Chris Russell > > > > t. 360.734.4940 > f. 360.647.9540 > > securitysolutionsnw.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sprinklerforum mailing list > http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum > For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] > > To Unsubscribe, send an email > to:[email protected]<to%[email protected]> > (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field) > _______________________________________________ Sprinklerforum mailing list http://lists.firesprinkler.org/mailman/listinfo/sprinklerforum For Technical Assistance, send an email to: [email protected] To Unsubscribe, send an email to:[email protected] (Put the word unsubscribe in the subject field)
