In the A/E world, there is much confusion regarding the definition of fire protection rating and fire resistance rating when designing doors, windows, transoms, sidelights and other openings in rated construction. These terms are often used interchangeably by mistake, but they represent two very different types of assemblies. A third term, "fire rating", is often used as well, making the distinction even more confusing. In this article, we'll review the differences between fire resistance ratings and fire protection ratings and show you how to determine the requirements for your specific situation. All code references are to the 2018 IBC.

If you have been involved in the design or installation of a fire alarm system, whether as an architect, engineer, or owner, you have probably asked the question, "Is a strobe required here?" Like all engineering questions, the answer depends on a number of factors. In this post, I will walk through the code path step-by-step to help you understand where fire alarm strobes are required.

New on the blog today is an occupant load calculator based on factors from the 2015, 2018 and 2021 editions of the IBC. Check it out at the link below!

New on the blog today is a tool that assists in determining wall rating requirements when you have a fire wall that intersects an exterior wall. IBC 706.5.1 gives two options for this condition, one of which is drawing an imaginary lot line between the two exterior walls. Check it out at the link below!

After a really nice response on the fire and smoke damper cheatsheet I have created a questionnaire tool that makes the process way easier. You answer a series of yes/no questions and the tool kicks out the damper requirement and code reference! Enter your info below to checkout the tool...

The 2021 IBC includes several changes that impact Group I-2 occupancies. These changes build upon updates from 2018 edition and continue with the sub-grouping of occupancies into either Condition 1 or 2 that started in the 2015 edition. As a quick reminder, IBC 308.3 defines these as:

Group I-2, Condition 1: "facilities that provide nursing and medical care but do not provide emergency care, surgery, obstetrics or in-patient stabilization units for psychiatric or detoxification, including but not limited to nursing homes and foster care facilities."

Group I-2, Condition 2: "facilities that provide nursing and medical care and could provide emergency care, surgery, obstetrics or in-patient stabilization units for psychiatric or detoxification, including but not limited to hospitals."

As more and more states move to adopt the 2018 IBC, it's important to know about a few code updates that impact the design of occupied roof spaces. And if you're jurisdiction is on the ball and already adopted the 2021 IBC, there are a few additional items that apply to you.

In the last year or so, there have been several fire incidents during the construction of wood-framed residential buildings. Recently, in January 2021, a fire at the Ely at Fort Apache apartment complex in Las Vegas completely destroyed the building, racking up an estimated $25-30 million in damages. Or last year, a Jacksonville, Florida grew so large that it shut down a portion of nearby Interstate 295 and forced the local fire department to deploy 45 apparatus, including 14 engines and seven ladder trucks. In both of these cases, as well as other similar fires, there were two clear similarities:

• The building construction included wood structural members (Type III, IV or V construction)
• The building sprinkler systems were not yet active

In large, wood-framed apartment buildings, the window of time between enclosure of the structure and the building sprinkler system being functional is a clear vulnerability. The presence of a huge fuel load without an active fire sprinkler systems is a dangerous situation, where a single ignition source can lead to horrific fire losses. 

In the A/E design community, the term "open stair" is frequently used to describe a stair that is not enclosed with walls, partitions or barriers. While "open stair" is not a term used in the International Building Code, it generally aligns with a stairway (which is a defined term in the IBC) not used for egress purposes or an exit access stairway (also a defined term). The terms "communicating stair" and "convenience stair" are also used in the same line of discussion, though depending on the situation, these could be referring to communicating spaces or convenience openings, both types of vertical openings defined in NFPA 101.

In this post, we'll review the IBC requirements for open stairs and describe several code paths that can be used to provide open stairs in your design. I will use the term "open stair" throughout the post, but remember, since this is not a defined term, any formal documentation on drawings, plans etc. should use the proper nomenclature identified in this overview. This post will be limited to stairs within a building and will not address exterior stairways.

UPDATE: See new average grade plane calculator, linked below.

In the past few months, I've had several clients ask me questions regarding grade plane calculations - most often related to determining whether a particular story counts as a story above grade plane or as a basement. Here is quick rundown of how to do the calculation and the implications.

Delayed egress doors are one of the most commonly-used features in design situations where some level of access control is needed on the path of egress. Under normal conditions, delayed-egress doors are a deterrent to building occupants, limiting access through the door unless necessary for an emergency. During an emergency, the delay function will deactivate (whether upon loss of power, or sprinkler/fire alarm activation), effectively making the door a normal egress door.

Similar to the other cheatsheets I have put together, this one is motivated by numerous architect requests for clarification as to when a delayed egress door can be provided.

After a few weeks of troubleshooting, I'm proud to share a new calculator for separated, mixed occupancy buildings! You enter in the construction type, sprinkler details, occupancies and proposed areas and the calculator will kick out the allowable height area and number of stories for each occupancy. Plus, it calculates the mixed occupancy ratios and tells you the required separations between occupancies!

Over the summer, I was interviewed on the Fire Code Tech podcast. The conversation ranged from performance-based design, the UMD FPE program, trends in the industry and advice for you professionals entering the FPE/Code market. If you haven't listened, check it out!

It's been a full summer here on my end, at least in one sense. While the pandemic has forced vacation cancellations and generally fewer social gatherings, work has been full steam ahead for the past few months. I've also been working on a weekly basis to help PE Roadmap clients as they study for the Fire Protection PE exam this fall. As we get towards the last remaining months before the October exam, I am looking forward to some more regular posts on the blog, which I anticipate to be a mixture of life safety tools, cheat sheets and code questions.

On another front, I've also had some recent conversations with Joe Meyer over at MeyerFire regarding our Code Calls initiative. While we are still soliciting feedback from Indiana AHJs regarding their local requirements, we are also looking for some ways to further jump start our progress. One of these is putting together a database that provides a link to State/City/County/Municipality local amendments, as well as the link to that jurisdiction's website where you can find contact information. Similar to the main Code Calls database, we are starting in Indiana and hoping to branch out from there. More on that in the coming months.

In recent weeks, many states have seen a sharp increase in the number of new cases of COVID-19. According to the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center, Arizona, Texas and Florida are seeing record numbers of new cases in the last two weeks. Many other states are seeing rising trends as well.

At the end of March, I wrote a post about the impact the COVID-19 pandemic may have on occupant load factors. Nearly four months later, I believe it's clear that the pandemic has changed the way we work and gather as a society, at least for the foreseeable future. 

In response to the pandemic, nearly every state has placed restrictions on gathering and assembly spaces, typically requiring them to operate at no more than 50% of their original capacity. This 50% reduction has included airlines, restaurants, public transit systems, and casinos, just to name a few.

As I've thought more about social distancing and occupant load factors in the last few weeks, I've been considering if this percent reduction actually makes sense.

First, lets review how building or space capacities are typically determined...

For the purposes of egress, occupant load factors found in IBC Chapter 10 (and also NFPA 101 Chapter 7) are used to determine the minimum number of occupants that need to be considered when sizing the means of egress. A denser occupant load factor results in more people per unit area and a greater egress width.

But the occupant load factors found in IBC Table 1004.5 are used to determine the minimum occupant load that needs to be accommodated by the means of egress. The IBC specifically allows the occupant load to be increased beyond the number established by Table 1004.5, so long as there is sufficient egress capacity and the load does not exceed 1 occupant per 7 square feet (IBC 1004.5.1). The posting of the occupant load that you see near the main exit from restaurants, entertainment venues and other assembly occupancies is often reflective of an increased occupant load beyond Table 1004.5.

So when a State or County Government orders restaurants to operate at 50% capacity, does this automatically result in the minimum six feet of social distancing recommended by the CDC?

Maybe.

It all depends on how the 100% capacity number was determined. If the restaurant's (or other business's) occupant load was originally based on a denser load factor, such as 1:15 for tables and chairs seating, even a 50% reduction in capacity is unlikely to result in social distancing. It's even more unlikely if that 100% capacity was based on an increased occupant load, beyond what IBC Table 1004.5 requires.

Instead of starting with a percent reduction in capacity, it may be more effective to use occupant load factors to determine a maximum capacity for a building or space during pandemic social distancing conditions. Using the CDC guidelines, 6 feet of distance between people results in 1 person for 36 square feet (or perhaps 1 person per ~28 square feet using a 3 foot radius measurement).

Assuming occupants can be evenly distributed through the space (a potentially big assumption), this method would allow for social distancing, regardless of the posted occupant load or exit capacity of a space.