Fire-Safe Buildings and Masonry Codes
By Stephen Szoke, Director of Codes and Standards, PCA
Masonry Home > Products
and Properties > Fire-Safe Buildings and Masonry Codes
 Today’s
building code officials should be encouraged to develop code provisions
that provide an improved level of redundancy for life safety, property
protection, and welfare of the general public. Owners and designers
should be aware of the life safety and property protection benefits
of balanced design. In a related article
the findings of the report on the World Trade Center disaster confirm
the superior performance of buildings where concrete and masonry
were used as passive fire protection of structural elements.
Where the Codes Fit In
The recent merger of the three major model building code organizations
into
the International Code Council resulted in a family of codes for
the built
environment. The new International Building Code (IBC) is a compilation
of the
requirements found in the legacy codes of the three predecessor
organizations.
Unfortunately, it has adopted the least conservative passive fire
protection
requirements from the three legacy codes. In addition, new code
change
proposals continue to be submitted that will further relax the passive
fire
protection requirements for buildings.
Conversely, PCA and allied industry groups advocate changes to increase
the
passive fire protection for buildings in an effort to reinstate
the level of fire
protection provided by prior codes. PCA and allied masonry and concrete
groups continue to promote balanced design—appropriate combinations
of
non-combustible, fire-resistive floors and walls providing compartmentation,
automatic fire sprinklers, and smoke detection systems.
Seven Reasons to Rethink Sprinkler Trade-Offs
The continued relaxation of passive fire protection as a trade-off
for the increased use of sprinklers may not be appropriate for adequate
life safety, property protection, and welfare of the public.
Consider the following:
- Aging population. The number of people aged 65 years of age
and older will peak around the year 2030. These older adults tend
to have hearing, visual, mental, or physical impairments and comprise
about 25% of all fire deaths.
- Nearly 10% of all structure fires are intentionally set. In such
fires, if automatic
suppression systems are present, they may be deliberately disabled,
or the fire
may be set in a fashion to overcome the sprinkler system.
- The codes have become more stringent in other areas, such as
structural performance
and energy conservation. Better fire provisions, meaning providing
for
increased life safety and property protection, deserve to receive
a similar, if not
greater, level of attention.
- Increased use of multi-family construction. Apartment buildings
and college
dormitories continue to grow in number. Without the appropriate
combination of
passive fire protection and automatic detection and suppression
systems, are the
occupants adequately protected?
- Sprinkler effectiveness. Operational reliability and performance
reliability are not the same. Operational reliability, usually
in the 95% to 99% range, means that when the temperature reaches
the design temperature, the sprinkler head will operate. Performance
reliability, the ability of sprinklers to control or extinguish
a fire, is considerably less than operational reliability. Until
sprinkler performance reliability approaches 100%, redundancy
(two-hour noncombustible fire barriers) needs to be incorporated
into multi-family occupancies.
- Sprinkler malfunctions. Faulty O-rings are just one example
of a recall. Is the sprinkler operating properly? When do you
learn that the item doesn’t work as anticipated? Will explosions
disable sprinklers? What if the system is shut down for routine
maintenance or to repair leaks?
- Water supply. Will there be enough water when a fire occurs?
Will multiple structure fires deplete water supplies? Will an
earthquake or other natural disaster disrupt the public water
supply?
 It
is not enough to have automatic detection and suppression equipment.
Redundancy for fire safety—non-combustible masonry and concrete
separations—is necessary. In fact, designers should consider
exceeding the greatly relaxed minimum life safety provisions in the
International Building
Code by specifying minimum two-hour non-combustible walls and
floors to separate living units in multi-family construction. Automatic
suppression and detection systems should accompany noncombustible
construction, but sprinkler trade-offs should be eliminated. |
 |
|