# IRC 2009 Definitions



## RJJ

This should get the attic stair question going! :lol:

Attic, Habitable: So what does this mean?


----------



## FredK

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Stairs to meet code???? :?:


----------



## JBI

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

ATTIC, HABITABLE. A finished or unfinished area, not considered a story, complying with all of the following requirements:

1. The occupiable floor area is at least 70 square feet (17 m2), in accordance with Section R304,

2. The occupiable floor area has a ceiling height in accordance with Section R305, and

3. The occupiable space is enclosed by the roof assembly above, knee walls (if applicable) on the sides and the floor-ceiling assembly below.

THAT'S what it means...


----------



## JBI

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

It means that if it can reasonably be finished as living space, it gets treated differently than an attic that cannot be reasonably finished as living space.

And, Yes that will likely mean compliant stairs... D'OH!


----------



## fatboy

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Oh sure.......you guys had to go and start using the "S" word again, thought you learned your lessons.......  :lol:


----------



## RJJ

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

well it seems we now have a defined space for those stairs!


----------



## packsaddle

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

That definition meets most attics in the US.

So, now all new single family homes will need fire sprinklers AND compliant stairs to the attic.


----------



## incognito

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

If it is not conditioned it is not habitable--no sprinklers and the stairs do not have to comply.


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

2009 IRC; new requirements.

(Note: you cannot use the requirements and definitions of the 2000, 2003, 2006 IRCs; and/or any other code; to interpret the requirements of the 2009 IRC.)

In accordance with the definition of "ATTIC; HABITABLE AREA", there is no requirement for conditioned space; and it can also be an "unfinished area".

There is no requirement for an "attic; habitable area" to a be a "HABITABLE ROOM"; and the "attic habitable area" is not subject to the requirements of R303.1 for light, ventilation and heating; that requires "habitable rooms" to have light, ventilation and heating.

The requirements for "ATTIC, HABITABLE AREAS" is "a specific requirement" for attic areas; and in accordance with R102.1; "the specific requirements shall be applicable".

Also, Table R301.5 Minimum Uniformly Distributed Life Loads; has added, "Habitable attics and attics served with fixed stairs; require minimum live load of 30 psf.".

If you have "fixed stairs" you are going to be required to meet new minimum requirements in the attic area served by those "fixed stairs".

And there is more,    

In the 2009 IRC, Section R311, Means of Egress is discribed in more detail;

"R311.1 Means of egress.  All dwellings shall be provided with a means of egress as provided in this section.  The means of egress shall provide a continuous and unobstructed path of virtical and horizontal egress travel from ALL PORTIONS OF THE DWELLING to the exteriior of the dwelling at the required egress door WITHOUT REQUIRING TRAVEL THROUGH A GARAGE.

You cannot have a fixed stairs from the habitable attic space (as defined in chapter 2, definitions); to the garage; because the "habitable attic space is "a portion of the dwelling".

Stairs and Stairways to attic areas are officially back,   

Uncle  Bob


----------



## RJJ

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Well think on this! If it is habitable and has exposed insulation wouldn't it need to be protected? 15min covering ?

UB: Thanks for forcing me to open those new books! The 09 codes should produce some great debates!


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

RJJ,

Me too.  I really didn't want to take the wraps off my set of 2009 I-Codes; but, now that Oklahoma is working on adopting new State codes;  and I may find myself on one of the technical committees; so, I finally unwraped them.

(On a side note; there are approximately 13 people in Oklahoma that have ICC Residential Energy Certifications; and one of them is retired.   :mrgreen: )

There are a lot of changes; and many States and local AHJs are adopting the new 2009 I-Codes, without knowing what is in them; but, that really isn't new.

Uncle Bob


----------



## RJJ

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Hey! There are a whole bunch of inspectors that don't know what in them either. I was at the hearings and follow many things closely and still find surprises.  :roll:

Right now I am trying to go page by page and compare what is new to what is old. Should produce some interesting issues.


----------



## Oldman

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

It appears that 5 levels of habitable areas can be considered a three story structures thus being allowed to be constructed by the IRC? (Basement, story 1, 2 & 3 and habitable attic)


----------



## FM William Burns

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

yep, and we can still have 40' high rescue and egress openings that the FD can't access with a 24' (typically carried) portable extension.  Hope the new homes come equipped with:

http://www.fireescapesystems.com/commer ... scape2.asp


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				FM William Burns said:
			
		

> yep, and we can still have 40' high rescue and egress openings that the FD can't access with a 24' (typically carried) portable extension.  Hope the new homes come equipped with:http://www.fireescapesystems.com/commer ... scape2.asp


I would think a fire escape means should be employed whenever the means of rescue can become challenging with existing equipment like a fire-escape stairway protected by a 3 hour rated fire-wall. Such as a concrete wall. Accessed at all levels from grade to highest occupied/habited floor area with no more then one flight of stair travel to exterior fire-escape stairway landing.

This stairway should ideally be of fire-resistant or fire-proof construction and protected by 3 hour fire rated wall. In residential, I may be lenient on the door way but I think fire-rated doors should be employed on the emergency escape. Should primarily apply to new construction unless feasibly installable on an existing building without destroying the historic elements of the building. It depends.


----------



## FM William Burns

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

RA,

I can't seem to find that requirement/alternative in the IRC.


----------



## kilitact

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

JD wrote;



> It means that if it can reasonably be finished as living space, it gets treated differently than an attic that cannot be reasonably finished as living space. And, Yes that will likely mean compliant stairs... D'OH!


I would agree, if it doesn't meet this definition that the stairs are still not required to meet the means of egress requirement.


----------



## kilitact

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

RA;

why go to all the trouble installing 3 hour-rated walls and be lenient on the door??


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				kilitact said:
			
		

> RA;why go to all the trouble installing 3 hour-rated walls and be lenient on the door??


I can go with 1hr rated door but not likely a 3-hour rated door. You want to move a brick door?

However, the exterior landing would be 2-3 hour rated. And possibly also the interior landing would have 1 - 3 hour rated R.C. construction. The reason is the door would not be easy to be made 3 hr. rated and also be functional.

If possible, any interior stairs to the exterior fire escape stair way would be R.C or other non-combustible construction.


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				FM William Burns said:
			
		

> RA,I can't seem to find that requirement/alternative in the IRC.


It's not. It is a design recommendation.  I would also suggest any flight of stairs going up or down to an exterior fire escape stairway landing to be of 2-3 hour rated construction including the interior landing. The door has to be light enough to open and a door rated at 2-3 hours would be a brick or r.c. door. Not something I can imagine to be very easy to open or close.


----------



## FM William Burns

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

RA,

I knew that and sorry.........should have put a     after the post, just being a little smart @$$.  I also understood and agree with the door. That proposed design alternative would be a welcome sight for those types of McMansions we've seen far too often and will see again when the economy gets better and especially for those areas where the RFS will be amended out.

I'm just afraid that for similar reasons as mentioned in other threads, the costs would tick off the interest groups responsible for the historic reductions seen presently in the model and amended editions of the code.  At least there remains a means in the model to contribute to greater escabability by reducing the hazards ability that forces civilians to make decisions to decend those heights by the only available makeshift means and hazardous options when the fight or flight mechanism kicks in.


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				FM William Burns said:
			
		

> RA,I knew that and sorry.........should have put a     after the post, just being a little smart @$$.  I also understood and agree with the door. That proposed design alternative would be a welcome sight for those types of McMansions we've seen far too often and will see again when the economy gets better and especially for those areas where the RFS will be amended out.
> 
> I'm just afraid that for similar reasons as mentioned in other threads, the costs would tick off the interest groups responsible for the historic reductions seen presently in the model and amended editions of the code.  At least there remains a means in the model to contribute to greater escabability by reducing the hazards ability that forces civilians to make decisions to decend those heights by the only available makeshift means and hazardous options when the fight or flight mechanism kicks in.


There are techniques and possible improvements to my design concept that would keep the fire (slow down the progression) away from the door way to begin with. Essentially putting in a 3 hour rated wall on the interior side and exterior side of the interior stair way or a number of techniques to reduce fire progression. Fire does not progress over rock/concrete/brick as fast as wood in most cases. Giving additional time for escape. Door can't be too heavy to operate. I would be lenient on the door if there is essentially a fire break solution.

I would say this would be more applicable to new construction then existing buildings. Historic buildings are another topic altogether and maintaining historic character being important.


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Rick,

What the hell are you talking about?

"3 hour fire rated walls; concrete enclosed stairways; concrete stairways, brick doors?"

What are you building; Hitler's bunker?

It's a HOME for crying out loud!

And, what has this to do with the Original Topic?

2009 Definition of ATTIC; HABITABLE:

"ATTIC, HABITABLE. A finished or unfinished area, not considered a story, complying with all of the following requirements:

1. The occupiable floor area is at least 70 square feet (17 m2), in accordance with Section R304,

2. The occupiable floor area has a ceiling height in accordance with Section R305, and

3. The occupiable space is enclosed by the roof assembly above, knee walls (if applicable) on the sides and the floor-ceiling assembly below."

Sheesh,

Uncle Bob


----------



## RJJ

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Wow! Wow! Wow! 3hr walls is this an H occupancy? :lol:

I thought we had a light hearted topic on attics and through in a set of stairs for fun! :lol:  :lol:  :roll:


----------



## north star

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

*RJJ,*

*Well, I hope you're happy now.  *  *   You wanted to get "this going", ...well,*

*you've done that.    It's a going!   :lol:*


----------



## TJacobs

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

I've got the popcorn popping in the microwave   :roll:


----------



## texasbo

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Uncle Bob said:



> Rick,What the hell are you talking about?
> 
> "3 hour fire rated walls; concrete enclosed stairways; concrete stairways, brick doors?"
> 
> What are you building; Hitler's bunker?
> 
> It's a HOME for crying out loud!
> 
> And, what has this to do with the Original Topic?


UB: I think he's probably suggesting that this would be a good design for a habitable attic, since they are usually smaller. Main levels would probably need something a little less flimsy.

Come on guys, I think you're being a little harsh here. I mean who among us has never lived in a house with a 3 hour exterior concrete wall with a masonry interior stair enclosure leading to an exterior fire escape with not more than one flight of stairs to a fire escape landing?

I asked for a price adjustment on mine, because the door was made from cheap Mexican brick, and not the good stuff. It was easier to open, however.

Rick, you're a good sport.


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

TexasBO,

"Come on guys, I think you're being a little harsh here."

 :lol:  :lol:

Don't take me wrong; I love to read our Rick's posts.  He brings a refreshing new slant to every topic he posts on.  That "Attic; Habitable area" would be a great place to put a concrete safe room.  I'm just waiting to see how it's going to be supported from the attic to the foundation.

Uncle Bob


----------



## vegas paul

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

UB - you can support it to the foundation by using some of that structural strap net stuff...    :lol:


----------



## texasbo

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Tor-Eggs.

From the website:

"THE LESS DEADLY, LEAST EXPENSIVE, AND MOST SUCCESSFUL WAY TO RESPOND TO A NATURAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER IS WHEN THE BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES OF THE IMPACTED COMMUNITY SURVIVE THE QUAKE, STORM, FLOOD AND/OR FIRE!!!!"

He takes great pride in advertising his structural system as "less deadly", but "least expensive"...

The website is priceless.

Sorry for hijacking to high holy hell.

"God Bless and God's Speed"


----------



## fatboy

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

If you guys keep talking about him, he'll end up here.......just sayin.........  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:


----------



## JBI

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

I'll apologize in advance for perpetuating another ill-educated posit by our resident unlicensed designer, but I can't ignore it...

"I can go with 1hr rated door but not likely a 3-hour rated door. You want to move a brick door?"

What planet do you live on? Standard door ratings for fire doors are 45 minutes, 1 1/2 hours and three hours (once upon a time known as 'C' label, 'B' label and 'A' label). That's a steel door on a steel frame rated for 3 hours. No bricks, no additional weight to speak of.

I refuse to address the concept of three hour rated exterior walls on a SFR, because the idea is just plain silly!


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				Uncle Bob said:
			
		

> TexasBO,"Come on guys, I think you're being a little harsh here." :lol:  :lol: Don't take me wrong; I love to read our Rick's posts.  He brings a refreshing new slant to every topic he posts on.  That "Attic; Habitable area" would be a great place to put a concrete safe room.  I'm just waiting to see how it's going to be supported from the attic to the foundation.Uncle Bob


That is a structural decision.Below is just a grossly simplified mock up. I'll leave design flexibility up to each designer, architect, engineer, ect. Other design factors for the remaining walls may apply. It is just an illustration of the concept in rough.Concept Mock-Up.PNG[/attachment:33qo9ue5]
	

		
			
		

		
	

View attachment 67


View attachment 67


/monthly_2010_05/572953b543fac_ConceptMock-Up.PNG.c7ea0167b27ac60c98f499000b80e221.PNG


----------



## texas transplant

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

JD,

You beat me to the post again.  Thank you for explaining doors.   I really think I would have beat you to that post this time, but was ROFLMAO.  That and I had to send my inspector out to a job that is getting some rated doors today and tell the contractor that he needed to order brick instead.

RA,

I was kinda having a bad day and needed a break so called up the BB to check things out, thanks for brightening my day.

I started to pop the popcorn, but decided to go directly to my hip flask.

I really have to try and read the BB more times during the day.


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				John Drobysh said:
			
		

> I'll apologize in advance for perpetuating another ill-educated posit by our resident unlicensed designer, but I can't ignore it..."I can go with 1hr rated door but not likely a 3-hour rated door. You want to move a brick door?"
> 
> What planet do you live on? Standard door ratings for fire doors are 45 minutes, 1 1/2 hours and three hours (once upon a time known as 'C' label, 'B' label and 'A' label). That's a steel door on a steel frame rated for 3 hours. No bricks, no additional weight to speak of.
> 
> I refuse to address the concept of three hour rated exterior walls on a SFR, because the idea is just plain silly!


I wasn't looking at the rating of the door but interior door to the concept would be 1-1/2 hours. But what do they make the steel door survive fire for 3 hours - solid steel billet that is 3-ft x 7-ft. OR coated in Asbestos. If you can find a door that is of that mass then so be it.

There are a number of design solutions. If the stairway is just from attic space to an exterior stairway, there is a number of design methods to support the structure and weight and meet any seismic zone.

The illustration shows a simple ground to roof type system. Various techniques and methods can be done with similar fire-break.

The point of the stairway is to provide a non-impeded means of escape from a fire. A stairway of non-combustable construction on the interior with doors out to the exterior and an exterior stairway of non-combustible construction can also be available. Integrated means of ventilation maybe a critical and important part of design.  3-hr wall rating can be as simple as C.M.U. construction or brick or other such construction.


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				texas transplant said:
			
		

> JD,You beat me to the post again.  Thank you for explaining doors.   I really think I would have beat you to that post this time, but was ROFLMAO.  That and I had to send my inspector out to a job that is getting some rated doors today and tell the contractor that he needed to order brick instead.
> 
> RA,
> 
> I was kinda having a bad day and needed a break so called up the BB to check things out, thanks for brightening my day.
> 
> I started to pop the popcorn, but decided to go directly to my hip flask.
> 
> I really have to try and read the BB more times during the day.


I didn't have time to look at exact door rating but I would be looking at whatever rating that can meet a minimum of 60 minutes. So it would be the 1.5 hour door and a normal door or 45 minute fire-rated door or 1.5 hour rated door could be use for the door to exterior in the pic. Ok the fire rated doors are clarified. Good, JD. The reason for 3 hour rating if also for a reason if a person did pass out on the stairway because of smoke inhalation or whatever even though systems of venting the smoke out would be a part of design - it gives ample time and reasonable amount of protection so the person doesn't get burned alive. It is a concept mockup pic. Food for thought and the idea would be to get thoughts going and discussion. A house is a building.


----------



## texas transplant

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Rick,

Please never change.   You provide me with so much fun reading on the BB.


----------



## TJacobs

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

We can't even get self-closing house-to-garage doors...your going to get a 3-hour door??? :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

Oh wait, as brudgers will remind me, fires never start in the garage...nevermind...


----------



## Mule

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				RickAstoria said:
			
		

> The reason for 3 hour rating if also for a reason if a person *did pass out *on the stairway because of smoke inhalation or whatever even though systems of venting the smoke out would be a part of design - it gives ample time and *reasonable amount of protection* so the person doesn't get burned alive.


The guy passes out....the door is still standing....until the walls around the door burn down, allowing the 3 hour brick door to fall on top of the guy, :shock:  who used to be alive until    ......BAM...SQAUSH...guts and blood. :cry: .....seeping out from under the brick door! :evil:

Well I guess we should've thought about a lighter door!


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				TJacobs said:
			
		

> We can't even get self-closing house-to-garage doors...your going to get a 3-hour door??? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: Oh wait, as brudgers will remind me, fires never start in the garage...nevermind...


Fires can start anywhere. Just use the same stuff used in commercial buildings for self-closing. It already exists. A house is a building so treat it like one.


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				Mule said:
			
		

> RickAstoria said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reason for 3 hour rating if also for a reason if a person *did pass out *on the stairway because of smoke inhalation or whatever even though systems of venting the smoke out would be a part of design - it gives ample time and *reasonable amount of protection* so the person doesn't get burned alive.
Click to expand...

The guy passes out....the door is still standing....until the walls around the door burn down, allowing the 3 hour brick door to fall on top of the guy, :shock:  who used to be alive until    ......BAM...SQAUSH...guts and blood. :cry: .....seeping out from under the brick door! :evil:

Well I guess we should've thought about a lighter door!

That is why the wall around the door is 3-hour rated. Of course there is a time limit on the material as with any material.

The rating was mainly for the wall. I wanted the door to be light be provide some degree of protection with a minimum of 3-hour rated landing and stairway. The door on the interior side would be maybe 1.5 hour rated. Maybe 3-hours. The wall would be a minimum of 3-hours but may even be 4-5 or even 6 - hour depending on thickness of wall.

Minimum of 3-hours was the base-line for the walls.


----------



## JBI

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Fires can start anywhere. But I doubt you'll find too many cases of a person being 'burned alive' in a structure fire. Most get burned dead. Charred remains are typically individuals who died of smoke inhalation, their bodies burned after death occurred.

Why is this thread getting morbid?


----------



## TJacobs

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Don't forget you can use (2) 1.5-hour doors in series... :mrgreen:


----------



## TJacobs

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Would you allow 3-hour fire-rated glazing :?:  :roll:


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				John Drobysh said:
			
		

> Fires can start anywhere. But I doubt you'll find too many cases of a person being 'burned alive' in a structure fire. Most get burned dead. Charred remains are typically individuals who died of smoke inhalation, their bodies burned after death occurred. Why is this thread getting morbid?


That depends on how fast the fire got to them but agree. Why should he be cremated for free?

Morbid.... yes. Then again, the person could have passed out because of heat & fatigue or you could have stumbled (even with legally compliant stairs) and is knocked out but not dead. We want firefighters to get to him and rescue him before him and the firefighters are cremated alive and be three or four charred bodies but 2-3 of them would have charred yellow & firefighter helmets and one is just an ordinary joe. The three firefighters would be medium done and the poor joe would be overcooked.


----------



## texas transplant

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

TJ and Mule,

The last couple of pages of this thread are even better reading if you fill your coffee cup with bourbon.   :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

I'm still cruising the web looking for a manufacturer of brick 3hour doors.   :roll:


----------



## beach

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

We all know why doors have less of a rating than the walls they are installed in, don't we?

Oh yeah..http://popup.lala.com/popup/432627065039277054


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				TJacobs said:
			
		

> Would you allow 3-hour fire-rated glazing :?:  :roll:


Depends.  Is the glazing in direct line. The interior wall side of the stairway would not have glazing and the exterior wall side may have ordinary fire-rated glazing but the locality would have to not be an issue and the bottom of window be 112-120" above stair landing & stairs treads and be like a safety glass when it breaks.

Except escape windows but would only be on the exterior walls side.

The exterior wall part is redundancy and partly structural.


----------



## Mule

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				TJacobs said:
			
		

> Would you allow 3-hour fire-rated glazing :?:  :roll:


Only if it was between a garage wall and a bedroom!


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				texas transplant said:
			
		

> TJ and Mule,The last couple of pages of this thread are even better reading if you fill your coffee cup with bourbon.   :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
> 
> I'm still cruising the web looking for a manufacturer of brick 3hour doors.   :roll:


We won't. It is in the basement of one of those New York buildings. Ok, it was more then 3-hr rated but a brick door.

But, the magic drug (I mean fire-proofing) - called asbestos is no longer in use these days pretty much. We haven't made an equal to it in fire-protection properties, as of yet or have we?


----------



## TJacobs

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

If you install Z-brick on a fire door does it violate NFPA 80 and void the listing :?:  :lol:


----------



## TJacobs

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				texas transplant said:
			
		

> TJ and Mule,The last couple of pages of this thread are even better reading if you fill your coffee cup with bourbon.   :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
> 
> I'm still cruising the web looking for a manufacturer of brick 3hour doors.   :roll:


I like Bailey's in my java...


----------



## texasbo

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Rick said:



> The reason for 3 hour rating if also for a reason if a person did pass out on the stairway because of smoke inhalation or whatever even though systems of venting the smoke out would be a part of design - it gives ample time and reasonable amount of protection so the person doesn't get burned alive. It is a concept mockup pic. Food for thought and the idea would be to get thoughts going and discussion. A house is a building.


I just sh!t down my leg. Seriously.


----------



## RickAstoria

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				texasbo said:
			
		

> Rick said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The reason for 3 hour rating if also for a reason if a person did pass out on the stairway because of smoke inhalation or whatever even though systems of venting the smoke out would be a part of design - it gives ample time and reasonable amount of protection so the person doesn't get burned alive. It is a concept mockup pic. Food for thought and the idea would be to get thoughts going and discussion. A house is a building.
Click to expand...

I just sh!t down my leg. Seriously.

Got everyone talking.


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

Come on ya'll; stop it.  I've been laughing so hard I'm crying and I'm having a hard time breathing.

Rick,

Don't listen to them; your design is way above and beyond minimum code requirements (way, way, way, way above and beyond); and therefore, outside their ability to comprehend.

Uncle Bob


----------



## texasbo

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Is a brick fire door made from fire brick?


----------



## texas transplant

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

TJ,

I think it works that if you put one layer of z-brick on one side of the door, you get a 1 1/2 hour rating and a layer on both sides gets you a 3-hour rating.   :roll:  :lol:

Oh by the way you said Bailey's in your coffee, this thread has switched me to straight bourbon in my coffee cup.   :lol    :lol:

Texasbo,

Join TJ and I, a little liquor makes this thread a blast.  And you won't have those reactions if you tip a little.


----------



## kilitact

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



> Got everyone talking


 and thinking outside the box. give them some asbestos for wipe :lol:


----------



## FM William Burns

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



			
				RJJ said:
			
		

> This should get the attic stair question going!  Attic, Habitable: So what does this mean?


Further fire safety reductions in the code and an increased opportunity for the *Chimney Effect* :cry:


----------



## RJJ

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

I would not permit Z brick unless tested for the application.

FM: You are getting serious on a none serious thread!

Kil: the three hr rating is a little more then outside the box. It my qualify for outside the planet!


----------



## texas transplant

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

RJJ,

Are you gonna be a stickler and require fire brick?   :roll:  :lol:


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Ok, ya'll can stop drinking and go home now.  You might want to stop by the package store and restock the office liquor cabinet.

And, be careful on those stairs to the attic bunker.   

Uncle Bob


----------



## FM William Burns

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

Rjj, Yea you know me Mr. Serious  

UB,

Glad to see you online today.  At first glance I thought you may have been flying through Austin this morning.


----------



## Uncle Bob

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

FM,

 :lol: ; the guy looks a little like Packsaddle.  Their going to use this to make small air craft file flight plans everytime they take off; like that would have stoped him.   :roll:

I guess if he would have driven his car into the building they would want to require us to file GPS reports when we go to the grocery.  There is a neat indoor play ground around the corner from that building on 183; where I used to take my daughter when she was little; and then there is the Arberitum (high end shoping area); not too far from there; I used to take her to when she was in her teens.

Did anyone notice in some of the close-up shots; that the soil was being washed out from under the foundation?  Gotta love that "compacted fill?" they use under the foundations.

Every time something happens; they tighten up on our rights.  Next we will have to wear watches with GPS so they can track where we go; and our vehicles won't start if we aren't wearing the watch.

People don't kill people; air planes do.

Uncle Bob


----------



## texasbo

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

UB said:



> People don't kill people; air planes do.


I went straight from architecture school to Pensacola, Florida based on that promise.

That building would have suffered no damage whatsoever (other than a pleasing distressed patina) if it had 3 hour reinforced concrete exterior walls and brick doors. Did you guys see the news footage of them pulling the unconscious guy from the stairwell? He'd sucked in a little smoke despite the ventilation system, but otherwise was none the worse for wear; partied like it was 1999 on 6th Street two hours later.

And all this time we've been kidding around with our friend Rick...


----------



## FM William Burns

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions



> Every time something happens; they tighten up on our rights. Next we will have to wear watches with GPS so they can track where we go; and our vehicles won't start if we aren't wearing the watch.


UB,

Already there since 74% (2006 data) of our population uses cellular phones.  The big eye in the sky is watching


----------



## RJJ

Re: IRC 2009 Definitions

FM: No not is the air today! I try to fly under the radar so I would have probably hit a planter or a traffic light on approach! :mrgreen:


----------

