# UBC - IBC Building Type Equivalents



## DTBarch (May 25, 2011)

I'm working in a 6 story building originally designed under the 97 UBC as a Type II F.R. building type.  As such, all interior partitions had a minimum of 1 HR fire rating.  Fast forward to today, this particular municipality has adopted the 2006 IBC.  From what I understand, and you can certainly correct me if I'm wrong, the current IBC equivalent of the Type II F.R. building type from the 97 UBC is Type I-B

Table 601 in the IBC has eliminated a fire rating requirement for all non-bearing interior partitions unless it's required by another part of the code.

Question:  On the 4th floor we have a new exhaust duct penetrating one existing partition before turning up and penetrating two floors and the roof deck above.  The existing partition has existing penetrations that are fire caulked which was required by the original code.  Do we need to maintain that and install fire dampers at the partition penetration, or does the current code override that and allow us to disregard that?  If the answer is that we can disregard, is it otherwise prudent to maintain that rated condition, or is it completely unnecessary.

Thank you.


----------



## Architect1281 (May 25, 2011)

Sounds Like the IBC II A  / 2A at any rate sounds like you are creating a shaft ( Almost not sure ) but that would be rated 2Hr in most cases


----------



## DTBarch (May 25, 2011)

Thanks 1281, but I believe the IBC II-A is the equivalent to the old UBC Type II-1HR classification.  Additionally, we're not creating a shaft, just dampering ductwork.  A shaft is one of the other options on the table, but a completely different solution.


----------



## RLGA (May 25, 2011)

DTBarch:  You are correct, the IBC equivalent of the 97 UBC Type II-F.R. is Type IB.

Under the 97 UBC, the 1-hour fire-resistive wall construction was just that: wall construction.  It was not an assembly which would require rated openings and penetrations.  Under the IBC, nonloadbearing partitions are not required to have any rating, so openings and penetrations still are not required.

However, if the wall under the UBC was an occupancy separation wall, then that is an assembly, and all openings and penetrations are required to be protected.  Under the IBC, occupancy separations use the "fire barrier" assembly, which also requires protected openings and penetrations.

In either case--UBC or IBC--the floor penetrations must be protected unless the duct is enclosed in a shaft, which utilizes fire barrier assemblies (for the IBC) or shaft enclosures (for the UBC).


----------

