# Vertical penetrations in a high-rise



## jar546 (Nov 17, 2019)

You see this during a renovation of a dwelling unit inside a high-rise structure that is Type IIA construction with fire sprinklers.  Would you allow this?


----------



## RLGA (Nov 17, 2019)

This is not acceptable for a couple of reasons:

The evaluation report from UL indicates it is only suitable for Type VB construction. Since this is a high rise Type IIA construction means they’re using it outside of the approved use.
The penetrations require firestop assemblies tested per ASTM E 814 or UL 1479. This product has NOT been tested per either.


----------



## jar546 (Nov 17, 2019)

RLGA said:


> This is not acceptable for a couple of reasons:
> 
> The evaluation report from UL indicates it is only suitable for Type VB construction. Since this is a high rise Type IIA construction means they’re using it outside of the approved use.
> The penetrations require firestop assemblies tested per ASTM E 814 or UL 1479. This product has NOT been tested per either.



I agree. I could not even find an ASTM E84 rating on the can.


----------



## RLGA (Nov 17, 2019)

The ER does indicate it passed ASTM E 84.


----------



## e hilton (Nov 17, 2019)

Give the guy a little credit for trying. It says its good for residential construction, and he used it in a residence.  At least it wasnt plain foam.


----------



## RLGA (Nov 17, 2019)

e hilton said:


> Give the guy a little credit for trying. It says its good for residential construction, and he used it in a residence.  At least it wasnt plain foam.


If there are drawings and specifications for the project that require tested firestop assemblies, then no credit is due—they should’ve been familiar with the contract requirements.


----------



## cda (Nov 17, 2019)

No

Plus just because it says Fire, does not mean it is directly out of the fire code

A building Code item to me on new and remodel work.


----------



## jar546 (Nov 17, 2019)

e hilton said:


> Give the guy a little credit for trying. It says its good for residential construction, and he used it in a residence.  At least it wasnt plain foam.



Which is exactly what we found in other dwelling units of high rises


----------



## jar546 (Nov 17, 2019)

RLGA said:


> If there are drawings and specifications for the project that require tested firestop assemblies, then no credit is due—they should’ve been familiar with the contract requirements.



Yes and when I ask for specs on the drawings I get resistance but this is what happens even when there are specs.


----------



## RLGA (Nov 17, 2019)

jar546 said:


> Yes and when I ask for specs on the drawings I get resistance but this is what happens even when there are specs.


If I was the architect providing contract administration, I would reject the installation, even if the building accepted it. It is still a breach of contract. The contractor would be required to replace all of the non compliant materials and replace them with compliant materials. If the contractor refuses, the owner has the right to withhold payment on that portion of the work, and if the contractor still refuses to correct the deficiency, the owner can bring in a separate contractor to correct the work and charge the original contractor for the cost.


----------



## ADAguy (Nov 17, 2019)

Point, why wouldn't the building have to approve the work first? And then confirm it met code when completed?


----------

