# 13R or 13D



## Rick18071

Does a R3 seprated from a use B with a 2 hr fire wall need a NFPA 13 R or 13D sprinklers? The B side does not need sprinklers.


----------



## cda

I thought once you go R you sprinkle the entire building????

More then likely 13R


----------



## High Desert

If the two occupancies are separated by a firewall they are two separate buildings and two separate fire areas. I think it's a 13D, but I may be wrong. The B wouldn't need to be sprinklered if two separate buildings.


----------



## mtlogcabin

High Desert said:
			
		

> If the two occupancies are separated by a firewall they are two separate buildings and two separate fire areas. I think it's a 13D, but I may be wrong. The B wouldn't need to be sprinklered if two separate buildings.


Where in the code does a 2-hour fire barrier automatically make it a seperate building?

Would this be a live work unit under the 2009?


----------



## cda

Rick

is this a one story builidng or is the R on top of the B??


----------



## High Desert

It has to be the appropriate 2-hour wall.

706.1 General. *Each portion of a building separated by one or*

*more fire walls that comply with the provisions of this section*

*shall be considered a separate building.* The extent and location

of such fire walls shall provide a complete separation. Where a

fire wall also separates occupancies that are required to be separated

by a fire barrier wall, the most restrictive requirements

of each separation shall apply


----------



## mtlogcabin

Brain fart I was thinking Fire Barrier not Fire Wall.


----------



## Gene Boecker

If you sprinkler the entire building, then the residential part must be designed to 13 or 13R.  A 13D system can only be used in limited situations: one- and two-family dwellings.


----------



## Builder Bob

A 13 R system would be required.....IMHO. The scope of the IRC is for detached 1 &2 family dwellings or townhomes. A R-3 occupancy does not exist int he code language of the IRC.

(we are still stuck in the 2006 ed in SC.)

The biggest problem I see is trying to mix and match the scope of the IRC with the IBC. (My hangup is the word detached.)


----------



## jar546

Make sure we are not talking apples and oranges.  There is a large difference between a "fire wall" (read the definition) and a wall that is rated for a 2 hour fire separation.


----------



## FyrBldgGuy

If this isn't a home-business then why would you have a B attached to an R-3, or is this a rental next to a bar?


----------



## brudgers

Buildings containing an R occupancy require sprinklers throughout.

If the R occupancy is a one or two family dwelling then a 13d sprinkler system may be used.

If the occupancy is eligible for 13R then that may be used.

If there is a true firewall then there are two buildings and the B side will not require sprinklers.

However, a firewall for a B occupancy is required to be three hours, not two.


----------



## mark handler

NFPA 13D is the standard for the “Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One and Two-Family Dwellings

and Manufactured Homes” (basically an individual unit system)

NFPA 13R is the standard for the “Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Residential Occupancies up to and

Including Four Stories in Height” (a whole building system)

Just a single R, NFPA 13D


----------



## brudgers

mark handler said:
			
		

> NFPA 13D is the standard for the “Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One and Two-Family Dwellingsand Manufactured Homes” (basically an individual unit system)
> 
> NFPA 13R is the standard for the “Installation of Sprinkler Systems in Residential Occupancies up to and
> 
> Including Four Stories in Height” (a whole building system)
> 
> Just a single R, NFPA 13D


Two dwellings can also be a 13D.


----------



## mark handler

brudgers said:
			
		

> Two dwellings can also be a 13D.


ReRead the quoted text in your post "NFPA 13D is the standard for the “Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One and Two-Family Dwellings"


----------



## brudgers

mark handler said:
			
		

> ReRead the quoted text in your post "NFPA 13D is the standard for the “Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One and Two-Family Dwellings"


A 13D can be installed in an entire building.

Most are.

13R and 13D are both designed to protect residents neither is intended to protect any other occupancy and neither is more applicable to a B or M occupancy than the other.


----------



## RBK

brudgers said:
			
		

> 13R and 13D are both designed to protect residents neither is intended to protect any other occupancy and neither is more applicable to a B or M occupancy than the other.


13R provides references to NFPA 13 for areas that are beyond it's scope, while 13D does not contain any such reference, other than to say that 13 or 13R should be used for the residential portions of all other buildings.    So I would say that 13R is much more applicable to mixed occupancy buildings.  13R covers residential buildings, so you could have a single apartment attached to the end of a shopping mall, and as long as all the appropriate code provisions are met, the building could be protected in accordance with NFPA 13R.


----------



## mark handler

RBK said:
			
		

> 13R provides references to NFPA 13 for areas that are beyond it's scope, while 13D does not contain any such reference, other than to say that 13 or 13R should be used for the residential portions of all other buildings.    So I would say that 13R is much more applicable to mixed occupancy buildings.  13R covers residential buildings, so you could have a single apartment attached to the end of a shopping mall, and as long as all the appropriate code provisions are met, the building could be protected in accordance with NFPA 13R.


Is It "one" Mixed use Building?


----------



## brudgers

RBK said:
			
		

> 13R provides references to NFPA 13 for areas that are beyond it's scope, while 13D does not contain any such reference, other than to say that 13 or 13R should be used for the residential portions of all other buildings.    So I would say that 13R is much more applicable to mixed occupancy buildings.  13R covers residential buildings, so you could have a single apartment attached to the end of a shopping mall, and as long as all the appropriate code provisions are met, the building could be protected in accordance with NFPA 13R.


Neither 13D or 13R is applicable to anything other than residential occupancies.

Although 13R is a higher standard because it has a separate supply, flow and tamper switch, and other requirements - that does not make it any more applicable. It's only goal is to get people out of the building just like 13D and unlike 13 which is also intended to protect the structure.

Keep in mind that the reason a sprinkler is required is because of the dwelling(s). Yes if there are three apartments then 13R or full 13 is required. But 13D will meet the requirements for one or two dwellings within the structure.

I am sure you would like it to be another way, but it isn't so it's best to just accept the code as written.


----------



## Builder Bob

Don't get hung up on what NFPA scopes are - The requirement for installation of te sprinkler system is from the code. A standard only tells how it is to be installed.

The scope of the IRC is for "detached" one and two family dwellings or townhomes. A building with a firewall might make a seperate building but does not make it detached if it abuts another building.

The scope of NFPA 13, 13R, and 13 D are irrelvent when the code mandates the installation. I would like to think that the NFPA documents would be similar or mirror the scope of the applicable building code. However, the NFPA 13R does not have a height limitation with it --- just the number of stories. The Building code limits the height to 60 feet.


----------



## cda

RICKS not here

so if the R was on top of the B would the entire buidling have to be sprinkled??????????????            even with a two hour wall???


----------



## brudgers

If the R is on top of B, a wall won't separate them into two buildings.

Under IBC any building containing a group R fire area must be sprinklered throughout.


----------



## Rick18071

One story type VB construction.

Owner will live in unit but "B" is much larger than the "R". So it can't be a live/work unit

They are talking about buiding a "true fire wall"

706.1 Fire walls make a seprate building. So it won't me a mixed occupancy

Table 706.4 (a) Type V construction only needs 2 hr. walls

903.3.1.3 one and two family dwellings can use NFPA 13D

Sprinkler co. is trying to tell me they can use 13D.

I think it should be 13R, but not sure.

Major problem, no public water, must use a well.

What do you say, 13R or 13D?


----------



## brudgers

1. Why do you think it should be 13R - based on the building code, I mean?

2. Is it just so you can make the building prohibitively expense due to the lack of municipal water supply?


----------



## Rick18071

I don't think I can go the the IRC and call the R side a 1 or 2  family Dwelling if it's attached to a B. If I could they could use 13R.

903.3.1.3 says 1 & 2 family dwellings can use 13R, but there is no defintion of 1& 2 family dwellings in the IBC.


----------



## brudgers

Because the code does not require you to use common sense, you can always make the most unreasonable interpretation possible and hide behind a shield of bureaucracy while making people jump through hoops for your amusement.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Effective Use of the International Building Code

.........The IBC applies to all occupancies, including one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses that are not within the scope of the IRC. The IRC is referenced for coverage of detached one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses as defined in the Exception to Section 101.2 and the definition for "townhouse" in Chapter 2. The IBC applies to all types of buildings and structures unless exempted. Work exempted from permits is listed in Section 105.2.

This is clearly a one family dwelling R-3 under the IBC.(It's attached) If you separate it from the B with a true fire wall with no openings then I might agree (although it's attached) it is a separate building and the 13D would be applicable and the B would not need to be sprinklered. If it is not a true firewall then a full NFPA 13 system is required per Table 508.4


----------



## TJacobs

The reason to get hung up on it is because even before you see the plans they are calling for a ruling on which standard they have to use.


----------



## TJacobs

If you have stacked dwelling units with each stack separated by a true fire wall are you telling me you could use 13D?


----------



## permitguy

As already stated, the IRC applies only to DETACHED one- and two- family dwellings and townhomes.  The described residential unit is not detached, so this is an IBC structure.

In 13D, the definition of dwelling also specifies that it is DETACHED, except townhomes separated by fire-resistive assemblies.  As already established, the described residential unit is not detached, and is not seperated from another townhome, so the installation standards of 13D do not apply.

The correct standard for the sprinkler installation in the described residential unit is 13R.  I'd be paying extremely close attention to the plan for the firewall.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Don't have a copy of 13D so I stand corrected and agree a firewall would allow a 13R system and not a 13D.


----------



## Rick18071

It is the "detached" part of detached one & two family dwelling that is the prolem. I don't think a fire wall that makes it into a separated building makes it detached. Don't get me wrong I wish they could use a 13D system and was trying to see if would work. I will tell them that they can go to the appeal board. I would like if someone could prove to me that separated by a fire wall also means detached. IBC 415 has a definition of a Detached Building: "A separate single-story building without a basement or crawl space, used for the storage or use of hazardous materials and located an approved distance from all other structures". This doesn't help much but it does say somthing about a "distance" between buildings.


----------



## permitguy

The code doesn't say that a firewall creates a detached building.  The 415 definition is very specific in scope to H occupancies, and doesn't apply here.  A more relevant section to the discussion is Section 201.4, stating "Where terms are not defined through the methods authorized by this section, such terms shall have ordinarily accepted meanings such as the context implies."  Look up "detached" in any dictionary and you'll have all the proof you need to justify your position.  You're in the right, here.  Don't feel bad about it.


----------



## brudgers

This reminds me of code officials who classify any building with masonry walls and wood truss roof as Type III and then want to enforce the fire ratings.


----------



## permitguy

Unlike your anecdote, my position here is very clearly based on the code (as you requested).  I have provided the citations to support my position.  If you have a code-based counter argument, then I'm all ears.


----------



## brudgers

Umm...since when did a mixed occupancy create an attached structure?


----------



## permitguy

A mixed occupancy does not create an attached structure.  Attaching buildings to each other creates an attached structure.

at·tached [uh-tacht]

–adjective

1. joined; connected; bound.

2. having a wall in common with another building ( opposed to detached): an attached house.


----------



## brudgers

Other than in your imagination, how exactly does a mixed use building containing an R3 and B occupancy become two buildings?


----------



## permitguy

A mixed use building containing an R3 and B occupancy becomes two buildings when a fire wall complying with IBC 706 is constructed between them.

The OP is not discussing a mixed use building.  It is discussing two buildings separated by a fire wall.  This does not create detached buildings.  It creates attached buildings, one an R3, one a B.


----------



## Glennman CBO

Isn't a sepatate building considered non attached? How can it be attached and a separate building at the same time?


----------



## mark handler

Glennman CBO said:
			
		

> Isn't a sepatate building considered non attached? How can it be attached and a separate building at the same time?


IBC 503.1.2 Buildings on same lot. Two or more buildings on the same lot shall be regulated as separate buildings *or shall be considered as portions of one building *if the building height of each building and the aggregate building area of the buildings are within the limitations of Table 503 as modified by Sections 504 and 506. The provisions of this code applicable to the aggregate building shall be applicable to each building.


----------



## mtlogcabin

503.1 General.

The building height and area shall not exceed the limits specified in Table 503 based on the type of construction as determined by Section 602 and the occupancies as determined by Section 302 except as modified hereafter. Each portion of a building separated by one or more fire walls complying with Section 706 shall be considered to be a separate building.

In-order to be a portion of a building it would have to be attached first.


----------



## permitguy

> Isn't a sepatate building considered non attached? How can it be attached and a separate building at the same time?


Example:

I can build a one-family dwelling, a fire wall, a retail establishment, another fire wall, a two-family dwelling, a fire wall, a restaurant, a fire wall, another one-family dwelling, a fire wall, and a movie theater.  Each would be considered a separate building, even though they are attached.  I can't build the one- and two-family dwellings per the IRC in this instance, because the IRC would require them to be detached.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Effective Use of the International Building Code

The International Building Code® (IBC®) is a model code that provides minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare of the occupants of new and existing buildings and structures. The IBC is fully compatible with the ICC family of codes, including: International Energy Conservation Code® (IECC®), International Existing Building Code® (IEBC®), International Fire Code® (IFC®), International Fuel Gas Code® (IFGC®), International Mechanical Code® (IMC®), ICC Performance Code® (ICCPC®), International Plumbing Code® (IPC®), International Private Sewage Disposal Code® (IPSDC®), International Property Maintenance Code® (IPMC®), International Residential Code® (IRC®), International Wildland-Urban Interface CodeÔ (IWUIC®) and International Zoning Code® (IZ®)......

The IBC applies to all occupancies, including one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses that are not within the scope of the IRC. The IRC is referenced for coverage of detached one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses as defined in the Exception to Section 101.2 and the definition for "townhouse" in Chapter 2. The IBC applies to all types of buildings and structures unless exempted. Work exempted from permits is listed in Section 105.2.

The IBC does not use the term "detached" in their requirement for a 13D system in a one and two family dwelling yet a previous post stated "detached" is in the 13D standard for describing a one and two familiy dwelling. Don't you just love the consistency in the codes :banghd

[F] 903.3.1.3 NFPA 13D sprinkler systems.

Where allowed, automatic sprinkler systems installed in one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses shall be installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13D.


----------



## brudgers

permitguy said:
			
		

> A mixed use building containing an R3 and B occupancy becomes two buildings when a fire wall complying with IBC 706 is constructed between them.The OP is not discussing a mixed use building.  It is discussing two buildings separated by a fire wall.  This does not create detached buildings.  It creates attached buildings, one an R3, one a B.


OK so here is the brilliant logic being applied.

If the occupancies are separated by a fire barrier, protecting the entire building with a 13D system complies.

However, if a much higher level of separation between the occupancies is provided by a fire wall - then the sprinkler system requires an upgrade to 13R - including flow and tamper switches and continuous monitoring (not to mention a separate supply, wye's and everything else). Given that the system is on a well, a fire pump will be needed along with the regular inspections, etc.

If only hydrogen could be the most common element.


----------



## mtlogcabin

> If the occupancies are separated by a fire barrier, protecting the entire building with a 13D system complies


No a fire barrier would be a occupancy seperation and the footnotes to Table 508.4 would require a full NFPA 13 throughout the entire building

Table 508.4

footnotes

S  = Buildings equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.

NS  = Buildings not equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1.


----------



## permitguy

> OK so here is the brilliant logic being applied.


There is literally nothing in the text you quoted that would support the "brilliant logic" of the conclusions you tried to draw from it.

A fire barrier would render this one building with a group R fire area, and sprinklers would be required throughout.  Some will say 13R for the R-3 and 13 for the B.  Some will say 13 throughout.  I'm not going there for the purposes of this discussion.

The greater protection of a fire wall would render this two buildings, albeit attached, and allowing the R-3 to be sprinklered in accordance with 13R.  The B would require no sprinklers at all.

Nothing I have typed here suggests anything different than the position I just laid out.  I have specifically stated - with code references - that 13D is not a consideration under any circumstances in the situation described in the OP.


----------



## brudgers

I smell feet.


----------



## Rick18071

still not sure about this. The IBC and NFPA does not use the word "detached". It is only used in the IRC. If both buildings are inspected under the IBC and not the IRC for the ressidential building 13D seems to be allowed.


----------



## Builder Bob

OK - rick, show me where i can construct a B occupancy in the IRC

This may clear it up for you - the exception in the following section out of the 2006 IBC

101.2 Scope. The provisions of this code shall apply to the construction,

alteration, movement, enlargement, replacement,

repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance,

removal and demolition of every building or structure or any

appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or

structures.

Exception: Detached one- and two-family dwellings and

multiple single-family dwellings (townhouses) not more

than three stories above grade plane in height with a separate

means of egress and their accessory structures shall comply

with the International Residential Code.


----------



## Rick18071

Thanks bob, I wish this could help. But Pa does not use ch. 1 of the IBC. We have Act 45 (UCC) to take it's place. And I don't think we can call it detached if by a fire wall.


----------



## permitguy

NFPA most certainly _does_ use the word "detached".  Read the scope of 13D, then read the definitions of the words contained therein.  The described construction is clearly outside the scope of 13D.


----------



## Rick18071

*NFPA 13 D*

*1.1 Scope*. this standard shall cover the design and installation of automatic sprinkler systems for protection against the fire hazards in one- and two-family dwellings and manufactured homes.

Definitions:

*3.3.4 Dwelling*. Any building that contains not more than one or two dwelling units intened to be used, rented, leased, let, or hired out to be occupied for habitation purposes.

*3.3.4 Dwelling Unit*. One or more rooms, arranged for the use of one or more individuals living together, as in a single housekeeping unit, that normally have cooking, living, sanitary, and sleeping facilities.

Don't see anything about "detached"


----------



## brudgers

Rick18071 said:
			
		

> *Any building* that contains not more than one or two dwelling units intened to be used, rented, leased, let, or hired out to be occupied for habitation purposes.


Don't forget the "any building" part either.


----------



## permitguy

Somebody needs an updated copy of NFPA 13D, and it isn't me.   

The definition was changed in 2007 to clarify what the intent had been all along:

3.3.3 Dwelling.   Any detached building, or any part of a townhouse structure that is separated from the remainder of the townhouse structure with fire resistance rated assemblies in accordance with local building code, that contains no more than two dwelling units intended to be used, rented, leased, let, or hired out to be occupied or that are occupied for habitation purposes.


----------



## Rick18071

Permitguy, I did get this from my copy of the 2007 issue of NFPA 13D. I don't understand where you got a different definition. Can anyone help with this?

Buudgers, a fire wall between B an R makes them separate buildings.


----------



## brudgers

Rick18071 said:
			
		

> Permitguy, I did get this from my copy of the 2007 issue of NFPA 13D. I don't understand where you got a different definition. Can anyone help with this?Buudgers, a fire wall between B an R makes them separate buildings.


 Only if the Design Professional designates the wall as such.  It's not the code official's call (even though the building might fail to meet area requirements).


----------



## permitguy

There is a discrepancy between the printed version we have in our office and the archived version that can be accessed from NFPA's website (web says detached).  In any case, the intent is clearly established between the IRC, IBC, and NFPA 13D, even if you haven't adopted the sections or the editions that provide the clarification.

Now, if you have an amendment that was specifically written to change the scope of any of these codes/standards, that is a different story.  That would be pretty unusual, though.


----------



## Rick18071

I think it should be 13R. My boss says 13D. Have to go with 13D. Said he will not pay for a new copy of NFPA 13D for the new definition of Dwelling.


----------



## brudgers

Rick18071 said:
			
		

> I think it should be 13R. My boss says 13D. Have to go with 13D. Said he will not pay for a new copy of NFPA 13D for the new definition of Dwelling.


Your boss is right.


----------



## permitguy

> I think it should be 13R. My boss says 13D. Have to go with 13D. Said he will not pay for a new copy of NFPA 13D for the new definition of Dwelling.


He wouldn't need to pay for a copy.  It can be viewed on their website for free.  In any case, reading comprehension isn't for everyone.  At least you'll know how to apply it properly when you're in the position to do so.  Thanks for the update on the outcome.


----------



## carrollj604

Do any codes address "Manufactured Home" sprinkler system requirements?  (IKA mobile homes)

Researching online, I see a lot of assumptions but don't see any code references that state sprinkler systems to be required.  Thanks


----------

