From: David B Merrick <mrkgp(--nospam--at)pacbell.net>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 10:05:21 -0600
Not a good idea.
All epoxies melt, but it depends on how much of it is insulated from the
fire. How could one control insulating finishes? I do not use epoxy anchors
for critical supports of beams to concrete walls but on the other hand I
would not rely on a collapse.
Mechanized collapse could trap persons where otherwise an escape is
In San Francisco there was a rule that did require that masonry walls must
be able to free stand after a burn-out. The design criteria was to use a
lateral pressure of 5 psf. with all interior wood framed walls removed,
except interior 2 hr. walls. Those interior fire rated walls were used
perpendicular to the wall to support the property line wall after a
I no longer find the burn-out rule in the SF code. Does anyone know why?
David Merrick, SE
Michael Zaitz wrote:
> Hello All;
> Sometime back the issue of 4 hour firewalls that allows the structure to
> collapse on either side of the wall without affecting the structure on
> the other side of the wall. I have a wall that is now required to be a
> 4 hour wall (due next week) and as such I need to do something to allow
> the collapse. To make matters worse the wall is a shear wall (or at the
> moment it is). I remember talk of anchors that will melt of allowing
> the structure to fall but did not see anything in the archives that had
> any manufacturers or the like. Coould someone provide me with some
> information or some leads as to where to find information on these types
> of anchors?