Need a book?
Engineering books recommendations...
Return to index:
RE: Firewall Connection
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: Firewall Connection
- From: "Kestner, James W." <jkestner(--nospam--at)somervilleinc.com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:15:15 -0500
would recommend using a double firewall in this instance.
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:40
had a brief search of the archives for this topic but had no luck in finding
have a situation where I need to design a firewall (not fire separation)
between an existing freezer building (steel frame clad with insulation panels)
and a new processing facility. the firewall will be constructed in between the
insulation panels of the existing building and the steel framing of the new
building is in Vancouver BC which most of you know is a high seismic zone. The
dilemma is how to connect the fire wall to the new steel frame such that
collapse of the building doesn't cause collapse of the firewall and
yet still support the wall by the frame and roof diaphragm under seismic
loads. Any magical connection out there that can achieve this? My brief search
of the archives returned some mention of melt-away anchors, however, the
possibility remains that the fire is remote from the wall (say on the next row
of columns parallel to the wall). This could still cause the building to
collapse without the opportunity for these melt-away anchors to
other question relates to the existing building. For those familiar with the
NBCC or BCBC. Does the existing building need to be tied to the firewall? My
understanding is that the intent of the code is simply to supply a wall that
remains standing in the event that either building collapses. In
essence, for the pure purpose of a firewall, it does not have to be
tied to either building, it can be free standing.
assistance is greatly appreciated.