Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: IBC Fire Walls and Seismic Code

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Matthew:

The term "weak link" comes from the Canadian Code reference. I think of "fusible link" as the mechanism that allows fire doors to close during a fire event. 

Where can one obtain technical info. on "Nylatron" bolts? 

A question comes to mind that if the fire (away from the wall) causes a collapse and the bolts on each side of the wall are under similar temperature and stress, bolts on each side may break or melt at similar times even though the desire is to have bolts only on the fire side break or melt.

This is an area of the code that in recent time has become very important but yet info. is very limited. Our profession is in need of some additional research in this area.

Jim K.





-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Stuart [mailto:pesepeng(--nospam--at)hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:10 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: IBC Fire Walls and Seismic Code


In my neck of the woods we call that a "fusible link" and I typically use 
Nylatron bolts. Heckmann also sells a metal break away connection but I 
prefer the Nylatron because it "melts" at a substantially lower temperature 
(500 degrees) than the Heckmann connectors.

Matthew


>From: "Kestner, James W." <jkestner(--nospam--at)somervilleinc.com>
>Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>Subject: RE: IBC Fire Walls and Seismic Code
>Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:35:28 -0500
>
>Matthew:
>
>That is correct. For double walls, the required space is between each wall.
>
>Weak link is a type of fastening detail that will release the firewall from 
>the structure undergoing a fire condition.
>
>Jim K.
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>From: Stuart, Matthew [mailto:mstuart(--nospam--at)schoordepalma.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:54 PM
>To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>Subject: RE: IBC Fire Walls and Seismic Code
>
>
>
>For double fire walls the "space" for movement occurs between the two 
>adjacent walls and not between the steel and the wall as is the case for 
>the most part with the other examples.
>
>I'm not familiar with the term "Weak Link", what does this mean?
>
>Matthew Stuart
>
>   _____
>
>From: Kestner, James W. [mailto:jkestner(--nospam--at)somervilleinc.com]
>Sent: Wed 4/26/2006 4:11 PM
>To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>Subject: RE: IBC Fire Walls and Seismic Code
>
>
>There are several ways to design firewalls:
>
>Cantlivered
>Tied
>Double
>Weak Link
>
>With steel structures, you must provide enough distance between structures 
>for the steel to expand without damaging the firewall(s). This distance 
>varies 2 1/2" and 7 1/2".
>
>I would think that the double firewall or tied firewall would be the common 
>way to design in seismic areas.
>
>The IBC gives little guidance to the engineer on how to design these 
>firewalls. The best references are NFPA 221, FM, NCMA and Commentary M of 
>the Canadian Code.
>
>Jim K.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul Feather [mailto:pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:00 PM
>To: SEAOC List
>Subject: IBC Fire Walls and Seismic Code
>
>
>Under the IBC, the area separation walls from the UBC are gone, and the 
>corresponding wall is a Fire Wall.
>
>The primary difference is the ability of one side of the structure to 
>collapse, without taking down the wall.  The commentary clearly shows the 
>diaphragm sheathing as discontinuous at the Fire Wall in Type V 
>construction.
>
>Question, how does this square with the seismic code provisions where all 
>parts of the structure are to be interconnected, or a separation joint is 
>to be provided?  Are we now supposed to provide 4 to 8 inch seismic joints 
>at all area separation walls, essentially breaking the building into 
>multiple buildings?
>
>Under the UBC Area Separation Walls it was permissible to have the 
>sheathing extend through at the floor diaphragms, and the only problem was 
>maintaining the rating through the assembly.
>
>What are other people doing about this condition?
>
>Paul Feather PE, SE
>www.SE-Solutions.net
>pfeather(--nospam--at)SE-Solutions.net
>

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********