ROP MEETING MINUTES. 2. Introduction of Attendees. The following committee members and guests were in attendance. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "ROP MEETING MINUTES. 2. Introduction of Attendees. The following committee members and guests were in attendance. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT"

Brice Osborn O’Connor’
6 years ago
Views:

1 BLD/SAF-FIR September 2009 ROP Meeting Minutes ROP MEETING MINUTES Building Code Life Safety Technical Committee on Fire Protection Features Thursday-Friday, September 24-25, 2009 Meeting Embassy Suites Hotel Cleveland Downtown Cleveland, OH 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Chair Eric Rosenbaum at 8:00 a.m. on Thursday, September 24, 2009 at the Embassy Suites Hotel Cleveland Downtown, Cleveland, OH. Chair Rosenbaum noted that agenda item 6 would be addressed after agenda items 7 and Introduction of Attendees. The following committee members and guests were in attendance. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT NAME Eric Rosenbaum, Chair Joseph A. Castellano, Principal John F. Devlin, Principal Brian L. Eklow, Principal Sam W. Francis, Principal Ralph D. Gerdes, Principal Wayne D. Holmes, Principal Jonathan Humble, Principal Thomas Janicak (Alternate to K. Roeper) Ignatius Kapalczynski, Principal Marshall A. Klein, Principal William E. Koffel, Principal Vickie J. Lovell, Principal William J. McHugh, Jr. Principal Kurt A. Roeper, Principal REPRESENTING Hughes Associates, Inc. The RJA Group, Inc. Aon/Schirmer Engineering Corporation Aon Risk Services American Forest and Paper Association Ralph Gerdes Consultants, LLC HSB Professional Loss Control American Iron and Steel Institute Steel Door Institute Connecticut Department of Public Safety Marshall A. Klein & Associates, Inc. Koffel Associates, Inc. Rep. glazing Industry Code Committee Inter Code Incorporated Rep. Air Movement & Control Association Firestop Contractors International Association Ingersoll-Rand Security Technologies Rep. Steel Door Institute

2 BLD/SAF-FIR September 2009 ROP Meeting Minutes Andrew M. Schneider, Principal Catherine L. Stashak (Alternate to K. Wood) John F. Bender, Voting Alternate Kristin Collette, Staff Liaison Maryland State Fire Marshals Office Rep. International Fire Marshals Association Office of the Illinois State Fire Marshal Underwriters Laboratories Inc. Voting Alternate to UL Rep. NFPA GUESTS NAME Josh Elvove Kevin Gallagher Diana Hugue Dennis Pitts Sarah Rice John Valiulis Thomas S. Zaremba REPRESENTING General Services Administration Fire Chiefs Association of Massachusetts Koffel Associates, Inc. American Forest & Paper Association S. Rice Consulting Hilti Inc. Rep. International Firestop Council Alliance of Primary Fire Rated Glazing Manufacturers TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEMBERS NOT PRESENT NAME Gregory J. Cahanin, Principal David E. Lewis, Principal Jon W. Pasqualone, Principal REPRESENTING Cahanin Fire & Code Consulting Rep. Louisiana State Firemen s Association Code Consultants, Inc. Martin County Board of County Commissioners Rep. Florida Fire Marshals and Inspectors Association 3. Approval of Minutes. The minutes from the October 2, 2007 meeting were approved with one modification. Mr. Devlin noted the spelling of Schirmer Engineering was incorrect. The mistake will be corrected. 4. Fire Protection Research Foundation Project Review. Bill Koffel and Diana Hugue from Koffel Associates gave a presentation on the project Quantifying Smoke Barrier Performance. This project was initially proposed by the BLD/SAF-FIR Technical Committee during the ROC meeting in the Fall of 2007 and was conducted by the Fire Protection Research Foundation. See attachment A - Pg Standardization of Language Where Supervision of Sprinkler Systems Is Required. The committee addressed this issue and no further action was taken. 6. Consistency of List Based Options i.e., when all conditions must be met or some conditions must be met. A task group was formed to address the sections

3 BLD/SAF-FIR September 2009 ROP Meeting Minutes in NFPA 101 and NFPA 5000 where a list based option was used. The task group and committee developed committee proposals where needed. 7. NFPA 101 ROP Preparation. All public proposals were addressed. Committee proposals were developed as needed. See ROP letter ballot package. 8. NFPA 5000 ROP Preparation. All public proposals were addressed. Committee proposals were developed as needed. See ROP letter ballot package. 9. Other Business. No additional business was addressed. 10. Future Meetings. The next meeting will be the Report on Comments meeting and will be held in the Fall of 2010 at a location to be determined. 11. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 am on Friday, September 25, 2009 by Chair Rosenbaum. Meeting Minutes were prepared by: Kristin Collette, NFPA Staff Liaison

4 Quantifying Smoke Barrier Performance William E. Koffel, P.E., FSFPE Diana E. Hugue, P.E. Koffel Associates, Inc. In conjunction with The Fire Protection Research Foundation Overview Scope: Provide a literature review regarding quantifying the performance of penetrations of smoke barriers to include: Code change proposals Codes and standards Additional resources Provide a review of existing or proposed test methodologies concerning smoke barriers Provide recommendations for additional research 1

5 Smoke Barriers NFPA 101 Section Barrier, Smoke : A continuous membrane, or a membrane with discontinuities created by protected openings, where such membrane is designed and constructed to restrict the movement of smoke. Smoke Barrier Penetrations 2

6 Background UL 1784, Air Leakage Tests of Door Assemblies Acceptance criteria = 3 cfm/sq ft of door opening 1991 Life Safety Code Allowed openings up to 20 sq in. in the lower half of corridor walls in health care occupancies Subsequently increased to 80 sq in. in smoke compartments protected with automatic sprinkler protection Smoke Barriers NFPA 101 Section Barrier, Smoke : A continuous membrane, or a membrane with discontinuities created by protected openings, where such membrane is designed and constructed to restrict the movement of smoke. Duct penetrations addressed Door openings addressed in various ways Through penetrations not addressed 2009 IBC Background 3

7 Recent Code Development Activity Proposal Limit combined leakage rate in a smoke barrier to 0.75 cfm/ sq ft of total wall area at 0.1 in. water column Based on permitted leakage for doors and opening limitation Recent Code Development Activity Proposal Require materials sealing penetrations to be listed for restricting transfer of smoke No values given 4

8 Additional Resources NFPA 105, Recommended Practice for the Installation of Smoke-Control Door Assemblies NFPA 12A, Standard d on Halon 1301 Fire Extinguishing Systems, Annex B Principle of Smoke Management, J. Klote and J. Milke 5

9 Test Methodology Air Pressurization ASTM E Standard Test Method for Determining Air Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization Overall building air leakage Determines tightness of building envelope Test Methodology Sound Meters An Acoustic Method of Leak Flow Measurement By C. Lin, S. Wtki Watkins, and dw. Walker Looked at circular leak holes in piping under various pressure conditions and pipe materials Test Methodology Other ASTM E Standard Practices for Air Leakage Site Detection in Building and Air Barrier Systems Smoke Leakage Through Wall Openings in a Fire, W. Chan-Wei, et. al. Environmental Tobacco Smoke Leakage from Smoking Rooms, J. Wagner, et. al. 6

10 Test Methodology Other US Patent Method and device for detecting leaks in penetrations of a nuclear reactor vessel head during operation ASTM E Water penetration of exterior windows, curtain walls, and doors by cyclic static air pressure differential An Air Barrier System in Cambridge, M. MeLampy, et. al. Determining the Criteria Leakage of individual penetrations Simple to determine Uses cold smoke Current approach for dampers, doors, and when addressed, through penetrations Total wall-leakage criteria Technically more valid Enforcement difficult Is it acceptable to merely require the design to comply? Must the actual assembly, as constructed, meet the criteria? 7

11 Determining Test Methods Depends on whether individual penetrations are to be considered or the barrier as a whole Type of smoke? Temperature Particulates Inconsistencies between current test criteria Future Research CFD Modeling for typical smoke barrier assemblies Use leakage values for individual penetrations Sound or infrared test methods 8

MEETING MINUTES NFPA Technical Correlating Committee on Safety to Life January 6, 2011 ROC Meeting The Wyndham Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ

MEETING MINUTES NFPA Technical Correlating Committee on Safety to Life January 6, 2011 ROC Meeting The Wyndham Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order by Chair William Koffel