Firestop Site

Main Site

07840 Master Specification

Firestop Glossary

History of Firestops

Related Sections of Work!!

Bounding! Very Important

Penetration Seal Drawings

Building Joints 1

Building Joints 2

Building Joints 3

Contact

These drawings complement Section 07840 Firestopping Master Specification. These are the joint drawings, webpage 1 of 3 (use linkbars to navigate). Please follow the links in the boxes above or below to get from one to the next. These drawings are intended to show where firestopping is required. The areas to be firestopped are shown cross-hatched. The idea is that the specification text shall govern what materials and certification listings are to be installed - where. The drawings also complement one another as well as the accompanying text, beneath each drawing. Another significant concept embodied in this information is that the entire use of it in a project manual is intended to ensure, or at least increase the likelihood of equality in bidding.

Please scroll down.

Main Site

Firestop Site

Code Evaluations AVAILABLE!

Glossary of Fire Protection Terms

3M Fire Barriers

Vectorising Drawings and Maps; Paper to CAD

Circuit Integrity Fireproofing

Bounding

Code Req's for Firestops

Essay on Performance Based Codes

Master Spec. Section 07840 Firestopping

Related Sections to 07840

Penetration Seal Drawings

Building Joint Drawings 1

Building Joint Drawings 2

Building Joint Drawings 3

History of Firestops in North America

Warnock Hersey Experience

Firestop Trade Jurisdiction

Achim Hering Bio

Man Made Mineral Fibres

Fire Protection Industry Links

Firestop Products and Equipment

Firestop Mortar

Firestop Silicone Foam

Intumescent Products

Endothermic Products

Insulation Products

Caulking & Paint Firestops

Firestop Pillows

Firestop Devices

Firestop Slide Show 1 of 10 Basics

Firestop Slide Show 2 of 10 Code

Firestop Slide Show 3 of 10 No Seal

Firestop Slide Show 4 of 10 Deemed-to-comply

Firestop Slide Show 5 of 10 Misinstalled

Firestop Slide Show 6 of 10 Re-entered

Firestop Slide Show 7 of 10 Faulty Spec.

Firestop Slide Show 8 of 10 Proper Firestops

Firestop Slide Show 9 of 10 Test

Firestop Slide Show 10 of 10 Smoke and Trays

Sample Firestop Listing

Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning; Boiling-Hot Pressure Washing

ULC           UL

T O S

(Theory of Survival)

DIBt

TU Braunschweig iBMB

CONTACT

07840 Drawing 6

07840 Drawing 6 - Perimeter Slab Edge Firestop

07840 Drawing 6 concerns the perimeter slab edge firestop. This is for situations, where the building's façade is suspended from the building in a manner, where there is no point contact between the exterior wall panels and the perimeter edge of the concrete slabs, at each floor level. Mr.,Ms. or Mrs. Architect: Here are some pitfalls to be aware of. First of all, there is the pink elephant issue of the fact that most exterior wall assemblies are neither required, nor capable of having a fire-resistance rating. What you may have here is precast concrete panels, curtain wall assemblies or the Dryvit approach. BOUNDING is as essential here, as anywhere else. Each component, the slab, the firestop, the mullions and fasteners for the façade must be bounded by a certification listing, which is specific to this particular application. A bit of background: For generations, in Canada, there were only two systems addressing the perimeter slab edge firestop condition, which consisted of stuffed, glorified rockwool. There were two vendors for this, who used to be partners, but then went their own separate ways, both in the Greater Toronto Area. One bought rockwool from CGC, the other from Roxul, in Milton. Both pretended it was their own unique product, though in fact it was but private labelled rockwool. Each had a system at ULC, based on a test that each of them ran, between two concrete slabs. There was no motion test involved and there was no hose stream test involved. The glorified rockwool approach could, therefore, be seen as no more than inefficient furnace filters, holding back the flame, but being incapable of holding back re-ignitable, toxic flue gases. The resulting 'seal' was and remains susceptible to falling out from breathing on it, mostly due to insufficient stuffing (compression - enforcement) as well as water damage, sagging, etc. Nonetheless, since there were two, albeit very simply, ULC tests and listings involved, the solution was cheap, stuffing in glorified rockwool was the norm and status quo in Canada. This is what this looks like:

Rockwool stuffed into precast perimeter joint in Burlington, ON.

You can also see here, the issues concerning the integrity of the suspended façade in general. The concrete panels are fine. But the caulking is no match for a fire - and neither are the windows, nor the flammable polyurethane foam around them.

The above mentioned rockwool-only listings never bounded anything more than a joint between two concrete slabs. Subsequent listings, involving top caulking, first with 1/2" of silicone, then 1/4" of silicone, then flammable urethane, then latex paints, down to 1/16" these days, ensued. Childlike, simplistic explanations for the top caulking were that the rockwool stopped the fire, and the caulking stopped the smoke. This infantile explanation remains the reason for specifications, which differentiate between 'firestopping' and 'smoke sealing'. This is, strictly speaking, nonsense. Smoke penetration is not a relevant fact in testing to ULC-S115 of S101, or E814 or E101. Only the L ratings criteria, a much later edition to ULC-S115 listings can be seen as a pre-doomed approach to mastering or at least quantifying smoke penetration in any sort of standardised method. Pre-doomed, because installation quality at the lab has nothing whatsoever to do with what really happens in the field. To quantify smoke tightness, as a means of quantifying firestop installation quality, the only thing to do is to run selective infiltrometer, or door fan testing, combined with smoke pencil testing, right on site. Everything else is, well, you know. But the burning issue remains BOUNDING. You can't base perimeter edge firestops on testing that was based on a joint between two concrete slabs. Not since the first listing for perimeter edge conditions became available. Furthermore, we all know that the façade is subject to motion. Thus, you cannot legally afford to disregard the issue of motion any longer either. To date, to the best of my knowledge, and I expect soon stand to be corrected, there is only one ULC listing, that is actually based on the perimeter edge condition, as well as operational motion of the joint. This is ULC listing PJ1. PJ1 also covers more than just one type of façade, which is important. A system listed for Dryvit, can't be used for curtain wall, or precast concrete panels, etc. This is a very clever move by the vendor of this system, because in the presence of this system, all the other hitherto grandfathered systems, based on concrete only, no motion testing etc. become illegal  and inexcusable for use in this application. But apart from that, because of the inexpensive materials used in this listing, there is no additional financial burden on a construction project, when compared against any of the other grandfathered systems. The overriding issue still remains and will, in all likelihood stay under the purposely procured skeleton rug of passive fire protection. And that is the issue that what you have, mostly, is an unrated wall assembly coming up against a rated floor assembly. The philosophical issue is, where does the (rated) floor end and where does the (unrated) wall begin? If you have a closer look at PJ1, you will see that ULC wisely extricates itself from the dilemma by stating that the rating for the firestop is ZERO, when the rating of the wall is ZERO, which is predominantly the case. So why put in a rated system, which costs real money, even though it is a cheap system (paint and wool, big deal!)?? Because 9 times out of ten, in reality, even PJ1 won't be rated, when the exterior wall is not rated. Well, one does what one can. The purposely procured rug also covers another large item, to be considered: Southwest Research, in Texas, conducted some testing to see about the integrity of curtainwall systems proper. This testing was privately sponsored, but the results were widely published. In a real room test, as well as a few real fires, such as the LA Bank Tower Fire, what was proven to happen is this:

Los Angeles Bank Tower Fire

You have a fire on one of the floors. The fire pops out the glass, which falls down to shred people, fire fighters and fire hoses on the ground. Then the fire leaps up, through the now open window, decimating the curtain wall it touches along the way. After all, this is made of aluminum, which we know to quickly disappear in a fire. In fire testing, anything made of aluminum usually forms a puddle on the bottom of the furnace, minutes after the start of the test. The Royal Navy also quickly found out about the effects of the melting temperature of aluminum, on 04. May 1982, when HMS Sheffield was sunk by a French-made Exocet missile, courtesy of the Argentinean Navy, off the coast of the Falkland Islands, during the Falkland Islands Conflict. British ship superstructures were made in large proportions of aluminum. This is nice and light, which makes the ship faster and more fuel efficient, but if a missile or bomb does make it through the ship's defences, it is soon toast, along with a lot of those on board. The military can ill afford not to learn from such experiences and one would be hard-pressed to find modern combat ships, which rely on aluminum superstructures. In building construction, however, we have the rug. That's where we put such items. The rug consists of endless justifications (pencil-whipping), backed up by people with alphabet soup behind their names, PLUS, of course, precedence. We have done it this way ever since Buddha was a cowboy. Therefore we keep doing it this way, except with more justifications and ignorance of technical facts. NASA won't use the same O-rings anymore, that contributed to the shuttle accident in the eighties, because people died. But in fire protection, we insist on continuing to let people die due to inoperable fire protection. We continue to see this, fire after fire, building after building, but, for the most part, nothing changes. So, Mr., Ms. or Mrs. Architect, the best thing to do for the perimeter edge firestop, is not to have one. Use a different method to create your building façade. Just look at the top left hand side picture in this URL: http://www.oocities.com/danchaput2000/basics.html and judge for yourself. If you use brick walls, or drywall, but have the exterior façade resting on each slab, at the perimeter edge, and keep windows small, use balconies - anything to impede the exterior upward path of flame, you will have applied past experience in fire protection and losses to your building, and should be able to sleep better at night. Curtain walls are made of aluminum and glass. Think about it! They look pretty, but if you use them, and the sprinklers fail, have you made provision for escape tunnels to and from the building so that the falling glass won't shred people on the ground? Pre-cast concrete panels are non-combustible, of course. But you have joints all over the place, which you seal with backer rod and caulking, which burns like dry cow paddies. Think about that. Think about the outer configuration of your building, first and foremost. As far as exterior drywall systems, polystyrene systems with latex modified plasters. If you feel you must use those, consider the experience of Roxul, in Milton, who have done some very realistic testing on such systems. The more inorganic your system, the better off you are in a fire.

07840 Drawing 7

07840 Drawing 7 - Head-of-Wall Joint Firestop - Masonry or Concrete wall against Q Deck - ALONG the Flute

07840 Drawing 7: Again, heed the comments in the Master Specification Section. This firestopping must precede the spray fireproofing, if there is to be spray fireproofing on the Q deck. Figure out how much motion there will be. Civil engineers are often overly cautious in answering such questions, to the point of physical impossibilities, which, when allowed for in construction, can add considerable and unnecessary costs. You're best off to pick and specify the exact UL or ULC listings, which fit the bill, both in terms of motion compensation and hourly fire-resistance duration. Also, VERY IMPORTANT: Pick Head of Wall Joint Firestop Systems, whose configuration in terms of packing and sealing is identical to mechanical and electrical penetration seal systems. Why? Because these joints are ALWAYS penetrated. Look at this pic:

Head of Wall Joints are ALWAYS penetrated. Choose systems that are listed penetration seals also.

New systems are being added all the time by assorted firestop manufacturers. Check on each job, before specifying. Avoid the Cheech & Chong method: letting the masonry contractor do this, or letting the mason do part of it, like stuffing in the wool. A popular euphemism of this is the old "rake back" virus. Many specifications still say this: let the mason stuff it with wool and then someone is supposed to come along and "rake back" the wool enough, in order to then apply firestop caulking. This boggles the mind, when you really think about it. Who would want to caulk over top of someone else's packing? Who is responsible for the combination after the fact? Two people installing one firestop? And how do you "rake back"? Does that mean 'compress more', or remove some of the wool (negating the listing)? Either way, this is simply another code infraction looking for a pre-determined place to happen. Bounding must be a single responsibility for one sub trade, the firestopper, if the result is intended to meet code, rather than just to trade dollars against safety. So, pick your system, and place responsibility in Section 07840, along with all the required documentation, which makes it economically and practically unfeasible to bust up the workscope.

07840 Drawing 8

07840 Drawing 8 - Head-of-Wall Joint Firestop - Masonry or Concrete Wall againts Q Deck, as seen against the Flute

07840 Drawing 8: This is simply a side view of Drawing 7 above. Please refer to the above comments.

07840 Drawing 9

07840 Drawing 9 - Head-of-Wall Firestop, Masonry or Concrete Wall abutting Concrete Slab above

07840 Drawing 9: Please refer to comments shown under 07840 Drawing 7 above. The only difference here is that the head of wall joint abuts a straight concrete slab, as opposed to metal deck.

Firestop Site

Main Site

07840 Master Specification

Firestop Glossary

History of Firestops

Related Sections of Work!!

Bounding! Very Important

Penetration Seal Drawings

Building Joints 1

Building Joints 2

Building Joints 3

Contact

Main Site

Firestop Site

Code Evaluations AVAILABLE!

Glossary of Fire Protection Terms

3M Fire Barriers

Vectorising Drawings and Maps; Paper to CAD

Circuit Integrity Fireproofing

Bounding

Code Req's for Firestops

Essay on Performance Based Codes

Master Spec. Section 07840 Firestopping

Related Sections to 07840

Penetration Seal Drawings

Building Joint Drawings 1

Building Joint Drawings 2

Building Joint Drawings 3

History of Firestops in North America

Warnock Hersey Experience

Firestop Trade Jurisdiction

Achim Hering Bio

Man Made Mineral Fibres

Fire Protection Industry Links

Firestop Products and Equipment

Firestop Mortar

Firestop Silicone Foam

Intumescent Products

Endothermic Products

Insulation Products

Caulking & Paint Firestops

Firestop Pillows

Firestop Devices

Firestop Slide Show 1 of 10 Basics

Firestop Slide Show 2 of 10 Code

Firestop Slide Show 3 of 10 No Seal

Firestop Slide Show 4 of 10 Deemed-to-comply

Firestop Slide Show 5 of 10 Misinstalled

Firestop Slide Show 6 of 10 Re-entered

Firestop Slide Show 7 of 10 Faulty Spec.

Firestop Slide Show 8 of 10 Proper Firestops

Firestop Slide Show 9 of 10 Test

Firestop Slide Show 10 of 10 Smoke and Trays

Sample Firestop Listing

Kitchen Exhaust Cleaning; Boiling-Hot Pressure Washing

ULC           UL

T O S

(Theory of Survival)

DIBt

TU Braunschweig iBMB

CONTACT

1