High Piled Storage Area Separation

[arion]

Hi,

I am currently working on a project where the client's high piled storage area is primarily tire rack storage, approx. 900 sq. ft. total. After analysis of the existing sprinkler system, there is no way the tire rack will be supported (existing = .20/1500 vs. required = .6/5000 or .4/3000 + 1 level of in-rack).

In lieu of having them tear up the surrounding area to add a new riser to support this area, I have thought of a clever way around it, but wanted peer support here.

CFC Section 105.6.22 states that "An operational permit is required to use a building or portion thereof as a high piled storage area exceeding 500 square feet."

Since the building is a small boutique, my idea is to create 1-hour rated fire walls from floor to ceiling to separate the high piled storage area into 2 or 3 separate high piled storage areas, each under 500 sq. ft.

Because each high piled storage area is separate, I can conclude that each one of them does not require a permit, right?

I understand that this means I will lose the project, but it is the right thing to do in this situation if this is the case that this is allowed. I just wanted some peer verification. The code seems to suggest that I can lawfully do this method, but I wanted to double check, since it is after all tire storage. All regulations in the code are there only in the case where the high piled storage area in question is in excess of 500 sq. ft.


Thanks in advance!

 

[arion]

By the way, my determination of the system not being sufficient is according to NFPA 13 Chapter 18, Protection of Rubber Tire Storage.

 

[cdafd]

Do not have the book, at the ball game, but look in the high piled chapter and see if it is still there

Use to be distance or I think one hour

Or bring tires go six feet or below on storage, spread them out

 

[stookeyfpe]

Your applying the California Fire Code. You can use a fire barrier to seperate and isolate your high hazard commodities so long as the construction meets the requirements of the CBC and your tire sprinkler protection meets Chapters 9 and 23 of the CFC.

Your design is legitimate and legal.

 

[arion]

Hi Stookeyfpe, Thanks for the advice. Unfortunately, the whole reason this came up is because the sprinkler system is wildly unsupportive for tire storage, which is why I'm trying to avoid it altogether by it passing as not necessary to permit in the first place.

Alternatively, I have discovered that I can classify the area as a Miscellaneous Storage per Chapter 13 if I added in in-rack sprinklers. If I did that, then the ceiling sprinklers would actually pass according to Fig 13.2.1 curve OH2 (according to my purpose) being exactly at .2/1500. The problem is, if I included in-rack sprinklers, wouldn't the demand of them still require a separate water source, since the existing source is barely able to support the existing system? Or can the in-racks piggy-back off the existing sprinkler system?

Thanks!

 

[cdafd]

from 2003 IFC,



2304.2 Designation based on engineering analysis. The designation
of a high-piled combustible storage area, or portion
thereof, is allowed to be based on a lower hazard class than that
of the highest class of commodity stored when a limited quantity
of the higher hazard commodity has been demonstrated by
engineering analysis to be adequately protected by the automatic
sprinkler system provided. The engineering analysis
shall consider the ability of the sprinkler system to deliver the
higher density required by the higher hazard commodity. The
higher density shall be based on the actual storage height of the
pile or rack and the minimum allowable design area for sprinkler
operation as set forth in the density/area figures provided
in NFPA 231 and NFPA 231C. The contiguous area occupied
by the higher hazard commodity shall not exceed 120 square
feet (11 m2), and additional areas of higher hazard commodity
shall be separated from other such areas by 25 feet (7620 mm)
or more. The sprinkler system shall be capable of delivering the
higher density over a minimum area of 900 square feet (84 m2)
for wet pipe systems and 1,200 square feet (11m2) for dry pipe systems. The shape of the design area shall be in accordance
with Section 903.



2306.3.2.1 Aggregate area. The aggregate of all
high-piled storage areas within a building shall be used
for application of Table 2306.2 unless such areas are separated
from each other by 1-hour fire-resistance-rated
fire barrier walls constructed in accordance with the International
Building Code. Openings in such walls shall
be protected by opening protective assemblies having a
1-hour fire protection rating.
2306.3.2.2 Multiclass high-piled storage areas.
High-piled storage areas classified as Class I through
Class IV not separated from high-piled storage areas
classified as high hazard shall utilize the aggregate of all
high-piled storage areas as high hazard for purposes of
application of Table 2306.2. To be considered as separated,
1-hour fire-resistance-rated fire barrier walls shall
be constructed in accordance with the International
Building Code. Openings in suchwalls shall be protected
by opening protective assemblies having a 1-hour fire
protection rating.
Exception: As provided for in Section 2304.2.

 

[cdafd]

arion

does this storage meet the entire defintion of "miscellaneous storage"

kind of sounds like that the tire storage is the nature of the business???

and also you need to start with the fire code than jump to 13. so if there are design criteria in the fire code look there first

 

[arion]

Hi cdafd,

Yes, it is a small tire shop and I have verified that it does in fact meet all the requirements for miscellaneous storage. It's primary function is not storage, but tire repairs and other auto services. in regards to jumping to 13, what do you mean start in the fire code? the basis of my argument is CFC Section 105.6.22, which states that "An operational permit is required to use a building or portion thereof as a high piled storage area exceeding 500 square feet." I believe you are referring to the code you posted in CFC Section 2306.3.2.1. If this is the case, I have read this too, and it further supports my argument by stating that the aggregate of all HPS areas are required to use in Table 2306.2 UNLESS fire-rated walls separate them. The table is not my concern in this case, but the permit requirement itself. However, it seems to serve as supplementary support.

If I can keep all high piled storage areas under 500 sq. ft., there is no need for an operational permit, regardless of how the sprinklers protect anything. It is this claim that I am stating that would like peer verification on. The reason I am questioning myself is that usually area separation is usually to exclude a higher hazard commodity from the design, but in this case, it legally makes sense that it should be allowed.

Thanks for the input everyone!

 

[cdafd]

the permit is only of the ahj requires one

you need to check all of chapter 23 for the situation you are looking at.

Yes you can divide the tires up into smaller storage areas, if it will work for the business



""""To be considered as separated,1-hour fire-resistance-rated fire barrier walls shallbe constructed in accordance with the International Building Code.""""""""

I am just saying chapter 23 has both building design and sprinkler design criteria, that need to be met first before jumping to nfpa 13

don not just look at chapter 1