Rated doors and "plant-ons"

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Robin E. Snyder Senior Member Username: robin Post Number: 200 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 11:58 am:    A question has come up regarding the Architect's design intent to use wood trim as a surround of the metal frame at rated door assemblies. NFPA doesn't seem to address plant-on's on frames. NFPA does say: "features may be attached to fire doors "in accordance with the manufacturer's inspection service procedure and under label service." Can anyone provide any input regarding the use of wood trim that surrounds the metal frame of a rated assembly? Am I not seeing something in NFPA? Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 289 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 12:10 pm:    Robin, You won't find it in NFPA The rating of frames is covered under UL Standards. They used to have a UL Standard (UL 63?)for frames, but dropped it years ago because all of the door manufacturers were already in compliance. I've done it - however, it must be designed to be fastened to the wall only. Mechanically fastening to the rated door or door frame voids the label. Bob Woodburn, RA CSI CCS CCCA LEED AP Senior Member Username: bwoodburn Post Number: 258 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 12:19 pm:    That wouldn't seem to rule out adhesively-attached trim... Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 290 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 12:30 pm:    Only if the adhesives have a UL Rating and meet the required toxicity requirements when burned. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 81 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 01:02 pm:    We had a similar design request (within the last 3 weeks) to applicque ship-lap vertical boards on a 60 minute fire-rated hollow metal door. This from Curries. No can do unless the door was UL or WHI or ULC tested with this treatment (adhesive or mechanical fasteners). I have trimmed out the steel frames with wood (5/4 stock) profiled to accommodate 1/2" returns; fasteners only into jamb studs (wood or steel). No exception taken by AHJ. Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 291 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 01:27 pm:    Wayne, That's been my experience and solution as well. I was once asked to apply a bronze sheet to a rated H.M. Door. UL said "No Way", it had to do with the adhesives again. Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 116 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 01:37 pm:    Often in the morning when I pass through the ground floor lobby of the building I work out of, the door to the Fireman's Control Closet will be open. The lobby walls are stone veneer and the FCC door was detailed to match. With the door open you can see all sorts of random sized wood furring supporting the stone applied to the face of what needs to be a fire-rated occupancy separation door. This must date back to a 1986 remodel. I always think of that as I explain to designers why they cannot apply much more simple overlays and appliques to doors such as are discussed in this thread. Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 82 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 02:07 pm:    Steve, It is hard to defend your position when there is precedent all around to do differently. "How did they do that" we say to ourselves. Older code? Cleaverly disguised code exception? Negotiation with AHJ? Ran the fire separation around the room and did not include the entry door? Just did it and nobody noticed or cared if they did notice? Shit happens? And on and on. William C. Pegues, FCSI, CCS Senior Member Username: wpegues Post Number: 743 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Thursday, July 31, 2008 - 02:12 pm:    Well, just remember at some point they will be starting the code mandated yearly inspection of rated doors. On the other hand, there is no manpower to perform those inspections so they will hire inexperienced people who will doing things like approve bronze clad hollow metal door. Then we will face owners who want this and point to their existing doors that passed -grin! Ronald L. Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 662 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Friday, August 01, 2008 - 08:23 am:    In Appendix F of NFPA 80-1999 (the edition adopted by the 2006 IBC) it mentions “Plant-ons” to door surfaces. It doesn’t distinguish between frames or the door itself (although it does mention “door face” in a couple of locations), so it is really difficult to make a determination if they're referring to the “door assembly” or a particular component of the assembly without a specific NFPA interpretation. It has been my opinion that if the frame itself is not physically modified (bent, warped, penetrated, etc.) then the integrity of the frame remains intact and the application of adhesively applied wood trim should not alter the fire-resistance characteristics of the frame or the door assembly. But that’s only an opinion; the building official has final say on what he/she will accept. As for the inspections, that may or may not be adopted by ICC for the 2009 IBC--my thoughts are that it will not be accepted if the 2007 edition of NFPA is considered. This is similar to the ICC's adoption of ASCE 7, in which the ICC excluded the requirements for special inspections (Appendix 11A), including those for suspended ceilings in particular seismic areas.