An architectural detail for a project we're bidding shows EIFS being used to wrap the outside of a large overhang above a pickup/drop off area for a building.
We're looking at whether sprinklers are required below the canopy, and the applicable section that would apply to omit sprinklers would be NFPA 13-2016 22.214.171.124:
"126.96.36.199 Sprinklers shall be permitted to be omitted from below the exterior projections of combustible construction, provided the exposed finish material on the exterior projections are noncombustible, limited-combustible, or fire retardant–treated wood as defined in NFPA 703..."
My question is, is EIFS considered combustible or limited-combustible? As best I can tell it's considered combustible but am interested if others have already dug into this in more detail. Thanks in advance.
Posted anonymously for discussion. Discuss This | Submit Your Question | Subscribe
9/16/2019 01:21:24 pm
Unless they can show it has fire retardant properties per nfpa 703 it would have to be combustible
9/17/2019 03:55:49 pm
For the purposes of this exception NFPA 703 only allows fire-retardant treated wood. Typically this is dimensional, pressure treated lumber.
Arthur J Tiroly
9/16/2019 02:35:10 pm
The size of this overhang is not mentioned. If it is directly attached to the building this looks like a port cochere. ,From previous discussion this requires sprinklers if over 4' wide and directly attached or within 5'.
9/17/2019 06:29:03 am
For this project it's over four feet in width, detached from the building but very near the building (only 1 or 2 feet off the face with no exterior separation) - so the overhang is considered part of the main building.
9/17/2019 02:28:39 am
EIFS is to be considered as combustible in most cases. Many bad return on experience (Monte Carlo casino hotel in Las Vegas in January 2008 for example)
Leave a Reply.
Subscribe and learn something new each day:
Top April 2023 Contributors
Get 100 Days of Free Sample Questions right to you!
PE PREP SERIES