Excellent cantilever structural slab pic. :-)

No potshots here. Just pointing out some facts others should recognize.

Mark, I didn't take that as you vaunting your knowledge over mine. I am saying that if some practitioners withhold information, and it has become clear that this is the case, then it does degrade those of us who share, and it violates trust. Any emotionalism aside, how can we trust you to be forthright now? Why should we share in this circumstance?

Dmaceld: Will you have any appliance in your crawl? Furnace, boiler or hotwater heater?

If not a 15 min thermal barrier will not be required under your ICCES report from BB as long as it is not conected to a basement.

 

Dave

 

The original point of all this was I know we have trouble convincing consumers and officials who are not familar with ICF's is that ICF's are not the problem during a fire, As someone pointed out during a fire in an ICF structure they built the fire department was happy that the concrete walls contained the fire within the structure itself. That is the publicity we as ICF contractors need, not the story as it appeared in the newspaper article in Toronto, that is our black eye, one persons ignorance of what the ICF provides (and how it works) and another who wrote a story without realizing that the interviewee made uneducated incorrect statements. Personally when I build myself another house will have a concrete floor and roof system because of my experience, I used to share it with people to convince them that wood floors were not the way to go and to use Coreslab or Insuldeck, most people felt the extra expense as well as not required (What are the chances a house will burn down? 1 in 5000? I don't know) as well as North Americans we have difficulty understanding the concept of concrete homes (Since we are the only country in the modern world that actually uses a temporary shelter material (wood) to build complete homes). That article may have been read by someone who is planning a new home and now says 'No ICF for me'. I guess it will take 100 positive articles (or more) to extinguish the damage from this one.

Mark, I am not questioning your fire block idea, but I am not sure it serves any purpose once the fire gets into the floor system, especially a TJI type system.

Good thought, unfortunately doesn't look like it'll fly. I will have sealed and conditioned crawl space and attic with crawl, attic, and living all interconnected. Below are the pertinent words from the ICCES report for the Styrochem beads in the blocks manufactured at Jerome, ID. The ICCES report for Starex beads has less info. There are no ICCES reports for the finished ICF forms from BB.

The UL reports that are part of the BB compliance report seem to show the blocks meet the flame spread and smoke developed criteria req'd by the IRC. Unfortunately, I don't see anything in the UL reports that shows the tests were performed IAW with UL test methods UL1040 or UL1715, or the other tests listed in 2006 IRC Section R314.6 Specific approval.

2.2.2 Special Use: The foam plastic boards produced
from the StyroChem beads can be used on walls in attics
and crawl spaces with no covering applied to the attic or
crawl space side of the foam plastic, provided the following
conditions are met:
3. Air in the attic or crawl space is not circulated to other
parts of the building.
4. Attic ventilation is provided in accordance with 1997
Uniform Building Code™ (UBC) Section 1505, 2000
International Building Code® (IBC) Section 1202.2, or
2000 International Residential Code® (IRC) Section
R806.
5. Under-floor ventilation is provided in accordance with
UBC Section 2317.7, IBC Section 1202.3, or IRC
Section R406.

Dmaceld, for what it's worth go to ESR-1911

Dave

Good to see that that ESR exists, finally. Doesn't get me off the hook though. It has the same restriction against circulating air from the crawl space into the living space as does the ESR for the foam beads.

What about the plastic ties, by weight, they tend to be the biggest portion of an ICF, and those plastics do not meet the flame spread and smoke devloped ratings that I have seen as of yet. I have seen many companies use the bead manufacturers information, with no concern for the other components.

Your thoughts.

Mark Ross

I haven't read where the ties/webs have ever been tested either, but probably because its a "surface burn" and there not exposed. You do bring up a good point about ARXX though.

Dave

The fire test I have seen documentation on are based using a small room with a piece of furniture...no floor system with any attachment. Has any one performed a test another way? If a fire were to somehow burn between drywall and the foam (Say the wall was furred out with 2x's for a pedestal sink) what is the ratings for a 5/8" AB or the Simpson ICFLC? Or how about plywood attached to the wall behind kitchen cabinets and something on the kitchen counter catches fire? That alone has the potential for a fire to burn directly beside the wall and for sure chase it directly up.

M R , we've barbequed a few scraps and are amazed at how well the ties burn.
equal to vinyl siding I'd say, and that's the siding of the masses around here.

Eric:

Your comment makes me wonder, what the flame spread and smoke developed rating of vinyl siding is. Does anyone know, it would be good information in this thread I believe.

mark

I'm sure ratings vary a bit from mfg to mfg, but here are specs for certainteed. (bottom of first page)

LINK

Bunt

Well it does seem relatively safe, I would say that this is a realistic comparison, if a fire was intense, it would be worse of course, and reality dictates thats although there are issues with vinyls, they are not insurmountable.

Thanks for the link.

Mark Ross

In the early 90's when I was with ConForm, we were required to do a corner burn, don't recall the old test number, have some copies of it in old files that could be dug up....the concern then was the contribution of the plastic web to the fire....We passed these tests back then and I'm sure the newer protocol is a little more stringent than what was required back then since ICF was an anomaly. The fire blocking requirement has been listed on research reports for as long as I remember. I have had the opportunity to be involved in obtaining code approval for several ICF systems since the early 90's. Every one of these code approvals had the issue of multi level fire blocking on the interior. If that is bad, then one should review the test protocol and requirements to meet EXTERIOR fire issues...EIFS fought a long hard battle to get approved on exteriors. I'm not involved in this arena so much anymore, but do believe that the next hot button will be the exterior side.
I had the opportunity to work with the investigation of a 4 story 4 unit condo that burned years ago in downtown Dallas....most of the heavier lumber components of these units were only charred....the one investigator summed it up nicely..."fire is lazy...it burns the easy fuel first. There was no foam left in the units and suprisingly, we quit counting voids at 100 and some were large enough you could crawl through.

Building an ICF structure is no different than that of any other material. Attention to details such as fire blocking are SOMEONE'S responsibility. I wouldn't blame shortcomings on ICF at all. The World Trade Centers had incorrect firestopping / proofing and they probably had a dozen fireproofing engineers....it all requires common sense and the ability to think like fire...same goes for waterproofing etc....

As far as the media hitting on the ICF? The media is the last source of sound information...if you believed the paper, you wouldn't know which way to turn without getting hit by a car, knifed or raped.

I'm glad these issues are being brought forward. We at All-Terior Systems LLC (JAMB-it-ALL) have been looking at these same issues. We have a product called the UTC-300 or Universal Top Cap. It is designed to solve a multitude of issues around connection and fire ratings. Recently one of our customers was allowed to eliminate the firewall penetration through the roof of his attached family home. Using our UTC-300 he was able to contain the ICF with 5/8 drywall and poured the IFC wall to the underside of the framing. It took a little extra time to ensure his angles were correct but the end result was worth it. I will be happy to help anyone with these types of issues. BTW our product is .037 Gal.

Geoff 314-322-6337

Geoff;

How much of this product do you sell? I ask because I wasn't sure if your company was still in business or wanted to sell product, I left a message on your answering machine on January 4th requesting info on a few jobs I am starting and was interested in your product, since there was no response I have had to go elsewhere.

Chris,
You probably allready recieved this responce but I'll put it up for everyone. I caught you message not your number I'm sorry I could not get back to you. We are selling product accross the country. It is solving real problems for ICF builders and we would love to work with anyone who is looking for solutions to build better ICF structures. Please feel free to call me direct at 314-322-6337. Have a great day.
Geoff Mees