Firestopping Book Firestopping Book PDF

FIRESTOPPING
Everything you need to

know about firestopping
Supported By
Author
1
Jay Woodward
Brij Bhushan Singh
Firestopping
Cover Design: Ritika Rastogi & Loveleen Arora

Project Head – Hamid Naderi & Brij Bhushan Singh
Author – Jay Woodward & Brij Bhushan Singh
Type Setting – Ritika Rastogi
Illustrations – Ritika Rastogi
Copyright (c) 2019
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. This publication is a copyrighted work owned

by the International Code Council, Inc & Hilti India Pvt Ltd. Without advance
written permission from the copyright owners, no part of this book may
be reproduced, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means,
including, without limitation, electronic, optical or mechanical means (by
way of example, and not limitations, photocopying or recording by or in
an information storage retrieval system). For information on permission
to copy material exceeding fair use please contact: publications, 4051
Flossmoor Road, Country Club Hills, IL, 60478. Phone 1-888-ICC-SAFE
(422-7233).
The information contained in this document is believed to be accurate;

however, it is being provided for informational purpose only and is
intended for use only as a guide. Publication of this document by the ICC
& Hilti should not be construed as the publishers engaging in or rendering
engineering, legal or other professional services. Use of the information
contained in this book should not be considered by the user to the
substitute for the advice of a registered professional engineer, attorney or
other professionals. If such advice is required, it should be sought through
the services of a registered professional engineer, licensed attorney or
other professional.
Trademarks: “International Code Council,” the “International Code Council”

logo and the “International Building Code” are trademarks of International
Code Council, Inc.
Image Credits: Hilti, Internet Resources & ICC
Errata on various ICC publications may be available at

www.iccsafe.org/errata.
First Printing:
PRINTED IN INDIA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Foreword 4
Preface 6
Introductory Remarks 10
1. INTRODUCTION TO FIRE SAFETY 18
1.1. Fire Accidents
1.2. Active & Passive Fire Protection
1.3. Passive Fire Protection
1.4. Fire Endurance Testing
2. FIRESTOP & ITS APPLICATIONS 34

2.1. Introduction
2.2. Definitions
2.3. Firestop Applications
2.4. Firestop Properties
2.5. Some Myths
3. FIRESTOP FOR THROUGH PENETRATION 56

3.1. Introduction
3.2. Codes & Standards
3.3. Testing and rating
3.4. Engineering judgement
3.5. System selection
3.6. Installation & Inspection
3
4. FIRESTOP FOR JOINTS 100
4.1. Introduction
5. PERIMETER FIRESTOP JOINTS FOR CURTAIN 127

WALL ASSEMBLY
5.1. Introduction
6. ADDITIONAL ATTRIBUTES OF FIRESTOP & 169

MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS
6.1 Smoke Leakage Ratings
6.2 Movement Ratings
6.3 Acoustic Ratings
6.4 Innovative Firestop Systems
6.5 Generic Vs Comprehensive Specifications
FOREWORD
It gives me immense pleasure in writing the foreword to this book
on firestopping. It is the first book of its kind on the subject in our
country.
India has been going through a phase of rapid urbanization and

construction technology has been developing at a faster rate than
ever before. Along the side, we have also witnessed fire incidents
across India, leading to loss of human lives. Fire safety in a building
has been understood in the industry by referring to building codes
& standards along with historical design practices. And many of
the times our understanding has been limited to either active fire
protection systems like detection systems & Sprinklers or passive
fire protection like fire doors, to state a few. In India, the National
Building Code was revised after more than a decade and it was
released in March 2017. This building code came out with a lot of
significant changes and improvements where a lot of emphases
are also given on passive fire protection. However, it has also been
observed that enforcement of these safety guidelines remains a
big concern. While codes & standards will continue to go through
continuous improvements, effective enforcement methods, like
specifications compliance and inspection methods encompassing
all components of passive fire safety, in our country should be of
utmost importance.
This book aims to bridge the gap in understanding on the subject

due to lack of comprehensive reference guide in our country and
will be useful guidebook for the practicing architects, consultants,
building owners, and enforcement agencies who have to either
Design, Specify, Approve, Install, Inspect or Maintain proper
firestop systems in a building as part of compartmentation. This
book introduces the basic concepts related to firestopping and
explains the design methods of through penetration firestop
systems and Joints Firestop Systems as per both National &
International building Codes. Moreover, several design methods
are also covered in detail along with the introduction of the concept
of Engineering Judgements.
5
I would like to thank and congratulate both authors without whose
expertise it was not possible to complete this book. I would
recommend you to read this book and use it as per your project-
specific situations. This book is an effort to promote fire safety in
India and save more and more lives along with enhancing building
performance by using tested and studied firestop systems.
Jayant Kumar
Managing Director
Hilti India Pvt Ltd.
PREFACE
After working for around a decade in the Fire Protection Industry
in India, I could understand how our structures are designed,
understood and regulated. Indian structures in the 21st century
have started their vertical growth due to rapid urbanization. These
aspects have also given a new dimension to fire safety and brought
various challenges from the fire protection standpoint.
One of the biggest challenge in India to fight any fire is traffic,

reliability of water supply and maintenance of active fire
protection systems. Therefore, architects and designers have also
continuously given more and more attention to the passive fire
protection systems which are independent of challenges like traffic
and other issue highlighted above. But even then, it has been
noted that passive fire protection is understood by many as only a
few types of passive fire protection systems. The understanding of
Firestopping is one such factor that needs a lot of attention in order
to design our structure fire safe.
This lack of understanding is primarily because we don’t have any

literature in India which can address this topic in detail. Hence, in
the mission to save lives and make our structures fire-safe and
spread technical awareness, I started writing this book with huge
support from the International Codes Council.
This book, Firestopping examines the provisions of the National

Building Code of India and International Building Code® (IBC®)
related to the protection of openings and penetrations in fire-
resistance-rated construction to preserve the effectiveness of the
rated assembly. Openings and penetrations in a fire-resistance-
rated and/or smoke-resistant assembly create potential weak links
or holes that can dramatically reduce the assembly’s effectiveness,
or render it completely ineffective if they are not properly protected.
This publication explains and illustrates the correct application of
the code requirements for penetration and joint firestop systems
so that a fire-resistance-rated and/or smoke-resistant building
assembly can perform as intended and maintain its rating.
7
This book begins by reviewing the basics of fire protection, fire-
resistance and fire-protection ratings and the pass/fail criteria
established by the test standards. It then discusses in detail each
provision related to penetrations (definitions, test standards, where
penetration protection is required, sleeves, dissimilar materials,
ducts, installation, inspection, and maintenance); and fire-resistant
joint systems (test criteria, installation, where joints systems are
required, voids at the intersection of exterior walls and floors, and
joints in smoke barriers). After reviewing each of the elements and
the related code requirements, the book then looks at administrative
and non-code issues that affect these elements.
While primarily written to focus on the code requirements related to

these protection features, this book recognizes that the code user
must understand the basic concepts of fire protection as well as
product testing and listing requirements in order to ensure that the
correct product is selected and properly installed. Therefore, this
book has been written to include some non-code items, guidance
on how these provisions may need to be administratively applied,
or where the reader can obtain additional assistance or guidance.
Because the book looks at each specific code section or provision,

it could be used to determine the details of a provision and what
is needed to comply with that specific requirement. On the other
hand, because the book addresses multiple code subjects and
provisions, it can be used to gain a better understanding of how the
code protects buildings and occupants from the hazards of fire and
smoke.
Acknowledgements
Author is grateful for the support and sponsorship of Hilti and
support from International Firestop Council (IFC). Their strength,
as well as their valuable input and guidance in the development of
this publication, are keys to the success of education in this
industry. The membership directory of the IFC can be found at
www.firestop.org/ifc-members.
The author would like to thank several people who have helped to
create this publication. Even though their names may not be listed
on the cover, there should be no doubt that this document would
not exist without their assistance and effort. First, Jayant Kumar,
Managing Director of Hilti India Pvt Ltd who had the original idea
for this book.
Grateful appreciation is due to a great number of people who

provided reviews and suggestions, and photos for this book. This
is a much better publication due to the efforts of these individuals
which includes Mark Johnson and Hamid Naderi from ICC, Paul
Langford, Markus Schneider, Edward Goldhammer, John Valiulis,
Sameer Sarin, Sandeep Arora, Ritika Rastogi, Loveleen Arora,
Remya Sadanandan, Deepanjan Sengupta, Priyadarshini Singh,
Rajshekar Patil, Dinesh Kumar, Tanya Manchanda from Hilti and
Disha Agarwal from Delhi College of Engineering.
9
INTRODUCTION
This publication will look at the it completely ineffective if
requirements for Firestopping they are not properly protect-
systems, which are used in a ed. If such a situation occurs,
building for compartmentation. then generally it has been seen
One of the primary modes of that even before the fire depart-
fire and smoke spread within ment arrives at the place of a fire
the building is via the openings accident, the building is filled with
which get created by the pas- fire and smoke. Such a spread of
sage of services/utility path- fire through the utility service pen-
ways (pipes, electrical cables, etrations not only endangers the
ducts,etc.). Fire and smoke life of the occupants, but it also
generally find their way out of affects the response of the fire-
its origin via these openings. fighting team. This book will shed
Openings and penetrations in light on each topic of firestopping
a fire-resistance-rated barrier with a goal to enhance education
create a potential weak link or and awareness in the construc-
hole that could dramaticall re- tion and fire-fighting industry.
duce the assembly’s effective-
ness or render
11
In this book, we will try to give references from
not only the National Building Code of India
(NBC) but we will also focus on the International
Building Code (IBC) guidelines because in case
of lack of Indian standards, industry often refers
to the IBC code along with UL & ASTM standards.
Part 4 of the National Building Code (NBC) &
Chapter 7 of the International Building Code
(IBC) provide detailed requirements for firestop
systems, including structural members, walls,
partitions and horizontal assemblies. Other
portions of these codes tell us when certain fire-
resistance-rated elements are required and what
level of protection they must provide. They specify
how fire-resistance-rated and/or smoke-resistant
building elements are to be constructed and how
openings and penetrations of such elements are to
be protected. This publication is written to address
the requirements in both the NBC 2005 & 2016
versions and IBC 2015 editions.
To begin with, it is important to According to NBC 2016, section
understand how fire-resistance- 2.28, fire resistance ratings
rated and/or smoke-resistant for the fire stop systems are
assemblies are tested and established by using the test
are expected to perform. procedures by approved and
Understanding the purpose of the accepted methods. In this
assembly provides guidance on context, the Bureau of Indian
what type of opening protection Standards has developed Fire
is required and will show the resistance test methodology
importance of properly installing for Through Penetration
penetration firestop systems and Firestop system - IS 12458
fire-resistant joint systems. “Fire Resistance of Through
Penetration Fire Stops-Method
of Test”. These test methods
serve the following two
purposes:
13
■■ Evaluate the ability of an assembly to contain a fire and
maintain its structural integrity, over the period for which it is
to be rated.
■■ Measure and evaluate the heat transfer (temperature rise)

through the firestop system’s entire thickness to ensure that
hot-surface ignition cannot occur on the protected side.
■■ Evaluate the stability by acceptable performance under the hose

stream test.
As stated in IBC 2015 Section 703.2, fire-resistance ratings are
established for building elements, components or assemblies by
using the test procedures specified in ASTM E 119 or UL 263, which
are essentially equivalent. This code section also includes the
following three requirements, which will be discussed in detail later:
1. Section 703.3 and the methods listed within it may be used

as an alternate means for determining fire resistance.
2. When incorporating materials, systems or devices that were

not tested as a part of the fire-resistance-rated assembly,
sufficient data must be made available to the building official to
show the required fire-resistance rating has not been reduced.
3. Materials and methods used to protect joints and penetrations

shall not reduce the fire-resistance rating of an element,
component or assembly.
15
The ASTM E 119 and UL 263 tests evaluate the ability of an
assembly to contain a fire, maintain its structural stability, or
both, over the period of time for which it will be rated. The tests
measure and evaluate heat transfer (temperature rise) through
membrane elements that protect structural framing to help
ensure the assembly can serve its purpose and also measure heat
transfer through the entire thickness of the assembly to ensure that
hot-surface ignition cannot occur on the protected side. These tests
are conducted using the time-temperature curve shown in Figure
1. The temperatures used in the test standard are not intended to
be indicative of any specific fire type but are intended to provide a
consistent reproducible means so that various building elements,
components and assemblies can have their performance evaluated
and compared to both the test and to each other.
Figure 1
Understanding the performance criteria for fire-resistance-rated
and/or smoke-resistant assemblies is important since it gives the
code user a better appreciation of the level of protection that these
assemblies provide. Therefore, it is important that these weakened
points be protected with assemblies of matching rating. The
protection of these openings and penetrations are the focus of this
book so that code users and building occupants can be assured that
fire-resistance-rated and/or smoke-resistant assemblies do perform
their intended function and can minimize or prevent the spread of
fire and smoke and the potential for structural failure.
When reviewing the code’s requirements related to fire-resistance-

rating and/or smoke-resistant assemblies, knowing a bit about each
of the specific test standards and the distinction between a fire-
resistance rating and a fire-protection rating are important aspects
to understand. Each of the specific test standards used in the
evaluation of the assemblies, components or penetrations has its
own pass/fail criteria used to determine compliance or acceptance
in meeting the requirements.
By focusing on the penetration firestop systems and joint systems,

this book will hopefully make the code requirements easier to
understand and apply so that the fire-resistance-rated assemblies
may continue to do their job and protect the buildings and people
within them. Unless these breaches (openings, penetrations, joints)
and other features of fire-resistance and smoke-resistant assemblies
are properly protected, we will not get the level of building safety we
expect.
17
Introduction to
CHAPTER 1 Fire Safety
Individuals working in the field When a fire starts, a chemical

of fire safety should have a ba- reaction is needed to sustain it.
sic working knowledge of fire Therefore, for a fire to sustain,
science. This chapter has a key it needs fuel, oxygen, heat and
goal of giving the reader a ba- chemical reaction. These four
sic perspective of fire science variables represent the fire tet-
and types of practices avail- rahedron. As mentioned, four
able to counter fire incidents. fire extinguishing principles ex-
This chapter will also provide ist.
a perspective to the reader
about the size and trend of fire ■■ Control the Fuel
accidents in India. ■■ Control the Oxygen
■■ Fuel ■■ Control the Heat
■■ Oxygen ■■ Control the Chemical Reaction
■■ Heat
(Fig 1.1 - Picture of Fire Tetrahedron)

19
If we see any fire incident in India or globally, the fire occurs and
grows by feeding on these three elements and sustains by following
the principle of the fire tetrahedron. Fire Departments try to break
one or multiple links in this chain to control and suppress the fire.
Let’s look at some fire accidents which happened in India recently.
FIRE ACCIDENTS
According to National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) 2015, fire
accidents kill 48 Indians every day. Fire accidents have killed over
100,000 Indians in 5 years (2011-2015). The worldwide picture,
except in western advanced countries, is also not very promising.
Even recently, there have been multiple fire accidents.
(Fig 1.2 - factly.in)

ESIC Hospital Fire, Mumbai - A major fire outbreak at government-
run ESIC Kamgar Hospital located at Marol in suburban Andheri,
Mumbai lead to the death of 10 people while more than 140 people
were rescued. The accident took place on December 17, 2018. Even
though eight fire tenders were rushed to the spot of the accident
immediately, the life of 10 people couldn’t be saved. The fire officials
labeled it as a Grade IV fire which is categorized as severe fire.
The fire as well as smoke breached the fire compartment of origin
and gutted multiple floors. Such a fast spread of fire & smoke in the
building can only be avoided if tested and approved firestop systems
are in place.
(Fig 1.3)
21
Carlton Tower Fire, Bangalore – Based upon the patterns of
smoke travel and color of walls and ceiling, it was reported by various
sources that the fire started between the first and second floors in the
electrical shaft. Smoke traveled through the lobby and the staircase.
The occupants were left with only one Fire exit to escape, which too
was full of smoke. Access to the terrace was locked. Fire Service
Staff had to break the terrace door after reaching the seventh floor.
Several modifications are done in building and the removal of

horizontal sealing in the ducts at alternative floor level allowed the
fire /smoke to travel from lower floors to upper floors. Along with
many aspects, this case also highlights why it is so important to
seal the shafts at each floor and every opening leading from this
shaft to the respective floors.
(Fig 1.4)
This leads us to explore more about passive fire protection which
is used to restrict the passage of fire and smoke within the same
compartment. But before going into the details of passive fire
protection, let’s have a wholistic look on both types of protections
Active Fire Protection Passive Fire Protection
(Fig 1.5)
During any type of fire accidents, the safety of the occupants and
first responders is accomplished by the egress system of the building
and the combination of passive and active means. A passive fire
protection system is an integral part of the building materials and
constructions, such as partition walls to restrict the fire and smoke
in the one compartment, fire-resistant spray to enhance the fire
resistance capacity of the load-bearing steel structure and so on.
Active systems are designed to act when a fire is present and needs
activation through one or multiple methodologies such as detectors,
sensors or mechanical means.
In this book, we will explore one of the key components of passive

fire protection – Firestopping.
23
PASSIVE FIRE PROTECTION
Passive Fire protection is considered in building design to
compartment the structure vertically and horizontally. Despite its
industry name, Passive Fire Protection systems are always at work.
The two key areas of the same are:
■■ Fire resistant Coatings
■■ Compartmentation
FIRE-RESISTANT COATINGS
Buildings, bridges, high-rise buildings and warehouses are made
using structural steel sections. Industry experts prefer the use of
structural steel over any other building material for construction.
This is mainly because of the innumerable benefits structural steel
provides. With benefits also come to some disadvantages. When a
steel structure is subjected to heat, it loses its strength. At around
400 deg C the load-bearing capacity of the steel structure starts to
decrease rapidly. At approximately 600 deg C, it loses 50% of its
strength. This creates critical danger for the structure to collapse.
Intumescent coatings are one of the efficient ways to provide fire
resistance to the load-bearing steel structure. The purpose of setting
a fire resistance period is to ensure that in the event of a fire within
a building, the load-bearing capacity of the building will continue
to function until all occupants have escaped or been assisted to
escape.
(Fig 1.6)
The fire-resistance capacity of the compartmentalized wall and/or

floor depends upon:
■■ Integrity, i.e. the ability to resist the passage of flames/hot gases
and.or
■■ Insulation, i.e. the ability to restrict the temperature rise on the
unexposed face
■■ Stability: the ability to withstand under the hose stream test when
subjected to impact, erosion and cooling effects.
COMPARTMENTATION
Large buildings are typically segmented into smaller compartments
with fire-resistive boundaries and protected openings through these
boundaries. The objective of compartmentation is to confine a
fire to a limited area for a specified time and thus slow down fire
spread through a building, to leave more time for safe evacuation
of the occupants, and to reduce property and indirect losses.T
his advantage not only helps the occupants to evacuate from the
building, but it also allows significant advantage to the fire-fighters
to fight the fire in a relatively safer scenario.
25
Compartmentation is one of the most important aspects of the fire
safety design of the building. For example, in high rise residential
buildings, each flat unit is designed in such a way that it is separated
from the other flat so that the fire spread from one flat another can be
avoided. And if the flat is large in area, then it gets compartmented
further internally to provide the occupants means of escape.
(Fig 1.7)
(Fig 1.8)
In National Building Code 2016 terms, compartmentation is designed
under part 4, clause 2.21 -
“A space within a building that is enclosed by fire barrier or fire-resistant

walls on all sides, including the top and bottom.”
The fire resistance capacity of the compartmentalized wall and, or

floor is its ability to:
■■ Maintain integrity
■■ Provided insulation resistance against excessive heat transfer
■■ Prevent the structure against collapse.
Compartmentation in a building is achieved by various systems,

however, the key systems to affect the compartmentalization are as
follows:
Fire Barriers - Fire Barriers are interior walls that extend from floor
to the roof or floor to floor, including concealed spaces. Fire Barriers
are intended to sub-divide the portions of the buildings for preventing
the spread of fire throughout the structure.
In terms of NBC 2016, Fire Barriers are defined as follows:
“A fire barrier is a vertically or horizontally aligned fire-resistant member

such as a wall or a fire curtain, or a floor. These may be with discontinuities
created by openings with a specified fire resistance rating, where such
members are designed and constructed with a specified fire resistance
rating to limit the spread of a fire that also restricts the movement of smoke.”
27
(Fig 1.9)
Fire Door –An important aspect of

limiting the spread of fire, smoke,
and toxic gases is protecting the
openings in the fire compartment
design that are provided to allow
the building to be functional. Fire
Doors are one of the systems
which are necessary for the
functioning of the building. Fire
doors are used to enable safe
egress of the occupants from the (Fig 1.10)
building in case of fire.
In terms of NBC 2016, Fire door

assembly is defined as follows:
“Any combination of fire door, frame, hardware and other accessories that
together provide a specific fire-resistant rating to the opening in terms of its
stability, integrity and insulation properties, when installed in the openings in
fire separation walls. Fire door is a component of fire door assembly.”
Fire Stop – For the building to function, utility services are needed
which create penetrations through the compartments. Such utility
penetrations create a breach in the fire barrier and hence are
required to be sealed by fire resistance systems. These systems
are called fire stop systems.
In terms of NBC 2016, Fire doors are defined as follows:
“A fire-resistant material, or construction, having a fire resistance rating of

not less than the fire separating elements, installed in concealed spaces or
between structural elements of a building to prevent the spread/propagation
of fire and smoke through walls, ceilings and the like as per the laid down
criteria.”
29
(Fig 1.11)
1. Fire stop assembly for through penetrations is a combination of

firestop compatible for use with the penetrant, penetration items
such as cables, cable tray, conduits, ducts, pipes, etc., and their
means of support through the wall or opening that together restores
the fire resistance rating of the fire separating elements in terms of
its integrity and/or insulation properties.
2. Fire stop assembly for joints is the one where fire stop with
movement capability is used to seal the linear joints between
adjacent fire separating elements, to maintain the fire resistance of
the separating elements, which should be installed within its tested
design limits with regard to size of the joint, type of assembly, and
anticipated compression and extension of the joint.”
4. The effectiveness of a barrier depends on its inherent fire
resistance; the details of its construction; and its penetrations, such
as doors, windows, ducts, pipe chases, electrical raceways, and
grilles.
(Fig 1.12)
The effectiveness of the fire-resistance systems are evaluated via

fire endurance tests.
Fire Endurance Testing: The fire endurance of a building element

is determined on the basis of a performance based testing by
subjecting the materials in the furnace to a time- temperature curve
and pressure in the furnace. Through penetrations and joint systems
are mounted in a vertical or horizontal frame. The frame is placed
against an open wall furnace or on top of an open ceiling furnace,
and is exposed to the standard time-temperature curve fire. Failure
criteria for separating elements are based on thermal penetration
and integrity. Thermal penetration is measured with thermocouples
attached to the unexposed side of the element.
31
Procedures for measuring
the fire endurance of wall and
floor/ceiling assemblies, roof
structures, beams, and columns
are described in ASTM E119,
Standard Test Methods for Fire
Tests of Building Construction
and Materials.
All ASTM fire endurance test
standards, except ASTM E1725,
Standard Test Methods for Fire (Fig 1.13)
Tests of Fire-Resistive Barrier
Systems for Electrical System
Components,29 prescribe a
supplemental hose stream test
procedure to evaluate the ability
of the construction to resist
disintegration under adverse
conditions. The hose stream test is
either performed after termination
of the fire endurance test, or on a
duplicate specimen that has been
exposed to the standard fire for
half the duration of the desired
fire endurance classification.
(Fig 1.14)
33
Firestop & Its
CHAPTER 2 Applications
(Fig 2.1)
In virtually every building, the fire-resistance-rated and/or smoke-

resistant assemblies are penetrated by pipes, cable trays, vents,
tubing, wiring, conduit and ductwork so that building systems can
be installed, and the building can serve its intended function. When
this is done the building compartmentation gets breached which
forms the point of non-compliance and these breaches can become
a threat to life and property safety if unsealed by approved firestop
systems.
In India, NBC 2016 recommends the sealing of breaches created

by low voltage cables, electrical cables, pipes, ducts and shaft
sealing, etc. under multiple clauses. However, it does not give very
comprehensive detail in the 2016 edition.
In India, NBC 2016 recom- IBC Section 703.2 requires the
mends the sealing of breaches rating of penetrations to be de-
created by low voltage cables, termined in accordance with
electrical cables, pipes, ducts Section 714 with the purpose
and shaft sealing, etc. under of showing “that the required
multiple clauses. However, it fire-resistance rating is not re-
does not give very comprehen- duced”.
sive detail in the 2016 edition.
When dealing with penetrations,
This is why it is advantageous to perhaps the best thing to keep
refer to IBC where it gives good in mind is that there is no sin-
education on the requirements gle item that will work for each
of sealing such breaches. To and every situation. Penetration
maintain the effectiveness of an firestop protection systems are
assembly, dependent on:
■■ The type and rating of the fire-resistance-rated assembly

■■ The type, size and material of the penetrant
■■ The type and thickness of any insulation used on the penetrant
■■ The material type and thickness of any sleeve used in the assembly
■■ Any covering on the penetrant
■■ The size and configuration of the opening
■■ The annular space between the penetrant and the periphery of the
opening
■■ The type of firestopping material(s) used in the penetration firestop
system
35
The systems will also vary be- Designers can improve the likeli-
tween different manufacturers hood of compliance by providing
and within individual product a schedule of firestop systems
lines. Therefore, designers, con- similar to the way in which they
tractors/installers and inspec- provide window, wall, or door
tors need to avoid becoming schedules. In many situations,
complacent and assuming that the schedule of firestop systems
all systems are created equal is done on a deferred submittal
or are installed in a similar man- basis. Installers and inspectors
ner. They also need to avoid the can then follow the approved
tendency of just looking to make plans and know exactly which
sure that the holes are filled or penetrations use which firestop
that the firestop material is a system or method of protection.
specific color.
IBC Section 714 addresses specific requirements for maintaining

the integrity of the assemblies where penetrations occur. The re-
quirements within this section depend on the type of penetrating
item, the type of assembly being penetrated and whether the pene-
tration passes entirely through the assembly or through one mem-
brane or side of the assembly. It is also important to note that the
requirements of Section 714.5 apply to non-fire-resistance-rated
horizontal assemblies as well since openings through them can
also lead to the spread of fire, smoke or other hot gases to other
storeys or levels of a building. The IBC tends to view horizontal
assemblies as a way to compartment a building. Protecting pen-
etrations even in a non-fire-resistance-rated assembly will help to
provide protection and reduce the likelihood of a fire spreading to
other levels.
Although the requirements for the protection of penetrations will
vary based on the type of assembly being penetrated and the type
of penetrating item, the intent of all of the provisions is essentially
the same: to restore the fire-resistance-rated assembly to its orig-
inal condition so that the penetration does not reduce the assem-
bly’s rating. Section 714 contains four main parts, which will be
discussed shortly. They include:
■■ Fire-resistance rated walls – Section 714.3

■■ Fire-resistance rated horizontal assemblies – Section 714.4
■■ Non fire-resistance rated horizontal assemblies – Section 714.5
■■ Smoke barriers – Section 714.4.4
The fire-resistant assemblies and/or smoke-resistant walls and

horizontal assemblies are tested using the ASTM E 119 or UL 263
test in order to evaluate their ability to contain a fire, maintain their
structural ability or to do both for the period of time at which they
are rated. These two tests will also measure and evaluate heat
transfer through the building elements to help ensure the assembly
can serve its intended purpose.
Now, before we move on to the firestop application and details, it

will be easier if we acquaint ourselves with the common terminolo-
gy used in this chapter and in this book.
37
DEFINITIONS
Annular space: The opening When protecting penetrations, it

around the penetrating item. is important to understand an-
This is essentially the gap be- nular space limitations specified
tween the penetrating item and in the tested and listed systems
the surrounding base construc- published by third-party listing
tion material of the fire-resis- organizations. Each system will
tance-rated and/or smoke-resis- specify the required annular
tant assembly the penetration space, and how the penetrant
is breaching. This breach or is allowed to be installed within
annular space affords a path for the opening. Many systems will
flames, smoke or hot gasses to include minimum and maximum
spread into or through the rated dimensions for annular space.
assembly. The annular space Figures 2.4 and 2.5 show exam-
is typically either filled with a ples of how annular space may
firestopping material or covered vary depending on the place-
by a device to protect the open- ment of the penetration within
ing. Figure 2.3 illustrates the an- the opening.
nular space.
PIPE FLOOR OR WALL

PENETRATION
ANNULAR SPACE
PLAN VIEW
PIPE
PENETRATION
ANNULAR SPACE
IS THE GAP BETWEEN
THE PENETRATION
AND SURROUNDING CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION FLOOR OR WALL
SECTION
(Fig 2.2 Annular Space)

CENTERED
(A) CENTERED
OFF-CENTERED
(B) OFF-CENTERED
POINT CONTACT
PENETRATION IN
CONTACT WITH
(C) POINT CONTACT POINT CONTACT EDGE OF OPENING
(NO PROTECTION
WITHIN GAP)
(Fig 2.3 Minimum Annular Space Determined by Testing and Listing)
39
CENTERED OFFSET
POINT CONTINUOUS
CONTACT CONTACT
(Fig 2.4 Examples of Different Positions of Penetrating Items)
As penetrating items are often located

off-center within an opening, it is import- MINIMUM
ant that the minimum annular space for

the installed penetration is not less than
ANNULAR
SPACE
the minimum annular space required by

the tested system, and that the maximum
annular space for the installed penetration MAXIMUM
is not larger than the maximum annular
space allowed by the tested system. Fig- (Fig 2.5 Measuring Minimum and
ure 2.6 illustrates how the minimum and Maximum Annular Space Around
maximum annular spaces are determined Penetrating Item)
in an installed penetration. The size of the
annular space is not the only issue that
the listing will address. Each system will
specify whether the penetrant needs to be
centered, maybe offset, may have a point
contact or may have continuous contact.
PENETRATION FIRESTOP MEMBRANE PENETRATION
The general term used for the A breach in one side of a
material(s) or device used for floor-ceiling, roof-ceiling or wall
the protection of penetrations. assembly to accommodate an
The IBC code’s definition indi- item installed into or passing
cates the term includes both a through the assembly. Figure 2.6
through-penetration firestop or a shows an example of membrane
membrane-penetration firestop. penetration of a wall assembly
In NBC there is only one defini- and the difference between the
tion which is for through pene- membrane penetration, mem-
tration firestop and membrane brane-penetration firestop and
penetration terminology is yet to membrane-penetration firestop
be included. system.
MEMBRANE- MEMBRANE-PENETRATION
PENETRATION FIRESTOP FIRESTOP SYSTEM
The actual material, device or Everything involved in protect-

construction that is installed to ing the penetration and resist-
protect the opening through the ing the spread of fire from one
protective membrane on one side to the other. This includes
side of a fire-resistance-rated the original fire-resistance-rated
assembly (see Figure 2.6) wall or horizontal assembly, the
item penetrating the assembly
and the materials/devices that
are installed to close and protect
the penetration (see Figure 2.6).
41
FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED
STUD WALL ASSEMBLY
MEMBRANE PENETRATION
(THROUGH ONLY ONE SIDE
OF ASSEMBLY)
MEMBRANE PENETRATION FIRESTOP
MEMBRANE PENETRATION FIRESTOP

SYSTEM – INCLUDES:
• FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED WALL OR
HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLY
• PENETRATING ITEM – PASSING
THROUGH ONE SIDE OF ASSEMBLY
• MATERIALS/DEVICES INSTALLED TO
RESIST SPREAD OF FIRE INTO THE
ASSEMBLY
(Fig 2.6 Membrane Penetration, Firestop and Firestop System)
THROUGH PENETRATION
A breach in both sides of a floor, floor-ceiling or wall assembly to
accommodate an item passing through the breaches. Figure 2.7
shows an example of a through penetration and how it differs from
a membrane penetration due to the fact that it passes entirely
through the assembly. Through penetration definition is included in
both IBC and NBC.
THROUGH-PENETRATION FIRESTOP SYSTEM
Everything involved in protecting the through penetration and re-
sisting the spread of fire from one side to the other. This includes
the original fire-resistance-rated wall or horizontal assembly, the
penetrating item passing completely through the assembly and the
materials/devices installed to close and protect the penetration (see
Figure 2.7).
THROUGH PENETRATION
(PASSES ENTIRELY THROUGH
BOTH SIDES OF THE ASSEMBLY)
THROUGH PENETRATION FIRESTOP

SYSTEM INCLUDES:
• FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED WALL
OR HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLY
• PENETRATING ITEM – PASSING COMPLETELY
THROUGH THE ASSEMBLY
• MATERIALS/DEVICES INSTALLED TO RESIST
SPREAD OF FIRE INTO OR THROUGH THE
ASSEMBLY
(Fig 2.7 Through Penetration, Firestop and Firestop System)
43
F Rating: The time period for which the penetration firestop system
limits the spread of flames through the penetration when tested in
accordance with ASTM E 814 or UL 1479. In order to achieve an F
rating, the firestop system must also maintain its structural integrity,
as evaluated through a hose stream test. See Figure 2.8 for an
illustration of the difference between an F rating and a T rating. F
rating is measured in minutes or hours.
T Rating: The time period during which the penetration firestop

system limits the spread of flames through the penetration and limits
temperature rise on the unexposed (non-fire) side of the assembly,
including that on the penetrating item, to a maximum of 325°F
above its initial temperature when tested in accordance with ASTM
E 814 or UL 1479. In order to achieve a T rating, the firestop system
must also maintain its structural integrity, as evaluated through a
hose stream test. See Figure 2.8 for an illustration of the difference
between an F rating and a T rating. T rating is measured in minutes
or hours.
The temperature-rise limitations match the maximum individual

point temperature rise from the ASTM E 119 and UL 263 tests,
which are used for determining the fire-resistance rating of the wall
or the horizontal floor or roof assembly. By the T rating test imposing
the same maximum temperature rise limitations, it has essentially
restored the fire-resistance-rated wall or horizontal assembly back
to its original condition and shown that the penetration does not
reduce the original assembly’s ability to stop a fire from spreading.
Obtaining a T rating is more difficult than obtaining an F rating. This
is because the T rating indicates that the firestop system is not only
capable of stopping the flames from passing through the assembly
at the penetration, as an F rating, but it also limits the heat transfer
to the unexposed side of the assembly.
The testing requirement for the T rating involves placing a number
of thermocouples on the unexposed side of the assembly.
Thermocouples are placed on the backside of the penetrating
item, on the firestopping material and on the wall or floor assembly.
T Rating is measured as the amount of time taken by any of the
thermocouples on the unexposed side to exceed a temperature rise
of 325 F (180 degree C) above its initial temperature. Therefore the
T rating is an indication of how long all the unexposed surfaces stay
below the temperature rise limits.
T RATING
F RATING
• TEMPERATURE RISES
• PREVENT FLAME PASSAGE
• F RATING CRITERIA
• MAINTAIN STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY
(HOSE STREAM TEST) THROUGH PENETRATION
FIRESTOPS
(Fig 2.8 F Rating and T Rating)
45
L RATING
An air leakage rating used to (and were included in each of
measure and limit the airflow and the three legacy codes), L rat-
thus the smoke leakage through ing requirements were included
a firestop system. The L rating for the first time in the 2006 edi-
provides a quantitative indication. Therefore, buildings built
tion of the through-penetration according to the earlier codes
firestop system’s ability to resist would not have been required to
the passage of smoke. Only the be provided with L ratings. How-
penetrations and joints in smoke ever, some penetration firestop
barriers (Sections 714.3, 714.4.4 systems installed within them
and 715.6) are required to have may have been provided with
an L rating and meet the code’s this level of protection. L rating
limits on air leakage. While pro- is measured in cfm/sq. ft.
visions for protecting penetra-
tions for fire performance have L Rating requirements are yet to
been included in the IBC since be included in NBC.
its first edition
W RATING
Although not currently required The W rating is a water leakage

by the code, it is important to un- rating used to demonstrate that
derstand this term since some a firestop system will prevent
firestop systems indicate that water leakage through the sys-
they are listed with a W rating. tem, and will maintain its fire
Code users should be familiar performance after incidental wa-
with this term since there may ter exposure. The water leakage
be situations where the owner evaluation is done using a 3-foot
or designer desires this level of water column pressure head for
protection. 72 hours.
The W rating is generally thought serve its role of protecting the
of as a “fitness for use” evalu- penetration should a fire occur.
ation and is being specified in Since a W rating is not currently
applications where a floor is fre- required by the IBC, any system
quently cleaned with water. The which has this rating would cur-
use of a system with a W rating rently exceed the code require-
provides the building owner and ment in this regard. W ratings
their reps with the assurance are provided in classes.
that water will not pass through
a firestop system and damage W Rating requirements are yet
the floor beneath, and that the to be included in NBC.
system will continue to
MINERAL FIBER
Insulation composed principally of fibers manufactured from rock,
slag or glass, with or without binders. Mineral fiber insulation is
commonly used for pipe insulation or is used as a fire blocking ma-
terial. Fiberglass insulation is included under this definition.
MINERAL WOOL
Synthetic vitreous fiber insu-
lation is made by melting pre-
dominately igneous rock or
furnace slag, or other inorganic
materials, and then physically
forming the melt into fibers. In
many firestop systems, miner-
al wool is used as a backing
or damming material to allow
for the placement of a specific
(Fig 2.9)
depth of firestopping material
47
and is also used to fill voids in joint spaces to provide the neces-
sary thermal resistance in fire-resistant joint systems (which are
discussed later in this book). Note that materials made from glass
fiber are not classified as “mineral wool,” so materials made from
glass fiber cannot substitute for mineral wool in firestop systems.
For additional information related to this topic, see the discussion in
the “Miscellaneous items” section of the book, under the subhead-
ing “Mineral wool versus mineral fiber.”
FIRESTOP APPLICATIONS
Firestop applications can be segregated primary into two main
categories -
■■ Through Penetration
■■ Joints
(Fig 2.10)
However, these can be further categorized and understood by the
following chart:
How firestop systems perform their functions will depend on the

types of materials used and the intended purpose of the system.
The systems will perform their required functions as a result of the
fire-resistive properties of the materials in combination with their
proper installation. These systems can then prevent the passage of
flames or increased temperatures through the penetrations of the
fire-resistance-rated assembly. In a June 2007 publication, Best
Practice Guide on Fire Stops and Fire Blocks and Their Impact on
Sound Transmission, the National Research Council of Canada’s
Institute for Research in Construction provided a nice summary in-
dicating firestop materials possess one or more of the following
properties:
INTUMESCENCE
The property of a material to increase in volume upon exposure to
heat. This action causes the firestop to fill the opening, thus cre-
ating a seal in a fire separation. Typical intumescent products be-
gin to swell in the range of 300 to 355°F (150 to 180°C), & reach
full expansion in the range of 660 to 750°F (350 to 400°C) before
hardening into a rigid material. The rigid char layer, formed towards
the end of the intumescence reaction, insulates and prevents flame
passage through the penetration.
Some intumescent material formulations will also cause significant

pressure while expanding. This pressure can be useful in applica-
tions such as the firestopping of plastic pipes, where the pressure, if
suitably directed, can compress and seal the softening pipe during
a fire. Other intumescent formulations provide minimal pressure
while expanding, which would make their selection and application
appropriate for applications where pressure is not useful or critical.
49
(Fig 2.11)
ENDOTHERMIC REACTION
The property by which a material absorbs the heat of the exposing
fire by using that heat to decompose itself. A typical example is
a gypsum, which contains water bound in crystalline form. These
crystals require a large quantity of heat to break down and release
and evaporate the water. By absorbing heat on the fire-exposed
side, the material retards heat transfer to the unexposed side.
ABLATIVE REACTION
The property by which a material resists heat transfer by using the

heat of the fire to erode itself. The material, by sacrificing itself,
protects the unexposed side from rapid temperature rise until it is
spent. A typical example is a silicon-based firestop material.
INSULATION
The property by which a material resists heat transfer as a result
of its low thermal conductivity. Insulating materials used in firestop
systems must be stable at high temperatures to preserve their
properties when exposed to fire. A typical example is a mineral
wool made from fibers with a melting point well above the expected
fire temperatures.
Some Myths
Compartmentation means Fire Door & Fire Wall?
Compartmentation is a method by which buildings are divided into
individual fire-resistance rated cells so that the spread of fire and
smoke can be limited to an individual cell and all other cells of the
buildings remain free of fire and smoke risk.
These compartment sizes are designed by following building code

provisions. But people often have a belief/practice that while de-
signing compartmentation Fire Doors and Firewalls must be rated
for 1 hour, 2 hours, 3 hours or more. But they often misunderstand
that all such compartments have utility penetration breaches cre-
ated by electric wires, electric cable tray, ducts, pipes, etc. When
such penetrations exist, they become the way from which fire and
smoke spread out of the compartment and compromise other com-
partments too. Therefore, it is important to design compartmenta-
tion by considering the following systems together:
■■ Fire Barrier
■■ Fire Door
■■ Fire Stops
■■ Fire Dampers
51
(Fig 2.12)
Therefore, while designing or inspecting, attention must be given

to the entire concept of compartmentation design by considering
systems like Firestops, Fire Dampers, Fire doors and Fire barriers.
All Kind of Firestopping is done in the same way?

As mentioned in this book earlier too, when dealing with penetra-
tions, perhaps the best thing to keep in mind is that there is no sin-
gle item that will work for each and every situation. However, there
is a misunderstanding among some that if a Firestop can work for
one kind of penetrant, eg.: pipe it will work with other kinds of pen-
etrants (e.g: pipe, electric cable, etc) too. This is not correct. Every
situation of penetration in a building can be different. The difference
can be penetrant, its size, wall type, annular space variation, type
of cable, bunched cable or not bunched cables, etc. There can be
n number of scenarios. Hence it is recommended that when it is
required to choose for a particular scenario of Firestop, one must
choose from the third party websites of UL after going through the
details of the test certificate.
Fire & Smoke Rating is F Rating?
Fire Ratings have been often considered as F rating, which is true
in the UL world. But people often confuse Fire rating with the smoke
rating. While F is a Fire rating, smoke ratings are evaluated by a
different test procedure and awarded L rating post-compliance.
Hence for Fire & smoke rating, the ideal way to understand is by
understanding it as a separate rating: F rating for Fire & L rating for
the smoke.
(Fig 2.13)
53
ICC-ES
To further check the compliance of building products with the code,
ICC Evaluation Service Reports (ICC-ES) can also be utilized.
These are also a very good resource to ensure satisfactory com-
pliance with the building code. The International Building Code ad-
dresses alternative materials and methods of construction in Sec-
tion 104.11. The IBC is not intended to prohibit any type of material
or design that may be developed, therefore, there are provisions for
evaluating new and innovative materials and methods of construc-
tion. The building official reviews alternate designs and products to
determine if they comply with the purpose and intent of the code.
The building official must determine if the alternate is at least the
equivalent to the code in quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resis-
tance, durability and safety. The ICC Evaluation Service (ICC-ES)
was created to assist the building official in this process. ICC-ES
is a subsidiary of the International Code Council (A member of the
ICC Family of Solutions). It develops acceptance criteria for dif-
ferent types of construction products and evaluates the products
based on the acceptance criteria or other national standards to de-
termine if they comply with the intent of the particular code.
An ICC-ES evaluation report includes specific information about

the product being reviewed. It provides manufacturer information,
installation requirements and details, and specific conditions for the
approval. The report is issued for a specific time period and re-
newed as required. It is also approved based on specific editions
of the code. Because the IBC code is revised every 3 years, it is
important for the current report to be used in evaluating the product
for use in a project. ICC-ES Reports are known as ESR (Evaluation
Service Reports) and are available free of charge on the ICC-ES
Website at https://icc-es.org/
Most Widely Accepted and Trusted
What’s in an ICC-ES Evaluation Report

ICC-ES Evaluation Reports from ICC Evaluation Service® are the most preferred resource
used by code officials to verify that new and innovative building products comply with
code requirements. The ICC-ES Evaluation Reports provide information about what code Most Widely Accepted and Trusted
requirements or acceptance criteria were used to evaluate the product, how the product
should be installed to meet the requirements, how to identify the product, and much
more. ICC-ES Evaluation Reports are divided into eleven major areas.
CSI Division Number––ICC-ES Evaluation Reports, and the building products 1
1 represented in them, are organized according to the Construction Specifications
Institute’s (CSI) Masterformat system. 2
E
Report Holder––The name and address of the company or organization that has
2 applied for the ICC-ES Evaluation Report.
3
Evaluation Subject––The specific product(s) covered by the report.
PL
3
9
4
Evaluation Scope––The code(s) that were used to evaluate the product.
4
5
Properties Evaluated––A brief description of the properties the product was
5 evaluated against such as fire resistance and wind resistance. This section also
M
6
shows if the product can be used for structural purposes.
Uses––Identifies the scope of the ICC-ES Evaluation Report and relates the 7
6 product evaluated to code provisions.
SA
Description––Provides a general description of the product and its features, such
7 as length, thickness, etc. 8
10
Installation––Identifies general and often specific requirements to help the

8 inspector ensure the product is installed properly according to the code
11
requirements or acceptance criteria.
Conditions of Use––Statement that the product, as described in the ICC-ES
9 Evaluation Report, complies with or is a suitable alternative to the requirements
of the applicable code and a list of conditions under which the report is issued.
Evidence Submitted––Data (i.e. test reports, calculations, installation
10 instructions) that was used in evaluating the product.
Identification––Information that can be used to identify the product, including
11 the manufacturer’s name, product code, ICC-ES Evaluation Report number, etc. View current ICC-ES Evaluation Reports online: www.icc-es.org/Evaluation_Reports
16-13417
55
Firestop for Through
CHAPTER 3 Penetration
(Fig 3.1)
FIRESTOP FOR THROUGH PENETRATION

Rapid urbanization and the rise of our structures vertically has led
to the use of various utilities like pipes, ducts cables etc. The build-
ings today are full of service penetrations going from room to room,
floor to floor or shaft to floors etc. Electrical cables, plumbing pipes,
hvac ducts are few of the key services which are being used in the
majority of the buildings.
57
When these services pass from one compartment to other it leaves
an opening which creates a breach in the compartment. This is
where systems like through penetration fire stop are used to restore
the fire resistance of the opening by using tested through-penetra-
tion fire stop systems for that particular opening. Through Penetra-
tions are those which pass all the way through the barrier.
In the case of only membrane penetrations, the penetration passes

through a part of the barrier but not the complete barrier. Exam-
ples – outlet boxes, junction boxes, conduits that lead to the ceiling
above from the back-box.
(Fig 3.2)
(Fig 3.3)
(Fig 3.4)
59
CODES AND STANDARDS
The code text in NBC 2016, section 3.4.5 & 3.4.5.4 requires through
penetrations to be protected by fire stop systems having the same
fire-resistance rating as that of the floor/wall. To establish the fire-re-
sistance rating of the firestop system, the National Building code of
India recommends using accepted standards. In India, IS 12458
standard is available for use in case of the firestop fire-resistance
test. IS 12458 standard in India, is similar in requirement and test
methodology as ASTM E814 and UL 1479 standards.
In the US Building code IBC 2015, the code text in Section 714.3.1
requires through penetrations to be protected in accordance with
Section 714.3.1.1 (as part of the fire-resistance-rated assembly) or
Section 714.3.1.2 (by a through- penetration firestop system, tested
and listed per the ASTM E 814 or UL 1479 standard). However,
Section 714.3.1 includes an exception that allows two methods for
protecting penetrations in lieu of a system tested in accordance
with ASTM E 119 or UL 263 (see Section 714.3.1.1), or ASTM E
814 or UL 1479 (see Section 714.3.1.2). This exception is limited
to steel, ferrous or copper pipes, tubes or conduits and focuses
on the protection of the annular space. Also, the exception is limit-
ed to the non-combustible pipes, tubes or conduits mentioned and
would exclude any type of combustible penetrants such as cables,
insulated wiring, plastic pipes or items such as ducts, chimneys or
combustion appliance vents.
Item 1 of the exception is limit- Based on Item 4-1.1 of Table
ed to concrete or masonry walls 721.1(2), a 2.7-inch thickness
and accepts filling the annular would be required for a pene-
space with concrete, grout or tration of a 1-hour wall while a
mortar provided it is installed ei- 3.8-inch, 4.6-inch or 5.4 inch
ther to the full thickness of the thickness would be needed for a
wall or to the thickness required 2-hour, 3-hour, or 4-hour fire-re-
to maintain the fire-resistance sistance ratings respectively.
rating. Figure 3.3 illustrates the Item 1 also places additional
application of Item 1 of the ex- restrictions that the penetrating
ception. Code users could use item may not exceed a nominal
resources such as Table 721.1(2) 6-inch diameter size and that
or other sources to determine the size of the opening through
the required thickness for which the original wall assembly may
the opening is not to be filled for not exceed 144 square inches.
its entire depth. As an example, This limits the size of the hole
assume that a 6-inch concrete through the wall to the equiv-
wall of sand-lightweight con- alent of a 12-inch by 12-inch
crete is to be penetrated. square opening or approximate-
ly a 13 ½ -inch-round opening.
PENETRATING ITEM
• 6″ MAX. NOMINAL
DIAMETER
OPENING THROUGH WALL
• 144 SQ. IN. MAXIMUM
MASONRY WALL
FILLED WITH CONCRETE,

GROUT OR MORTAR
• INSTALLED TO FULL THICKNESS
OF WALL, OR TO THICKNESS REQUIRED TO
MAINTAIN FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATING
CONCRETE WALL
(Fig 3.5) 61
Concrete, grout and mortar have may occur from building move-
traditionally been accepted for ment or the expansion and con-
protecting the annular spaces traction of the piping system.
in penetrations of concrete and Therefore, if the penetrating
masonry walls due to both test- item is expected to move during
ing and empirical experience the life of the building, then pro-
and because these materials visions should be made to ac-
form a hard barrier that remains commodate that movement so
in place and does not contract that neither the firestop nor the
or open up during fire exposure. piping is damaged. This may
involve changes in the piping
When using this part of the ex- design, so it can move and not
ception, code users should replace stresses on the pipe, or
member that provisions such pull it away from, or break the
as IPC Section 305.2 require surrounding concrete, mortar or
piping to be installed to prevent grout protection.
damage to the system that
Item 2 provides a number of options but may not be as easy to

comply with as some people believe. While Item 1 provides a spe-
cific listing of acceptable materials to fill the annular space, Item
2 can allow virtually any material if tested as specified. And, while
it limits the penetrants to steel, ferrous or copper pipes, tubes or
conduits, it does not restrict the size as in Item 1. Item 2 does, how-
ever, impose a specific performance requirement and therefore the
designer would need to submit evidence that the material used to
fill the annular space adequately prevent the passage of flame and
hot gases sufficient to ignite cotton waste.
The requirements of IBC Sec- it will basically be restoring the
tions 104.11.1 and 104.11.2 re- base assembly to what is re-
garding research reports and quired to pass the ASTM E 119
testing are generally applicable or UL 263 fire test or what is re-
for determining whether the ma- quired for a penetration firestop
terial and method of installation system to obtain an F rating.
are adequate. In this situation, One limitation of this option is
the filling material is subject- that while there are a number of
ed to the same time-tempera- sources to find specifically list-
ture criteria used for the testing ed penetration firestop systems
of the base assembly or the (tested to the ASTM E 814 or
through-penetration firestop UL 1479 standards) for various
system. However, the hose types of assemblies and pen-
stream test is not applicable. The etrants under Item 1, it may be
positive furnace pressure spec- more difficult to find existing test
ified is the same requirement information or installation in-
as contained in ASTM E 814 or structions under Item 2 because
UL 1479, and is intended to ex- the materials used are not list-
pose any holes or weaknesses ed products. Therefore, the de-
in the fill material. Because the signer or installer would need
end result is that the approved to submit evidence to the code
fill material must “prevent the official to show the fill material
passage of flame and hot gases has been properly tested and
sufficient to ignite cotton waste,” performed adequately and how
other than the lack of the hose the material is to be installed to
stream test requirement, meet this level of performance.
63
TESTING AND RATING
Firestop system designs are tested and listed by independent test-
ing agencies such as Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) and In-
tertek. All the key elements of each design become a part of the
listing. The fire resistance tests for through penetration firestop
systems are performed by multiple standards available globally.
However, only UL and ASTM standards come close to the Indi-
an firestop system fire resistance test methodology. The below ta-
ble describes the key characteristics of IS, ASTM, UL, EN and BS
standards while performing fire resistance test for firestop systems.
Parameter IS ASTM/UL EN BS
Fire Resistance/Rated Assembly
Transmission of heat on unexposed side
Hose Stream
Smoke Resistance
Water Rating
(Fig 3.6)
Upon passing either of the standards- IS 12458, UL1479

& ASTM E814 standard tests, through penetration firestop
systems are granted the following ratings–
Integrity – F Rating: It is the rating period for which the firestop
test assembly is able to withstand the fire test without allowing the
passage of flame or occurrence of flaming on the unexposed side of
the test sample. Also, the tested firestop assembly shall not develop
any openings upon subjection to hose stream test, for the rating to
be valid.
(Fig 3.7)
Insulation – T Rating: It is the rating period for which the temperature

of the firestop test assembly measured by any thermocouple on the
unexposed surface of the firestop or on any penetrant goes not
more than 180 °C above its initial temperature. Also, the firestop test
assembly shall withstand the fire test along with the hose stream,
for the rating to be valid.
65
(Fig 3.8)
One of the popular misunderstandings regarding firestop systems
testing is that some users think that firestop materials are awarded
fire-resistance rating. This is not true. Material as such does not
get any rating. It’s always the complete Firestop systems which
get tested and awarded a rating. Each component of the assembly
plays a crucial role in the performance of the firestop material. The
firestop system consists of:
■■ Size of the material of the penetrant
■■ The type of assembly being penetrated
■■ The type and thickness of insulation used on the penetrant, if any
■■ The size and configuration of the opening,
■■ The annular space between the penetrant and the periphery of the
opening
■■ The type of firestopping material etc.
Therefore, whenever a tested is selected, it is important for the

stakeholder to consider each component into consideration and
then choose a firestop system from the testing lab listing database.
Systems can be selected from the following links:
■■ https://iq.ulprospector.com/info/
■■ https://www.hilti.com/firestops
ENGINEERING JUDGEMENT
When field conditions differ from the original design or
unanticipated construction hindrances are encountered and the
field conditions cannot be easily or cost-effectively redesigned,
design recommendations are typically made to propose alternative
methods that ensure that the performance of the firestop system is
not compromised. These are referred to as ‘Engineering Judgments
or EJs’ and are specified below for guidance only. Since these
recommendations are not based upon identical designs as those
which were fire tested, it is important that they are developed using
sound engineering principles and good judgment.
Firestop Applications should always be treated as very critical and

must be applied per properly tested certifications of the complete
system. It must be known that Fire Rating of the assembly is not only
dependent on the Firestop material but also on all the components
in the system.
But very often the job site conditions differ from the original design
or unanticipated construction hindrances are encountered and the
field conditions cannot be easily redesigned.
In the absence of the exactly tested certifications similar to the

job site conditions, firestop design recommendations are provided
which are typically made to propose alternative methods that ensure
that the performance of the firestop system is not compromised,
they are known as ‘Engineering Judgments or EJs’. Engineering
Judgements are made as per the guidelines laid down by the
International Firestop Council (IFC).
The typical Firestop Selection process should start with finding the
nearest UL or of any accredited tested system (Intertek etc).
67
■■ Step 1 – Check the measurements of the opening.
■■ Step 2 – Check the measurements of the penetrating items
■■ Step 3 – Cross check-in UL directory – if the dimensions of opening
and penetrants are the same as in any of the ULs.
■■ For a simpler selection, one can use the UL Submittal Generator as
shown below.
■■ Step 4 – Cross check-in UL directory – if the dimensions of opening
and penetrants are the same as in any of the ULs.
For a simpler selection, one can use the Firestop Submittal

Generator as shown below.
(Fig 3.9)
■■ In case the respective UL is not available, an engineering judgement

must be prepared by the firestop vendor based on site conditions.
■■ An Engineering Judgement form must be filled and sent to the
engineering judgement expert.
Note that an Engineering Judgement must be prepared only by

a trained and authorized person of the firestop manufacturer/fire
protection engineer/third party labs.
When/why is an EJ used?
When no tested system exists that exactly matches the conditions
of the field application.
Typical situations:
■■ Annular space larger/smaller than tested
■■ Hole shape different than tested
■■ Curtain wall construction not identical to that tested
■■ More penetrating items in the hole than the tested system allows
■■ Access to one side only
■■ Oversized openings
■■ Structural member penetrations
■■ Intersections of rated assembly with non-rated assembly
(e.g. roof deck)
KP ENGINEERING JUDGMENT FIRESTOP DETAIL

PROJECT :
CONTRACTOR :
F-RATING = 2-HR.
BOTTOM VIEW
A A
(Fig 3.10) (Fig 3.11)

SECTION A-A
2 3
1
6
4
7
8
HILTI, Inc. Sheet 1 of 2 Drawing No.

Plano, Texas USA (800) 879-8000 Scale
3/32" = 1"
Designed by
Date
Dec. 01, 2017
69
IBC Guidelines regarding applications where no
tested systems exist
712.3.1.1 Fire-resistance-rated assemblies. Penetrations shall be
installed as tested in an approved fire-resistance-rated assembly.
104.11 Alternative materials, design and methods of construction

and equipment. The provisions of this code are not intended to
prevent the installation of any material or to prohibit any design or
method of construction not specifically prescribed by this code,
provided that any such alternative has been approved.
An alternative material, design or method of construction shall be

approved where the building official finds that the proposed design
is satisfactory and complies with the intent of the provisions of this
code and that the material, method or work offered is, for the purpose
intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this code in
quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety.
IFC Guidelines for Engineering Judgement
Firestop systems deter the passage of fire, hot gases and toxic
smoke through openings in walls, floors and floor/ceiling assemblies
for through penetrations, membrane penetrations, joints, blanks,
gaps, voids and ducts. These systems are required by building
codes to be tested and rated as part of an assembly in accordance
with an approved test standard. Some of these are tabulated below:
APPLICATION TEST STANDARD
Service penetrations (e.g. ASTM E814, UL1479

pipes, cables, ducts)
Joint System ASTM E1966, UL2079
Perimeter Joint Firestops ASTM E2307

(e.g. exterior wall/floor
intersections)
Note: For through penetrations, the applicable standard is ASTM

814 or UL 1479.
Revised Engineering Judgement Guidelines

(October 2018)
All elements of a tested and rated firestop system, including the
assembly into which the system is installed, constitute a specific
and inseparable engineered unit that must be utilized as such.
Firestop system designs are tested and listed by independent
testing agencies such as Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL and
Intertek). The specific elements of each design become integral to
the listing.
Since the recommendations are not based upon identical designs

as that which were fire tested, it is important that they are developed
using sound engineering principles and good judgment.
Construction industry professionals, building officials, fire officials,

firestop contractors and other stakeholders need appropriate
guidelines for evaluating and using such judgments.
71
IFC developed Recommended IFC Guidelines for Evaluating
Firestop Systems Engineering Judgments (EJs).
IFC EJ Guidelines
EJs for firestop systems should:
■■ Not be used in lieu of tested systems when available;
■■ Be issued only by a firestop manufacturer’s qualified technical
personnel or in concert with the manufacturer by a knowledgeable
registered Professional Engineer, Fire Protection Engineer, or an
independent testing agency that provides listing services for firestop
systems;
■■ Be based upon interpolation or extension of previously tested firestop
systems that are either sufficiently similar in nature or clearly bracket
the conditions upon which the judgment is to be given. Additional
knowledge and technical interpretations based upon accepted
engineering principles, fire science and fire testing guidelines (e.g.
ASTM E 2032 – Standard Guide for Extension of Data From Fire
Resistance Tests Conducted in accordance with ASTM E 119, ULC
Subject C263E – Criteria for Use in Extension of Data from Fire
Endurance Tests, or ASTM E2750 – Standard Guide for Extension of
Data from Penetration Firestop System Tests conducted in Accordance
with ASTM E814) may also be used as further support data;
■■ Be based upon full knowledge of the elements of the construction to
be protected and an understanding of the probable behavior of that
construction and the recommended firestop system protecting that
construction if it was subjected to the appropriate Standard Fire Test
method for firestops for the rating indicated on the EJ;
■■ Be limited only to specific conditions and configurations upon
which the EJ was rendered and should be based upon reasonable
performance expectations for the recommended firestop system
under those conditions;
■■ Be accepted only for a single, specific job and project location and
should not be transferred to any other job or project location without
a thorough and appropriate review of all aspects of the next job or
location’s circumstances.
Basic Requirements to be mentioned in the

EJ Certificate
Proper EJs should:
■■ Be presented inappropriately descriptive written form with or without
detailed drawings where appropriate;
■■ Clearly, indicate that the recommended firestop system is an EJ;
■■ Include clear directions for the installation of the recommended
firestop system;
■■ Include dates of issue and authorization signature as well as the
issuer’s name, address and telephone number;
■■ Reference tested system(s) upon which design (EJ) is based on;
■■ Identify the job name, project location and firm EJ is issued to along
with the non-standard conditions and rating supported by the EJ;
■■ Have proper justification (i.e. UL, ULC, Intertek, SWRI or another
independent laboratory system(s) and or opinions);
■■ Provide complete descriptions of critical elements for the firestop
configuration.
73
Basic, Common
■■ Type(s) of assembly used or being penetrated;
■■ Rating supported by the EJ.
Through Penetrations
■■ Penetrating item(s) (type, size, etc.);
■■ Annular space requirements, (minimum, maximum, actual, nominal,
etc.)
■■ Opening size;
■■ Firestop product(s) to be used, type and amount (thickness if
applicable);
■■ Accessory items(s) (i.e. anchors, backing material, etc.)
■■ Accessory item(s) (i.e. insulation type, thickness and compression,
etc.)
Duct Enclosure Systems

■■ Duct System Type (i.e. kitchen exhaust, hazardous material
exhaust, ventilation, supply/return, etc.);
■■ Duct Construction – dimensions, material, gauge, reinforcement,
connections, orientation (horizontal, vertical or both);
■■ Enclosure System – brand name designation, description, fire-
resistance rating;
■■ Thickness, density, number of layers, fire rating, clearance to
combustibles, material joints, mechanical attachment to duct, duct
support system, access door construction.
■■ Firestop System – annular space dimensions, floor/wall
construction, design number, components, installed thickness.
Some examples of EJ’s:
Membrane Penetration
DS ENGINEERING JUDGMENT FIRESTOP DETAIL
PROJECT :
CONTRACTOR :
F RATING OF ASSEMBLY : 2 HOURS
FRONT VIEW SECTION A-A
A A
1. GYPSUM WALL ASSEMBLY (UL/cUL CLASSIFIED) (2-HR. FIRE-RATING).

2. STEEL ELECTRICAL BOX WITH STEEL COVER PLATE
3. HILTI CP 617 FIRESTOP PUTTY PAD OF CFS-PA FIRESTOP PUTTY PAD (1/8" THICK) TO COVER THE
EXTERIOR SURFACES OF THE BOX AND TO COMPLETELY SEAL AGAINST THE STUD WITHIN THE
STUD CAVITY. ADJOINING PIECES OF PUTTY PAD TO OVERLAP APPROXIMATELY 1/2" AT THE SEAM.
PUTTY PAD TO ALSO EXTEND AROUND THE CONNECTOR SECURING EACH MC CABLE, EMT,
OR CONDUIT TO THE BOX.
NOTES
1. ELECTRICAL BOXES TO BE UL LISTED
2. FIRE-RATING OF ASSEMBLY IS DEPENDENT UPON THE PERFORMANCE OF ELECTRICAL
FIXTURES UNDER FIRE CONDITIONS.
(Fig 3.12- Membrane)
THIS ENGINEERING JUDGMENT REPRESENTS A FIRESTOP SYSTEM THAT WOULD BE EXPECTED TO PASS THE STATED RATINGS IF TESTED.
(REFERENCE : UL SYSTEM NUMBER CLIV )
HILTI India Pvt Ltd. Sheet
6th Floor Building 8 Tower C, DLF CyberCity
1/1 Drawing No.
054_EJ_DS
Phase II, Gurugram - 122 002 Scale Not to scale _OBEROI
Representative only _360_WEST
Designed by
Date _20180523A
Hilti Firestop Systems
75
23RD MAY, 2018
Saving Lives through Innovation and Education

Duct Penetration
PROJECT :
CONTRACTOR :
A
3"
FRONT VIEW
A 2
1
5/8"
5
3
4"
6"
SECTION A-A
(Fig 3.13- Duct EJ)

(REFERENCE : UL SYSTEM NUMBER C-AJ-7051, WJ-7109, C-AJ 7145)
1/2 Drawing No.
015_EJ_DS
Phase II, Gurugram - 122 002 Scale Not to scale _DAICEC
Representative only _VOLTAS
Designed by
Date _20180328
Hilti Firestop Systems 28th March, 2018

Cable Tray Penetration
PROJECT :
CONTRACTOR :
5 1
4
(Fig 3.14- Cable Tray EJ)
(REFERENCE : UL SYSTEM NUMBER WJ-8056)
1/2 Drawing No.
023_EJ_DS
Phase II, Gurugram - 122 002 Scale Not to scale _DAICEC
Representative only
77
_VOLTAS
Designed by
Date _20180507_C
Hilti Firestop Systems 28th March, 2018

Pipe Penetration
PROJECT :
CONTRACTOR :
A A
1
2
3
5 4
THIS ENGINEERING JUDGMENT REPRESENTS A FIRESTOP SYSTEMPipe

(Fig 3.15- THAT WOULD
EJ) BE EXPECTED TO PASS THE STATED RATINGS IF TESTED.
(REFERENCE : UL SYSTEM NUMBER C-AJ 2567, C-AJ 8143)
1/2 Drawing No.
038_EJ_DS
Phase II, Gurugram - 122 002 Scale Not to scale _MOTERA_
Representative only L&T
Designed by
Date _20180427A
Hilti Firestop Systems 27TH APRIL, 2018

IFC recommends that these guidelines be considered when
evaluating whether any firestop system EJ meets minimal
requirements. Questions concerning the EJ request should be
addressed to the initiator of the design recommendation.
SYSTEM SELECTION
System selection for through fire protection can be done by

accessing third-party certification laboratory listing directories.
One of the examples is the UL certification directory. The UL
directory follows a specific nomenclature to identify the different
firestop systems listed.
To choose a system, we need to know the basic details of the

application.
■■ What type of building assembly is requiring firestopping? - Floor or
Wall
■■ What type of material is the building assembly - Concrete, Gypsum,
Wood Frame
■■ What is the penetrating item(s)? - Metallic, Nonmetallic, and Cables,
etc.
■■ What are the specific descriptions regarding the penetrants? -
Diameter, quantity, type of plastic, type & thickness of insulation,
etc.
■■ What is the hourly rating you are looking for? - F Rating, F and T
Rating
■■ Are there any special considerations? - Movement, Environmental
exposure
79
NAVIGATING UL
Example 1:-
First Alpha Character–signifies what is being penetrated:
1. C-AJ-4083
Combination of Floor and Wall
■■ F = Floors
■■ W = Walls
■■ C = Walls and Floors
Following Alpha Character(s)–wall or floor construction type
2. C-AJ-4083
Construction Type of Floor or Wall
■■ A = Concrete floors © 5 inch thick
■■ B = Concrete floors © 5 inch thick
■■ C = Framed floors
■■ D = Steel decks in marine vessels
■■ E-I = Reserved for future use
■■ J = Concrete or masonry walls © 8 inch thick
■■ K = Concrete or masonry walls © 8 inch thick
■■ L = Framed walls
■■ M = Bulkheads in marine vessels
■■ N-Z = Reserved for future use
Numeric Component - first digit identifies the type of penetrant,
next three are sequential system numbering
3. C-AJ-4083
Cable trays with electrical cables
4. C-AJ-4083
Individual System Number
■■ 0000-0999 = No Penetrant
■■ 1000-1999 = Metallic pipe, conduit or tubing
■■ 2000-2999 = Nonmetallic pipe, conduit or tubing
■■ 3000-3999 = Electrical cables
■■ 4000-4999 = Cable trays with electrical cables
■■ 5000-5999 = Insulated pipes
■■ 6000-6999 = Busways
■■ 7000-7999 = HVAC ducts
■■ 8000-8999 = Mixed multiple penetrations
■■ 9000-9999 = Reserved for future use
By following the below-mentioned steps, any firestop system

can be easily identified.
Step 1: Log in to www.ul.com

Step 2: Type “Product iQ” in the search box.
Step 3 : Click on the first link
81
(Fig 3.16)
(Fig 3.17)
Step 4: Click on “Access Product iQ”
(Fig 3.18)
Step 5: Sign Up or Sign in
(Fig 3.19)
83
Step 6 – After logging in, click on Firestop Systems tab under
the Building Materials & Systems drop down menu.
(Fig 3.20)
Step 7 – Use the refine results tab to put the criterion for which
Firestop system is being searched.
For example -
Filter F Rating – 2 Hour
Penetrating Item – Non-metallic pipe
Through Penetration Firestop System – Concrete floors with
minimum thickness greater than 127 mm.
When we select these filters, there will be multiple firestop systems
that will appear. From these systems, an appropriate system can
be selected depending on the case.
(Fig 3.21)
Step 8 – Choose the right system by referring to the right

firestop system details. An example of a firestop system is
shown below in detail:
(Fig 3.22)
85
(Fig 3.23)
INSTALLATION & INSPECTION
(Fig 3.25- Inspection)
Installation of firestop systems is a critical parameter to comply to

ensure the intended performance of the fire stop systems. Every
Firestop system tested under third-party certification schemes like
UL and Intertek etc. highlights the key parameters about the system
such as void, fill or cavity, material thickness or type. This should be
strictly followed in conjunction with the manufacturer’s installation
instructions.
87
Because of the wide variety of and occupants if it is not prop-
penetrants and assemblies, erly installed in the field. While
there truly is no one single the code does not provide a lot
firestop product tested and list- of guidance on the inspection
ed as a firestop system that can of firestops, perhaps the best
work for all situations. Even with advice is to simply follow the
a given penetrant and assem- phrases used throughout Sec-
bly combination, variations in tion 714, such as “installed as
the annular space from one in- tested,” “installed in accordance
stance to another could require with their listing” and “installed
a completely different firestop in accordance with the instruc-
system. Therefore, the design- tions included in the listing.” If
ers, installers and inspectors the installer and inspector both
must look at the specific details make sure that the firestop sys-
for the proposed tested and tems being used are certified for
listed firestop systems to make the specific application and are
sure they are appropriate for the properly installed, a compliant
design conditions and they are and effective level of protection
properly installed to provide the should result. If they do not fol-
anticipated performance. While low this guidance, the safety of
a tested and listed firestop sys- both the building and the occu-
tem may perform perfectly in the pants, and the effectiveness of
laboratory, it could compromise the penetration may be compro-
the safety of both the building mised.
One aspect that the building able in the proper selection and
code does not generally address installation of the firestop sys-
is that who is responsible for in- tems; or to each subcontractor
stalling firestops. The inspector or tradesperson to take care
is concerned with ensuring that of the penetrations they cre-
the openings and penetrations ate. The downside of expecting
have been protected as re- each contractor to take respon-
quired and not with the fact that sibility for the penetrations they
who is responsible for the same. create is that they may not know
However, from the owner’s, con- the variety of firestop solutions
tractor’s or installer’s viewpoint, available or have the experi-
the issue of who is responsible ence to properly select or install
is critically important in ensuring some of the systems. Further,
that penetrations are properly depending on the schedule,
protected and that the firestop they may not be on the job site
systems are installed where, when some penetrations are
when and how they are sup- created or need to be protected.
posed to be. Therefore, at the Since assigning responsibility
beginning of every project, the for installing firestopping is crit-
owner, designer and contrac- ical from the cost perspective
tors need to determine who is and in ensuring that the building
responsible for complying with is properly protected, this deci-
the firestopping requirements. sion must be made beforehand
The responsibility may fall to a so that everyone involved in the
specialty contractor who is ex- construction process knows
perienced and knowledge what is expected of them.
89
Neither NBC or IBC contains many provisions that specifically
require or address the inspection of firestop systems. However, there
are a few provisions that should be looked at, and depending on the
jurisdiction’s requirements, it may affect how the firestop provisions
are applied. Although not directly addressing firestopping, two
sections to consider are IBC Sections 107.2.1, related to information
on construction documents, and IBC Section 104.1, related to the
powers of the building official. Four sections that specifically relate
to firestopping will also be discussed so that code users are aware
of the requirements and the intent behind the provisions. These
include:
■■ IBC Section 110.3.6, which requires the protection of joints and

penetrations to remain accessible and not be concealed until
inspected.
■■ IBC Section 1705.17, which requires special inspections for through

penetrations, membrane penetrations, fire-resistant joint systems
and perimeter fire barrier systems when they are installed in high-
rise buildings or in buildings assigned to Risk Category III or IV per
Section 1604.5.
■■ IBC Section 703.7, which requires marking and identification of

assemblies that require protected openings or penetrations.
■■ IFC Section 703.1, which addresses the maintenance of fire-

resistance-rated assemblies, including firestop and joint systems.
Section 107.2.1 states that the construction documents are required
to be of such quality and detail such that the building official can
determine whether the proposed work conforms to the code’s
requirements.
Note: NBC 2016 currently does not include installation and inspection
requirements of Firestop in particular. However, in Chapter 4,
Annexure E, it gives the requirement for Life Safety Audit once in
two years.
Some designers elect to include (or some jurisdictions may require)

a penetration firestop system schedule similar to what would be
provided for a wall, door or window schedule. They select Systems
that are Project Specific :
■■ What is the rating required?
■■ What is penetrating floor or wall?
■■ What is a floor or wall made of?
■■ What is the Annular Space?
For example, the planned schedule could indicate something as

simple as “Hilti system ABC is to be used for gypsum-covered metal-
framed walls with pipe penetrations having an annular space of less
than 1 inch, while Hilti system XYZ is to be used if the annular space
exceeds 2 inches.” Specifying the annular space minimums and
maximums from those firestop systems can also serve to ensure
that tradespeople installing those penetrations will not make holes
in the assemblies that are then difficult or costly to protect, or that
would have no available systems and would require an engineering
judgment. Most situations requiring an engineering judgment are
those where the hole shape and size were created without the
eventual firestopping in mind.
91
This simple guidance gives the plan examiner the opportunity to
make sure that appropriate systems are specified. Also, it provides
the installer with specific assemblies that satisfy code requirements;
and directs the installer and inspector to list the information that
can ensure that the system is appropriate and is being properly
installed. A firestop schedule also serves as a reminder, similar to a
door schedule, that no one system will work throughout the project
and each opening may have a different requirement.
While there is nothing within IBC Section 107.2.1 that specifically

states what level of information is required to “show in detail that …
[the work] will conform to the provisions of this code,” IBC Section
104.1 gives the building official the authority to “adopt policies and
procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions.”
Therefore, it would be permissible for the jurisdiction to decide when
and what information must be submitted to show that the proper
firestop systems are being selected and how they are to be installed.
Providing this information early in the process may help to ensure
that the manufacturer’s installation instructions are available on the
job site for the contractor to use during the installation and for the
inspector to use to verify if the system is appropriate and properly
installed.
While it is easy to say that information on firestops must be provided

and addressed early on, in most situations this level of detail may
not be possible and may really be nothing more than conceptual
information on what is intended. Because most plans don’t address
exactly where and how penetrations are made or whether multiple
items may be grouped in a single hole. The details for the firestop
systems may only be provided as deferred submittals (see Section
107.3.4.1) and only be available when the manufacturer’s installation
instructions are provided to the inspector.
Since the annular spaces covered by any given product may vary,
it is very difficult to provide accurate information until the hole and
penetration are actually made; only then is it possible to select the
actual system to be used. For example, for any given wall assembly
and pipe type, you might need product A for a continuous point of
contact installation; product B for an installation with a single point of
contact and a 3-inch annular space on the other side; and product C
for a pipe centered in the hole with 1 ½ inches all around. However,
although code officials and designers need to be realistic in their
expectations as to what information and detail can be provided
early on, it is still important that, prior to installation and inspection,
the details of protection be determined so that the manufacturer’s
installation instructions are available before the firestop system is
installed or inspected.
Section 110.3.6 specifically addresses a part of the inspection

process as it relates to firestops and joint protection. This section
recognizes that the building official must have the opportunity to
inspect these systems before they are concealed from view. The
contractor needs to be aware of this requirement so he or she
does not proceed beyond the approved sequencing schedule. An
inspector should not be expected to accept/approve work which he
or she is unable to verify, and can prompt the removal of construction
in order to ascertain proper installation.
Besides simply requiring a special inspection program, Section

1705.17 references ASTM E 2174 and ASTM E 2393, which
establish how inspections are to be performed. The standard, the
ASTM E 2174 “Standard Practice for On-Site Inspection of Installed
Fire Stops,” provides procedures on how to inspect the systems
and guidelines to be followed for both conducting the inspections
and reporting the results back to the code official and the firestop
installer.
93
The information within these standards will help the designer prepare
the statement of special inspections required by Section 1704.3.
The special inspection program for observation of firestop systems
installation or destructive testing of installed firestop systems is
similar to all other special inspection programs required by Chapter
17 of the IBC which requires:
■■ The special inspection agency to be approved (Section 1704.2);
■■ The special inspector to be approved and qualified (Section
1704.2.1);
■■ The special inspection agency to be employed by the owner or the
design professional who is acting as the owner’s agent and not by
the contractor (Section 1704.2);
■■ The design professional or applicant to submit a statement of
special inspections as a condition for permit issuance (Section
1704.2.3) with the statement identifying specific items related
to the inspections (Sections 1704.3 and 1704.3.1); and
■■ The special inspection agency to submit reports documenting
the inspections, corrections and discrepancies to the code
official (Section 1704.2.4).
Section 703.7 will help owners, contractors and inspectors know

when protection of penetrations is required. This section mandates
walls requiring protected openings and penetrations to be identified
with some type of sign or marking to indicate that openings placed
in the wall must be protected. Identifying walls that require protected
openings helps to maintain the wall’s fire resistance or smoke
integrity throughout the life of the building. Of course, the lack of
such signage should not be deemed an indication that a wall is not
required to have a fire-resistance rating or protected openings and
penetrations. The code provides many exceptions to the need for
such markings.
In addition, the application of the markings may have been forgotten
or not assigned, which would be a code-compliance deficiency that
should be noted and corrected. The most reliable reference to consult
in establishing which walls are supposed to be fire-resistance-rated
and which are not is the design documents.
Where an accessible concealed space is provided in areas adjacent

to firewalls, fire barriers, fire partitions, smoke barriers, smoke
partitions or any other wall required to have protected openings, there
must be a means of marking the wall so that it is clear that openings
through it must be protected See Figure 101 for an example of this
requirement. This allows building maintenance workers, contractors
and inspectors a quick visual reference that they need to ensure that
any penetrations or openings are protected. Further, in situations
where a phone technician, cable installer or I.T. wiring person pokes
a hole in the wall, they will be alerted that someone must provide a
firestop system or other means to restore the assembly to its original
condition.
MINIMUM SIGN OR STENCILING

3 IN. AT MAXIMUM
LETTERING 30-FT INTERVALS ACCESSIBLE
AND WITHIN 15 FEET CONCEALED SPACE
OF EACH END
FLOOR OR ROOF DECK
FIRE BARRIER
PROTECT ALL OPENINGS
CEILING
FLOOR
(Fig 3.26)
95
Identification Sign in Accessible Concealed Space
This type of marking is only required where access to the concealed

space is available through, for example, an access opening or a
suspended acoustical tile ceiling system. If the concealed space
is not accessible (such as in situations where a gypsum ceiling
is installed directly to the bottom of floor joists in a floor/ceiling
system), then the marking is not required since the assumption
is that people will be unable to enter the space and poke holes
through the assembly. Section 703.7 does provide specific lettering
sizes, wording and locations to draw attention to the wall protection
requirements.
One last code section to discuss is the maintenance requirements

for fire-resistance-rated assemblies from Section 703.1 of the
International Fire Code (IFC). This section requires that the fire-
resistance rating of the construction “including … firestops … and
fire-resistant joint systems” is to be maintained. The requirements
further state, “such elements shall be visually inspected by the
owner annually and properly repaired, restored, or replaced where
damaged, altered, breached or penetrated.” This requirement for
annual inspection is not applicable if the penetrations are in an area
that is concealed and not accessible. This would coordinate with
the logic from Section 703.7, which assumes that, if the space is
not accessible, people have not gotten into the area and poked any
additional holes or penetrations through the assembly.
IFC Section 703.1 requires if the annual inspection finds additional

holes have been made, “openings made therein for the passage
of pipes, electrical conduit, wires, ducts, air transfer openings and
holes made for any reason shall be protected with approved methods
capable of resisting the passage of smoke and fire.”
Some key points to keep in mind while conducting inspections:
■■ Is the firestop system listed? (e.g. by Underwriters Laboratories

(UL), Intertek Testing Services (ITS)).
■■ Do the specified firestop systems comply with the standard testing
requirements for the in-place conditions?
■■ The local authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) shall approve
Firestop system details and Firestop products. Hence, Firestop
systems details and materials should be included in the plans and
specifications.
■■ How are engineering judgments evaluated?
■■ Are all the firestop system details made available to building
inspectors?
■■ Do the general contractor and subcontractors understand that the
protection of penetrations and joints will be inspected?
■■ Firestop systems must not be concealed from view before being
inspected and approved
■■ Walkthrough visual inspections should be made during the firestop
installation
■■ When necessary or required, a destructive evaluation will be made
on various types of firestop systems
■■ Flashlights, coring device and other appropriate tools make a proper
inspection easier
■■ Proper depths, annular space and product types are critical to the
effectiveness of the system
■■ Construction documents detailing the firestop locations and systems
must be kept on-site to assist in the conduct of the inspection
■■ Observe that the actual products, containers, wrappings or boxes
are labeled with the approved testing agency marks and are as
specified in the submitted details
■■ Measure the depth and width of materials as indicated in the details
(sometimes density measurements are also required for products
such as thermal insulation)
97
■■ Observe that the through penetration firestops have been installed
in such a manner that the required movement can be achieved.
■■ Compare the installed firestop system with the approved submitted
details
■■ Observe a reasonable degree of workmanship, which would indicate
compliance with the specified designs
■■ Deficient installations must immediately be corrected and then re-
inspected before concealment
As mentioned before also, in NBC 2016, under Annexure E,

subsection E7, Fire and Life Safety Audit recommendation is
highlighted. However, the qualification and approval of firestop
inspectors are yet to be described.
99
Firestop for
CHAPTER 4 Joints
(Fig 4.1)
Firestop Joints can be primarily classified into two main segments –

Linear joints and Perimeter joints. The perimeter firestop joints are
used in the case of curtain wall assemblies and it will be explained
in the next chapter in detail. In this chapter we will explore linear
joints in detail which are shown below:
(Fig 4.2)
Head of Wall Head of Wall
Concrete to Concrete Gypsum to Fluted Deck
Wall to Wall
Floor to Wall Concrete to Concrete
Concrete to Concrete
Floor to Floor
Concrete to Concrete
(Fig 4.3 Typical Joint Types )
Firestop Joints are used with the intention to join individual structural
elements to accommodate movements, dimensional tolerances,
inadequate designs and to avoid constrictions in the building.
Examples of such cases could be the profile of the structure which
gets formed after creepage & shrinkage of concrete. And then
there are additional inherent environmental factors at play such as
humidity, temperature changes, wind, seismic forces, etc.
While deciding the fire-resistance rating of the firestop joint systems,

it is very important to consider movement forces. It is important that
these joints along with their fire resistance rating also accommodate
movement so that any shrinkage, creep or any external factor forces
can be absorbed without damaging any structural component.
While joints can occur in a variety of locations and assemblies (see

Figures 4.4 and 4.5), it is good to have an example in mind prior to
looking into the specific requirements. Perhaps one of the easiest
examples is a joint in an exterior wall constructed using pre-cast tilt-
up concrete wall panels.
101
While the concrete panels themselves can provide the wall’s
required fire-resistance rating, the gap or joint between adjacent
panels must be protected to ensure that flames or hot gases cannot
pass through the gap and lead to a fire spreading to the interior of
the building. Another easily recognized example is an expansion
joint or seismic joint, often seen in floor assemblies, which allow
portions of a building to move independently. While an expansion
joint allows portions of the building to move independently, it is still
important that the joint is able to maintain the floor’s fire-resistance
rating whether the gap due to the differential building movement
between the floors is small or large.
EXPANSION OR
WIND JOINT
JOINT AT JUNCTURE
OF FLOOR AND WALL
JOINT AT FIRE-RESISTANCE-
TOP OF WALL SEISMIC OR RATED WALL
EXPANSION JOINT ASSEMBLY
FIRE-RESISTANCE-
RATED WALL
ASSEMBLY
FIRE-RESISTANCE-
RATED FLOOR
ASSEMBLY
(Fig 4.4 Examples of Joints)

FIRE-RESISTANT JOINT
ASSEMBLY
FIRE-RESISTANCE-
RATED WALL
. . ASSEMBLY
BUILDING JOINT BUILDING JOINT
WALL ASSEMBLY
. . . . . . .
. .
. . . .
FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
FLOOR ASSEMBLY .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
FIRE-RESISTANT JOINT .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
ASSEMBLY .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
FIRE-RESISTANCE-RATED .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
WALL ASSEMBLY .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
FLOOR/CEILING ASSEMBLY
(Fig 4.5 Types of Joints)
103
Also common are “top of wall” or “head of wall” joints. While fire-
resistance-rated wall and floor assemblies are tested as assemblies
using the ASTM E 119 or the UL 263 test standards, neither
of those tests evaluates the performance at the point where the
wall and horizontal assembly connect. To illustrate this, consider
the continuity provisions for a fire barrier in Section 707.5 which
require the fire barrier to extend to the underside of the floor or roof
deck above and that joints and voids at the intersection of the two
systems comply with Sections 707.8 and 707.9. The photo shown
in Figure 104 illustrates a situation where a fire barrier extends to a
corrugated metal deck, creating voids over the top of the wall. If these
voids are not protected with a top-of-wall joint system, they provide
a direct path for a fire to spread to the unexposed side of the wall
and therefore negate the intent and purpose of the wall. The photo
in Figure 105 shows the installation of another type of joint system
at the top of the wall. Without properly protecting these breeches or
intersections with fire-resistant joint systems, the effectiveness of
the fire-resistance-rated wall will clearly have been compromised.
CODES & STANDARDS

In the current version of NBC 2016, it doesn’t give any specific
application requirement for joints. However, it presents a clear
definition of joints in clause 2.32, note 2 of Part 4 as below:
“Fire stop assembly for joints is the one where fire stop with
movement capability is used to seal the linear joints between
adjacent fire separating elements, to maintain the fire resistance of
the separating elements, which should be installed within its tested
design limits with regard to size of the joint, type of assembly, and
anticipated compression and extension of the joint.”
IBC, however, fills this gap and provides the information discussed
in this section. IBC, Section 715.1 begins by stating that joints
installed “in or between fire-resistance-rated” walls or horizontal
assemblies are required to be protected by approved fire-resistant
joint systems. While Section 715 contains specific requirements for
certain locations in Sections 715.4 through 715.6, most locations
are covered by the general requirements of Section 715.1 or its
exceptions.
Perhaps the most important aspect of Section 715.1 is the exception

of listing the nine locations where joint systems are not required
to be installed. The vast majority of these locations eliminate the
need for joint protection due to the fact that some other provision
would allow a fire to circumvent the joint system; therefore it cannot
be justified to require a joint system in which fire could bypass by
another route. A quick review and discussion of the various exempt
locations are as follows:
■■ Item 1: In Section 712.1.2 and Exception 2 of Section 1019.3, the
code allows unconcealed vertical openings and open exit access
stairways within an individual dwelling unit.
■■ Item 2: Although not common, this provision recognizes that a shaft
may be used to protect the floor opening and therefore prevent the
spread of a fire from one level to the next. In this situation, there is
no protection required at the floor opening due to the fact that the
shaft walls will contain and limit the potential spread of fire within
the building. This provision mirrors the fact that Sections 712.1.1 and
713 allow unprotected vertical openings within a shaft enclosure.
105
■■ Item 3: Where the floor is located within the enclosed atrium space
(see Section 404.6), the floor is adjacent to a floor opening and
exposed to other levels of the building. In this situation, the floor
is essentially located within the boundaries of the open atrium
atmosphere and therefore the code is not focused on the vertical
spread of the fire or hot gasses within the space. It is important,
however, to notice that this exception is only applicable to portions
of floors within the atrium enclosure (Section 404.6) and does not
extend to the entire floor level unless the provisions of Exception 3
in Section 404.6 have been used and the volume of the space has
been accounted for in the smoke control system’s design. Figure
107 illustrates which floors may be left without joint protection in
accordance with Item 3.
■■ Item 4: Similar to floors within atriums, which were addressed in
Item 3, this item will eliminate the joint protection requirements
for floors within a mall. Figure 108 illustrates this situation and
shows the floors that are covered by the exception. In applying this
provision, it is important to recognize that the wording limits the
exception to the floors within the mall and not to all floors within the
mall building. By definition and under the provisions of Section 402,
the “mall” is a common pedestrian area within a covered mall or
open mall building.
■■ Item 5: Fire-resistive joint systems are exempted from the floors
of parking garages for a number of reasons. However, parking
garages have an extensive list of other protection requirements in
Section 406. Because provisions in Sections 712.1.10 and 406.5.9
allow various unprotected vertical openings within parking garages,
the elimination of joint protection in these structures will not greatly
compromise them. In addition, based on the amount and type of fuel
loading within a garage, a vehicle fire may be fairly extensive but
often will not spread to adjacent vehicles or areas.
■■ Item 6: Mezzanine floors can conceptually be viewed as similar to
the floors in atriums or malls, which are covered by Items 3 and 4.
Since a mezzanine complying with Section 505 is considered to be
a portion of the story in which it is located (see Section 505.2), the
code does not look for separation within the same level but only
between adjacent stories. This concept is supported by Section
505.2.3, which allows a mezzanine to be open and unobstructed
to the room in which it is located; Section 712.1.11, which allows
unprotected vertical openings in the mezzanine floor; and the
fact that an exit access stairway from the mezzanine may be left
unenclosed because it serves “floor levels within a single story”
and is exempt per Section 1019.2. (See Appendix B, Item 24, for
discussion related to changes between the 2012 and 2015 editions
of the code.)
■■ Item 7: This item, which is applicable to walls, mirrors the exception
in Section 705.9. At locations where unprotected openings are
allowed in an exterior wall, these provisions allow for the elimination
of the fire-resistive joint system. Based on Table 705.8, unprotected
openings are allowed in sprinklered buildings with a fire separation
distance of 3 feet or greater, or at 5 feet or greater if the buildings
are not equipped with a sprinkler system.
ATRIUM ENCLOSURE – SECTION 404.6
ATRIUM
JOINT
PROTECTION VOLUME OF
REQUIRED ADJOINING SPACE
ACCOUNTED FOR
IN DESIGN OF SMOKE
CONTROL SYSTEM
FLOORS WITHIN ATRIUM SPACE

WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE
PROTECTED JOINTS
107
(Fig 4.6 Floor Joints Within an Atrium)
MALL
TENANT SPACE
JOINT PROTECTION REQUIRED

FOR FLOORS OUTSIDE OF
MALL
FLOORS “WITHIN” THE MALL

DO NOT REQUIRE FIRE-RESISTIVE
JOINT PROTECTION
(Fig 4.7 Floor Joints Within a Mall)
When using the calculated fire-resistance provisions of Section

722.2.1.3 for joints between concrete precast wall panels, the code
states that the unprotected joints are to be included when determining
the percentage of openings allowed by Table 705.8. In addition, the
fact that the exception in Section 715.3 allows a joint to be tested
and fire-resistance-rated from only one side at 5 feet appears to
indicate the code intends joints to be considered as openings and
included within the percentage of wall openings allowed by Section
705.8. If non-sprinklered buildings are allowed nonrated joints at 5
feet by Item 7 in Section 715.1, then there would be no reason for
the exception in Section 715.3 to address the nonsymmetrical joints
with a fire separation distance greater than 5 feet unless the joints
are expected to be considered as either protected or non-protected
openings by Section 705.8.
■■ Item 8: Fire-resistive joint systems may be eliminated where
openings are allowed within a fire-resistance-rated roof assembly.
In general, Section 712.1.15 will allow unprotected openings
through a fire-resistive roof assembly since the code does not
address fire spreading from the building to the outdoors. However,
several provisions-such as Exceptions 2, 3 and 4 in Section 706.6,
Exception 4 in Section 705.11, Section 706.6.1 and others will
prohibit roof openings in certain locations.
■■ Item 9: Section 715 is not intended to regulate joints installed in
assemblies that are provided to control shrinkage cracking and
evaluated as a part of the overall assembly’s fire-resistance test.
Examples of such control joints are the limited-depth saw-cut
control joint in concrete and some of the control joint systems
used within the face layer of stucco systems. These types of joints
are made in an assembly so that cracks in the surface occur at
specific points along a straight line and not randomly across the
finished surface. Construction joints, such as the stopping and
starting points for two successive concrete pours or control joints,
which are intended to prevent shrinkage cracking (such as saw-cut
control joints) in concrete or masonry, typically accommodate very
little movement or may not go through the complete depth of the
assembly’s protection. Therefore, Item 9 in the exception does not
require compliance with ASTM E 1966 or UL 2079, as referenced
in Section 715.3, but instead permits control joints with a maximum
joint width of 5/8 inch to be tested in accordance with ASTM E 119
or UL 263. This allowance reflects fire test data that has existed
since the 1960s regarding control and perimeter relief joints in fire-
rated systems, the performance of these systems in the field and
a rational approach regarding minor movement (defined here as a
maximum of 5/8 inch) where no appreciable damage or fatigue is
incurred by the joint system. Since all buildings move slightly, it is
not prudent to have to cycle and test joint systems that only move a
few millimeters.
109
■■ Although their movement is limited, control joint systems must still
pass the rigors of ASTM E 119 or UL 263 in accordance with Item
9 of the exception, but this is often done as a part of the overall
assembly’s initial fire test. Thus, the construction details of such
tested joints would be included as part of the overall assembly’s test
report or listing.
■■ Perhaps the easiest way to think of this item is that it applies to
joints within an assembly and testing as part of the assembly’s
original fire test, which did not include movement but did include
testing on the protections of small surface cracking or control joints.
Conversely, the base paragraph and the requirement to test to
ASTM E 1966 or UL 2079 account for movement and address the
intersection between different assemblies.
Although the exceptions clearly state that fire-resistant joint systems

are not required at these nine specific locations, the code would still
not allow an unprotected opening through or between assemblies
that could jeopardize the structural integrity of the fire-resistive
assembly. As an example, consider the floor of a mezzanine within
an open room (see Item 6). While it would not make sense to provide
a fire-resistant joint to limit temperature rise on the unexposed
upper floor surface because heat and flames can go around the
assembly to reach the mezzanine, to protect against structural
failure of the mezzanine floor it is not permissible to leave a joint
in the ceiling unprotected if it could lead to heat in the mezzanine
floor assembly exceeding limits discussed in the section related
to fire tests. So, although Sections 712.1.5.1 and 715 could lead to
the assumption that joint protection is not needed, the continuity
requirements of Sections 711.2.2 and 712.1.15 and the fact that an
assembly must be constructed and installed as tested support code
officials’ expectations that breaches and their respective joints will
not compromise the structural integrity of the assembly.
Because the performance of joints is not evaluated as a part of the
general ASTM E 119 or UL 263 fire test, Section 715 addresses
the situations where breeches occur “in or between” assemblies,
providing the details and test standards to be used for determining
compliance. Joint firestop systems that are in compliance with
Section 715 will: a. Accommodate cyclical movement of the adjacent
assemblies; b. Prevent the passage of flames and hot gases sufficient
to ignite cotton waste to the unexposed side of the assembly; and
c. For joints that are part of a wall assembly, remain in place when
subjected to the hose stream test. The hose stream test simulates
pressures and impacts such as building components falling and
shocking the joint firestop. As the saying goes, a chain is only as
strong as its weakest link. By extension, if a fire-resistance-rated
assembly does not have its breeches adequately protected with
fire-resistant joint systems, then the effectiveness of the assembly
is compromised.
JOINT SYSTEMS IN SMOKE BARRIERS
The last provision in Section 715 addresses situations where a joint

occurs within a smoke barrier and mandates that the joint should
have an L rating (a leakage rating) that does not exceed 5 cubic
feet per minute (cfm) of air leakage per linear foot of joint length at
0.30 inch of water for both the ambient temperature and elevated
temperature tests. This air leakage rate must be determined using
the UL 2079 test standard since the ASTM E 1966 standard does
not include this rating and as such is not referenced under the fire
test criteria of Section 715.6. The provisions of Section 715.6 are
applicable to both horizontal assemblies serving as smoke barriers
as well as walls constructed in accordance with Section 709. As
per IBC, smoke barriers may be required or installed at a number of
locations including:
111
■■ Group I-2 and I-3 occupancies in accordance with Sections 407.5
and 408.6
■■ As part of a smoke control system per Section 909.5
■■ An accessible means of egress and accessible area of refuge per
Sections 1009.6 and 1009.6.4
■■ To compartment underground buildings or protect the elevator
lobbies within them per Sections 405.4.2 and 405.4.3.
■■ For the protection of elevator lobbies per Sections 3007.6.2 and
3008.6.2
The L rating of a tested assembly is verified at both the ambient

temperature and at elevated temperatures to ensure that the product
can perform its intended function at a broad range of temperatures.
Conducting the leakage test at both temperatures helps eliminate
products that are effective at one end of the temperature range but
lack the characteristics needed to stop the spread of smoke when
exposed to the different situations that may be encountered. Code
users should also realize that the air leakage test is an optional
test within the UL 2079 standard. Therefore, not all assemblies that
indicate they were tested in accordance with UL 2079 will have
been tested to establish an L rating. As a base test standard, the
UL 2079 standard is similar to the ASTM E 1966 standard in the
fact that it is accepted by Section 715.3 for determining the fire-
resistance capabilities of a joint system, but, the smoke barrier air
leakage requirements of Section 715.6 can be verified only by the
additional, optional leakage test.
One of the most overlooked persons while providing compliant joint

systems is the structural engineer. Since joints must be capable
of accommodating the movement of buildings and independent
assemblies while still performing as intended, it is important to
know exactly how much movement is anticipated between adjacent
assemblies.
If the building’s movement is greater than the joint firestop system
can accommodate, a through opening could be created, or the joint
could be pulled apart and fail to provide the required protection.
Conversely, if movement reduces the joint space to a size smaller
than the design anticipated, it could displace the joint materials or
result in crushing of one of the assemblies or of the adjacent finishes
or protection. Therefore, one of the first people with whom the joint
requirements should be discussed is the structural engineer, who
would be able to provide guidance on the anticipated movement the
joint system will face over the building’s lifetime.
TESTING & STANDARDS

For the Firestop joint system, there is no testing standard existing so
far in India. However, by practice the industry uses ASTM/UL tested
systems for firestop joints.
In IBC, Section 715.3 establishes the testing criteria used to determine

the suitability of fire-resistant joint systems in specific applications.
The code requires joint systems to be tested in accordance with the
requirements of either the ASTM E 1966 or UL 2079 standard, which
are essentially equivalent. As mentioned previously, these standards
evaluate joint systems that protect linear openings between adjacent
fire-resistance-rated assemblies. The tests require the joint system
to meet many of the same requirements that the ASTM E 119 or UL
263 tests do for the wall or horizontal assembly (ability to prohibit
passage of flame, limit temperature transmission, withstand hose
stream test, maintain load-bearing capacity if needed), but focus
on the joint and its ability to go through anticipated movement
cycles while continuing to function. The ASTM E 1966 test does not
evaluate the level of smoke leakage and, therefore, where smoke
barriers are involved, Section 715.6 will specify that testing is done
in accordance with UL 2079 and require an L rating with a maximum
specified air leakage rate.
113
Similar to the requirement for testing of nonsymmetrical wall
construction in Section 703.2.1, any nonsymmetrical joint system
intended for installation in wall assemblies must also be tested
from both faces. The assigned fire-resistance rating is established
by using the shortest duration obtained from the two tests. Figure
106 illustrates an example of symmetrical and nonsymmetrical fire-
resistive joint systems. However, the code provides two options that
would accept a nonsymmetrical joint tested from only one side:
■■ The text in the base paragraph of Section 715.3 allows the joint
to be tested from “the least fire-resistant side” (if that can be
established) and have the fire-resistance established on the basis of
that one test.
■■ The exception in Section 715.3 will allow joint systems in an exterior
wall with a fire separation distance greater than 5 feet to be tested
for only interior fire exposure.
NONSYMMETRICAL JOINT SYMMETRICAL JOINT
(Fig 4.8 Nonsymmetrical and Symmetrical Fire-Resistive Joint Systems)

As a part of the testing criteria, each joint system must evaluate
the effect of a splice within the joint. A splice within the joint must
be tested since the presence and orientation of the splice in a joint
system can affect fire performance. This requirement also recognizes
that based on the requirements in Section 715.2: a joint must be
securely installed as specified by the manufacturer’s installation
instructions and the system’s listing for the entire length of a joint.
Installed joints generally exceed the lengths evaluated during the
fire test, and such joints may exceed the length of prefabricated joint
systems or have cold joints where the field installation of the system
may be delayed or sequenced. Therefore, this requirement from the
test standard to evaluate splices within a joint helps ensure the final
full-length installed condition is still capable of performing as well as
the tested sample.
After the testing process, each of the fire-resistant joint systems is

listed in the product directory of the third-party testing laboratory
and the manufacturers develop installation instructions addressing
their specific products. Section 715.2 requires that the systems be
installed in accordance with their listing requirements to ensure that
the joint system will be capable of performing as intended and that
it is appropriate for the location and construction. Because of the
variety of available products, solutions and installation methods
thereof, it is important that the designer, installer and inspector, all
have access to the listing requirements of each.
As explained in the chapters above Firestop joint system designs

are tested and listed by independent testing agencies such as
Underwriters Laboratories (UL) and Intertek etc. All the key elements
of each design become part of the listing. The fire resistance test
for the firestop joint is performed by multiple standards available
globally. However, in practice, it has been noted that in India, ASTM
1966 and UL 2079 standards are recognized by the architects and
consultants.
115
As per the ASTM and UL standards, when firestop joints are tested,
they are either qualified as static joints or dynamic joints. For a
Firestop joint system to be qualified as dynamic joint, UL & ASTM
standards require it to be subjected to a cycling test before the Fire
endurance test.
(Fig 4.9 Cycling test table)
After completing the cycling test, the sample is subjected to Fire

Endurance Test for the rating period. On successful completion
of the test for the respective joint systems, assembly rating and
movement rating is granted.
SYSTEM SELECTION
System selection for through fire protection can be done by
accessing third-party certification laboratory listing directories. One
of the examples is the UL certification directory. The UL directory
follows a specific nomenclature to identify the different firestop
systems listed.
application.
■■ What type of building assemblies is the joint formed by? - Floor/
Floor, Floor/Wall, Wall/Wall, Top of Wall/Ceiling
■■ What type of material is the building assembly? - Concrete, CMU,
Gypsum
■■ What is the hourly rating you are looking for? - Assembly rating (1 –
4 hour)
■■ How big of a joint is required (inches)
■■ How much movement is required? - Must accommodate building
movement (% of the joint size)
■■ Are there any special considerations? - Unique construction
condition, environmental exposure
NAVIGATING UL
Example 1:-
HW-D-0286 - Head of Wall
First Two Alpha Characters – identify the type of joint system,

barriers that form the joint.
■■ FF = Floor-to-Floor
■■ WW = Wall-to-Wall
■■ FW = Floor-to-Wall
■■ HW = Head-of-Wall
117
HW-D-0286 - Movement: Dynamic
Next Alpha Character – identifies the movement capabilities

of the system
■■ D = Dynamic (movement capabilities)
■■ S = Static (no movement capabilities)
HW-D-0286 - Joint Width ≤ 2 inch | HW-D-0286 - Individual

System Number
Numeric Component – the first digit identifies the width of the

joint system, next three are sequential system numbering.
■■ 0000-0999 = joint ≤ 2 inch

■■ 1000-1999 = joint > 2 inch ≤ 6 inch
■■ 2000-2999 = joint > 6 inch ≤ 12 inch
■■ 3000-3999 = joint > 12 inch ≤ 24 inch
■■ 4000-4999 = joint > 24 inch
By following the below-mentioned steps, any firestop system

can be easily identified.
Step 1: Log in to www.ul.com

Step 2: Type “Product iQ” in the search box.
Step 3: Click on the first link
(Fig 4.10)
(Fig 4.11)
119
Step 4: Click on “Access Product iQ”
(Fig 4.12)
Step 5: Sign Up or Sign in
(Fig 4.13)
Step 6 – After logging in, click on Joint Systems under the
Building Materials & Systems drop-down menu.
(Fig 4.14)
Step 7 – Use the refine results tab to put the criterion for which
the firestop system is being searched.
For example -
Joint System Type – Head of Wall
Movement – Class I Dynamic
Hourly Rating – 2 hours
Nominal Joint Width – 2 in.
When we select these filters, there will be multiple firestop systems
that will appear. From these systems, an appropriate system can
be selected depending on the case.
121
(Fig 4.15)
Step 8 - Choose the right system by referring to the right

firestop system details. An example of a firestop system is
shown
JOINT below
SYSTEMS | ULin detail:
Product iQ Page 1 of 3
XHBN.HW-D-0286 - JOINT SYSTEMS
Design/System/Construction/Assembly Usage Disclaimer

• Authorities Having Jurisdiction should be consulted in all cases as to the particular requirements covering the
installation and use of UL Certified products, equipment, system, devices, and materials.
• Authorities Having Jurisdiction should be consulted before construction.
• Fire resistance assemblies and products are developed by the design submitter and have been investigated by UL
for compliance with applicable requirements. The published information cannot always address every
construction nuance encountered in the field.
• When field issues arise, it is recommended the first contact for assistance be the technical service staff provided
by the product manufacturer noted for the design. Users of fire resistance assemblies are advised to consult the
general Guide Information for each product category and each group of assemblies. The Guide Information
includes specifics concerning alternate materials and alternate methods of construction.
• Only products which bear UL's Mark are considered Certified.
(Fig 4.16)
XHBN - Joint Systems
See General Information for Joint Systems
System No. HW-D-0286

JOINT SYSTEMS | UL Product iQ Page 2 of 3
1. Floor Assembly — The 2 hr fire-rated fluted steel deck/concrete floor assembly shall be constructed of the materials and
in the manner described in the individual D900 Floor-Ceiling Design in the UL Fire Resistance Directory and shall include the
following construction features:
A. Steel Floor and Form Units* — Max 3 in. (76 mm) deep galv steel fluted floor units.
B. Concrete — Min 2-1/2 in. (64 mm) thick reinforced concrete, as measured from the top plane of the floor units.
2. Wall Assembly — Min 8 in. (203 mm) thick reinforced lightweight or normal weight (100-150 pcf or 1600-2400 kg/m3)
structural concrete. Wall shall be installed parallel with the flutes of the steel floor and form units (Item 1A). Wall may also
be constructed of any UL Classified 2 hr fire rated Concrete Blocks*. When wall is constructed of concrete blocks, the top
course of block shall be filled with concrete, grout or mortar.
See Concrete Blocks (CAZT) category in the Fire Resistance Directory for names of manufacturers.
3. Joint System — Max separation between bottom of spray-applied fire resistive and top of the wall at time of
installation of joint system is 2 in. (51 mm). The joint system is designed to accommodate a max 12.5 percent
compression or extension from its installed width. The joint system consists of the following:
A. Forming Material* — Min 4 pcf (64 kg/m3) mineral wool batt insulation cut into strips min 2 in. (51 mm) wide
compressed 33 percent in thickness and inserted into the gap between the top of the wall and the bottom of the
floor units flush with one surface of the wall.
ROCK WOOL MANUFACTURING CO — Delta Board
B. Fill, Void or Cavity Material* — Min 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) wet thickness (min 1/16 in. or 1.6 mm dry thickness) of fill
material sprayed or troweled into joint to completely cover mineral wool forming material and to overlap a min of
1/2 in. (13 mm) onto wall and steel deck within joint cavity.
HILTI CONSTRUCTION CHEMICALS, DIV OF HILTI INC — CP672 Firestop Spray
C. Forming Material* — Min 4 pcf (64 kg/m3) mineral wool batt insulation cut into strips min 6 in. (152 mm) wide,
compressed 33 percent in thickness and inserted into the gap between the top of the wall and the bottom of the
floor units flush with the installed forming material Item 3A. When the void beneath the steel deck is located
entirely above the wall, the void shall be completely filled with mineral wool insulation compressed 33 percent in
thickness. When void beneath the steel deck is located in part above the wall, that portion of the void above the
(Fig 4.17)
https://iq.ulprospector.com/en/profile?e=170318 123
7/11/2019
JOINT SYSTEMS | UL Product iQ Page 3 of 3
wall shall be packed with additional strips of mineral wool batt insulation compressed 33 percent in thickness flush
with the surface of the wall.
ROCK WOOL MANUFACTURING CO — Delta Board
D. Fill, Void or Cavity Material* — Min 1/8 in. (3.2 mm) wet thickness (min 1/16 in. or 1.6 mm dry thickness) of fill
material sprayed or troweled to completely cover mineral wool forming material and to overlap a min of 1/2 in. (13
mm) onto wall and steel deck on accessible side of the wall.
HILTI CONSTRUCTION CHEMICALS, DIV OF HILTI INC — CP672 Firestop Spray or CFS-SP WB Firestop Joint
Spray
* Indicates such products shall bear the UL or cUL Certification Mark

for jurisdictions employing the UL or cUL Certification (such as
Canada), respectively.
Last Updated on 2010-06-04
The appearance of a company's name or product in this database does not in itself assure that products so identified have been
manufactured under UL's Follow-Up Service. Only those products bearing the UL Mark should be considered to be Certified and
covered under UL's Follow-Up Service. Always look for the Mark on the product.
UL permits the reproduction of the material contained in the Online Certification Directory subject to the following conditions: 1.
The Guide Information, Assemblies, Constructions, Designs, Systems, and/or Certifications (files) must be presented in their entirety
and in a non-misleading manner, without any manipulation of the data (or drawings). 2. The statement "Reprinted from the Online
Certifications Directory with permission from UL" must appear adjacent to the extracted material. In addition, the reprinted material
must include a copyright notice in the following format: "© 2019 UL LLC"
(Fig 4.18)
INSTALLATION AND INSPECTION

The inspection of penetration firestops and joint systems is not
specifically addressed in the code. As a general rule, these are
“listed” systems and therefore must be installed in accordance
with their listing and the manufacturer’s installation instructions.
Code users may want to be aware of the ASTM E 2393 standard,
Standard Practice for On-Site Inspection of Installed Fire-resistive
Joint Systems and Perimeter Fire Barriers. According to Chapter 17
(see Sections 1705.17 and 1705.17.2), compliance with that standard
is mandatory for special inspections of fire-resistant joint systems
where required. A brief discussion of this standard is included at the
end of this book in the section dealing with miscellaneous topics.
https://iq.ulprospector.com/en/profile?e=170318 7/11/2019
IBC Guidelines regarding Inspections:
■■ 110.3.6 Protection of joints and penetrations in fire-resistance

rated assemblies, smoke barriers and smoke partitions shall not be
concealed from view until inspected and approved.
■■ 107.1.1 - Information on Construction Documents shall be of
sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of
the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the
provisions of this codes
■■ 107.3.4.1-Deferred submittals Deferred submittals are defined as
those portions of the design that are not submitted at the time of the
application and that are to be submitted to the building official within
a specified period.
IBC Special Inspections
■■ 1705.16 Fire-resistant penetrations and joints. In high-rise buildings

or in buildings assigned to Risk Category III or IV in accordance
with Section 1604.5, special inspections for through-penetrations,
membrane penetration firestops, fire-resistance joint systems, and
perimeter fire barrier systems that are tested and listed
■■ 1705.1.1 Special cases. Special inspections shall be required for
proposed work that is, in the opinion of the building official, unusual
in its nature
■■ ASTM standards required in 1705.16 for inspection procedures
(E2174-04 and E2393-04).
125
Perimeter Firestop Joints
CHAPTER 5 for Curtain Wall Assembly
(Fig 5.1)
The number of tall buildings constructed is increasing ever more

rapidly. Tall buildings have become more common in cities. For
example, statistics compiled by the CTBUH show that the number
of buildings of 200 meters’ height or greater increased by 441%
from 2000 until the end of 2016. That number grew another 26.5%
between 2016 and 2018 (CTBUH 2018).
127
Numerous high-profile fire incidents have recently occurred
involving the façades of tall buildings around the world. Incidents
such as these pose a life-safety hazard to the building occupants
and people in a neighboring property, cause damage to the building,
present a challenge for the fire and emergency services, and affect
the operation.
In high-rise constructions, it is always a challenge for the firefighters

to reach the affected floors of fire because the snorkel heights are
limited in its reach. The other challenges faced in such structures for
fire safety is evacuating the occupants from such a large evacuation
distance via stairs and the physical stress involved.
Therefore, in high rise structures, fire safety is of supreme priority

and passive fire protection becomes the key component that
provides safety to occupancy, structure and provides extra time for
firefighters to reach the floor on fire.
In the urbanized world, the trend in the majority of these high-rise
buildings has been seen with more and more usage of curtain
walls or glass facades. These curtain walls become the external
elegant factor for any building, but it also plays a critical role in
energy efficiency and sustainability of the building. But from a safety
point, such structures enveloped by a curtain wall system pose an
additional challenge to the fire safety of the building.
In addition to the specific characteristics of the curtain wall systems,

several other related aspects need to be considered. During
design and construction, and similarly, if a building later undergoes
refurbishment, the building regulatory system and the adoption of
various national or international test standards can have a critical
impact on the performance of a façade in a fire incident. Avoiding
or compromising the edge of the slab opening with no systems or
untested system means compromising with the safety of people.
Perimeter fire barriers are one of the required systems from the
Building Codes and it’s an effective fire and smoke resistance
compartmentation methodology. In this chapter, we will be
describing the details of perimeter firestop systems for curtain walls.
Before moving on any further, let’s first discuss the fundamentals of
a curtain wall system.
Curtain wall systems are factory-made and site assembled systems

in the majority of the cases and it gets installed at site panel by
panel. They are bought to the site and assembled. These are of two
types based on the way each component is assembled.
■■ Stick Curtain Wall System

■■ Unitized Curtain Wall System
Stick Curtain Wall System involves its components to be assembled

piece by piece on the building at the site. These are mainly installed
in low rise buildings or small regions. This is because to reach
higher elevations, exterior access is needed. For this additional
requirement like scaffolding, cranes, etc. will be required.
129
The above system gains the advantage of low shipping cost as onsite
adjustments are possible. But the time and labor consumption are
recorded to be high.
(Fig 5.2)
Unitized curtain wall systems involve assembling through

interlocking units that are bought from the factory. The whole
components are bought together as a single unit from the factory.
Individual installation of each component is not necessary as
required in stick system. The size of the unitized curtain wall is
dependent on the floor to floor height of the building. Hence it is
essential to keep in mind the mode of transportation and installation
while planning the depth of facade. Unitized systems are mainly
used in high rise buildings. This does not require exterior supports
like cranes or scaffolding. Only mini cranes or a temporary hoist can
be held over the floor to keep it help during installation.
The unitized curtain wall systems gain the advantage of faster

construction and higher quality because of factory manufacturing.
But it does gain a high shipping charge due to the requirement of
larger protection during transportation.
Here it is very important to understand the different requirements
of Fire safety in both these systems because of their differing
installation and application style.
In stick systems, the primary element is the façade panels which

gets attached on the exterior part of the wall by leaving an air gap
for insulation purpose of the inside occupancy. The façade panels in
stick systems exist in a range of configurations and often combustible.
Therefore, NFPA 285 (“Standard Fire Test Method for Evaluation
of Fire Propagation Characteristics of Exterior Wall Assemblies
Containing Combustible Components”) standard was formed to test
and evaluate the combustibility of such exterior assemblies.
Whereas in the unitized system, façade systems are fixed to a

bracket extending outwards from the floor assembly. This often
leaves a gap between the floor and façade panels which often
ranges from 50 mm to 200 or 250 mm.
131
Due to this particular situation, ASTM formed and released a test
standard – ASTM E2307 which replicates a similar situation of
unitized curtain wall on a test furnace and evaluates its performance
to resist fire spread.
Therefore, it is important to not confuse between NFPA 285 and

ASTM E2307. NFPA 285 is a test that measures the propagation
of fire in stick systems. And ASTM E2307 is a test that measures
the integrity of the compartment when unitized curtain wall configu
rations are created.
In this chapter, we will focus on ASTM E2307 & unitized curtain wall
configuration as it related to the understanding of firestop systems.
One of the basic questions which needs to be understood in Façade

Fire science is the Mechanism of Fire Spread:
There are primarily following mechanism by which we see Fire

Spread in curtain walls:
■■ Inside: Hot gases and flames present on the floor hit the perimeter
fire barrier and the interior surfaces of the curtain walls.
■■ Outside: Hot gases and flames which have broken the glazing get
project outwards and hit the curtain wall above from exterior side.
■■ Outside: Hot gases and flames which have broken the glazing
radiate the heat to and through the glazing to the building contents
inside.
From the perspective of Fire containment, there are primarily two

basic ways
CODES AND STANDARDS
National Building Code of India recognized the fire risk created by

such façade assemblies and hence include the recommendations
for the first time in NBC 2016 version. Under Section 3.4.10.2
following recommendations are made to address the fire safety of
such assemblies.
“3.4.10.2 Glass facade shall be in accordance with the following:
b) All gaps between floor-slabs and façade assembly shall be sealed

at all levels by approved fire-resistant sealant material of equal fire
rating as that of floor slab to prevent fire and smoke propagation
from one floor to another.”
As far as IBC is concerned, Section 715.1.1 requires the void at the

intersection of a floor and an exterior curtain wall to be protected.
The intent of this provision is to ensure the continuity of the
horizontal assembly and to eliminate the possible spread of fire or
hot gasses vertically in the building through the void (See fig 5.3).
This requirement applies regardless of whether the wall or the floor
has a fire-resistance rating, which is why this provision is placed
within a separate section. The fact that this requirement addresses
both rated and non-rated assemblies coordinates with the provisions
of Sections 711.1 and 714.5 and will help prevent the migration of
smoke and fire to other levels of the building. The void or breach at
the intersection of the floor and curtain wall must comply with the
protection provisions in Section 715.4. The technical requirements
of Section 715.4 will be covered shortly, but code users should note
that Section 715.4 applies where the floor has a fire-resistance
rating, while Section 715.4.1 applies where the floor does not have
a fire-resistance rating.
133
(Fig 5.3)
Several phrases have been coined for the systems that protect
the void at the intersection of a fire-resistance-rated floor and an
exterior curtain wall. Some of the designations are perimeter fire
containment systems, perimeter joint systems, floor edge joint
systems, safing joint systems and perimeter fire barrier systems.
The phrase “perimeter firestop systems” describes the situation
well. The systems occur at the perimeter of the building. The intent
of the systems is fire containment. The curtain wall is typically not
fire-resistance rated, so these systems should not be confused with
joint systems evaluated to ASTM E 1966 or UL 2079. These systems
include the specific floor construction, the exterior curtain wall, the
protection on the interior face of the curtain wall if provided, and the
material(s) used to protect the void between the floor slab edge and
the curtain wall. The materials used in the void are often referred to
as safing materials.
Code users should also recognize that the intersection of the exterior
wall and the floor assembly provide multiple different paths that may
allow a fire to spread. The code establishes different requirements
for each of these potential paths and addresses means to prevent
the spread of fire through these paths. Conceptually, the easiest
way to look at the three paths for the fire to spread to adjacent floor
levels at the exterior wall are:
■■ Through Void: Spreading within the building through the void space
created between the edge of the floor and an exterior curtain wall.
This is regulated by Section 715.4 and addressed later.
■■ Through Cavity: Spreading through a void or cavity within the
exterior curtain wall. In this situation, the fire would spread by a
path within the concealed space of the exterior wall. This would be
regulated by Sections 718 and 718.2.2, or perhaps Chapter 14 (e.g.,
1403.5) but is not addressed within this book.
■■ Leap-frogging: Spreading to the exterior and then impinging on
an opening in an upper level. This path is generally referred to as
“leap-frogging,” is regulated by Sections 705.8.5 and 715.5, and is
addressed later.
These three potential paths are shown within Figure.
OPENINGS IN
EXTERIOR WALL
– REGULATED BY INTERIOR
SECTIONS 705.8
AND 715.5
AT VOID SPACE-REGULATED
BY SECTION 715.4
EXTERIOR
WITHIN EXTERIOR WALL –

REGULATED BY SECTION 718
AND CHAPTER 14
(Fig 5.4 Potential Paths for Fire Spread)

135
In the 2015 code, Section 715.4.2 was added to address the joint
between a rated fire barrier wall and a non-fire-resistance-rated
exterior curtain wall. This topic will be discussed in more detail when
the technical requirements of Section 715.4 are discussed.
The means by which the exterior curtain wall is constructed and

attached to the floor will dictate the fire risk associated with the
exterior curtain wall/floor intersection. Figure 5.4 shows several
different arrangements for the exterior wall and floor intersection.
In Condition A, the exterior walls bear on the floor slab and run
from the top of the floor below to the bottom of the floor above. In
this scenario, there is no void at the edge of the floor slab, and as
such, the only path for flame propagation is via leap-frogging.
Under Conditions B and C, the exterior curtain wall skirts past the
outer edge of the floor slab, creating a void between the wall and
the edge of the floor slab. That void, if left unprotected, will allow
for the passage of flames from the floor below to the floor above.
In Condition B, the cavities of the exterior curtain wall are open.
As such, the void extends from the interior surface of the exterior
sheathing, siding or finish material to the edge of the floor slab. In
this situation, the two paths for flame propagation are through the
void and via leap-frogging.
In Condition C, the exterior curtain wall contains a membrane on the

interior surface of the wall so the void would only include the gap
between the edge of the horizontal assembly and the interior face
of the exterior wall. However, this wall construction contains a void
within the wall cavity. As such, in this situation, the paths of flame
propagation include through the void, through the cavity and via
leap-frogging.
Therefore, it is important to find a perimeter fire containment system
that has been evaluated using the same conditions as those in
the actual construction. It is also important to find a system that
describes a curtain wall attachment method consistent with what is
being constructed. The attachment method has proven to be one of
the most critical factors relating to the performance of the system.
The floor requirements of Section 715.4 are split into two parts.
Section 715.4.1 applies to situations where the floor assembly does
not have a fire-resistance rating, while Section 715.4 deals with rated
floor assemblies. The code expects the voids to be filled regardless
of whether the floor is rated or not, but the primary difference is that
the code expects a tested system to fill the void where a rated floor
system is used (see Section 715.4), while Section 715.4.1 for non-
rated floors will only require an “approved” material or system.
Where a fire-resistance-rated floor or floor/ceiling assembly is used,

any void between the floor and an exterior wall must be protected
using a perimeter fire containment system that has been tested to
the ASTM E 2307 standard and provides an F rating that is equal
or greater than the fire-resistance rating of the floor. The ASTM E
2307 test is titled the Standard Test Method for Determining Fire-
resistance of Perimeter Fire Barriers Using Intermediate-Scale,
Multistory Test Apparatus.
This test standard was developed specifically to evaluate the ability

of a perimeter fire containment system to prevent the passage of
flame and hot gases at the interface between a fire-resistance-rated
horizontal assembly and a non-fire-resistance-rated exterior curtain
wall. Figure 5.6 shows the details of the test furnace used with the
ASTM E 2307 test. One item to be aware of is that the test was
developed to address the void space between the interior surface of
the wall assembly and the adjacent edge of the floor.
137
For the purposes of the ASTM E 2307 test standard, the interior face
of the exterior wall is at the interior surface of the wall’s framework.
Therefore, the test is not intended to evaluate the spread of fire within
the core or cavity of the exterior wall assembly. Nor is it intended to
evaluate the passage of flames via the openings in the exterior wall
(i.e. leap-frogging), which is addressed by Section 705.8.5. Most
of the tested and listed systems will involve details and information
regarding the need for spandrel insulation or finishes to protect
the interior of the curtain wall, which appears to create quasi-
fire-resistance-rated walls. But this is not the case. The spandrel
insulation is used to provide some integrity to the exterior curtain
wall, keeping it intact enough to allow the safing material installed
in the void to remain in place. (See details B and C in Figure 5.5 to
see the distinction between the voids addressed by ASTM E 2307.)
If the insulation or finish on the inside face of the exterior wall is not
adequate to resist the test’s fire exposure, then the exterior wall will
deteriorate to the point that it is not able to hold the safing material
in place. Under either scenario, the fire barrier will have failed to
stop the fire from spreading to the upper floor through the void at the
edge of the floor. Perimeter fire containment systems listed using
ASTM E 2307 typically include:
■■ Some types of mineral wool insulation mechanically secured to the

interior side of the spandrel panels of the exterior wall to protect the
curtain wall framing system.
■■ A reinforcing angle or channel mechanically secured to the curtain
wall adjacent to the floor slab.
■■ Compressed mineral wool insulation filling the gap or void between
the floor and the curtain wall, which is commonly referred to as
“safing.”
■■ A smoke seal applied on top of the safing insulation.
Figure 5.7 shows the typical components specified in listings of

tested perimeter fire containment systems.
THERE IS NO VOID BEYOND FLOOR ASSEMBLY.
THEREFORE DOES NOT REQUIRE COMPLIANCE
WITH SECTION 715.4
(a)
HORIZONTAL ASSEMBLY
EXTENDS TO EXTERIOR
EXTERIOR VOID REGULATED BY SECTION 715

GLAZING OR
PANEL
(b)
VOID INCLUDES ALL SPACE

TO INTERIOR SURFACE OF
SHEATHING, SIDING OR FINISH
EDGE OF FRAMING OR MULLION
BEYOND
EXTERIOR WALL ASSEMBLY
VOID REGULATED BY SECTION 715
(c)
VOID DOES NOT INCLUDE

EXTERIOR WALL CAVITY
(ATTACHMENT IS NOT SHOWN IN B & C FOR CLARITY)

139
(Fig 5.5 Exterior Wall and Floor Intersections)
10″
SECTION
(Fig 5.6 ASTM E 2307 Test Furnace)

SUPPORT FOR CURTAIN
WALL INSULATION
CURTAIN WALL FRAMING

MEMBERS
VISION GLASS
FRAMING
COVERS
(INSULATION)
SPANDREL
PANEL
REINFORCING
ANGLE
CURTAIN
FIRE-RESISTANCE RATED WALL INSULATION
FLOOR ASSEMBLY
FIRESTOP
MATERIAL
SAFING
MATERIAL
(Fig 5.7 Typical Components in Tested Perimeter Fire Containment Systems)
TESTING AND RATING

The basic configuration of the test furnace and test sample in ASTM
E 2307 are as shown in Figure 5.6. The test furnace represents a
two-story building with the first floor fully engaged in a post-flashover
fire condition. The fire is provided using two burners; one on the
first floor of the structure and one outside the first floor, providing
a flame plume up along the side of the building. An exterior curtain
wall is then installed on one side of the structure. The void between
the curtain wall and the edge of the floor slab is then protected
with materials that are intended to prevent the passage of flames
through the void.
The ASTM E 2307 standard defines two rating criteria relating to

the fire performance of perimeter fire containment systems. The
conditions of acceptance for these two criteria are as follows:
141
F Rating: An F rating is the time period for which the perimeter
fire containment system prohibits the passage of flames sufficient
to ignite cotton waste through or around the boundaries of the
materials installed within the void.
T Rating: A T rating is the time period for which the perimeter fire
containment system: a. Prohibits the passage of flames sufficient
to ignite cotton waste through or around the boundaries of the
materials installed within the void; b. Limits the temperature rise on
the unexposed (top) side of the materials installed within the void to
a maximum at any individual point of 325oF (180oC) above its initial
temperature; and, for joints with a maximum width greater than 4
inches, c. Limits the temperature rise on the unexposed (top) side
of the materials installed within the void to an average of 250oF
(140oC) above its initial temperature.
Note the temperature rise limitations for a T rating match the

maximum individual point and average temperature rise from
the ASTM E 119 and UL 263 test used for determining the fire-
resistance rating of the floor assembly. By the T-rating test imposing
the same temperature rise limitations, it has essentially extended
the fire-resistance rating of the floor assembly to the interior face of
the curtain wall. Obtaining a T rating is more difficult than obtaining
an F rating. This is because the T rating indicates the perimeter fire
containment system is not only capable of stopping the flames from
passing through the void as an F rating does, but it must also limit
the heat transfer to the unexposed side of the materials used to
protect the void.
The code, in Section 715.4, requires perimeter fire containment

systems to have an F rating, which is equal to or greater than the
fire-resistance rating of the floor. This expected level of performance
was addressed previously.
While all perimeter joint protection is tested at its maximum joint
width, the maximum joint width of a static perimeter joint protection
is the same as its nominal joint width. This is another difference
between dynamic perimeter joint protection Listings and those
designated as “static”.
The dynamic perimeter joint protection is tested at its maximum

joint width, which is larger than the nominal joint width at which
the perimeter joint protection is installed. Many of the perimeter
joint protection systems consist of compressed insulation, which
increases its nominal density when installing into a perimeter joint
that is narrower than the nominal thickness of the insulation. In all
dynamic perimeter joint protection, the effective compression and
the effective density of the insulation decrease at maximum joint
width, which increases heat transfer through it creating a worse-
case ASTM E2307 fire test scenario.
No movement data is presented in static perimeter joint protection

Listings. The nominal joint width and maximum joint width are the
same for static perimeter joint protection, which is unrealistic for
perimeter joint applications. An unchanged (static) joint width means
that heat transfer through the insulation remains the same for their
nominal joint width and maximum joint width conditions. This is the
best-case fire test scenario. Static perimeter joint protection will
perform better than a dynamic perimeter joint protection that uses
the same nominal width and nominal density insulation because the
former does not experience a decrease in its effective compression
or effective density to be ASTM E2307 fire tested.
Some ASTM E2307 laboratory test frames are designed to

accommodate both horizontal and vertical movement cycling.
These test frames use hydraulics to cycle the dynamic perimeter
joint protection before the ASTM E2307 fire-resistance test is
conducted. The magnitude of expansion/ contraction movement
cycling for ASTM E2307 is determined by the test sponsors.
143
However, the magnitude of expansion/contraction movement cycling
of a building is determined by the maximum inward/outward deflection
of the curtain wall and the maximum expansion/contraction of the
floor assembly. These expansion/contraction movement values are
calculated by the structural engineer that designs the building and
these expansion/contraction values determine the movement of the
perimeter joint. The perimeter joint protection must be compatible
with the perimeter joint’s movement capabilities. However, it is
not reasonable to expect every building’s expansion/contraction
capabilities to be tested.
Therefore, testing a large expansion/contraction movement by

cycling to ASTM E2307 requirements is a potential solution. The
perimeter joint protection, including the insulation, must be installed
at the nominal joint width as it would be in the field. After installation,
the perimeter joint is closed by laboratory cycling to its minimum
joint width replicating joint contraction. The minimum joint width
creates the maximum effective density. This condition can cause
degradation of the insulation or undue stress on the curtain wall
assembly. The perimeter joint is then opened, replicating joint
expansion until the perimeter joint width reaches its maximum joint
width. Then the perimeter joint is closed again to its minimum joint
width. The rates at which these cycles occur and the number of
cycles required to be movement classified are defined by ASTM
E2307.
As was discussed earlier, one of the concepts of fire-resistive

construction is to contain the fire to the floor of origin. When
reviewing the conditions of acceptance of ASTM E 2307, we see, it
only protects from flame propagation and temperature rise through
or around the materials used to protect the void. It does not protect
from flame propagation through the concealed space of the exterior
wall or via leap-frogging through the window openings. As such, by
itself, ASTM E 2307 does not provide the same level of protection
anticipated or desired by the code.
This thought process led UL to develop a second set of criteria for
evaluating the performance of perimeter fire containment systems.
The early listings from UL were done using the test apparatus
described in ASTM E 2307, but with more stringent conditions of
acceptance. The UL method developed two rating criteria—an
Integrity rating and an Insulation rating. These terms are borrowed
from the international fire-resistance test standards. The conditions
of acceptance for these two ratings are as follows:
Integrity Rating: The criteria for the Integrity rating include the
requirements for the F rating of ASTM E 2307 in addition to a
requirement that the system must prevent the passage of flames
through openings in the curtain wall anywhere above the protected
void. Put another way, the criteria for an Integrity rating prohibits
flaming through all the three paths discussed earlier.
Insulation Rating: The criteria for the Insulation rating include the
requirements for the T rating in addition to the requirement to limit
the temperature rise to 325°F (180°C) above the starting temperature
anywhere on the interior surface of the curtain wall above the
protected void. Put another way, the criteria for an Insulation rating
limits the temperature rise anywhere on or above the floor level of
the test assembly, including the vertical mullions and vision glass.
As this discussion implies, the UL criteria increase the level of

protection achieved by prohibiting flame passage and limiting the
temperature rise anywhere on or above the floor level. UL now
requires the F and T ratings as the minimum level of protection.
However, the Integrity and Insulation ratings are offered as an option
for those manufacturers who would like to demonstrate a higher
level of safety. These higher performance levels are not required by
the IBC. Ultimately, the designer or owner will have to determine if
the level of protection required by the code is adequate or a higher
level of protection provided by a T rating, and Integrity rating or an
Insulation rating is required. For a code official to require this higher
level of safety, he or she would need to either amend the code or
demonstrate that the higher safety level is needed due to something
unique with that project.
145
The perimeter fire barrier containment system is typically concealed
by some type of an interior wall such as a knee or pony wall (see
Figure 5.8). These interior walls are not usually included as a part
of the tested assembly. Testing the assembly without these interior
walls allows a designer the flexibility to use any wall configuration
and construction permitted for that building type. It also allows the
building to be occupied prior to all floors or areas being finished with
the knee wall. However, simply providing a wall does not eliminate
the need for the perimeter fire containment system—unless the
interior wall detail has been specifically tested and shown to meet the
requirements of either the ASTM E 2307 standard or the exception
within Section 715.4. While the walls are not required by the test
standard and may conceal the void, simply constructing a wall, even
a fire-resistance-rated wall, is not adequate to replace the perimeter
fire barrier protection.
EXTERIOR WALL – FULL OR PARTIAL

WALL HEIGHT TO CONCEAL
PERIMETER GAP OR
BUILDING SERVICES
FLOOR
PERIMETER
FIRE BARRIER
LOCATION OF POSSIBLE
INTERIOR WALL OR
CEILING
(Fig 5.8 Knee Wall Concealing Perimeter Joint System)

The last sentence of Section 715.4 requires the spandrel wall to
comply with the requirements of Section 705.8.5. This coordinates
with the requirements from Section 715.5 and will be discussed with
that code section.
The exception within Section 715.4 recognizes that curtain wall

assemblies with vision glass that extends to the floor cannot meet
the test criteria in ASTM E 2307 and that prior to the 2009 IBC
these systems could be tested using conditions specified within the
exception. The option of using materials or systems that have been
subjected to an ASTM E 119 time-temperature fire condition under
positive pressure should provide a reasonable level of protection.
This will allow designs or systems that were tested and used in the
years prior to the development of the ASTM E 2307 standard. Figure
5.9 illustrates the location of the glazing and the requirements of the
exception.
VISION GLASS EXTENDS

TO FINISHED FLOOR LEVEL
APPROVED MATERIAL
SECURELY INSTALLED TO
SEAL VOID.
PROTECTION IS AT LEAST
EQUAL TO TIME PERIOD
OF FLOOR ASSEMBLY.
MATERIAL CAPABLE OF
RESISTING PASSAGE OF
FLAME AND HOT GASES
UNDER CONDITIONS OF
THE ASTME E119 TIME-
TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS.
(Fig 5.9 Protection of Floor/Wall Intersection with Full-Height Glazing)
147
As stated earlier, Section 715.4.1 applies to situations where the
curtain wall is adjacent to a non-fire-resistance-rated floor or floor/
ceiling assembly. The code provides little guidance as to the level
of protection required, leaving that up to the code official by using
the term “approved” materials (see IBC Chapter 2 for the definition
of “approved”). As a practical matter, the code does not require the
tested perimeter fire containment system for this situation simply
because the floor is without a rating. It would be permissible to use
a tested system (although, because the floor is nonrated it would not
be installed in full accordance with its listing), but that would exceed
a minimum level of performance. Whatever material is used should
be secured to stay in place and should be capable enough to block
the spread of fire or hot gases through the void for a time period
approximately equal to what the floor can provide. Any joint that can
stop or retard the spread of smoke and heat through the void will
help reduce the hazard that building occupants on other floors may
face. For additional guidance, code users should review Sections
712.1.5.2 and 714.5, and other sections that help reinforce the IBC
expectation that even nonrated floors provide at least a minimum
level of protection to other stories. The type of joint protection should
be compatible with the floor construction and appropriate for the
intended purpose.
Section 715.4.2 was added to the 2015 code to address the

situation where a fire-resistance-rated fire barrier wall terminates
at and adjoins a nonfire-resistance-rated exterior curtain wall. This
provision is conceptually like the void protection provisions found in
Sections 707.9 and 715.4.1, which recognize that these voids should
be filled with an approved material in order to retard the spread of
fire and hot gases through the joint. It also helps to clarify they are
not regulated by the ASTM E 1966 or UL 2079 standards, which only
address the joints and connections between fire-resistance-rated
assemblies. The code, therefore, looks for an “approved” material
or system as opposed to expecting the void system to be tested
and listed as Section 715.3 would require. While Sections 715.4 and
715.4.1 address the spread of fire to adjacent levels by closing the
void at the end of the floor assembly, Section 715.4.2 is focused on
the spread of fire around the end of the wall on the same floor level.
SPANDREL WALL REQUIREMENTS
Section 715.5 provides a cross-reference to the exterior wall
opening provisions of Section 705.8.5. That code requirement
addresses various protection options where openings in the exterior
wall are located on adjacent storeys. Figure 5.10 illustrates the basic
conditions where protection is required. The intent of these provisions
is to reduce or eliminate the potential for a fire to go outside of the
building through an opening on a lower floor then spread back into
the building via a window on a floor above (leap-frogging). (Figure
5.3, which was previously discussed and referenced, shows this as
a potential path for the fire to spread to adjacent levels). The Las
Vegas Hilton Hotel fire of February 10, 1981, is probably one of the
best examples of the importance of this code section and one of the
primary reasons these requirements were originally placed in the
code. In that fire, the flames from an elevator lobby fire spread up
through the building by going out of the windows on the lower level,
reaching the windows on upper storeys and ultimately causing the
elevator lobbies above to also catch fire. The fire spread by these
exterior paths, moving from the eighth to the 29th floor in about
a 10 to 15 minutes time period. Although this is not technically a
joint or penetration firestop issue, but this potential path to spread
fire vertically must be recognized and addressed. Figures 5.11 and
5.12 show the two primary means of addressing this issue in non-
sprinklered buildings.
Wall rated for

Vertical separation required for
exposure from both
openings in upper story by:
sides.*
• 3-ft. min. vertical separation, or • 1-hour min. rating
• 30-in. horizontal flame barrier
Separation/ 3-ft. min.

protection vertical
not required separation
5 ft. or less
horizontal * Cannot use Section 705.5
distance to eliminate rating on
exterior side of the wall at
Unprotected opening in the required 3-ft. vertical
adjacent lower story separation
(a) Exterior elevation (b) Exterior wall section

149
(Fig 5.10 Vertical Separation For Exterior Openings)
GLASS
MIN. 1-HOUR
RATED ASSEMBLY
3′-0″ MIN.
GLASS
(Fig 5.11 Vertical Separation of Glazing)
GLASS
WALL RATING PER

TABLES 601 AND 602
EXTERIOR
30-INCH
INTERIOR
1-HOUR
FLAME
BARRIER
GLASS
(Fig 5.12 Exterior Horizontal Flame Barrier)

Code users should realize that these spandrel wall requirements
are applicable based on the windows in the exterior wall and are
independent of whether the floor or exterior wall is fire-resistance-
rated. The code requirements in Sections 715.4 and 715.5 reference
back to Section 705.8.5 and, as Section 715.5 states, “the
requirements of Section 715.4 shall still apply to the intersection
between the spandrel wall and the floor” even where Section 705.8.5
does not require the spandrel to be rated. Therefore, while Section
705.8.5 may not require a rated spandrel panel or horizontal flame
barrier to prevent the exterior spread of fire to an upper level, the
code will still require the interior void between the curtain wall and
floor to comply with the requirements of Section 715.4. Again, Figure
5.3 shows the difference between the two paths and why the code
mandates following Section 715.4 even where Section 705.8.5 does
not require a rated spandrel wall.
MOVEMENT RATING:
It has also been noted that there are confusions about the significance
of movement consideration in firestop design for curtain wall.
Under normal service conditions, the perimeter joint protection

reacts to both horizontal and vertical movement. The magnitude of
the perimeter joint protection’s movement is dependent upon many
factors. “There are three movements to be considered: vertical,
lateral in the plane of a wall, and lateral normal to a wall plane. The
movements are typically defined by the span ratio; therefore, the
extension of structural spans recently seen in modern structures
significantly increased the deflection building components must
accommodate.” (Kazmierczak, 2010)
“The primary functions of the perimeter joint protection are to

accommodate various movements, such as those induced by
thermal differentials, seismicity, and wind loads, and impede the
vertical spread of fire at the building’s exterior perimeter from the
floor of origin to the floor(s) above.” (Nicholas, 2005).
151
As difficult as it is for some to imagine, buildings move. The
introduction of curtain walls gave buildings even more freedom to
move, with the peaceful rigidity of bulky bearing walls and relatively
short spans of oversized structural members now a thing of the past.
The biggest single difference between having windows punched into
load-bearing walls and having a curtain wall lies in the mechanisms
needed for the latter to accommodate movements—both between
cladding and structure and among cladding components themselves
(Figure 1).” (Kazmierczak, 2008)
The computer rendering of curtain wall movements in Figure 1

demonstrates the need for determining a perimeter joint protection’s
movement capabilities to establish compatibility with the curtain
wall’s movements, which are expansion/contraction and shear
movements. To be considered a dynamic perimeter joint protection,
both expansion/ contraction and shear movements must be cyclic
tested.
Horizontal Movement
There is a misconception that when the curtain wall is anchored
to the building’s floor assembly that there is no movement of the
curtain wall inducing no perimeter joint movement. The amount of
movement varies but all curtain walls enclosing buildings, especially
tall buildings are subjected to movement and cause perimeter joint
movement, which expands and compresses the perimeter joint
protection or subjects it to vertical/lateral shear.
“Curtainwall anchorage must be designed for each individual

project’s conditions, due to almost unlimited combinations of loads,
tolerances, movements, and substrates.” (WAUSAU, 2016)
Expansion and contraction movement at the perimeter joint

protection even occurs between the mullions anchored to the floor
assembly. This movement results from the deflection of the transom
caused by wind loads.
“Industry recommendations for wall framing deflection tested at the
design pressures are L/175 (where L=span).” (Makepeace, Shooner,
Kyle, Wiseman, & deMiguel, 2004) The deflection of the transom
simultaneously moves inward under exterior positive pressure
(wind load) on one building face and outward under negative
pressure on the opposite face of the building, though the degree of
movement is different. “The L/175 deflection criterion is an industry
recommendation only and can be altered by the specifier if the
project demands. Deflection limits of L/200 are quite common and
deflection limits of L/240 are also not unusual. The less the allowable
deflection the deeper or heavier the framing and there is an
increased cost associated with this.” (Makepeace, Shooner, Kyle,
Wiseman, & de Miguel, 2004)
Vertical Movement
The vertical movement of the curtain wall is a result of live loads
and thermal differentials. “Live load movements result from all
occupants, materials, equipment, construction, or other elements
of weight supported in, on, or by structural elements that are likely
to move. Live load movements can cause upward or downward
motion. For example, a downward live load on a floor below can
result in disengagement of improperly designed curtainwall anchors
on a floor above that remains static, while resulting in a “crushing”
action at the floor below.” (WAUSAU, 2016) The following WAUSAU
drawing and caption below illustrates the vertical movement caused
by live loads. Depending on the type of mullion attachment and
mullion spacing the deflection of the floor assembly will create
vertical shear on the perimeter joint protection.
“Thermal movement is also an issue with mullions. A typical two-story

aluminum mullion placed in an exterior environment can oscillate up
to 13 mm (0.5 in.).” (Kazmierczak, 2008) Thermal movement of a
mullion can be expressed as follows:
153
Where,
The temperature of the aluminum framing is a major factor determining

thermal movement. Consider the two extreme environmental
conditions within the same year in a major metropolitan city like
Boston5: the coldest day of the year with very heavy cloud overcast
(10°F in January 2017) and the hottest day of the year with no clouds
(95°F in June 2017). “The sunlight is putting energy into the metal.
If it receives energy faster than it can radiate/convect/conduct it
away, its temperature will increase. Ein−Eout=Eaccumulated (which
is a simplified form of the general conservation equation; greater
accumulated energy means greater temperature in this case).”
This accounts for the fact that the temperature of aluminum can
be significant when subjected to sunlight, e.g. 248°F. “In 25°C still,
dry air, the metal can get up to about 120°C in direct sunlight.6”
Remember that 25°C is only 77°F, not the maximum temperature
differential of 85°F in the preceding example that would further
increase the ΔL result.
ASTM E2307 requires the system to be tested for movement by

conducting a movement cycling test. The issue of joint movement
was discussed in a 1990 article written about joint systems in elevated
concrete slabs in buildings to inform the industry that proper joint
and joint system specifications are critical to the building’s functional
reliability.
(Nicholas, 1990) Making joint systems fire-resistive was addressed
in a 1991 article. (Nicholas, 1991-1) Due to industry confusion
between fire-resistive joint systems and firestop systems, another
1991 article compared and demonstrated that there are many
differences, including designing for expansion/contraction and shear
movements at joints within a building (Nicholas, 1991-2), between
fire-resistive joint systems and firestop systems tested to ASTM
E814 (ASTM International, 2017-1).
These articles about joint movement resulted in a new standard

test method being published to determine Cyclic Movement and
Measuring the Minimum and Maximum Joint Widths of Architectural
Joint Systems under ASTM E1399. (ASTM International, 2017-2)
ASTM E1399 is the basis of the cyclic movement requirements
in the fire-resistive joint systems standards ASTM E1966 (ASTM
International, 2015-2) and ASTM E2307 (ASTM International, 2015-1)
as well as ASTM E2837 (ASTM International, 2017-3). ASTM E2307
specifically addresses the unique conditions of a perimeter joint,
including movement. It was realized that deflecting the transom(s)
when the adjacent mullions are anchored to the floor assembly was
impractical in a fire laboratory environment. Adopting the cyclic
movement principles and the testing methodology in ASTM E1399
was practical and potentially a more onerous test condition.
To be considered a dynamic perimeter joint protection, both

expansion/ contraction and shear movements must be cyclic tested.
The cyclic movement demonstrates the perimeter joint protection’s
ability to move in expansion/contraction responding to environmental
forces (wind, thermal, and seismic) and to move in shear in reacting
to live loads while maintaining a seal between the floor assembly
and exterior wall assembly and resisting fatigue and degradation.
The cyclic rate, magnitude, and duration of movement can also affect
the performance of the perimeter joint protection when subjected to
standardized fire exposure. ASTM E2307 provides test conditions
for these variables.
155
While all perimeter joint protection is tested at its maximum joint
width, the maximum joint width of a static perimeter joint protection
is the same as its nominal joint width. This is another difference
between dynamic perimeter joint protection Listings and those
designated as “static”. The dynamic perimeter joint protection is
tested at its maximum joint width, which is larger than the nominal
joint width at which the perimeter joint protection is installed.
Many of the perimeter joint protection systems consist of compressed

insulation, which increases its nominal density when installing into
a perimeter joint that is narrower than the nominal thickness of the
insulation. In all dynamic perimeter joint protection, the effective
compression and the effective density of the insulation decrease
at maximum joint width, which increases heat transfer through it
creating a worse-case ASTM E2307 fire test scenario. It is important
that an understanding of the basic movement principles that affect
the performance of the perimeter joint protection is comprehended.
The depth of the insulation used in all the following examples is the
same.
No movement data is presented in static perimeter joint protection

Listings. The nominal joint width and maximum joint width are the
same for static perimeter joint protection, which is unrealistic for
perimeter joint applications. An unchanged (static) joint width means
that heat transfer through the insulation remains the same for their
nominal joint width and maximum joint width conditions. This is the
best-case fire test scenario. Static perimeter joint protection will
perform better than a dynamic perimeter joint protection that uses
the same nominal width and nominal density insulation because the
former does not experience a decrease in its effective compression
or effective density to be ASTM E2307 fire tested.
Effective Compression
Unlike static perimeter joint protection, effective compression of a
dynamic perimeter joint protection decreases when the perimeter
joint opens from the nominal joint width. To understand changes in
effective compression, consider the following equations. UL uses
the following equation below to calculate the uncompressed width
of the insulation to be used in the perimeter joint protection installed
at a nominal joint width.
For example, consider a nominal joint width of 2.00 inches requiring

the insulation of a perimeter joint protection installed at 25%
compression. The T uncomp of the insulation would be 2.67 inches.
The maximum joint width for the dynamic perimeter joint protection
is 2.25 inches. Maximum joint width is the widest joint opening the
fire-resistance rated perimeter joint protection can expand to during
the movement of the perimeter joint and maintain its ASTM E2307
fire-resistance rating.
The following equation is used to determine the decrease in

insulation compression of a dynamic perimeter joint protection,
when the nominal joint width expands to the maximum joint width.
157
The original compression of the insulation was 25% at its nominal
joint width of 2.00 inches. When the joint opens to its maximum joint
width of 2.25 inches the change in compression of the insulation
decreases to ≈19%. Since the mass of the insulation is constant
and in the perimeter joint width increases which in turn causes an
increase the volume of the perimeter joint, therefore the density of
the insulation compressed in the perimeter joint decreases.
Effective Density
Unlike static perimeter joint protection, the effective density of a
dynamic perimeter joint protection decreases when the perimeter
joint opens from the nominal joint width. To understand changes in
effective density consider the following equations.
For example, consider filling a nominal joint width of 2.00 inches with a
nominal 4-inch width, nominal 4-pcf density insulation. The effective
density at the nominal joint width is 8 pcf. Unlike static perimeter
joint protection, the effective density of a dynamic perimeter joint
protection changes when the nominal joint width changes. When
the nominal joint width decreases the effective density increases.
Conversely, when the nominal joint width increases the effective
density decreases. The maximum reduction in effective density
occurs at the maximum joint width. The change in the effective
density is expressed as follows.
The 8-pcf effective density at the nominal joint width decreases to

5.3-pcf effective density at the maximum joint width. This condition
is the worse-case test scenario as it allows a greater heat transfer
through the insulation.
Conclusion about Movement Cycling Test: While ASTM E2307

allows both static and dynamic perimeter joint protection installations,
a greater level of life safety can be achieved by specifying and testing
the more severe and necessary condition: dynamic perimeter joint
protection.
159
ENGINEERING JUDGEMENT
As explained in the previous chapters, very often the Jobsite curtain
wall conditions differ from the original design or unanticipated
construction hindrances are encountered and the field conditions
cannot be easily redesigned.
As there are multiple components involved in the curtain wall design,

hence there could be multiple factors in the curtain wall design
installed at site which can vary from the system which is tested with
laboratories like Intertek & UL. Generally, these variations in changes
at site or design from the unit which is actually tested, cannot be
easily or cost effectively redesigned so alternative methods must
be implemented to maintain the integrity of the system. And this
is why it is important that these principles be developed via sound
engineering principles and good judgement.
IFC Engg Guidelines

Perimeter Fire Barrier system engineering judgments should:
■■ Not be used in lieu of tested systems when tested systems are

available.
■■ Be issued only by firestop manufacturer’s qualified technical
personnel or, in concert with the manufacturer, by a knowledgeable
registered Professional Engineer, or Fire Protection Engineer, or
an independent testing agency that provides listing services for the
systems.
■■ Be based upon interpolation of previously tested perimeter fire barrier
systems that are either sufficiently similar in nature or clearly bracket
the conditions upon which the judgment is to be given. Additional
knowledge and technical interpretations based upon accepted
engineering principals, fire science and fire testing guidelines (e.g.
ASTM E 2032 – Standard Guide for Extension of Data from Fire
Endurance Tests) may also be used as further support data.
■■ Be based upon full knowledge of the elements of the construction
to be protected and the understanding of the probable behavior of
that construction, and the recommended firestop system protecting
it, were it to be subjected to the Standard Fire Test Method for the
required fire rating. It is important to understand that although it is the
joint between the slab edge and curtain wall that is evaluated during
testing, the surrounding construction components and insulation of the
system are also important in insuring acceptable joint performance.
■■ Be limited only to the specific conditions and configurations upon
which the engineering judgment was rendered and should be based
upon reasonable performance expectations for the recommended
firestop system under those conditions.
■■ Be accepted only for a single specific job and location and should not
be transferred to any other job or location without a thorough review
of all aspects of the next job or location’s circumstances.
Basic presentation requirements

Proper perimeter fire barrier system engineering judgments
should:
■■ Be presented in an appropriately descriptive written form with or
without detail drawings as may be deemed necessary.
■■ Clearly, indicate that the recommended system is an Engineering
Judgment and NOT a listed system.
■■ Include clear directions for the installation of the recommended
firestop system.
■■ Identify the job name, location and firm the EJ is issued for, along
with the non-standard conditions and hourly rating required.
■■ Provide complete descriptions of critical elements for the system
configuration. These shall include, but not limited to the following:
161
Basic, Common Factors
■■ Type(s) of assembly used e.g. Glass, Aluminum, Granite, Concrete
Spandrel
■■ Hourly rating required
Perimeter Fire Barrier System

■■ Closest Listed System upon which the EJ is based.
■■ Joint width
■■ Static or Dynamic
■■ Insulation type(s), thickness and compression, etc.
■■ Five Basic Principles
• Mechanical Attachment of the Spandrel Insulation
• Protection of the Mullions
• Compression fitting and orientation of the Safing Insulation
• Installation of a Reinforcement Member(s), stiffener, at the
Safe-Off area behind the spandrel insulation.
• Firestop Coating, type, thickness
By following the above evaluation process for Perimeter Fire

Barrier Systems’ Engineering Judgments, these can be developed
in accordance with sound engineering practice to ensure that life
safety and structural integrity are not compromised.
SYSTEM SELECTION
System selection for perimeter firestop system can be done by
accessing third-party certification laboratory listing directories. One
of the examples is the Intertek certification directory. The Intertek
directory follows a specific nomenclature to identify the different
firestop systems listed.
application.
■■ What is the makeup of the exterior wall? - Concrete panel, Spandrel
Glass, Aluminum Panel etc.
■■ What supports the exterior wall? – Steel stud, aluminum mullions,
etc.
■■ What is the hourly rating you are looking for? – F rating (1 – 2 hour)
■■ What is the smoke rating you are looking for? – L rating (<.1 SCFM/
LF)
■■ How big of a joint is required (inches) – Measured from edge of slab
to nearest point of curtain wall
■■ How much movement is required? – Must accommodate building
movement (% of joint size)
■■ Are there any special considerations? – Unique construction
condition, environmental exposure
For Example: By following the below-mentioned steps, the

perimeter firestop system can be easily identified.
Step 1: Log in to www.intertek.com

Step 2: Type “Product Directories” in the search box.
163
Step 3: Click on the Building Products Directory mentioned
under the description of Product Directories:
Step 4: Fill in the available criterion, such as standard name -

ASTM E2307 to select the Perimeter Firestop system.
Step 5: Click on the preferred link provided in blue to access
the certification detail:
Step 6: For Example, if we click the first row – “view all on

listing” the following page shows up:
165
Step 7: From the above-shown page, we can choose any
relevant system as per our requirement. For Example, lets
open HI/BPF 120-12
Step 8: The following detailed listing certificate opens up:

INSTALLATION AND INSPECTION
The inspection of curtain wall firestops is not specifically addressed
in the NBC 2016 or IBC 2015 code. As a rule, these are “listed”
systems and therefore must be installed in accordance with their
listing and the manufacturer’s installation instructions. Code users
may want to be aware of the ASTM E 2393 standard, Standard
Practice for On-Site Inspection of Installed Fire-resistive Joint
Systems and Perimeter Fire Barriers.
167
Additional Attributes of
CHAPTER 6 Firestop & Miscellaneous
Topics
Apart from what we have covered in the previous chapters of this

book, there are few other important details regarding Firestop
systems which can be of great advantage for any architect, designer,
building owner & inspectors. Let’s look at these important topics one
by one:
SMOKE LEAKAGE RATING

It has been seen that smoke inhalation is one of the most common
causes of fire incident injuries. According to the National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA), most fire deaths are the result of
smoke inhalation rather than burns. Why is it so difficult for people to
escape a fire? One of the many reasons given for this is that smoke
may be so thick and dense that occupants get disoriented. For a
fire to occur fire needs oxygen and consumes much of the available
oxygen individuals need to breathe and remain conscious. This
can happen so quickly that occupants are overcome and unable
to reach easily accessible exits. NFPA’s chart below illustrates
what occurs to a person at various oxygen levels. Notice that once
oxygen levels drop to half the normal amount, the movement toward
exits becomes difficult or impossible:
169
Hence to overcome this critical hazard it is important that buildings
get designed by not only considering fire but also the smoke.
This is the reason that some building codes around the world
require the building to be designed by considering smoke barrier
compartmentation as well.
In the National Building Code of India 2016, smoke barriers are

added as a separate definition for better clarity.
It is very important to understand that for any compartment to

function, it always requires utility services which lead to creating
a penetration in these smoke barriers in the first place. This is
also recognized by NBC 2016 and hence in the scope definition of
Firestop, it has been given equal attention as to Fire. Please see
below:
At the same time currently, NBC 2016 doesn’t specify the rating
needed to qualify a barrier as a smoke barrier.
But for this, help can be taken by referring IBC where Smoke barriers
complying with IBC Section 709 are used in several sections within
the code to compartment the building. The smoke barriers are
required in locations where occupants may be unable to evacuate;
therefore, the code is using a defend-in-place type of protection.
This could include hospitals, jails, ambulatory care facilities and
areas of refuge as a part of an accessible means of egress.
Smoke barriers are also used to compartment underground buildings,
as a part of a smoke control system and to protect the lobbies for fire
service access and occupant evacuation elevators. Smoke barriers
can be either walls or horizontal assemblies depending on which
directions require protection from both fire and smoke spread. In
general, smoke barriers require a minimum 1-hour fire-resistance
rating with very specific continuity requirements. Therefore, the
provisions for both walls (Section 714.3) and horizontal assemblies
(Section 714.4) specify that penetrations must be protected for both
their fire-resistance aspects and their role in limiting the spread of
smoke. This is accomplished by the reference to Section 714.4.4
and the provisions related to penetrations in smoke barriers.
It can be referred from the above IBC text that Penetrations in smoke
barriers must be tested using the UL 1479 test and receive an L
rating, which indicates that the penetration firestop system has been
evaluated for its air leakage performance. The ASTM E 814 standard
currently does not have a test protocol for L ratings. Therefore, the
code specifies compliance with the UL 1479 standard. The L rating
provides a quantitative indication of the penetration system’s ability
to resist the passage of smoke.
171
Because the L rating test is optional within the UL 1479 test standard,
code users must not simply assume that a firestop system tested to
the UL standard will comply and must verify that the firestop system
being used has actually been tested and received an L rating. The
code specifies that the amount of leakage permitted cannot exceed
5.0 cubic feet per minute (cfm) per square foot of opening for each
penetration, or a total leakage rate of 50 cfm for any 100 square
feet of wall or floor area. Having the L rating requirement within
the code provides a specific means to evaluate the capabilities of
the system and eliminates the subjective requirements that smoke
barriers needed to “limit,” “restrict” or “resist” the passage of smoke.
A specified performance level reduces the inconsistent application
of the requirements and helps code users know exactly what level
of performance is required.
It is important to point out that penetration systems must be evaluated

for their L rating at “both the ambient temperature and elevated
temperature tests.” While it is permissible for an intumescent F-
or T-rated firestop system to leave a gap between the penetrant
and firestop material when it is initially installed (due to the fact the
intumescent will expand to close the gap when the temperature at the
penetration increases), an L-rated system must provide an effective
seal both at its original installation and when or if it is exposed to
the increased temperatures of a fire. Because the purpose of the
L rating is to stop the spread of smoke, the code recognizes that
smoke could be located away from the fire in a place where the
temperature has not elevated to the point that it would cause an
intumescent material to expand and fill any gaps that would allow
for the passage of smoke. It is because of this need to stop cold
smoke that the code requires the L-rated system to be evaluated at
both ambient temperatures and an elevated temperature of 400oF.
Pre-manufactured firestop devices, such as cast-in-place devices
or cable management speed sleeves, that have fixed dimensions
and wall or floor openings that are specified to be a fixed size, will
typically have their L ratings reported in units of cubic feet per minute
(cfm) per device. If it is desired to evaluate such a device against the
5-cfm-per-square-foot leakage limit that the code sets for individual
penetrations, the reported L rating in units of cfm per device can be
converted to cfm per square foot by dividing the per-device L-rating
value by the size of the opening in the wall or floor (the opening’s
size units must be in square feet). The opening size that must be
used in this calculation is the size of the non fire-stopped hole that
was cut or cast in the wall or floor, not the net available area inside of
the device. The L rating reported for pre-manufactured devices can
sometimes be found in a tabular form with different values that are
dependent on what the penetrating item is, or how fully the device
is loaded with those penetrating items. The user is thus advised
to carefully evaluate the correct L rating that should be used for a
given installation based on how many and which penetrating items
are being routed through the device, and also what changes are
likely to occur during the life of the penetration, since many of these
devices are purposely designed to easily accommodate changes
(such as adding or removing cables) during the life of the building.
Firestop systems that can be used in openings of variable size,

which would typically be firestop systems using sealants, blocks,
pillows, plugs, putty or other malleable products, will have their L
ratings reported as cfm per square foot. These reported values
can be directly compared to the 5-cfm-per-square-foot air leakage
threshold from Item 1 in Section 714.4.4.
173
If it is desired to use the second option in 714.4.4 for these
penetrations, the combined 50 cfm of air leakage through all
penetrations within a 100-square-foot area, then the cfm per square
foot value for each penetration must first be converted to cfm before
adding them all together. To convert cfm per square foot to cfm,
multiply the cfm per square foot L-rating value by the size of the
non fire-stopped opening, using units of square feet for the opening
size. After that conversion, the cfm leakage through all the nearby
penetrations can be added together to ascertain if the total leakage
is within the allowed 50 cfm per 100 square feet.
MOVEMENT RATING
During/ after a major earthquake, there is always a risk of a fire
breakout due to the damaged gas lines, electrical systems, etc.
Historical records show that small fires are often initiated by
earthquakes, and these sometimes grow into large destructive fires
causing loss of life and severe damage to property.
Inadequate supply of reticulated water is the largest single reason

for post-earthquake fire damage. This results mainly from damage
to the underground pipe distribution network, but also much other
active fire protection related components. Of the thirteen events
shown in the Table below, only one appears to have no major
damage to water supply systems. This is a major area of concern
for designers and providers of infrastructure.
Therefore, it is very important that all the components of
compartmentation such as Firestop systems shall be able to
withstand for an adequate time when there is a post-earthquake fire.
The Current version of NBC 2016 recognizes this fact and included
the concept of Movement for Through Penetration in section 2.32.
However, it further needs to be explained and a testing criterion
needs to be set out for movement tests.
175
The IBC 2015 does not include the concept of through penetration
movement. But recently, ASTM published a standard on Movement
called ASTM E3037-16, “Standard Test Method of Measuring
Relative Movement Capabilities of Through Penetration Firestop
Systems”. This standard specifically addresses the test methodology
of Through Penetration Firestop system for Movement.
ACOUSTIC RATING
Improvements to existing materials, as well as the development
of new solutions, have expanded the limits by which architects
and engineers are free to design. Often these modern buildings
are occupied by various groups with very different uses. Sound
transmission through wail and floor assemblies within these
buildings becomes an important consideration during design to
accommodate the needs of the occupants.
This seems like a simple task with all the various wall and floor
designs available with tested Sound Transmission Coefficient (STC)
ratings. However, the complexity of this issue arises when these
wall and floor assemblies are also being required to maintain fire-
rated separations between occupancies within the building and the
STC rating and fire rating of these assemblies are compromised by
plumbing, electrical, and mechanical penetrations as well as joints
created between wall and floor assemblies. This is where passive
fire protection products known commonly as firestop products are
called upon to maintain the STC rating of the wall assembly as well
as maintain the fire rating of the assembly being penetrated.
How STC Ratings are Determined
For sound transmission testing in a laboratory, the sound is

transmitted from one room to another only through the separating
wall or floor specimen under test. In a building, however, there are
many paths for transmission of sound and associated structure-
borne vibration, as indicated in Figure 2.A. As a result, sound
isolation between adjacent rooms in a building is often much less
than would be expected from rated sound transmission performance
of the separating wall or floor assembly.
(Fig 6.1 Illustration of some typical paths for sound transmission)
177
Sound transmission testing simulates the same difficult test
parameters used to determine the performance of firestopping
products. The American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM)
developed several test standards to determine the acoustical
properties of different products. One of the most frequently utilized
standards is ASTM E-90 Standard Test Method for Laboratory
Measurement of Airborne Sound Transmission Loss of Building
Partitions and Elements. This standard outlines the method and
procedures for measuring sound loss through assemblies and
calculating the overall STC rating. Much like a fire test, the standard
evaluates the performance of the whole system (including the
assembly itself, joints, gaps and penetrations within the assembly)
to measure and determine the Sound Transmission Loss (STL) and
the resulting Sound Transmission Classification (STC) rating. The
method defined by ASM F90 utilizes two separate rooms that are
divided by a partition. The assembly to be tested is installed within
the dividing partition. One of the rooms is designated as the source
room and the other room is designated as the terminating room.
The test apparatus is designed so that sound is only transmitted
through the test specimen.
The purpose of this testing is like the testing conducted during a fire
test. The materials are evaluated to verify that the product system
being installed can maintain the desired rating of the assembly if
an assembly is required to maintain a 2-hour F-rating, then the
materials as installed must be capable of maintaining that rating.
The same is true when STC ratings are required. A separation
wail that is designed to provide an STC rating for example of 50,
then the configuration of materials used to seal openings and joints
must be capable of restoring the separation wall assembly to the
STC rating of 50. Note that an STC rating, like an F-rating, does
not apply to the product itself, but is instead provided for specific
installation of the product in a specific wall construction. Reducing
sound transmission between various occupancies is very important
to the comfort level of the occupants. Architects and engineers are
beginning to incorporate these sound requirements in their projects.
Modem building codes are also starting to recognize the importance
of minimizing sound between tenant separations. 2012 Model
Residential Building Code requires that an STC of 50 be maintained
for multi-family residential dwellings. This requirement ensures that
sound transmission between occupied spaces is kept to a minimum.
Sound transmission is a growing concern in today’s construction

industry. Firestop products are being installed to not only restrict
the passage of fire and toxic gasses but also to minimize sound
transmission between occupied spaces. There are test standards
that are specifically designed, such as ASTM E-90 to evaluate the
performance of these products. Like ASTM test for firestopping, the
firestop product is part of an overall STC assembly. A separation
wall or floor that has an STC of 45 for example, can not be increased
to a 50 by just adding a firestop product that may have been tested
up to a 50 in accordance with ASTM E-90. The product can only
provide an equivalent rating up to its tested rating with the assembly
in which it is installed.
(Fig 6.2 Typical ASTM E-90 Configuration)
179
INNOVATIVE FIRESTOP SYSTEMS
It is very important and routine work for a building to be audited
via Fire Inspectors, Insurance Bodies. Most of the traditional
systems like sealants and caulks are very difficult to inspect and
qualify because of the content of Firestop material for the particular
penetration/ the thickness of the joint spray in case of joints. Hence
, industry has been innovating the systems for easier inspection of
such life safety systems by having visual inspection. This is where
much of the inspection has taken place and now we see factory
assembled devices that can be installed in place according to
installation instruction and inspectors can visually be able to qualify
and ensure the presence of the right firestop system. For better
understanding and clarity of the reader about such systems, I am
showing only some peculiar innovations in the Firestop industry and
there are many more examples of such innovations available via
many manufacturers.
Innovations in Electrical Trade Firestop System

Firestop Speed Sleeve: Many times, it is noted that to reduce the
number of penetrations in a building for low voltage, medium voltage
cables, designers tend to design circular cores in the building. These
circular cores later are used for electrical cables to pass from one
compartment to the other. This is why the industry has introduced
multiple kinds of sleeve devices which can be simply installed with
minimal training. These devices also come of greater advantage to a
building owner because it can be repenetratable by simply opening
it and passing the new cables. And the same way cables can be
removed too. Please find below the picture of one of such devices.
Innovation in Firestop Cable Transit Systems for Industries: It has

been seen that industries often desire a Firestop system with much
more capability than only providing Fire Resistance Rating. Some of
the common demand from industries is that such Firestop systems
shall protect the high voltage cables of larger diameter by protecting
it individually. This is where architects and designers can refer to
cable transit systems that can withstand up to certain blast pressure
and protect the cables individually.
Please find below the picture of one of such devices.
181
Innovation in Mechanical Trade Firestop System
Much of the innovation in plastic pipes can be seen in the Mechanical

trade for plastic pipe penetrations. The traditional practice of
applying Firestop to plastic pipes have been firestop sealants. This
not only becomes tedious to install at sometimes, but it also is not
inspection friendly. This is where we see industry innovating the
Firestop devices for plastic pipes by introducing Firestop systems
which can be easily cast in during the stage of roofing. When it
gets cast in the roof at the roofing stage, a piping contractor can
later locate these devices easily visually and then pass the pipes by
simply opening the lid of the devices. At the same time, it becomes
very easy for an inspector to visually look at such devices cast in a
roof without touching it. Please find below the picture of one of such
devices.
Innovation in Linear Joints
Similar to through penetration, for horizontal compartmentation

joints are primarily used as fillers. The traditional way of applying
such systems at the required place is by using caulks tested as
per UL 2079 standard. Often it is seen that it is very tedious and
unlikely to inspect the caulks without really breaking the assembly
and then measuring the thickness visually. And then the thickness
at the entire linear joint distance where the caulks are applied in
the buildings is almost impossible. This is why we now have some
innovations in this category too, which can be used by architects
and designers which can be used at the joint depth and fastening
it to the assembly. Please find below the picture of one of such top
track seal joints.
183
Innovation in Curtain Wall Firestop
It is seen at many places that the application of Rockwool and spray

system for curtain wall firestop systems ends up being a tedious
and specialized job. Additionally, the spray is applied to maintain a
specific thickness over the entire length of the void. This becomes
difficult for inspectors to manually inspect. Hence there have been
some recent innovations where a factory manufactures ready to use
solution is made available to the designers & architects which can
be cut in easy installation without using any rockwool or spray. This
factory-made quick seal system for curtain wall can be cut in size
and installed in the void by a press fit.
Generic Vs Comprehensive Specification

In any project, it is very important that the specifications are of
comprehensive nature and provides the relevant details to the site
construction team so that confusion and non-technical decisions
can be avoided. It has been seen that in
For example The generic specifications text such as the one

mentioned below are of confusing nature.
Generic Spec - “Penetrations and joints in fire rated elements
should assure same fire rating as the element they go through.”
At the same time, if the project specifications are comprehensive and

well-studied, it not only provides a good clarity to the contractor, but
also helps the right budgeting and compliance with national building
codes and standards. The comprehensive specification text such
as the one mentioned below can be referred to as an example.
Comprehensive Specification - “For large openings and complex

penetrations made to accommodate cable trays and bundles,
multiple steel and copper pipes, Pre-formed block CFS BL made
from intumescent polyurethane material for temporary or permanent
firestop sealing around cables, cable bundles and conduits.
Surface burning characteristics according UL 723 (ASTM E84-
01): Flame spread index 10 and smoke development index 15. The
density is 0.27 g/cm³ and the expansion temperature (intumescent
activation) is around 392 °F (200°C). Seismic tested on mechanical
performance, smoke and fire-ratings. Application to be done by
HAFSC (_____ accredited firestop specialty contractor) and
applicator needs to submit Documanager generated report with all
application photos and relevant UL 1479 certificates or EJ solution
given by manufacturer.
For the information of readers, this book also contain the annexure
A, which highlights few firestop test reports from UL or Intertek
laboratories. This is provided to the reader for reference purposes
only as there are many such systems available among many
manufacturers and these are only some examples.
185
People Helping People Build a Safer World
®
Get FREE access to hundreds of

ICC resources and view the largest
collection of code titles
ICC’s Digital Codes Library (codes.iccsafe.org) conveniently
provides access to the latest code text while on the go, at home
or in the office, in an easy-to-navigate format.
NEVER MISS A CODE UPDATE Available anywhere 24/7
Use on any mobile or

digital device
View over 800+ ICC titles
19-17590
Learn how to use this powerful tool at codes.iccsafe.org

ICC Membership
An Essential Tool to advance your Building Safety Career!
Training
Networking
Code
Opinions
Product
Savings
Join our
64,000+
members
today!
Put the benefits of ICC Membership to work for you and your career!
Visit www.iccsafe.org/memnow or
call 1-888-ICC-SAFE (422-7233), ext. 33804 to learn more.
19-17662
187
About the Authors
Jay Woodward
International Code Council
Senior Staff Architect
Jay Woodward is a senior staff architect with the ICC’s Business and Product
Development department. Jay’s more than 31 years of experience in building
design, construction, code enforcement and instruction provides him with the
ability to address issues of code application and design for code enforcement
personnel as well as architects, designers, and contractors. Jay has previously
served as the Secretariat for the ICC A117.1 Standard committee, ICC’s
International Energy Conservation Code, and the International Building Code’s
Fire Safety Code Development committee.
A graduate of the University of Kansas and a registered architect, prior to joining
ICC Jay has also worked as an architect for the Leo A. Daly Company in Omaha,
Nebraska; as a building plans examiner for the City of Wichita, Kansas; and
as a senior staff architect for the International Conference of Building Officials
(ICBO). He is also a co-author of Significant Changes to the International Building
Code, 2015 edition and author of Significant Changes to the A117.1 Accessibility
Standard, 2009 Edition.
Brij Bhushan Singh

Hilti India Pvt Ltd
Head - Codes & Approvals (Fire Protection)
Brij currently works with Hilti India Headquarter to oversee the company’s efforts
to study and support codes and standards on passive fire protection in India.
He is a Mechanical Engineering from the University of Pune and possesses
working experience of close to 10 years in Fire Protection Field. Brij has worked
extensively on many passive fire protection topics such as Fire doors, Fire
Dampers, Smoke Dampers, etc. Brij has also worked as a fire risk consultant
for large scale industrial and commercial projects and he has conducted risk
evaluations for various low, medium and high hazard occupancies in and out of
India.
Currently, he works closely with Technical Universities & Fire Service College in
India to study and explore solutions for challenging fire hazards. Most recently,
he led the research project from Hilti to explore the myths and facts of façade
fires. He has represented and spoken on passive fire protection concept and its
importance in various forums, conferences across India and published multiple
articles on various national and international magazines.
Prior to Hilti, he has worked with organizations like FM Global & Underwriters
Laboratories (UL). On a voluntary basis, he also participates and contributes his
efforts in raising awareness for the Fire & Security Association of India (FSAI) as
Vice Chairman for Codes & Standards.

Firestopping Book Firestopping Book PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Firestopping Book Firestopping Book PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

FIRESTOPPING

Everything you need to

Cover Design: Ritika Rastogi & Loveleen Arora

Copyright (c) 2019

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. This publication is a copyrighted work owned

The information contained in this document is believed to be accurate;

Trademarks: “International Code Council,” the “International Code Council”

Image Credits: Hilti, Internet Resources & ICC

Errata on various ICC publications may be available at

2. FIRESTOP & ITS APPLICATIONS 34

3. FIRESTOP FOR THROUGH PENETRATION 56

5. PERIMETER FIRESTOP JOINTS FOR CURTAIN 127

6. ADDITIONAL ATTRIBUTES OF FIRESTOP & 169

India has been going through a phase of rapid urbanization and

This book aims to bridge the gap in understanding on the subject

One of the biggest challenge in India to fight any fire is traffic,

This lack of understanding is primarily because we don’t have any

This book, Firestopping examines the provisions of the National

While primarily written to focus on the code requirements related to

Because the book looks at each specific code section or provision,

Grateful appreciation is due to a great number of people who

■■ Measure and evaluate the heat transfer (temperature rise)

■■ Evaluate the stability by acceptable performance under the hose

1. Section 703.3 and the methods listed within it may be used

2. When incorporating materials, systems or devices that were

3. Materials and methods used to protect joints and penetrations

When reviewing the code’s requirements related to fire-resistance-

By focusing on the penetration firestop systems and joint systems,

Individuals working in the field When a fire starts, a chemical

(Fig 1.1 - Picture of Fire Tetrahedron)

(Fig 1.2 - factly.in)

Several modifications are done in building and the removal of

Active Fire Protection Passive Fire Protection

In this book, we will explore one of the key components of passive

The fire-resistance capacity of the compartmentalized wall and/or

“A space within a building that is enclosed by fire barrier or fire-resistant

The fire resistance capacity of the compartmentalized wall and, or

Compartmentation in a building is achieved by various systems,

In terms of NBC 2016, Fire Barriers are defined as follows:

“A fire barrier is a vertically or horizontally aligned fire-resistant member

Fire Door –An important aspect of

In terms of NBC 2016, Fire door

In terms of NBC 2016, Fire doors are defined as follows:

“A fire-resistant material, or construction, having a fire resistance rating of

1. Fire stop assembly for through penetrations is a combination of

The effectiveness of the fire-resistance systems are evaluated via

Fire Endurance Testing: The fire endurance of a building element

In virtually every building, the fire-resistance-rated and/or smoke-

In India, NBC 2016 recommends the sealing of breaches created

■■ The type and rating of the fire-resistance-rated assembly

IBC Section 714 addresses specific requirements for maintaining

■■ Fire-resistance rated walls – Section 714.3

The fire-resistant assemblies and/or smoke-resistant walls and

Now, before we move on to the firestop application and details, it

Annular space: The opening When protecting penetrations, it

PIPE FLOOR OR WALL

(Fig 2.2 Annular Space)

(Fig 2.3 Minimum Annular Space Determined by Testing and Listing)

(Fig 2.4 Examples of Different Positions of Penetrating Items)

As penetrating items are often located

ant that the minimum annular space for

the minimum annular space required by

The actual material, device or Everything involved in protect-