| Date |
Text |
| 2018-12-20 12:39:41 | PLAN |
| | REVIEW COMMENTS |
| | 4TH REVIEW: FBC FIFTH EDITION (2014) |
| | ROBERT MCDOUGAL, CBO |
| | COMMERCIAL COMBINATION PLANS EXAMINER |
| | (561) 805-6714 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | COMMENTS FROM THE PREVIOUS REVIEW HAVE NOT BEEN |
| | ADDRESSED COMPLETELY. DETAILED SHOP DRAWINGS OF THE |
| | DOOR AND SIDE PANEL ASSEMBLY FROM THE ENGINEER IS |
| | REQUIRED. FBC 107.2.1 SEE THE REQUESTED INFORMATION |
| | FROM THE LAST REVIEW LISED BELOW. |
| | |
| | I HAVE REVIEWED THE LETTER FROM WARREN W. SCHAEFER, |
| | P.E. #44135, AND HAVE FOUND IT TO BE DEFICIENT AS |
| | FOLLOWS: |
| | DOOR SIZE: THE OXO DOOR DOES NOT CORRESPOND TO THE |
| | ENTRY DOOR AS SHOWN ON THE APPROVED PLANS |
| | DOOR CONSTRUCTION: NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION IS PROVIDED, |
| | SUCH AS, THE TYPE OF WOOD FOR THE FRAME AND MULLIONS, |
| | HOW THE PLYWOOD LAYERS ARE ATTACHED TOGETHER AND HOW |
| | THE MULLIONS ARE ATTACHED TO THE STRUCTURAL SUBSTRATE. |
| | A DETAILED DRAWING IS REQUIRED. |
| | HINGES: WHAT SIZE, WHAT MANUFACTURER AND MODEL, WHAT |
| | SIZE SCREWS, WHAT SPACING |
| | LOCKS: WHAT MODEL |
| | INSTALLATION: DOES THIS OPENING HAVE BUCKS, ARE SCREWS |
| | INSTALLED IN PAIRS TO PREVENT TWISTING OF THE 2 X 6 |
| | JAMBS |
| | FIXED PANEL TO FRAME INSTALLATION: ARE THE SCREWS LESS |
| | THAN 12" FROM THE PANEL CORNERS, ARE THE PLYWOOD PANEL |
| | EDGES EXPOSED IF FACED MOUNTED TO THE FRAME, A DETAIL |
| | IS REQUIRED TO SHOW HOW THE PANELS ARE FACED MOUNTED TO |
| | THE FRAME |
| | WEATHER SEALS: HOW IS THE BOTTOM OF THE DOOR SEALED |
| | DOOR RATING: HOW WAS THE +/- 55 PSF RATING FOR THE DOOR |
| | DETERMINED, SHUTTERS ARE ONLY REQUIRED TO PROVIDE |
| | IMPACT PROTECTION FOR GLAZED AREAS THE DESCRIPTION OF |
| | THIS DOOR ASSEMBLY DOES NOT MENTION ANY GLAZING THAT |
| | WOULD REQUIRE IMPACT PROTECTION, THIS STRUCTURE HAS A |
| | 27' MEAN ROOF HEIGHT AND IS LOCATED IN EXPOSURE D WITH |
| | A 170 MPH VULT WIND SPEED VERIFY THE REQUIRED WINDLOAD |
| | PRESSURES. |
| | |
| | FBC 107.3.4.1 REQUIRES THE DESIGNER OF RECORD FOR THE |
| | PROJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVE THE PRODUCT APPROVAL |
| | SUBMITTALS IN WRITING. |
| | |
| | 1) PREVIOUS COMMENT THAT HAS NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY |
| | ADDRESSED. THE ENTRY DOOR FOR THIS PROJECT IS A CUSTOM |
| | DOOR AND APPARENTLY DOES NOT HAVE A PRODUCT APPROVAL AS |
| | REQUIRED BY FAC RULE 61G20-3. THEREFORE, YOU ARE |
| | REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING. |
| | FBC-R612.2 PERFORMANCE. |
| | EXTERIOR WINDOWS AND DOORS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO RESIST |
| | THE DESIGN WIND LOADS SPECIFIED IN TABLE R301.2(2) |
| | ADJUSTED FOR HEIGHT AND EXPOSURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| | TABLE FBC-R301.2(3). FOR TESTING REQUIRED IN SECTIONS |
| | R612.3 AND R612.5, DESIGN PRESSURES DETERMINED FROM |
| | TABLE R301.2(2) OR ASCE 7 ARE PERMITTED TO BE |
| | MULTIPLIED BY 0.6. |
| | |
| | FBC-R612.2.1 CUSTOM DOORS. |
| | CUSTOM (ONE-OF-A-KIND) EXTERIOR DOOR ASSEMBLIES SHALL |
| | BE TESTED BY AN APPROVED TESTING LABORATORY OR BE |
| | ENGINEERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING |
| | PRACTICES. |
| | |
| | FBC-R612.3.1 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS. |
| | STRUCTURAL WIND LOAD DESIGN PRESSURES FOR WINDOW AND |
| | DOOR UNITS OTHER THAN THE SIZE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE |
| | WITH SECTION R612.3 SHALL BE PERMITTED TO BE DIFFERENT |
| | THAN THE DESIGN VALUE OF THE TESTED UNIT PROVIDED SUCH |
| | DIFFERENT PRESSURES ARE DETERMINED BY ACCEPTED |
| | ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OR VALIDATED BY AN ADDITIONAL TEST |
| | OF THE WINDOW OR DOOR UNIT TO THE DIFFERENT DESIGN |
| | PRESSURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R612.3. ALL |
| | COMPONENTS OF THE ALTERNATIVE SIZE UNIT SHALL BE THE |
| | SAME AS THOSE OF THE TESTED OR LABELED UNIT. |
| | |
| | 2) NEW COMMENTS. I HAVE RECEIVED A LETTER FROM WARREN |
| | W. SCHAEFER, P.E. #44135, WHICH STATES THAT HE HAS |
| | INSPECTED A 3 PANEL DOOR UNIT INSTALLED AT 2900 N. |
| | FLAGLER DRIVE AND FOUND IT ACCEPTABLE AS A NON-IMPACT |
| | RATED ENTRY DOOR WHICH WILL SUPPORT THE DESIGN |
| | PRESSURES OF + / - 55 PSF. FROM THE DESCRIPTION AND THE |
| | PLANS THAT ARE ON FILE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ENTRY DOOR |
| | MUST HAVE BEEN MODIFIED FROM THE ONE THAT IS SHOWN ON |
| | THE PLANS. PROVIDE DRAWINGS OF THE DOOR AND CLARIFY |
| | WHICH DOOR THIS IS FOR. I ALSO HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE |
| | REQUIRED TESTING FROM AN APPROVED TESTING LABORATORY OR |
| | ENGINEERING REQUIRED BY FBC-R612.2.1 FOR THIS DOOR |
| | ASSEMBLY. PROVIDE TWO SETS OF AN EVALUATION REPORT FOR |
| | THE DOOR ASSEMBLY AS REQUIRED BY FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE |
| | CODE CHAPTER 61G20-3 AND FLORIDA STATUTES 553.842(1) |
| | AND 553.842(5). SEE THE FOLLOWING DEFINITIONS. THE |
| | EVALUATION WILL NEED TO INCLUDE ALL PARTS OF THE DOOR |
| | ASSEMBLY INCLUDING, HINGES, LATCHES, LOCKS, DEAD BOLTS, |
| | ETC. PROVIDE DRAWINGS WITH SECTIONS AND DIMENSIONS THAT |
| | SHOW THE DOOR AND FRAME CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING RAILS, |
| | STILES, PANELS, DOOR FRAME STOP, WEATHER STRIPPING, |
| | LOCATIONS OF THE HINGES, LATCHES, LOCKS, DEAD BOLTS, |
| | STRUCTURAL MULLIONS, THRESHOLD, SIZE, TYPE AND |
| | LOCATIONS OF ALL FASTENERS USED TO ATTACH THE ASSEMBLY |
| | TO THE STRUCTURE. SPECIFY THE MANUFACTURER, TYPE AND |
| | SIZE OF THE HINGES, LATCHES, LOCKS AND DEAD BOLTS. ALL |
| | OF THE COMPONENTS THAT MAKE UP THE DOOR ASSEMBLY ARE |
| | REQUIRED TO BE EVALUATED FOR WINDLOADS. |
| | |
| | FAC RULE: 61G20-3.002 |
| | 61G20-3.002 DEFINITIONS. |
| | (16) EVALUATION MEANS AN ASSESSMENT OF PRODUCT |
| | CONFORMANCE TO THE CODE BY COMPARING AGAINST STANDARDS |
| | OR INTENT OF THE CODE USING TESTING OR COMPARATIVE |
| | ANALYSIS OR RATIONAL ANALYSIS OR A COMBINATION THEREOF. |
| | (17)(A) EVALUATION REPORT MEANS A REPORT BASED UPON |
| | TESTING OR COMPARATIVE OR RATIONAL ANALYSIS, OR A |
| | COMBINATION THEREOF, FROM AN APPROVED PRODUCT |
| | EVALUATION ENTITY OR A LICENSED FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL |
| | ENGINEER OR ARCHITECT INDICATING THAT THE PRODUCT WAS |
| | EVALUATED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE OR THE |
| | INTENT OF THE CODE AND THAT THE PRODUCT COMPLIES WITH |
| | THE CODE OR IS, FOR THE PURPOSE INTENDED, AT LEAST |
| | EQUIVALENT TO THAT REQUIRED BY THE CODE. |
| | |
| | 3) TO ADDRESS WATER INFILTRATION FBC-R612.3 HAS SOME |
| | EXCEPTIONS WHICH ARE LISTED BELOW. EXCEPTION #2 MAY BE |
| | APPLICABLE TO YOUR CUSTOM DOOR. |
| | |
| | EXCEPTIONS: |
| | |
| | 1. DOOR ASSEMBLIES INSTALLED IN NONHABITABLE AREAS |
| | WHERE THE DOOR ASSEMBLY AND AREA ARE DESIGNED TO ACCEPT |
| | WATER INFILTRATION NEED NOT BE TESTED FOR WATER |
| | INFILTRATION. |
| | |
| | 2. DOOR ASSEMBLIES INSTALLED WHERE THE OVERHANG (OH) |
| | RATIO IS EQUAL TO OR MORE THAN 1 NEED NOT BE TESTED FOR |
| | WATER INFILTRATION. THE OVERHANG RATIO SHALL BE |
| | CALCULATED BY THE FOLLOWING EQUATION: |
| | |
| | OH RATIO = OH LENGTH/OH HEIGHT |
| | |
| | WHERE: |
| | |
| | OH LENGTH = THE HORIZONTAL MEASURE OF HOW FAR AN |
| | OVERHANG OVER A DOOR PROJECTS OUT FROM THE DOOR |
| | SURFACE. |
| | |
| | OH HEIGHT = THE VERTICAL MEASURE OF THE DISTANCE FROM |
| | THE DOOR SILL TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OVERHANG OVER A |
| | DOOR. |
| | |
| | 3. PASS-THROUGH WINDOWS FOR SERVING FROM A |
| | SINGLE-FAMILY KITCHEN, WHERE PROTECTED BY A ROOF |
| | OVERHANG OF 5 FEET (1.5 M) OR MORE SHALL BE EXEMPTED |
| | FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE WATER INFILTRATION TEST. |
| | |
| | 4. DECORATIVE GLAZED OPENINGS. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
