Trades working together

Status
Not open for further replies.
roger

roger

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Fl
Occupation
Retired Electrician
Ok, I'm in a field office right now and don't have my normal access to any other code books besides the NEC, with that said, does anybody know of any other code that would prohibit all trades from getting together and building a trapeze large enough to accommodate all the systems. Common racks for all systems are the norm on roofs so if the strut, angle iron, and rod for a trapeze are engineered for the load, what code(s) would be violated?

Note that no trade is supporting from another, all are on the trapeze.

There is a local inspector using the "it's in the building code" for substantiation to his turning down the overhead RI inspection.


I know there is nothing in the NEC and Mechanical codes that prohibit it but I need to make sure the IBC (or specifically the NC State Code) doesn't have anything that would.


Thanks


Roger
 
I'm no hand at citing building codes. But I will say that we just published a design that included just such a coordinated layout. One trapeze setup shared by electrical, telecommunications, plumbing, and HVAC. I can't even begin to think of a reason that any code would prohibit such a thing. Good luck with this one.
 
The only system that would not be permitted to share support would be the sprinkler system outside of that it should be OK unless covered by a local code.
 
RICK NAPIER said:
The only system that would not be permitted to share support would be the sprinkler system outside of that it should be OK unless covered by a local code.
Click to expand...

Rick, I should have mentioned that the Sprinkler and Steam piping are not included and are completely separate of the trapeze and each other.

Roger
 
It could be a sturctural design issue.

I bring this up because some building will build a truss system that is designed simply to hold the weight of the roof and not have anything supported from it. Now that's just a WAG, because we have a mall here and they have a design criteria that everyone must follow when hanging things from the roof structure.

You may be able to support things from the structure, but perhaps they don't want an isolated or point load.
 
cowboyjwc said:
It could be a sturctural design issue.

I bring this up because some building will build a truss system that is designed simply to hold the weight of the roof and not have anything supported from it. Now that's just a WAG, because we have a mall here and they have a design criteria that everyone must follow when hanging things from the roof structure.

You may be able to support things from the structure, but perhaps they don't want an isolated or point load.
Click to expand...

John, none of that is applicable to this project, and the real issue is the inpector not having anything more that "it's in the building code"

The trapeze is suspended from a concrete floor and beams, there is nothing from the roof or trusses.

Roger
 
Last edited:
roger said:
John, none of that is applicable to this project, and the real issue is the inpector not having anything more that "it's in the building code"

The trapeze is suspended from a concrete floor and beams, there is nothing from the roof or trusses.

Roger
Click to expand...

I did say it was a WAG.:grin:

Dang inspectors. Probably couldn't find anything to write up so he found something that he thought you wouldn't know the answer to either.:roll::D
 
cowboyjwc said:
I did say it was a WAG.:grin:

Dang inspectors. Probably couldn't find anything to write up so he found something that he thought you wouldn't know the answer to either.:roll::D
Click to expand...
Could be attempting to awe others with secret knowledge. One of those he could tell you but would have to kill you sort of things. :grin:
 
Are your inspectors not required to site a code number ?? If it's in the book it has a number. Ask him nicely to show it to you. Personally i think it is a structure and you all can use it.
 
There in the active IBC is one page each for the following:

Electrical, Mechanical, Special Systems, and Emergency, there is the note on maintaining clearance space
in concealed spaces, 36? for mechanical, trap door, FD, VAB's, etc.

There is nothing in the Index for separation of services.

For some reason I recall that in the architectural spec?s some place calls out for a two inch separation
of services, to include the finished insulated around pressure vessels, but couldn't find that one though.

Hope that helps.
 
Despite my limited knowledge of the IBC, I'd say it's not a problem. Have seen a similar situation a few years back on some plans but it was not my project. Finally I think it's worth pointing out that there's not often that every post in a thread agree on this forum (an understatement at that!); I'd say given that all these fine people agree, you're probably right. Let us know what happens after your showdown with the inspector :grin:
 
Please ask for a code reference on this one. If point loading is not an issue then I am not sure where he is going with this one.
 
I personally would not want this system its great your trying to work together but this could lead to some problems . Determining how much space you get per trade location of pipes how to determine who does what and cost . working on top of each other and oops i for got a pipe or i made a mistake on my location on the rack and crossing pipes that create the spaghetti effect . To many kids in the cookie jar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top