Difference between revisions of "Table Drafts 4"

Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Table Drafts 4"

(Begin with the end)
Line 7: Line 7:
 
<big><big><big><big><big>The Building Code and Wind</big></big></big></big></big>
 
<big><big><big><big><big>The Building Code and Wind</big></big></big></big></big>
  
This is the second part of a multi-part series on the Building Code and roofing:
+
This is the first part of a multi-part series on the Building Code and roofing:
 
:Part 1: Understanding the BC Building Code
 
:Part 1: Understanding the BC Building Code
 
:Part 2: The Building Code and wind
 
:Part 2: The Building Code and wind
 
:Part 3: Design Responsibility: from Code to Specification
 
:Part 3: Design Responsibility: from Code to Specification
 
You can find these articles in both the printed and digital editions of Roofing BC, the trade magazine published by the RCABC. You can also watch the video presentation, “Blown Away: Code Requirements for Membrane Roofs”, that addresses several articles in this series.
 
You can find these articles in both the printed and digital editions of Roofing BC, the trade magazine published by the RCABC. You can also watch the video presentation, “Blown Away: Code Requirements for Membrane Roofs”, that addresses several articles in this series.
 +
 +
This article explores the origin and function of the British Columbia Building Code, how to read and understand the Code, and what it says about roof design and construction.  While the material presented here is drawn from various government publications, it also reflects the writer’s own understanding of the Code – its structure, purpose and meaning.
  
 
The content on this page has been adapted from the original published article in [https://www.mediaedgemagazines.com/roofing-contractors-association-of-british-columbia-rcabc/rc212/ ''Roofing BC'' (Summer 2021)].
 
The content on this page has been adapted from the original published article in [https://www.mediaedgemagazines.com/roofing-contractors-association-of-british-columbia-rcabc/rc212/ ''Roofing BC'' (Summer 2021)].
<gallery mode="packed-hover">
 
Image:Code and Wind - Image 1.jpeg|<small>Photo credit:CTV News (Saskatoon)</small>
 
Image:Wind - Prince George, April 14 2020 (1).JPG |<small>Photo credit: Admiral Roofing Ltd.</small>
 
Image:Wind - Calgary roof blow-off (3).JPG | <small>Calgary, AB (Photo credit: unattributed)</small>
 
Image:Wind - Humbolt, SK apartment roof (7th St.).jpg | <small>Humbolt, SK (Photo credit: unattributed)</small>
 
Image:Wind - Mission hotel - Dec 20 2018 (2).jpg | <small>Mission, BC (RCABC)</small>
 
Image:Wind - Apartment building at 1820 14th Ave. N.E. (2015).jpg | <small>(Photo credit: unattributed)</small>
 
Image:Wind - Calgary roof blow-off (2).JPG | <small>Calgary, AB (Photo credit: unattributed)</small>
 
Image:Wind - 2021 January (blow-off, Edmonton).PNG | <small>Edmonton, AB (Photo credit: unattributed)</small>
 
</gallery>
 
 
==Introduction==
 
==Introduction==
Membrane roofs are ubiquitous on industrial, commercial, and institutional buildings and cover many multi-family and some single-family Part 9 structuresBut a poorly designed and constructed membrane roof can succumb to the powerful uplift forces of wind, leaving the building interior vulnerable to the weather.  Flying roof material can also pose a serious risk to public safetyDesigning a wind-resistant membrane roof system is prudent.  It is also a Code requirement.  In this article on the British Columbia Building Code, we look at why wind matters and what the Code has to say about wind-resistant membrane roofs for Part 3 buildings.
+
Constructing a building is a complex task.  It involves thousands of different materials and components, assembled into products and system by many people, both on the construction site and in shops and factoriesThe assembly and integration of these various materials and systems into a finished building requires tremendous coordination, negotiation, flexibility and constant adaptation to the weather, market forces, trade schedules and contractual commitmentsWhen it is all done, the commissioned building must be safe, accessible, provide a healthy environment for people, energy efficient, and it must capably protect the building interior and those who live or work there from both the weather and seismic events.
  
==Why wind matters==
+
Building construction involves many layers of responsibility.  Owners, for example, have an overall responsibility for their projects – to determine what will be built, how it will conform to existing laws, and how they will select qualified advisors and buildersDesigners are responsible to produce drawings and specifications that also comply with regulations and laws, and that reflect the interests of the ownerContractors bear the responsibility of performing the work, scheduling trades, managing supplies, and constructing the building to align with the drawings and specifications.   What ties them together in a common enterprise is the Building Code, which was developed to protect the public interest by establishing minimum requirements for safe, stable, and habitable buildings.
On July 18, 2019 a severe windstorm blew through part of Saskatoon, SaskatchewanWinds registering 85 km/h in the vicinity ripped away the entire membrane roof from the steel building occupied by EFL FlooringThe roof system was lifted off en masse.  The force from the wind and the failing roof was so strong it pulled rooftop mechanical equipment away, leaving gaping holes through the deck. One employee was nearly crushed in the parking lot by falling roof materials.  Roof debris scattered across the street and down the block.  Moments later, rains followed.
 
  
This is just one story.  There are others.  And all of them might have ended differently had the roof been designed and built to resist strong wind Of course, insurance often pays for wind damage and resulting loss from rain, but that really misses the point. Disasters like the one in Saskatoon alter the lives and livelihoods of people – folks who are our neighbours.  And some of them never recover, lacking the resilience to cope .  Roofs should stay where they are built.  As designers and constructors of roofs, we can do better.  We must do better.
+
==The Code: building harmony and uniformity==
 +
In British Columbia, nearly all building construction is governed by the British Columbia Building Code (the “Code”), an adaptation of the National Building Code of Canada (NBC)The City of Vancouver is an exception; as a Charter City with unique status across Canada, it operates under its own Building By-law, also an adaptation of the NBC. To understand what the Code is, and why it matters, we need to understand how it fits within the legislative framework established by government, and how the Code is developed.
  
We often think of wind as a phenomenon that pushes .  Trees bend because wind pushes against them.  Waves crash on a beach because they are driven by windSailboats ghost gracefully in a bay because wind presses against the sailsAll true, but not all there is to know about wind.
+
In Canada generally and in British Columbia specifically, the Code falls within a hierarchy of legislative tools used by government to standardize building constructionThe Building Act in British Columbia is a statute that provides “control or directives on legal authority”.  The Building Regulation is managed by the British Columbia Ministry of Farming, natural resources and industry and establishes consistent technical requirements under the authority of the Act for the construction of buildingsThe Code is an example of such a “technical requirement”.
  
“Wind is air moving from a place that has higher pressure to one that has lower pressure.”  Sometimes, this is a localized phenomenon where a ‘thermal’ carries warm air aloft, pulling cooler air in behind it.  Here on the south coast of British Columbia, faster warming land masses pull cool air in from the water, creating “inflow” winds; the reverse happens in late day as the land cools quicker than the nearby seaMicrosystems abound in a region freckled with islands, large and smallBig weather patterns revolve around high and low-pressure systems that develop both offshore and inland, and when the low-pressure centre is very low, resulting winds from air pulled into it can be violent.
+
Codes have a higher authority over standards. A code is mandatory, “broad in scope and is intended to carry the force of law when adopted by a provincial, territorial or municipal authority…”  Standards, which may be voluntary or mandatory, do not posses the strength of the Code, but may be referenced within the Code and “establish accepted practices, technical requirements, and terminologies for diverse fields”.  Numerous CSA, CGSB, ASTM, UL/ULC and industry standards are referenced throughout the Code and support its objectives.  For example, ASTM E 779, “Standard Test Method for Determining Air Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization” is referenced in the British Columbia Building Code, Division B, Part 10, 10.2.3.5 Building Envelope Airtightness TestingSome standards do not become legal requirements but are simply used in an industry as a recognized ‘articulation of “good practice”’The Standards in the RCABC Roofing Practices Manual are often referenced this way.
  
Inasmuch as wind pushes, it also pulls. Flowing over surfaces, wind creates negative pressure that can cause objects to moveSlopes cause horizontally flowing wind to deflect upwards and around objects, but when wind strikes a building with flat roof areas, the flow around these structures induces negative pressure over the roof surfacePowerful ‘sucking’ action can occur, and if the roof is not properly secured, the results can be catastrophic.
+
While the Code is the responsibility of the Ministry (and managed by the Building and Safety Standard Branch), the Code cannot be amended at the provincial level.   In fact, the Building and Safety Standard Branch offers no Code change mechanism to the publicThis is because the Code is an “offspring” of the NBC, the model building code (template) on which nearly all provincial building codes are based (Quebec operates under its own Code de construction du Québec).  The NBC has jurisdiction across the country only with respect to federal institutions and buildings that are owned and managed by ministries of the federal government (National Defence, for example)Beyond that, the NBC currently has no legal status in provinces and territories who adopt and adapt it to suit specific regional requirements.
  
To resist those negative forces, both replacement and new membrane roof systems must be designed so that all the component materials in the system are held together and securely attached to the building structure, using proven patterns of adhesives, fasteners or a combination of bothBut how do you know what makes them ‘proven’?  How can you avoid designing a future catastrophe, especially when it’s time to replace a roof?  Let’s answer each of those questions, beginning with the issue of replacement roofing.
+
The NBC was first published in 1941, and then substantially revised in response to a post-war construction boom.  The Code as we know it is consensus-based, developed by numerous federal, provincial and industry stakeholders under the direction of the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC)The Commission was established in 1991 by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC), and maintains other key national model codes published by Codes Canada (a division of the NRC).
  
==The Building Code and wind==
+
Members of the Commission are volunteers, selected from across Canada for their particular interests and expertise, and represent the broad geographical and technical spectrum of the country.  Together, they oversee the preparation and revision of several model codes used across Canada, including
===Alterations and new roofing===
+
*the National Building Code
[[File:Code and Wind - Image 4.jpeg|left|150px|link=https://free.bcpublications.ca/civix/content/public/bcbc2018/?xsl=/templates/browse.xsl&xsl=/templates/browse.xsl]]<br clear=all>
+
*the National Plumbing Code
Anyone who works with the Code knows that it applies to new buildings. However, it does not apply only to new construction, a common misconception.  It also can be enforced for existing buildings.  
+
*the National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings (NECB), and  
   
+
*the National Fire Code.  
Wait, what?  Yes, it can be applied to existing buildings.  In Division A, Part 1 (Compliance), Article 1.1.1.1. Application of this Code  reads, “This Code applies to… d) an alteration of any building.”  Pretty much to the point, isn’t it?  If you are still picking yourself up off the floor after reading that, take a little heart.  Not everything that might constitute an alteration is covered by the Code.  To discern what is and is not a Code matter, let’s briefly examine Article 1.1.1.1. through the lens of Code objectives, and then see what Article 1.1.1.1. means for roofing.
+
The Commission also oversees the development and revisions of numerous guidance documentsThe Canadian Electrical (CE) Code is prepared separately by the Committee on the Canadian Electrical Code, Part I, under the auspices of the CSA Group (formerly the Canadian Standards Association, or CSA); the CSA Group is accredited by the Standards Council Canada to develop the CE Code and numerous standards.
  
You will recall what the Code is not : it is not a quality assurance standard.  At the risk of sounding facetious, neither is it an interior decorating guideIts objectives are quite defined and establishes minimum requirements for occupant accessibility, health, and safety.  Even then, the stated objectives of the Code (''Division A, Part 2'', '''Section 2.2. Objectives''') do not apply to every type of building governed by the Code (see ''Division A, Part 2'', '''Section 2.1. Application''').
+
New and revised language in the NBC is the responsibility of nine Standing Committees established by the Commission, each overseeing a particular aspect of the NBCWith input from more than forty task groups and working groups, they work to sift through, evaluate and integrate into the NBC or related documents (such as user guides) all policy advice received from the provinces and territories, submitted through their Commission representatives. The result is a consensus-based Code used as a model by Canadian provinces and territories.
  
For example, consider Objective OH1 Indoor Conditions.  In a nutshell, Objective OH1 states that the Code intends to “limit the probability that, as a result of the design or construction of the building, a person in the building will be exposed to an unacceptable risk of illness due to indoor conditions” because of “contact with moisture” (OH1.3).  Said a different way, and framed in the context of roof replacement, if the failure of an altered roof exposes building occupants to moisture, which could then make them ill, the Code applies to roofs on existing buildings.
+
Although the nine Standing Committees are not necessarily aligned with the nine Parts of the Code, they address key subject matters that are integrated into each Part:
 +
*HVAC and Plumbing (SC-HP)
 +
*Energy Efficiency (SC-EE)
 +
*Earthquake Design (SC-ED)
 +
*Environmental Separation (SC-ES)
 +
*Fire Protection (SC-FP)
 +
*Hazardous Materials and Activities (SC-HMA)
 +
*Housing and Small Buildings (SC-HSB)
 +
*Structural Design (SC-SD)
 +
*Use and Egress (SC-UE)
 +
The NBC is revised and republished every five yearsThe British Columbia code cycle is offset from the NBC cycle by two years so that each iteration of the Code can be properly considered by the Building and Safety Standard Branch and, if necessary, revised to suit our provincial context and government mandates.
  
Diving a little deeper, we can better understand this by examining the meaning of key words in that sentenceDefined words in the Code are always italicized (Division A, Section 1.4. Terms and Abbreviations (Rev 2)).  For example, building means “any structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy”.  Note that in the definition for building, the tense is specific (present tense) and pertains to buildings that are already in use (“used” means ‘already constructed’ because it is contrasted with the word “intended” which carries a future or pre-construction sense).
+
In British Columbia, the Code is enforced by local governments who have the freedom to establish additional requirements on ‘unrestricted’ matters The NBC has jurisdiction across the country only with respect to federal institutions and buildings that are owned and managed by ministries of the government (National Defence, for example).  
 
 
Alteration means “a change or extension to any matter or thing or to any occupancy regulated by this Code.”  None of the key words in the definition for alteration (except the word building) are further defined, but notice the use of “or”, which means that an alteration can mean a material change in the building or a change in its occupancy (which means the way in which the building is or will be used).  Therefore, we must take the common sense of the requirement, namely that when a “thing” on a building is changed (a roof, for example), the Code applies to the change.
 
  
As stated earlier, there are limits to the application of the CodeChanging the exterior paint colour on a building would not be considered an alteration. For that matter, buying a new kitchen range and discarding the old one also does not concern the Code (“This Code does not apply to…mechanical or other equipment and appliances not specifically regulated in these regulations”) .  On the other hand, removing and replacing a structural element of a building certainly qualifies as a “change” that concerns the Code, for every type of building (see Objective '''OS2 Structural Safety''').  Code objectives are the key to understanding what “change” means.
+
We can be grateful for the Code and the uniformity it brings to building construction in CanadaIn the U.S., many states rely on the International Building Code (IBC), but there appears to be no uniformity across the country and some states mandate compliance with several codes, resulting in a complex regulatory environment for builders.
  
So much for the scope of the Code.  What does the Code have to say about membrane roofs?
+
==How the Code is organized==
 +
Most of us know the Code as a single book (or electronic document), but that is in fact Book I of a two-  volume document collectively called the British Columbia Building Code.  Book II of the British Columbia Building Code is the BC Plumbing Code.  Each is published as a separate document.  For the sake of simplicity, I will restrict further discussion to Volume I and refer to it simply as “the Code”.
  
===Begin with the end===
+
The Code is now free to anyone online, without a subscription.  Any text that carried over from the 2012 Code remains as black type.  New material is shown in blue and is clearly marked. The Code is constantly being revised, and addenda can be obtained from the Errata and Revisions page of the British Columbia Codes website.
[[File:Code and Wind - Image 5.jpeg|left|300px| <small>Photo credit:James Klassen</small>|link=https://rpm.rcabc.org/images/c/cb/Code_and_Wind_-_Image_5.jpeg]]<br clear=all>
+
To understand how to read the Code, you need to understand and appreciate its organization, which the Roofing Practices Manual is loosely modelled after.  The Code is arranged in three divisions, and each division is further segregated into Parts (for an explanation of the nomenclature used in the Code, read the Code Preface):
A roof keeps the weather outside, which is a plain way of saying that it “separates environments” (inside from outside).  The Code has various things to say about different types of roofs, but our focus is on membrane systems.  You won’t find clear articulation in the Code about roof types or even roof function, and there is an assumption that the reader already has a working understanding of membrane roof systemsNevertheless, since roof function is a useful way of understanding Code requirements for membrane roofs, we’ll rely on the functional categories established by the RCABC Roofing Practices Manual (RPM).
+
<ol>
 +
<li>Division A, titled “Compliance, Objectives and Functional Statements”, defines the scope of the Code, “outlines the main objectives and functional statements for technical building requirements”, and “explains why a requirement must be met and how to evaluate other ways to meet the acceptable requirements through alternative solutions.” 
 +
<li>Division B is the “how to” or technical division of the CodeCalled “Acceptable Solutions”, Division B identifies the technical means by which a building can satisfy the requirements of the Code.  Acceptable solutions include notes that link Division B back to the objectives and functional statements in Division A.
 +
<li>Division C, “Administrative Provisions”, articulates who is responsible for building design, and provides guidance when an alternative solution to the Code is necessary.  Many provinces and territories establish their own administrative provisions, including British Columbia.
 +
</li></ol>
 +
Each Division is arranged into Parts, and each Part is further arranged into sections, sub-sections, articles and so forth.  By such an arrangement, the reader can ‘drill down’ into the Code and obtain guidance.
  
The RPM classifies roof systems as either waterproofing or water-sheddingThe latter uses gravity to shed water away from the structureWater-shedding roofs are not designed to work under any kind of hydrostatic pressure and are commonly used on Part 9 structuresAsphalt shingles, cedar shakes and shingles, and metal panel roofs, all are water-shedding materials.
+
==A Code with purpose==
 +
The Code is not a quality control manual.  Quality, in fact, falls outside the mandate of the Code.  Nor does the Code deal with every issue that could fall within its scopeRather, the purpose of the Code is to mandate building fire safety, structural soundness and stability, occupant comfort and interior environment safety, ingress and egress, and the control of a building’s interior climateThese broad objectives are clearly articulated in Division A and are fashioned around statements that identify “undesirable situations and their consequences, which the Code aims to avoid occurring in buildings”.  These “objective statements” aim to “limit the probability” of an undesirable situation or “unacceptable risk” and are what the Code refers to as “entirely qualitative”As such, they are not intended to be used by themselves for designing or approving the construction of a building.
  
Waterproofing roof systems, on the other hand, resist hydrostatic pressure.  These roofs are usually (but not exclusively) “flat” (sloped toward drains less than 1:6), and most are insulated beneath the weathering surface.  Some are insulated above it .  The weathering surface is commonly referred to as a membrane, but not all membranes are the same; some are liquid-applied, others comprised of sheets of material welded together to form a monolithic covering (singular in form and function).
+
Because the Code does not deal with quality (which is left to regulations or standards that industry often develops and administers), it is bereft of any statements about best practicesRather, the Code permits certain kinds of materials and directs, in the broadest of terms, how they can be arranged to satisfy the minimum requirements established by the Objectives.  Where structural loads impact the design and construction of building enclosure systems, the Code provides guidance in Division B, and in the notes.
  
Membrane-type assemblies are used on most “Part 3 buildings”, and on some “Part 9” structuresWhile Division B, Part 9 does not provide expressed or even complete “acceptable solutions” for membrane roof systems , the requirements for membrane roofs employed on both Part 3 and Part 9 buildings find common ground in Division B, Part 5, which is where we now turn.
+
==Prescriptive or performance-based?==
 +
Until December 2018, the Code offered two paths by which a design could conform to its requirements: the prescriptive path and the performance -based path.  The prescriptive pathway was less onerous than the performance-based path former because it focused on the characteristics of individual components or systems of a building, not on how the building as a “system of systems” performedFor example, insulation tables specified minimum thermal resistance values, depending on where the insulation was installed, but these requirements were not integrated with the design and minimum requirements for the heating and ventilating systems of the building (Part 10), nor with the requirements for air controls (Part 5).  “Air barrier systems” had to be continuous between various materials and systems, but the Code appeared to be silent on how to verify “continuity”.
 +
With the release of the 2018 Code, all of that changed.  The prescriptive option vanished, and the Code shifted entirely toward specific, measurable performance criteria, driven in large part by a singular change in perspective: making buildings more energy efficient by focusing on the measurable continuity and thermal performance of the entire building enclosure (see my article, Stepping up our game, in the Fall 2018 issue of BC Roofing).  By doing this, the Code allowed for variables in system design, provided they achieved minimum performance characteristics.  This also meant that energy efficient mechanical systems became one strategy among several, to make buildings more energy efficient.
  
Part 5 (Division B) Environmental Separation is comprised of ten sections, each focused on a performance criterion or issue, like Heat Transfer or Air Leakage, rather than on a type of assembly, such as walls or the roofA brief examination of Section 5.6. Precipitation offers little about roofs beyond several broad functional statements – a roof must “minimize ingress of precipitation into the component or assembly” (don’t all roofs have to do this?) and it must “prevent ingress of precipitation into interior space” (yes, it says that)Nothing is said about wind.
+
This change in perspective dramatically impacted roof system design and strongly linked formerly nebulous connections between Part 4, 5 and 10 in Division B.  For example, the 2018 Code introduced expanded calculations in Part 4 concerning the determination of Specified Wind Loads.  Part 5 (including the notes to Part 5) added made-in-Canada solutions for keeping out the weather while simultaneously satisfying the structural design criteria in Part 4; that guidance was largely absent from earlier editions of the Code, which led designers to use whatever could be deemed ‘Code-compliant’, including the citation of standards and specifications published by FM GlobalAnd because the Code placed a heavier emphasis on the measurable continuity of air and vapour controls (Part 5 and Part 10), the design and construction of the roof took on more significance as a key facet of the entire building enclosureI will have more to say about these changes in future articles.
  
In Section 5.1. General, we find a few clues to the subject of wind.  Article 5.1.4.1. addresses “environmental loads”.  That looks promising since wind is an “environmental” phenomenon.  A quick read leads us further along in our quest: roofing must be designed to conform to the requirements in Subsection 5.2.2. “with regard to wind up-lift imposed on roofing….”  In Section 5.2. Loads and Procedures  we find the grail – Article 5.2.2.2. Determination of Wind Loads.  Article 5.2.2.2. deals with membrane roof systems “that separate dissimilar environments or are exposed to the exterior”, and which may be “<span class="recommended">subject to wind load, and…[are] required to be designed to resist wind load</span>” (red colour added for emphasis).  The Article is reproduced below; blue text in the Code indicates new material introduced in the Code in 2018.
+
==Complexity and integration==
:{| style="width:70%;"
+
If you are new to reading the Code, the first thing you must understand is that while the Code is clearly organized, it is complex and integrated among and across divisions and parts. Most readers focus on the “how to” technical requirements of Division B.  But if you read the Code carefully, you will see that every Part in Division B begins with a cross-reference to either Division A or Division C requirementsBecome familiar with entire Code, not only the divisions or parts that seem applicable to a specific subject or issue.
|-
 
|
 
:<big>'''5.2.2.2. Determination of Wind Load'''</big>
 
::::(See Note A-5.2.2.2.)
 
::1) This Article applies to the determination of wind load to be used in the design of materials, components and assemblies, including their connections, that separate dissimilar environments or are exposed to the exterior, where these are
 
:::a) Subject to wind load, and
 
:::b) Required to be designed to resist wind load.
 
::2) Except as provided in Sentence (3), the wind load referred to in Sentence (1) shall be 100% of the specified wind load determined in accordance with Article 4.1.7.1.
 
::3) Where it can be shown by test or analysis that a material, component, assembly or connection referred to in Sentence (1) will be subject to less than 100% of the specified wind load, the wind load referred to in Sentence (1) <span class="reference">shall not be less than the load determined by test or analysis</span>.
 
::4) <span class="reference">Except as provided in Sentence (5), the wind uplift resistance of membrane roofing assemblies shall be determined in accordance with the requirements of CAN/CSA-A123.21, “Dynamic Wind Uplift Resistance of Membrane-Roofing Systems.” (See Note A-5.2.2.2.(4).)</span>
 
::5) <span class="reference">Membrane roofing assemblies with proven past performance for the anticipated wind loads need not comply with Sentence (4). (See Note A-5.1.4.1.(5).)</span>
 
|}
 
Article 5.2.2.2. is not only about roofs.  It applies to any material, component, assembly, or their connections, that separates environments and may be subject to wind loadsThis includes wall systems and glazing.  Nevertheless, the thing to pay attention to is that “environmental separators” must be designed to resist “wind load” because if they fail and breach under load, they effectively cease to function to “prevent ingress of precipitation”.  To put it another way, a wind-damaged roof that lets in the rain no longer satisfies the Code requirements in Section 5.6 Precipitation and certainly won’t obtain the Code Objective OH1.
 
  
The interesting revelation arising from Article 5.2.2.2. is the reference to load calculations: wind loads must be “determined in accordance with Article 4.1.7.1.”  With this seemingly innocuous statement, Article 5.2.2.2. bridges two seemingly disparate Parts of the Code – Part 5 (which deals with the functional nature of the enclosure), and Part 4 (which is exclusively about structural loads).  Even the use of the term “specified wind load” in Article 5.2.2.2. is structural term used in Division B, Part 4. What does this all mean?
+
In basic terms, the Code addresses two kinds of buildings. A “Part 3” building broadly refers to various large institutional, commercial, and industrial structures built to comply with Division B, Part 3 and various other Parts in that division (''British Columbia Building Code, Division A, Part 1'', '''1.3.3. Application of Division B''', and ''Division B, Part 3'', '''3.1.2 Classification of Buildings or Parts of Buildings by Major Occupancy''').  A “Part 9” building alternatively refers to housing and small buildings up to three storeys in height and no larger than 600 m2 in area, which are governed by Part 9 in Division B.  This latter category includes single family dwellings, multi-family residential buildings and buildings with business occupancies.  In some cases, structural requirements in Division B, Part 4 apply to “Part 9” design requirements (see ''9.4.1 Structural Design Requirements and Application Limitations'').  It is also important to recognize that Parts 1, 7, 8 and 10 also apply to “Part 9” buildings (''British Columbia Building Code, Division A, Part 1'': Article 1.3.3.1., '''Application of Parts 1, 7, 8 and 10''').
  
It means this: a roof system isn’t just something that separates the ‘inside’ from the ‘outside’.  The roof is a structural component of the building.  It functions as a diaphragm to support the walls and the rest of the structure from collapse under gravitational loads, and it resists the upward lifting loads generated by wind which, if left unchecked, can jeopardize the function of the roof system.
 
  
[[File:Code and Wind - Image 6.jpeg|thumb|center]]<br clear=all>
+
==More than meets the eye==
 
+
Roofs now do more than simply keep the weather out; they protect the integrity of the whole building and serve are a key component in the entire building enclosure to control the movement of air, moisture, and sound in and out of the structure. To do this, they need to stay where they are built, and to stay where they are built, they must be designed and constructed to comply with the Code. By collaborating and learning together, the Design Authority and roofing contractor can make it work.  
Article 5.2.2.2 is not new to the Code .  What is new in Part 5 are the options by which a design can conform to these requirements.  The 2012 Code offered no guidance.  The design authority knew that the roof had to conform to the Code but had to look elsewhere for solutions.  Many designs (if they even paid attention to this somewhat obscure requirement) referenced what few standards industry had to offer, such as FM Global’s design specifications and approvals.  Today, the Code is specific and offers three pathways for compliance; none include FM standards or test methods.  All are performance-based.  Sentence (4) requires a roof to be designed using a tested roof assembly (“Tested Assembly”) (Sentence (4)).  Sentence (5) permits the use of a membrane system with “proven past performance” as an alternative to Sentence (4).  And in the Notes to Part 5, a third way is offered, which I will deal with separately.  Each of the first two merits brief comments.
+
   
 
+
In the next article of this series, we explore the subject of roof design and construction for Part 3 buildings and examine what the Code has to say about structural loading and roof membrane system selection. Additionally, we'll offer some ways in which design specifications can navigate the complexities of Code compliance, owner interests and performance criteria.  
===Tested Assemblies and Proven Past Performance===
 
[[File:Code and Wind - Image 7.jpeg|thumb|center| link=https://rpm.rcabc.org/images/c/cb/Code_and_Wind_-_Image_7.jpeg]]<br>
 
The term “tested roof assembly” refers to a membrane roof that has been tested in laboratory conditions by an NRC-qualified facility, using the CSA test method CSA-A123.21 “Dynamic Wind Uplift Resistance of Membrane Roofing Systems”.  The nature and application of a Tested Assembly is developed in the Notes to Part 5.
 
 
 
The Notes to Part 5 are critical.  Formerly collected in Appendices A and B and now offered at the end of each Part, the Notes to Part 5 provide a fuller explanation of the requirements in Article 5.2.2.2.  Sentence (4) is supported by Note A-5.2.2.2.(4).  The entire Note is replicated below.
 
 
 
:{| style="width:70%;"
 
|-
 
|
 
<span class="reference">'''A-5.2.2.2.(4) Membrane Roofing Systems'''. Wind loads for membrane roofing systems must be calculated in accordance with Part 4. The tested uplift resistance and factored load should satisfy the requirements of the Commentary entitled Limit States Design in the “User’s Guide – NBC 2015, Structural Commentaries (Part 4 of Division B).”</span>
 
 
 
<span class="reference">The test method described in CAN/CSA-A123.21, “Dynamic Wind Uplift Resistance of Membrane-Roofing Systems,” applies only to membrane roofing systems whose components’ resistance to wind uplift is achieved by fasteners or adhesives. It does not apply to roofing systems that use ballasts, such as gravel or pavers, to secure the membrane against wind uplift.</span>
 
 
 
<span class="reference">In the case of membrane roofing systems in which the waterproof membrane is attached to the structural deck using mechanical fasteners, the wind-induced forces and the roofing system’s response are time- and space-dependent and, thus, dynamic in nature. Further information on the design and evaluation of such systems can be found in “A Guide for the Wind Design of Mechanically Attached Flexible Membrane Roofs,” published by NRC.</span>
 
 
 
<span class="reference">The wind uplift resistance obtained from the test method in CAN/CSA-A123.21 is limited to configurations with specific fastener or adhesive patterns. To extrapolate the test data to non-tested configurations, refer to ANSI/SPRI WD-1, “Wind Design Standard Practice for Roofing Assemblies,” for a rational calculation procedure. However, in using this extrapolation procedure, wind loads should be calculated in accordance with the BCBC. NRC’s guide for wind design referenced above provides further guidance and examples of wind load calculations.</span>
 
|}
 
Notice several things.  First, notice that the entire note is new (blue text).  Second, note that the membrane roof system must be designed as a structural element (wind loads are determined using the means and methods in Division B, Part 4).  Lastly, notice that the CSA test method is limited in its scope to membrane roofs that are adhered or mechanically fastened, and that the method does not apply to ballasted roofs (where the ballast is the securement against wind uplift).  These are actually divided into three subcategories defined within the test method: Mechanically Attached Roof Systems (MARS), Adhesive-applied Roof Systems (AARS), and Partially Adhered Roof Systems (PARS) (a hybrid securement model).  In the fourth article in this series, we will explore the use of Tested Assemblies as part of the roof design process.
 
 
 
How does a roof designer find these Tested Assemblies?  Membrane manufacturers operating in Canada have had their membrane systems tested by accredited laboratories.  Some manufacturers publish the test results online; others will provide a test report if asked.  Some roofing associations provide tools for locating test reports.  The RCABC uploads reports into the Roofing Practices Manual and makes them available for review and download directly by the user.
 
 
 
The concept of “proven past performance” is introduced in Sentence (5) of Article 5.2.2.2.  To learn more about it, the reader is directed to Note A-5.1.4.1.(5) Past Performance as Basis for Compliance with Respect to Structural Loads.  The Note is too large to reproduce here in its entirety, but we can summarize it this way: when an assembly exists that has a proven record of resisting the specified wind loads, that assembly may be used to satisfy the Code. On the surface, this sounds easy, and in fact the option of “proven past performance” has been relied upon by design authorities as a kind of escape hatch to avoid the apparent strictures of Tested Assemblies.  However, the ‘test’ for proven past performance is more onerous and difficult to achieve than it appears.  It is also intended, by its placement in Article 5.2.2.2., to be an alternative to the primary pathway: using a Tested Assembly.
 
 
 
Therefore, if a conventionally insulated membrane roof system is expected to last 25 years, it should have a 25-year history to support its use an alternative to a Tested Assembly.  Furthermore, proven past performance is valid only when the properties of a material, component or assembly are “identical or superior to those of the materials, components or assemblies used as a reference.” Therefore, roof systems using relatively new materials may not qualify.
 
 
 
There is more.  The candidate roof system should have a history of use on one or more buildings similar to the one being designed.  This is because wind loads are dynamic in nature (that is, they push and pull with varying intensity and often from varying directions) and these wind loads are often products of the building’s context (due to loads exerted by funneled winds and building harmonics).  When framed this way, the test for proven past performance suddenly looks a lot less appealing.
 
[[File:Code and Wind - Image 8.jpeg|thumb|center| link=https://rpm.rcabc.org/images/c/cb/Code_and_Wind_-_Image_8.jpeg]]
 
 
 
===A third way===
 
Finally, we have to confront the ultimate question: what if neither a Tested Assembly nor an assembly with proven past performance will work?  The answer is (sort of) in the Notes to Part 5.  There, provision is made to extrapolate the roof securement using the ANSI-SPRI standard WD-1 .  However, that provision is not exactly a “Get out of Jail Free” card.  The extrapolation is limited to mechanically attached systems.  It does not apply to adhered systems or even to hybrid systems (secured with a combination of mechanical fasteners and adhesives).  For those, the securement of the roof system should be custom-engineered and may have to be extrapolated from Tested Assembly data.
 
 
 
==Good neighbours==
 
In London, UK you will hear an electronic P.A. announcement at each station in the “Tube” urging passengers to “mind the gap” between the platform and rail cars.  Gaps trip us up.  Where we expect firm ground, sometimes we find nothing.
 
 
 
Occasionally, there appear to be gaps in the Code – missing pieces that ‘trip up’ the design and construction process.  But not in this case.  Article 5.2.2.2. (Division B) explains what needs to be done to design a Code-compliant membrane roof; turning that into a real design is answered elsewhere in the Code.  As we will see in the next article of this series, Roof Design: from Code to specification, what the Code has to say about design responsibility may surprise you.
 
 
 
Roof design is complicated business.  Ultimately, good roof design must be rooted in a commitment to take care of each other – our neighbours.  Experience tells us that designing and building a roof that is resilient under pressure, to serve those who will live and work inside the building it protects, simply is the right thing to do.  As designers and constructors, we do more than simply build roofs.  Together, we create safe, habitable communities.
 
 
</div>
 
</div>
 
<div class="col-md-12">
 
<div class="col-md-12">

Revision as of 15:42, 24 September 2021



Division E - General Information


The Building Code and Wind

This is the first part of a multi-part series on the Building Code and roofing:

Part 1: Understanding the BC Building Code
Part 2: The Building Code and wind
Part 3: Design Responsibility: from Code to Specification

You can find these articles in both the printed and digital editions of Roofing BC, the trade magazine published by the RCABC. You can also watch the video presentation, “Blown Away: Code Requirements for Membrane Roofs”, that addresses several articles in this series.

This article explores the origin and function of the British Columbia Building Code, how to read and understand the Code, and what it says about roof design and construction. While the material presented here is drawn from various government publications, it also reflects the writer’s own understanding of the Code – its structure, purpose and meaning.

The content on this page has been adapted from the original published article in Roofing BC (Summer 2021).

Introduction

Constructing a building is a complex task. It involves thousands of different materials and components, assembled into products and system by many people, both on the construction site and in shops and factories. The assembly and integration of these various materials and systems into a finished building requires tremendous coordination, negotiation, flexibility and constant adaptation to the weather, market forces, trade schedules and contractual commitments. When it is all done, the commissioned building must be safe, accessible, provide a healthy environment for people, energy efficient, and it must capably protect the building interior and those who live or work there from both the weather and seismic events.

Building construction involves many layers of responsibility. Owners, for example, have an overall responsibility for their projects – to determine what will be built, how it will conform to existing laws, and how they will select qualified advisors and builders. Designers are responsible to produce drawings and specifications that also comply with regulations and laws, and that reflect the interests of the owner. Contractors bear the responsibility of performing the work, scheduling trades, managing supplies, and constructing the building to align with the drawings and specifications. What ties them together in a common enterprise is the Building Code, which was developed to protect the public interest by establishing minimum requirements for safe, stable, and habitable buildings.

The Code: building harmony and uniformity

In British Columbia, nearly all building construction is governed by the British Columbia Building Code (the “Code”), an adaptation of the National Building Code of Canada (NBC). The City of Vancouver is an exception; as a Charter City with unique status across Canada, it operates under its own Building By-law, also an adaptation of the NBC. To understand what the Code is, and why it matters, we need to understand how it fits within the legislative framework established by government, and how the Code is developed.

In Canada generally and in British Columbia specifically, the Code falls within a hierarchy of legislative tools used by government to standardize building construction. The Building Act in British Columbia is a statute that provides “control or directives on legal authority”. The Building Regulation is managed by the British Columbia Ministry of Farming, natural resources and industry and establishes consistent technical requirements under the authority of the Act for the construction of buildings. The Code is an example of such a “technical requirement”.

Codes have a higher authority over standards. A code is mandatory, “broad in scope and is intended to carry the force of law when adopted by a provincial, territorial or municipal authority…” Standards, which may be voluntary or mandatory, do not posses the strength of the Code, but may be referenced within the Code and “establish accepted practices, technical requirements, and terminologies for diverse fields”. Numerous CSA, CGSB, ASTM, UL/ULC and industry standards are referenced throughout the Code and support its objectives. For example, ASTM E 779, “Standard Test Method for Determining Air Leakage Rate by Fan Pressurization” is referenced in the British Columbia Building Code, Division B, Part 10, 10.2.3.5 Building Envelope Airtightness Testing. Some standards do not become legal requirements but are simply used in an industry as a recognized ‘articulation of “good practice”’. The Standards in the RCABC Roofing Practices Manual are often referenced this way.

While the Code is the responsibility of the Ministry (and managed by the Building and Safety Standard Branch), the Code cannot be amended at the provincial level. In fact, the Building and Safety Standard Branch offers no Code change mechanism to the public. This is because the Code is an “offspring” of the NBC, the model building code (template) on which nearly all provincial building codes are based (Quebec operates under its own Code de construction du Québec). The NBC has jurisdiction across the country only with respect to federal institutions and buildings that are owned and managed by ministries of the federal government (National Defence, for example). Beyond that, the NBC currently has no legal status in provinces and territories who adopt and adapt it to suit specific regional requirements.

The NBC was first published in 1941, and then substantially revised in response to a post-war construction boom. The Code as we know it is consensus-based, developed by numerous federal, provincial and industry stakeholders under the direction of the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC). The Commission was established in 1991 by the National Research Council of Canada (NRC), and maintains other key national model codes published by Codes Canada (a division of the NRC).

Members of the Commission are volunteers, selected from across Canada for their particular interests and expertise, and represent the broad geographical and technical spectrum of the country. Together, they oversee the preparation and revision of several model codes used across Canada, including

  • the National Building Code
  • the National Plumbing Code
  • the National Energy Code of Canada for Buildings (NECB), and
  • the National Fire Code.

The Commission also oversees the development and revisions of numerous guidance documents. The Canadian Electrical (CE) Code is prepared separately by the Committee on the Canadian Electrical Code, Part I, under the auspices of the CSA Group (formerly the Canadian Standards Association, or CSA); the CSA Group is accredited by the Standards Council Canada to develop the CE Code and numerous standards.

New and revised language in the NBC is the responsibility of nine Standing Committees established by the Commission, each overseeing a particular aspect of the NBC. With input from more than forty task groups and working groups, they work to sift through, evaluate and integrate into the NBC or related documents (such as user guides) all policy advice received from the provinces and territories, submitted through their Commission representatives. The result is a consensus-based Code used as a model by Canadian provinces and territories.

Although the nine Standing Committees are not necessarily aligned with the nine Parts of the Code, they address key subject matters that are integrated into each Part:

  • HVAC and Plumbing (SC-HP)
  • Energy Efficiency (SC-EE)
  • Earthquake Design (SC-ED)
  • Environmental Separation (SC-ES)
  • Fire Protection (SC-FP)
  • Hazardous Materials and Activities (SC-HMA)
  • Housing and Small Buildings (SC-HSB)
  • Structural Design (SC-SD)
  • Use and Egress (SC-UE)

The NBC is revised and republished every five years. The British Columbia code cycle is offset from the NBC cycle by two years so that each iteration of the Code can be properly considered by the Building and Safety Standard Branch and, if necessary, revised to suit our provincial context and government mandates.

In British Columbia, the Code is enforced by local governments who have the freedom to establish additional requirements on ‘unrestricted’ matters . The NBC has jurisdiction across the country only with respect to federal institutions and buildings that are owned and managed by ministries of the government (National Defence, for example).

We can be grateful for the Code and the uniformity it brings to building construction in Canada. In the U.S., many states rely on the International Building Code (IBC), but there appears to be no uniformity across the country and some states mandate compliance with several codes, resulting in a complex regulatory environment for builders.

How the Code is organized

Most of us know the Code as a single book (or electronic document), but that is in fact Book I of a two- volume document collectively called the British Columbia Building Code. Book II of the British Columbia Building Code is the BC Plumbing Code. Each is published as a separate document. For the sake of simplicity, I will restrict further discussion to Volume I and refer to it simply as “the Code”.

The Code is now free to anyone online, without a subscription. Any text that carried over from the 2012 Code remains as black type. New material is shown in blue and is clearly marked. The Code is constantly being revised, and addenda can be obtained from the Errata and Revisions page of the British Columbia Codes website. To understand how to read the Code, you need to understand and appreciate its organization, which the Roofing Practices Manual is loosely modelled after. The Code is arranged in three divisions, and each division is further segregated into Parts (for an explanation of the nomenclature used in the Code, read the Code Preface):

  1. Division A, titled “Compliance, Objectives and Functional Statements”, defines the scope of the Code, “outlines the main objectives and functional statements for technical building requirements”, and “explains why a requirement must be met and how to evaluate other ways to meet the acceptable requirements through alternative solutions.”
  2. Division B is the “how to” or technical division of the Code. Called “Acceptable Solutions”, Division B identifies the technical means by which a building can satisfy the requirements of the Code. Acceptable solutions include notes that link Division B back to the objectives and functional statements in Division A.
  3. Division C, “Administrative Provisions”, articulates who is responsible for building design, and provides guidance when an alternative solution to the Code is necessary. Many provinces and territories establish their own administrative provisions, including British Columbia.

Each Division is arranged into Parts, and each Part is further arranged into sections, sub-sections, articles and so forth. By such an arrangement, the reader can ‘drill down’ into the Code and obtain guidance.

A Code with purpose

The Code is not a quality control manual. Quality, in fact, falls outside the mandate of the Code. Nor does the Code deal with every issue that could fall within its scope. Rather, the purpose of the Code is to mandate building fire safety, structural soundness and stability, occupant comfort and interior environment safety, ingress and egress, and the control of a building’s interior climate. These broad objectives are clearly articulated in Division A and are fashioned around statements that identify “undesirable situations and their consequences, which the Code aims to avoid occurring in buildings”. These “objective statements” aim to “limit the probability” of an undesirable situation or “unacceptable risk” and are what the Code refers to as “entirely qualitative”. As such, they are not intended to be used by themselves for designing or approving the construction of a building.

Because the Code does not deal with quality (which is left to regulations or standards that industry often develops and administers), it is bereft of any statements about best practices. Rather, the Code permits certain kinds of materials and directs, in the broadest of terms, how they can be arranged to satisfy the minimum requirements established by the Objectives. Where structural loads impact the design and construction of building enclosure systems, the Code provides guidance in Division B, and in the notes.

Prescriptive or performance-based?

Until December 2018, the Code offered two paths by which a design could conform to its requirements: the prescriptive path and the performance -based path. The prescriptive pathway was less onerous than the performance-based path former because it focused on the characteristics of individual components or systems of a building, not on how the building as a “system of systems” performed. For example, insulation tables specified minimum thermal resistance values, depending on where the insulation was installed, but these requirements were not integrated with the design and minimum requirements for the heating and ventilating systems of the building (Part 10), nor with the requirements for air controls (Part 5). “Air barrier systems” had to be continuous between various materials and systems, but the Code appeared to be silent on how to verify “continuity”. With the release of the 2018 Code, all of that changed. The prescriptive option vanished, and the Code shifted entirely toward specific, measurable performance criteria, driven in large part by a singular change in perspective: making buildings more energy efficient by focusing on the measurable continuity and thermal performance of the entire building enclosure (see my article, Stepping up our game, in the Fall 2018 issue of BC Roofing). By doing this, the Code allowed for variables in system design, provided they achieved minimum performance characteristics. This also meant that energy efficient mechanical systems became one strategy among several, to make buildings more energy efficient.

This change in perspective dramatically impacted roof system design and strongly linked formerly nebulous connections between Part 4, 5 and 10 in Division B. For example, the 2018 Code introduced expanded calculations in Part 4 concerning the determination of Specified Wind Loads. Part 5 (including the notes to Part 5) added made-in-Canada solutions for keeping out the weather while simultaneously satisfying the structural design criteria in Part 4; that guidance was largely absent from earlier editions of the Code, which led designers to use whatever could be deemed ‘Code-compliant’, including the citation of standards and specifications published by FM Global. And because the Code placed a heavier emphasis on the measurable continuity of air and vapour controls (Part 5 and Part 10), the design and construction of the roof took on more significance as a key facet of the entire building enclosure. I will have more to say about these changes in future articles.

Complexity and integration

If you are new to reading the Code, the first thing you must understand is that while the Code is clearly organized, it is complex and integrated among and across divisions and parts. Most readers focus on the “how to” technical requirements of Division B. But if you read the Code carefully, you will see that every Part in Division B begins with a cross-reference to either Division A or Division C requirements. Become familiar with entire Code, not only the divisions or parts that seem applicable to a specific subject or issue.

In basic terms, the Code addresses two kinds of buildings. A “Part 3” building broadly refers to various large institutional, commercial, and industrial structures built to comply with Division B, Part 3 and various other Parts in that division (British Columbia Building Code, Division A, Part 1, 1.3.3. Application of Division B, and Division B, Part 3, 3.1.2 Classification of Buildings or Parts of Buildings by Major Occupancy). A “Part 9” building alternatively refers to housing and small buildings up to three storeys in height and no larger than 600 m2 in area, which are governed by Part 9 in Division B. This latter category includes single family dwellings, multi-family residential buildings and buildings with business occupancies. In some cases, structural requirements in Division B, Part 4 apply to “Part 9” design requirements (see 9.4.1 Structural Design Requirements and Application Limitations). It is also important to recognize that Parts 1, 7, 8 and 10 also apply to “Part 9” buildings (British Columbia Building Code, Division A, Part 1: Article 1.3.3.1., Application of Parts 1, 7, 8 and 10).


More than meets the eye

Roofs now do more than simply keep the weather out; they protect the integrity of the whole building and serve are a key component in the entire building enclosure to control the movement of air, moisture, and sound in and out of the structure. To do this, they need to stay where they are built, and to stay where they are built, they must be designed and constructed to comply with the Code. By collaborating and learning together, the Design Authority and roofing contractor can make it work.

In the next article of this series, we explore the subject of roof design and construction for Part 3 buildings and examine what the Code has to say about structural loading and roof membrane system selection. Additionally, we'll offer some ways in which design specifications can navigate the complexities of Code compliance, owner interests and performance criteria.

© RCABC 2024
RoofStarTM is a registered Trademark of the RCABC.
No reproduction of this material, in whole or in part, is lawful without the expressed permission of the RCABC Guarantee Corp.