| Posted By |
|
|
|
| |
Senior Member
|
Anthem, AZ
Posts: 1049
Joined: Nov, 2003
|  offline
|
|
 Thread Start First Page
[#1] Posted: Feb 08 2006 - 5:56:07 PM |  |  |
|
One of my guys just sent me this pic. I'm looking it up but so far can't find anything in the 03' IRC. I'm thinking there's got to be something related to a burn hazard. (I could se a toddler sitting on it)
I did note the lack of safety rail at the right side of the pic. Any assistance (quickly) would be appreciated. I've got several other things to get done before my eyeballs explode!
Download Attachment:
Image Unavailable! Sorry you must be logged in to view images.
Click Here For Free Registration
128.15 KB
|
Chris Prickett
REAL Truth in Real Estate
(623) 297 2557
www.goprickett.com
http://tiny.cc/prickettblog |
|
|
| |
Editor - TIJ
|
Kenmore, WA
Posts: 12154
Joined: Dec, 2003
|  online
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#2] Posted: Feb 08 2006 - 7:10:24 PM | | |
|
Hi Chris,
I dunno, it looks like it meets the 1ft height rule and I touch them all the time and I rarely find 'em hot enough to burn my hand. Still, it is puzzling. Wonder if one could legally fabricate a box out of wire mesh and put it around that thing to keep curious little hands and fingers off?
ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!!
Mike
|
| |
|
|
| |
Administrator
|
Chicago, IL
Posts: 5930
Joined: Dec, 2003
| offline
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#3] Posted: Feb 08 2006 - 8:48:53 PM | | |
|
Mfg. sez 1" clearance to combustible; it looks like you do because they got the collar for a standoff. Never found a B vent hot enough to burn anything, & I see several each week in this same general arrangement. This is Chicago, & they're cooking all the time; I always touch 'em to see, & they're always touchable.
If you got clearance to combustible, I wouldn't worry about it.
|
Kurt in Chicago
Workin' the Inner City
"Things are more like they are now than they ever have been before"
Dwight D. Eisenhower |
| |
|
|
| |
Senior Member
|
Kenmore, WA
Posts: 1747
Joined: Sep, 2004
| offline
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#4] Posted: Feb 08 2006 - 9:36:41 PM | | |
|
Only thing I can think that might be comparable from a common sense standpoint is the 7' rule for plumbing vent terminations on a rooftop / deck. Why would a plumbing vent need to vent this high? I guess so that nobody sucks down sewer gas.
One might make the argument that a person shouldn't be exposed to the exhaust gasses spewing out the top of the B-vent either. Other than than, I couldn't find any thing specific in writing saying this configuration is dis-allowed.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Associate Editor - TIJ
|
Gaston, Oregon
Posts: 5386
Joined: Dec, 2003
| offline
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#5] Posted: Feb 08 2006 - 11:14:00 PM | | |
|
G2427.6.5 says that gas vents have to terminate above a roof surface.
Is that a roof or a deck? What's the listing sheet call it?
If that's a deck, I'd say that the vent's in the wrong place.
- Jim Katen, Oregon
|
| |
|
|
| |
Administrator
|
Chicago, IL
Posts: 5930
Joined: Dec, 2003
| offline
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#6] Posted: Feb 09 2006 - 05:23:04 AM | | |
|
Ya know, it should be considered a deck because of the stair access, no?
There is, of course, the fact that it's never, ever, ever going to be moved, altered, or anything else.
|
Kurt in Chicago
Workin' the Inner City
"Things are more like they are now than they ever have been before"
Dwight D. Eisenhower |
| |
|
|
| |
Senior Member
|
Anthem, AZ
Posts: 1049
Joined: Nov, 2003
| offline
|
|
|
|
| |
Starting Member
|
Colorado Springs, CO
Posts: 10
Joined: Sep, 2006
| offline
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#8] Posted: Feb 01 2007 - 12:24:31 PM | | |
|
i know this is an old post, but figured I would respond. From the pic it looks like a roof. There sould be no less than 3 feet of clearance above the roof surface, and no less than 2 feet clearance above any surface less than 10 feet away.
|
www.BestHomeCheck.com
Greg@BestHomeCheck.com |
| |
|
|
| |
Member
|
perrysburg, OH
Posts: 77
Joined: Jan, 2007
| offline
|
|
|
|
| |
Active Member
|
Crystal Lake, IL
Posts: 754
Joined: Sep, 2003
| offline
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
[#10] Posted: Feb 01 2007 - 5:02:04 PM | | |
|
Uhmmm...
Isn't the 10-2-3 rule meant for chimneys serving solid-fuel burning appliances or fireplaces?
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Just stupid or wrong too?
