The British Columbia Building Code | Section 3.2. | Functional Statements

Division A: Compliance, Objectives and Functional Statements Part 3 – Functional Statements

British Columbia Building Code 2018 Division A

Section 3.2. Functional Statements

3.2.1. Functional Statements

3.2.1.1. Functional Statements

1) The objectives of this Code are achieved by measures, such as those described in the acceptable solutions in

Division B, that are intended to allow the building or its elements to perform the following functions

(see Note A-3.2.1.1.(1)):

F01 To minimize the risk of accidental ignition.

F02 To limit the severity and effects of fire or explosions.

F03 To retard the effects of fire on areas beyond its point of origin.

F04 To retard failure or collapse due to the effects of fire.

F05 To retard the effects of fire on emergency egress facilities.

F06 To retard the effects of fire on facilities for notification, suppression and emergency response.

F10 To facilitate the timely movement of persons to a safe place in an emergency.

F11 To notify persons, in a timely manner, of the need to take action in an emergency.

F12 To facilitate emergency response.

F13 To notify emergency responders, in a timely manner, of the need to take action in an emergency.

F20 To support and withstand expected loads and forces.

F21 To limit or accommodate dimensional change.

F22 To limit movement under expected loads and forces.

F23 To maintain equipment in place during structural movement.

F30 To minimize the risk of injury to persons as a result of tripping, slipping, falling, contact, drowning

or collision.

F31 To minimize the risk of injury to persons as a result of contact with hot surfaces or substances.

F32 To minimize the risk of injury to persons as a result of contact with energized equipment.

F33 To limit the level of sound of a fire alarm system.

F34 To resist or discourage unwanted access or entry.

F35 To facilitate the identification of potential intruders.

F36 To minimize the risk that persons will be trapped in confined spaces.

F40 To limit the level of contaminants.

F41 To minimize the risk of generation of contaminants.

F42 To resist the entry of vermin and insects.

F43 To minimize the risk of release of hazardous substances.

F44 To limit the spread of hazardous substances beyond their point of release.

F46 To minimize the risk of contamination of potable water.

F50 To provide air suitable for breathing.

F51 To maintain appropriate air and surface temperatures.

F52 To maintain appropriate relative humidity.

F53 To maintain appropriate indoor/outdoor air pressure differences.

F54 To limit drafts.

F55 To resist the transfer of air through environmental separators.

F56 To limit the transmission of airborne sound into a dwelling unit from spaces elsewhere in the building

(see Sentence 3.1.1.2.(2) for application limitation).

F60 To control the accumulation and pressure of water on and in the ground.

F61 To resist the ingress of precipitation, water or moisture from the exterior or from the ground.

F62

To facilitate the dissipation of water and moisture from the building.

F63 To limit moisture condensation.

F70 To provide potable water.

F71 To provide facilities for personal hygiene.

F72 To provide facilities for the sanitary disposal of human and domestic wastes.

F73 To facilitate access to and in the building and its facilities by persons with disabilities

(see Sentence 3.1.1.2.(3) for application limitation).

F74 To facilitate the use of the building’s facilities by persons with disabilities

(see Sentence 3.1.1.2.(3) for

application limitation).

Part 3 – Functional Statements Division A: Compliance, Objectives and Functional Statements

Division A British Columbia Building Code 2018

F75 To minimize obstacles for future modification to provide access (see Sentence 3.1.1.2.(4) for application

limitation).

F80 To resist deterioration resulting from expected service conditions.

F81 To minimize the risk of malfunction, interference, damage, tampering, lack of use or misuse.

F82 To minimize the risk of inadequate performance due to improper maintenance or lack of maintenance.

F90 To limit the amount of uncontrolled air leakage through the building envelope.

F91 To limit the amount of uncontrolled air leakage through system components.

F92 To limit the amount of uncontrolled thermal transfer through the building envelope.

F93 To limit the amount of uncontrolled thermal transfer through system components.

F95 To limit the unnecessary demand and/or consumption of energy for heating and cooling.

F96 To limit the unnecessary demand and/or consumption of energy for service water heating.

F98 To limit the inefficiency of equipment.

F99 To limit the inefficiency of systems.

F100To limit the unnecessary rejection of reusable waste energy.

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Past and ongoing modifications to atmospheric chemistry (from greenhouse gas emissions and land use changes) are expected to

alter most climatic regimes in the future despite the success of the most ambitious greenhouse gas mitigation plans.

(1)

Some regions could see an increase in the frequency and intensity of many weather extremes, which will accelerate weathering

processes. Consequently, many buildings will need to be designed, maintained and operated to adequately withstand ever

changing climatic loads.

Similar to global trends, the last decade in Canada was noted as the warmest in instrumented record. Canada has warmed, on

average, at almost twice the rate of the global average increase, while the western Arctic is warming at a rate that is unprecedented

over the past 400years.

(1)

Mounting evidence from Arctic communities indicates that rapid changes to climate in the North have

resulted in melting permafrost and impacts from other climate changes have affected nearly every type of built structure.

Furthermore, analyses of Canadian precipitation data shows that many regions of the country have, on average, also been tending

towards wetter conditions.

(1)

In the United States, where the density of climate monitoring stations is greater, a number of studies

have found an unambiguous upward trend in the frequency of heavy to extreme precipitation events, with these increases

coincident with a general upward trend in the total amount of precipitation. Climate change model results, based on an ensemble

of global climate models worldwide, project that future climate warming rates will be greatest in higher latitude countries such

as Canada.

(2)

January Design Temperatures

A building and its heating system should be designed to maintain the inside temperature at some pre-determined level. Toachieve

this, it is necessary to know the most severe weather conditions under which the system will be expected to function satisfactorily.

Failure to maintain the inside temperature at the pre-determined level will not usually be serious if the temperature drop is not

great and if the duration is not long. The outside conditions used for design should, therefore, not be the most severe in many

years, butshould be the somewhat less severe conditions that are occasionally but not greatly exceeded.

The January design temperatures are based on an analysis of January air temperatures only. Wind and solar radiation also affect

the inside temperature of most buildings and may need to be considered for energy-efficient design.

The January design temperature is defined as the lowest temperature at or below which only a certain small percentage of the

hourly outside air temperatures in January occur. In the past, a total of 158stations with records from all or part of the period

1951-66 formed the basis for calculation of the 2.5 and 1% January temperatures. Where necessary, the data were adjusted for

consistency. Since most of the temperatures were observed at airports, design values for the core areas of large cities could be 1or

2°C milder, although the values for the outlying areas are probably about the same as for the airports. No adjustments were made

for this urban island heat effect. The design values for the next 20to30 years will probably differ from these tabulated values due

to year-to-year climate variability and global climate change resulting from the impact of human activities on atmospheric

chemistry.

The design temperatures were reviewed and updated using hourly temperature observations from 480stations for a 25-year

period up to 2006 with at least 8years of complete data. These data are consistent with data shown for Canadian locations in the

2009 Handbook of Fundamentals

(3)

published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning

Engineers (ASHRAE). The most recent 25years of record were used to provide a balance between accounting for trends in the

climate and the sampling variation owing to year-to-year variation. The 1% and 2.5% values used for the design conditions

represent percentiles of the cumulative frequency distribution of hourly temperatures and correspond to January temperatures

that are colder for 8 and 19hours, respectively, on average over the long term.

The 2.5% January design temperature is the value ordinarily used in the design of heating systems. In special cases, whenthe

control of inside temperature is more critical, the 1% value may be used. Other temperature-dependent climatic design

parameters may be considered for future issues of this document.

July Design Temperatures

A building and its cooling and dehumidifying system should be designed to maintain the inside temperature and humidity at

certain pre-determined levels. To achieve this, it is necessary to know the most severe weather conditions under which the system

is expected to function satisfactorily. Failure to maintain the inside temperature and humidity at the pre-determined levels will

usually not be serious if the increases in temperature and humidity are not great and the duration is not long. The outside

conditions used for design should, therefore, not be the most severe in many years, but should be the somewhat less severe

conditions that are occasionally but not greatly exceeded.

The summer design temperatures in this Appendix are based on an analysis of July air temperatures and humidities. Wind and

solar radiation also affect the inside temperature of most buildings and may, in some cases, be more important than the outside air

temperature. More complete summer and winter design information can be obtained from Environment Canada.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

The annual maximum depth of snow on the ground has been assembled for 1 618stations for which data has been recorded by

the Atmospheric Environment Service (AES). The period of record used varied from station to station, ranging from 7 to

38years. Thesedata were analyzed using a Gumbel extreme value distribution fitted using the method of moments

(4)

as reported

by Newark etal.

(5)

The resulting values are the snow depths, which have a probability of 1-in-50 of being exceeded in any

one year.

The unit weight of old snow generally ranges from 2 to 5kN/m

, and it is usually assumed in Canada that 1kN/m

is the average

for new snow. Average unit weights of the seasonal snow pack have been derived for different regions across the country

(6)

and an

appropriate value has been assigned to each weather station. Typically, the values average 2.01kN/m

east of the continental

divide (except for 2.94kN/m

north of the treeline), and range from 2.55 to 4.21kN/m

west of the divide. The product of the

1-in-50 snow depth and the average unit weight of the seasonal snow pack at a station is converted to the snow load (SL) in units

of kilopascals (kPa).

Except for the mountainous areas of western Canada, the values of the ground snow load at AES stations were normalized

assuming a linear variation of the load above sea level in order to account for the effects of topography. They were then smoothed

using an uncertainty-weighted moving-area average in order to minimize the uncertainty due to snow depth sampling errors and

site-specific variations. Interpolation from analyzed maps of the smooth normalized values yielded a value for each location in

TableC-2, which could then be converted to the listed code values (S

) by means of an equation in the form:

where b is the assumed rate of change of SL with elevation at the location and Z is the location’s elevation above mean sea level

(MSL). Although they are listed in TableC-2 to the nearest tenth of a kilopascal, values of S

typically have an uncertainty of

about 20%. Areas of sparse data in northern Canada were an exception to this procedure. In these regions, an analysis was made

of the basic SL values. The effects of topography, variations due to local climates, and smoothing were all subjectively assessed.

The values derived in this fashion were used to modify those derived objectively.

For the mountainous areas of British Columbia, a more complex procedure was required to account for the variation of loads with

terrain and elevation. Since the AES observational network often does not have sufficient coverage to detail this variability in

mountainous areas, additional snow course observations were obtained from the provincial government of British Columbia.

The additional data allowed detailed local analysis of ground snow loads on a valley-by-valley basis. Similar to other studies, the

data indicated that snow loads above a critical or reference level increased according to either a linear or quadratic relation with

elevation. The determination of whether the increase with elevation was linear or quadratic, the rate of the increase and the critical

or reference elevation were found to be specific to the valley and mountain ranges considered. At valley levels below the critical

elevation, the loads generally varied less significantly with elevation. Calculated valley- and range-specific regression relations were

then used to describe the increase of load with elevation and to normalize the AES snow observations to a critical or

reference level. These normalized values were smoothed using a weighted moving-average.

Tabulated values cannot be expected to indicate all the local differences in S

. For this reason, especially in complex terrain areas,

values should not be interpolated from TableC-2 for unlisted locations. The values of S

in the Table apply for the elevation and

the latitude and longitude of the location, as defined by the Gazetteer of Canada. Values at other locations can be obtained from

Environment Canada.

The heaviest loads frequently occur when the snow is wetted by rain, thus the rain load, S

, was estimated to the nearest 0.1kPa

and is provided in TableC-2. When values of S

are added to S

, this provides a 1-in-50-year estimate of the combined ground

snow and rain load. The values of S

are based on an analysis of about 2 100 weather station values of the 1-in-50-year one-day

maximum rain amount. This return period is appropriate because the rain amounts correspond approximately to the joint

frequency of occurrence of the one-day rain on maximum snow packs. For the purpose of estimating rain on snow, the individual

observed one-day rain amounts were constrained to be less than or equal to the snow pack water equivalent, which was estimated

by a snow pack accumulation model reported by Bruce and Clark.

(7)

The results from surveys of snow loads on roofs indicate that average roof loads are generally less than loads on the ground.

Theconditions under which the design snow load on the roof may be taken as a percentage of the ground snow load are given in

Subsection4.1.6. The Code also permits further decreases in design snow loads for steeply sloping roofs, but requires substantial

increases for roofs where snow accumulation may be more rapid due to such factors as drifting. Recommended adjustments are

given in the “User’s Guide – NBC 2015, Structural Commentaries (Part 4 of Division B).”

The ground snow load values, S

, were updated for this edition of the Code using a similar approach to the one used for the

ground snow load update in the 1990NBC, which was the basis for the 1992 British Columbia Building Code

. The Gumbel

extreme value distribution was fitted to the annual maxima of daily snow depth observations made at over 1 400 weather stations,

which were compiled from 1990 onward – to as recently as 2012 for some stations – to calculate the 50-year return period

 smooth normalized SL  bZ

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Moisture Index (MI)

Moisture index (MI) values were developed through the work of a consortium that included representatives from industry and

researchers from NRC.

(1)

The MI is an indicator of the moisture load imposed on a building by the climate and is used in Part9

to define the minimum levels of protection from precipitation to be provided by cladding assemblies on exterior walls.

It must be noted, in using MIvalues to determine the appropriate levels of protection from precipitation, that weather conditions

can vary markedly within a relatively small geographical area. Although the values provided in the Table give a good indication of

the average conditions within a particular region, some caution must be exercised when applying them to a locality that is outside

the region where the weather station is located.

MI is calculated from a wetting index (WI) and a drying index (DI).

Wetting Index (WI)

To define, quantitatively, the rainwater load on a wall, wind speed and wind direction have to be taken into consideration in

addition to rainfall, along with factors that can affect exposure, such as nearby buildings, vegetation and topography. Quantitative

determination of load, including wind speed and wind direction, can be done. However, due to limited weather data, it is not

currently possible to provide this information for most of the locations identified in the Table.

This lack of information, however, has been shown to be non-critical for the purpose of classifying locations in terms of severity of

rain load. The results of the research indicated that simple annual rainfall is as good an indicator as any for describing rainwater

load. That is to say, for Canadian locations, and especially once drying is accounted for, the additional sensitivity provided by

hourly directional rainfall values does not have a significant effect on the order in which locations appear when listed from wet

to dry.

Consequently, the wetting index (WI) is based on annual rainfall and is normalized based on 1 000 mm.

Drying Index (DI)

Temperature and relative humidity together define the drying capacity of ambient air. Based on simple psychrometrics, values

were derived for the locations listed in the Table using annual average drying capacity normalized based on the drying capacity at

Lytton, B.C. The resultant values are referred to as drying indices (DI).

Determination of Moisture Index (MI)

The relationship between WI and DI to correctly define moisture loading on a wall is not known. The MIvalues provided in the

Table are based on the root mean square values of WI and 1-DI, with those values equally weighted. This is illustrated in

FigureC-1. The resultant MIvalues are sufficiently consistent with industry’s understanding of climate severity with respect to

moisture loading as to allow limits to be identified for the purpose of specifying where additional protection from precipitation

is required.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Wind Effects

All structures need to be designed to ensure that the main structural system and all secondary components, such as cladding and

appurtenances, will withstand the pressures and suctions caused by the strongest wind likely to blow at that location in many

years. Some flexible structures, such as tall buildings, slender towers and bridges, also need to be designed to minimize excessive

wind-induced oscillations or vibrations.

At any time, the wind acting upon a structure can be treated as a mean or time-averaged component and as a gust or unsteady

component. For a small structure, which is completely enveloped by wind gusts, it is only the peak gust velocity that needs to be

considered. For a large structure, the wind gusts are not well correlated over its different parts and the effects of individual gusts

become less significant. The “User’s Guide – NBC 2015, Structural Commentaries (Part4 of DivisionB)” evaluates the mean

pressure acting on a structure, provide appropriate adjustments for building height and exposure and for the influence of the

surrounding terrain and topography (including wind speed-up forhills), and then incorporate the effects of wind gusts by means

of the gust factor, which varies according to the type of structure and the size of the area over which the pressure acts.

The wind speeds and corresponding velocity pressures used in the Code are regionally representative or reference values.

Thereference wind speeds are nominal one-hour averages of wind speeds representative of the 10m height in flat open terrain

corresponding to Exposure A or open terrain in the terminology of the “User’s Guide – NBC 2015, Structural Commentaries

(Part4 of DivisionB).” The reference wind speeds and wind velocity pressures are based on long-term wind records observed at a

large number of weather stations across Canada.

Reference wind velocity pressures in previous versions of the Code since1961 were based mostly on records of hourly averaged

wind speeds (i.e. the number of miles of wind passing an anemometer in anhour) from over100 stations with 10 to 22years of

observations ending in the 1950s. The wind pressure values derived from these measurements represented true hourly wind

pressures.

The reference wind velocity pressures were reviewed and updated for the 2012edition of the Code. The primary data set used for

the analysis comprised wind records compiled from about 135stations with hourly averaged wind speeds and from 465stations

with aviation (one- or two-minute average) speeds or surface weather (ten-minute average) speeds observed once per hour at the

top of the hour; the periods of record used ranged from 10to54years. In addition, peak wind gust records from 400stations

with periods of record ranging from 10 to 43years were used. Peak wind gusts (gust durations of approximately 3to7seconds)

were used to supplement the primary once-per-hour observations in the analysis.

Several steps were involved in updating the reference wind values. Where needed, speeds were adjusted to represent the standard

anemometer height above ground of 10m. The data from years when the anemometer at a station was installed on the top of a

lighthouse or building were eliminated from the analysis since it is impractical to adjust for the effects of wind flow over the

structure. (Most anemometers were moved to 10m towers by the 1960s.) Wind speeds of the various observation types – hourly

averaged, aviation, surface weather and peak wind gust – were adjusted to account for different measure durations to represent a

one-hour averaging period and to account for differences in the surface roughness of flat open terrain at observing stations.

The annual maximum wind speed data was fitted to the Gumbel distribution using the method of moments

(4)

to calculate hourly

wind speeds having the annual probability of occurrence of 1-in-10 and 1-in-50 (10-year and 50-year return periods). The values

were plotted on maps, then analyzed and abstracted for the locations in TableC-2.

The wind velocity pressures, q, were calculated in Pascals using the following equation:

where

 is an average air density for the windy months of the year and V is wind speed in metres per second. While air density

depends on both air temperature and atmospheric pressure, the density of dry air at 0°C and standard atmospheric pressure of

1.2929kg/m

was used as an average value for the wind pressure calculations. As explained by Boyd

(10)

, this value is within 10% of

the monthly average air densities for most of Canada in the windy part of the year.

As a result of the updating procedure, the 1-in-50 reference wind velocity pressures remain unchanged for most of the locations

listed in TableC-2; both increases and decreases were noted for the remaining locations. Many of the decreases resulted from the

fact that anemometers at most of the stations used in the previous analysis were installed on lighthouses, airport hangers and other

structures. Wind speeds on the tops of buildings are often much higher compared to those registered by a standard 10m tower.

Eliminating anemometer data recorded on the tops of buildings from the analysis resulted in lower values at several locations.

Hourly wind speeds that have 1chance in10 and 50

(1)

of being exceeded in any one year were analyzed using the Gumbel

extreme value distribution fitted using the method of moments with correction for sample size. Values of the 1-in-30-year wind

speeds for locations in the Table were estimated from a mapping analysis of wind speeds. The 1-in-10- and 1-in-50-year speeds

were then computed from the 1-in-30-year speeds using a map of the dispersion parameter that occurs in the Gumbel analysis.

(4)

q 





Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

0.44 26.1 0.82 35.6 1.20 43.1 1.58 49.4

0.45 26.4 0.83 35.8 1.21 43.3 1.59 49.6

0.46 26.7 0.84 36.0 1.22 43.4 1.60 49.7

0.47 27.0 0.85 36.3 1.23 43.6 1.61 49.9

0.48 27.2 0.86 36.5 1.24 43.8 1.62 50.1

0.49 27.5 0.87 36.7 1.25 44.0 1.63 50.2

0.50 27.8 0.88 36.9 1.26 44.1 1.64 50.4

0.51 28.1 0.89 37.1 1.27 44.3 1.65 50.5

0.52 28.4 0.90 37.3 1.28 44.5 1.66 50.7

Table C-2

Climatic Design Data for Selected Locations in British Columbia

Location

Elev.,

Design Temperature

Degree-

Days

Below

18°C

Min.

Rain,

One

Day

Rain,

1/50,

Ann.

Rain,

Moist.

Index

Ann.

Tot.

Ppn.,

Driving

Rain

Wind

Pressure

s, Pa, 1/5

Snow Load,

kPa, 1/50

Hourly Wind

Pressures,

kPa

January July 2.5%

2.5%

°C

Dry

°C

Wet

°C

Ss Sr 1/10 1/50

100 Mile House 1040 -30 -32 29 17 5030 10 48 300 0.44 425 60 2.6 0.3 0.27 0.35

Abbotsford 70 -8 -10 29 20 2860 12 112 1525 1.59 1600 160 2.0 0.3 0.34 0.44

Agassiz 15 -9 -11 31 21 2750 8 128 1650 1.71 1700 160 2.4 0.7 0.36 0.47

Alberni 12 -5 -8 31 19 3100 10 144 1900 2.00 2000 220 2.6 0.4 0.25 0.32

Ashcroft 305 -24 -27 34 20 3700 10 37 250 0.25 300 80 1.7 0.1 0.29 0.38

Bamfield 20 -2 -4 23 17 3080 13 170 2870 2.96 2890 280 1.0 0.4 0.39 0.50

Beatton River 840 -37 -39 26 18 6300 15 64 330 0.53 450 80 3.3 0.1 0.23 0.30

Bella Bella 25 -5 -7 23 18 3180 13 145 2715 2.82 2800 350 2.6 0.8 0.39 0.50

Bella Coola 40 -14 -18 27 19 3560 10 140 1500 1.85 1700 350 4.5 0.8 0.30 0.39

Burns Lake 755 -31 -34 26 17 5450 12 54 300 0.56 450 100 3.4 0.2 0.30 0.39

Cache Creek 455 -24 -27 34 20 3700 10 37 250 0.25 300 80 1.7 0.2 0.30 0.39

Campbell River 20 -5 -7 26 18 3000 10 116 1500 1.59 1600 260 2.8 0.4 0.40 0.52

Carmi 845 -24 -26 31 19 4750 10 64 325 0.38 550 60 3.6 0.2 0.29 0.38

Castlegar 430 -18 -20 32 20 3580 10 54 560 0.64 700 60 4.2 0.1 0.27 0.34

Chetwynd 605 -35 -38 27 18 5500 15 70 400 0.58 625 60 2.4 0.2 0.31 0.40

Chilliwack 10 -9 -11 30 20 2780 8 139 1625 1.68 1700 160 2.2 0.3 0.36 0.47

Colwood Region

Colwood

(Colwood

Corners)

64 -6 -8 26 18 2900 10 100 1000 1.13 1030 220 1.7 0.3 0.48 0.63

Colwood

(Royal Bay

Village)

20 -5 -7 24 17 2600 8 80 910 1.05 930 220 1.2 0.3 0.48 0.63

Table C-1 (continued)

Wind Speeds

q V q V q V q V

kPa m/s kPa m/s kPa m/s kPa m/s

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

McBride 730 -29 -32 29 18 4980 13 54 475 0.64 650 60 4.3 0.2 0.27 0.35

McLeod Lake 695 -35 -37 27 17 5450 10 50 350 0.54 650 60 4.1 0.2 0.25 0.32

Merritt 570 -24 -27 34 20 3900 8 54 240 0.24 310 80 1.8 0.3 0.34 0.44

Mission City 45 -9 -11 30 20 2850 13 123 1650 1.71 1700 160 2.4 0.3 0.33 0.43

Montrose 615 -16 -18 32 20 3600 10 54 480 0.56 700 60 4.1 0.1 0.27 0.35

Nakusp 445 -20 -22 31 20 3560 10 60 650 0.78 850 60 4.4 0.1 0.25 0.33

Nanaimo 15 -6 -8 27 19 3000 10 91 1000 1.13 1050 200 2.1 0.4 0.39 0.50

Nelson 600 -18 -20 31 20 3500 10 59 460 0.57 700 60 4.2 0.1 0.25 0.33

Ocean Falls 10 -10 -12 23 17 3400 13 260 4150 4.21 4300 350 3.9 0.8 0.46 0.59

Osoyoos 285 -14 -17 35 21 3100 10 48 275 0.28 310 60 1.1 0.1 0.31 0.40

Parksville 40 -6 -8 26 19 3200 10 91 1200 1.31 1250 200 2.0 0.4 0.39 0.50

Penticton 350 -15 -17 33 20 3350 10 48 275 0.28 300 60 1.3 0.1 0.35 0.45

Port Alberni 15 -5 -8 31 19 3100 10 161 1900 2.00 2000 240 2.6 0.4 0.25 0.32

Port Alice 25 -3 -6 26 17 3010 13 200 3300 3.38 3340 220 1.1 0.4 0.25 0.32

Port Hardy 5 -5 -7 20 16 3440 13 150 1775 1.92 1850 220 0.9 0.4 0.40 0.52

Port McNeill 5 -5 -7 22 17 3410 13 128 1750 1.89 1850 260 1.1 0.4 0.40 0.52

Port Renfrew 20 -3 -5 24 17 2900 13 200 3600 3.64 3675 270 1.1 0.4 0.40 0.52

Powell River 10 -7 -9 26 18 3100 10 80 1150 1.27 1200 220 1.7 0.4 0.39 0.51

Prince George 580 -32 -36 28 18 4720 15 54 425 0.58 600 80 3.4 0.2 0.29 0.37

Prince Rupert 20 -13 -15 19 15 3900 13 160 2750 2.84 2900 240 1.9 0.4 0.42 0.54

Princeton 655 -24 -29 33 19 4250 10 43 235 0.35 350 80 2.9 0.6 0.28 0.36

Qualicum Beach 10 -7 -9 27 19 3200 10 96 1200 1.31 1250 200 2.0 0.4 0.41 0.53

Queen Charlotte

City

35 -6 -8 21 16 3520 13 110 1300 1.47 1350 360 1.8 0.4 0.48 0.61

Quesnel 475 -31 -33 30 17 4650 10 50 380 0.51 525 80 3.0 0.1 0.24 0.31

Revelstoke 440 -20 -23 31 19 4000 13 55 625 0.80 950 80 7.2 0.1 0.25 0.32

Salmon Arm 425 -19 -24 33 21 3650 13 48 400 0.47 525 80 3.5 0.1 0.30 0.39

Sandspit 5 -4 -6 18 15 3450 13 86 1300 1.47 1350 500 1.8 0.4 0.60 0.78

Sechelt 25 -6 -8 27 20 2680 10 75 1140 1.27 1200 160 1.8 0.4 0.37 0.48

Sidney 10 -4 -6 26 18 2850 8 96 825 0.97 850 160 1.1 0.2 0.33 0.42

Smith River 660 -45 -47 26 17 7100 10 64 300 0.58 500 40 2.8 0.1 0.23 0.30

Smithers 500 -29 -31 26 17 5040 13 60 325 0.60 500 120 3.5 0.2 0.31 0.40

Sooke 20 -1 -3 21 16 2900 9 130 1250 1.37 1280 220 1.3 0.3 0.37 0.48

Squamish 5 -9 -11 29 20 2950 10 140 2050 2.12 2200 160 2.8 0.7 0.39 0.50

Stewart 10 -17 -20 25 16 4350 13 135 1300 1.47 1900 180 7.9 0.8 0.28 0.36

Table C-2 (continued)

Climatic Design Data for Selected Locations in British Columbia

Location

Elev.,

Design Temperature

Degree-

Days

Below

18°C

Min.

Rain,

One

Day

Rain,

1/50,

Ann.

Rain,

Moist.

Index

Ann.

Tot.

Ppn.,

Driving

Rain

Wind

Pressure

s, Pa, 1/5

Snow Load,

kPa, 1/50

Hourly Wind

Pressures,

kPa

January July 2.5%

2.5%

°C

Dry

°C

Wet

°C

Ss Sr 1/10 1/50

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Seismic Hazard

The parameters used to represent seismic hazard for specific geographical locations are the 5%-damped horizontal spectral

acceleration for0.2, 0.5, 1.0, 2.0, 5.0 and 10.0second periods, the horizontal Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) and the

horizontal Peak Ground Velocity (PGV), with all values given for a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50years. The six spectral

parameters are deemed sufficient to define spectra closely matching the shape of the Uniform Hazard Spectra (UHS).

Hazardvalues are mean values based on a statistical analysis of the earthquakes that have been experienced in Canada and adjacent

regions.

(11)

The seismic hazard values were updated for this edition of the Code by updating the earthquake catalogue, revising the

seismic source zones, adding fault sources for the Cascadia subduction zone and certain other active faults, revising the Ground

Motion Prediction Equations (GMPEs),

(12)

and using a probabilistic model to combine all inputs.

For most locations, the new GMPEs are the most significant reason for changes in the hazard results from the 2012 Code

Oneexception is for areas of western Canada for which adding the Cascadia subduction source contribution to the model

probabilistically causes the most significant change. For locations in western Canada, the seismic hazard at long periods has

increased significantly for areas affected by the Cascadia interface. For other areas, the explicit inclusion of fault sources, such as

those in Haida Gwaii, has also affected the estimated hazard.

Further details regarding the representation of seismic hazard can be found in the Commentary on Design for Seismic Effects in

the “User’s Guide – NBC 2015, Structural Commentaries (Part 4 of Division B).”

Whistler 665 -17 -20 30 20 4180 10 85 845 0.99 1215 160 9.5 0.9 0.25 0.32

White Rock 30 -5 -7 25 20 2620 10 80 1065 1.17 1100 160 2.0 0.2 0.34 0.44

Williams Lake 615 -30 -33 29 17 4400 10 48 350 0.47 425 80 2.4 0.2 0.27 0.35

Youbou 200 -5 -8 31 19 3050 10 161 2000 2.09 2100 200 3.5 0.7 0.25 0.32

Table C-3

Seismic Design Data for Selected Locations in British Columbia

Location

Seismic Data

(0.2) S

(0.5) S

(1.0) S

(2.0) S

(5.0) S

(10.0) PGA PGV

100 Mile House 0.140 0.113 0.083 0.058 0.027 0.0080 0.064 0.109

Abbotsford 0.701 0.597 0.350 0.215 0.071 0.025 0.306 0.445

Agassiz 0.457 0.384 0.244 0.157 0.057 0.020 0.206 0.306

Alberni 0.955 0.915 0.594 0.373 0.124 0.044 0.434 0.683

Ashcroft 0.198 0.160 0.115 0.078 0.034 0.011 0.092 0.149

Bamfield 1.44 1.35 0.871 0.525 0.167 0.059 0.682 0.931

Beatton River 0.132 0.083 0.049 0.026 0.0083 0.0037 0.079 0.056

Bella Bella 0.208 0.232 0.187 0.129 0.049 0.017 0.103 0.286

Bella Coola 0.163 0.172 0.143 0.105 0.043 0.014 0.083 0.225

Burns Lake 0.095 0.080 0.066 0.052 0.024 0.0076 0.043 0.111

Cache Creek 0.195 0.157 0.112 0.077 0.034 0.010 0.090 0.148

Campbell River 0.595 0.582 0.408 0.265 0.094 0.034 0.283 0.487

Carmi 0.141 0.120 0.090 0.062 0.028 0.0086 0.065 0.111

Castlegar 0.129 0.100 0.074 0.048 0.022 0.0069 0.058 0.085

Table C-2 (continued)

Climatic Design Data for Selected Locations in British Columbia

Location

Elev.,

Design Temperature

Degree-

Days

Below

18°C

Min.

Rain,

One

Day

Rain,

1/50,

Ann.

Rain,

Moist.

Index

Ann.

Tot.

Ppn.,

Driving

Rain

Wind

Pressure

s, Pa, 1/5

Snow Load,

kPa, 1/50

Hourly Wind

Pressures,

kPa

January July 2.5%

2.5%

°C

Dry

°C

Wet

°C

Ss Sr 1/10 1/50

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

McLeod Lake 0.153 0.110 0.064 0.037 0.016 0.0053 0.068 0.078

Merritt 0.211 0.175 0.125 0.085 0.037 0.011 0.098 0.160

Mission City 0.644 0.550 0.327 0.204 0.069 0.024 0.283 0.419

Montrose 0.129 0.102 0.075 0.049 0.022 0.0069 0.058 0.086

Nakusp 0.135 0.102 0.070 0.045 0.020 0.0063 0.060 0.079

Nanaimo 1.02 0.942 0.542 0.328 0.104 0.037 0.446 0.684

Nelson 0.131 0.103 0.073 0.046 0.020 0.0065 0.058 0.080

Ocean Falls 0.180 0.199 0.163 0.117 0.046 0.015 0.091 0.258

Osoyoos 0.175 0.150 0.110 0.075 0.033 0.010 0.081 0.138

Parksville 0.917 0.859 0.519 0.322 0.106 0.038 0.405 0.639

Penticton 0.159 0.138 0.101 0.070 0.031 0.0096 0.074 0.129

Port Alberni 0.987 0.946 0.614 0.383 0.126 0.045 0.450 0.702

Port Alice 1.60 1.27 0.759 0.412 0.128 0.042 0.689 0.868

Port Hardy 0.700 0.659 0.447 0.272 0.091 0.032 0.320 0.543

Port McNeill 0.711 0.678 0.464 0.285 0.096 0.034 0.326 0.557

Port Renfrew 1.44 1.35 0.850 0.511 0.162 0.057 0.668 0.939

Powell River 0.595 0.556 0.373 0.242 0.086 0.031 0.273 0.457

Prince George 0.113 0.089 0.059 0.040 0.019 0.0059 0.049 0.079

Prince Rupert 0.246 0.269 0.209 0.135 0.046 0.016 0.117 0.314

Princeton 0.259 0.209 0.144 0.096 0.040 0.012 0.121 0.182

Qualicum Beach 0.888 0.838 0.517 0.323 0.108 0.038 0.395 0.629

Queen Charlotte City 1.62 1.37 0.842 0.452 0.124 0.041 0.757 0.989

Quesnel 0.105 0.088 0.065 0.047 0.022 0.0069 0.047 0.091

Revelstoke 0.145 0.109 0.070 0.043 0.019 0.0062 0.064 0.078

Salmon Arm 0.131 0.104 0.075 0.052 0.024 0.0073 0.059 0.093

Sandspit 1.31 1.16 0.724 0.396 0.110 0.036 0.603 0.868

Sechelt 0.828 0.745 0.434 0.265 0.086 0.030 0.363 0.555

Sidney 1.23 1.10 0.630 0.371 0.115 0.040 0.545 0.790

Smith River 0.705 0.447 0.234 0.100 0.028 0.0096 0.354 0.255

Smithers 0.100 0.090 0.076 0.058 0.025 0.0082 0.047 0.134

Sooke 1.34 1.24 0.752 0.456 0.144 0.050 0.605 0.885

Squamish 0.600 0.517 0.314 0.200 0.069 0.024 0.266 0.404

Stewart 0.139 0.132 0.111 0.078 0.029 0.010 0.068 0.180

Tahsis 1.35 1.19 0.767 0.456 0.144 0.050 0.622 0.852

Taylor 0.143 0.093 0.052 0.025 0.0076 0.0031 0.079 0.058

Terrace 0.146 0.145 0.120 0.085 0.032 0.011 0.072 0.200

Table C-3 (continued)

Seismic Design Data for Selected Locations in British Columbia

Location

Seismic Data

(0.2) S

(0.5) S

(1.0) S

(2.0) S

(5.0) S

(10.0) PGA PGV

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

3. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-conditioning Engineers, Handbook of Fundamentals, Chapter14 –

Climatic Design Information, Atlanta,GA, 2009.

4. Lowery, M.D. and Nash, J.E., A comparison of methods of fitting the double exponential distribution. J. of Hydrology, 10(3),

pp.259–275, 1970.

5. Newark, M.J., Welsh, L.E., Morris, R.J. and Dnes, W.V. Revised Ground Snow Loads for the 1990NBC of Canada. Can. J.

Civ. Eng., Vol.16, No.3, June1989.

6. Newark, M.J. A New Look at Ground Snow Loads in Canada. Proceedings, 41stEastern Snow Conference, Washington, D.C.,

Vol.29, pp.59-63, 1984.

7. Bruce, J.P. and Clark, R.H. Introduction to Hydrometeorology. Pergammon Press, London, 1966.

8. Skerlj, P.F. and Surry, D. A Critical Assessment of the DRWPs Used in CAN/CSA-A440-M90. Tenth International Conference

on Wind Engineering, Wind Engineering into the 21stCentury, Larsen, Larose & Livesay (eds), 1999 Balkema, Rotterdam,

ISBN9058090590.

9. Cornick, S., Chown, G.A., et al. Committee Paper on Defining Climate Regions as a Basis for Specifying Requirements for

Precipitation Protection for Walls. Institute for Research in Construction, National Research Council, Ottawa, April2001.

10. Boyd, D.W. Variations in Air Density over Canada. National Research Council of Canada, Division of Building Research,

Technical Note No.486, June1967.

11. Adams, J., Halchuk, S., Allen, T.I., and Rogers, G.C. Fifth Generation seismic hazard model and values for the 2015 National

Building Code of Canada. Geological Survey of Canada Open File, 2014.

12. Atkinson, G. M. and Adams J. Ground motion prediction equations for application to the 2015 Canadian national seismic

hazard maps, Can. J. Civ. Eng.40, 988–998, 2013.

Table C-4

Locations in British Columbia Requiring Radon Rough-Ins (see Article 9.13.4.2.)(1)

Forming part of Appendix C

Location Radon Rough-In Required/Not Required

100 Mile House Required

Abbotsford Required

Agassiz Not Required

Alberni Not Required

Ashcroft Required

Atlin Required

Bamfield Not Required

Barriere Required

Beatton River Not Required

Bella Bella Not Required

Bella Coola Not Required

Brackendale Not Required

Burns Lake Required

Cache Creek Required

Campbell River Not Required

Carmi Required

Castlegar Required

Chetwynd Required

Chilliwack Not Required

Clearwater Required

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Mackenzie Required

Masset Not Required

McBride Required

McLeod Lake Required

Merritt Required

Mission City Not Required

Montrose Required

Nakusp Required

Nanaimo Not Required

Nelson Required

Ocean Falls Not Required

Osoyoos Required

Parksville Not Required

Pemberton Not Required

Penticton Required

Port Alberni Not Required

Port Alice Not Required

Port Clements Not Required

Port Hardy Not Required

Port McNeill Not Required

Port Moody Not Required

Port Renfrew Not Required

Powell River Not Required

Prince George Required

Prince Rupert Not Required

Princeton Required

Qualicum Beach Not

Required

Queen Charlotte City Not Required

Quesnel Required

Revelstoke Required

Rossland Required

Salmon Arm Required

Sandspit Not Required

Sechelt Required

Sidney Not Required

Smith River Required

Smithers Required

Table C-4 (continued)

Locations in British Columbia Requiring Radon Rough-Ins (see Article 9.13.4.2.)(1)

Forming part of Appendix C

Location Radon Rough-In Required/Not Required

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Table C-5

Required Performance of Windows and Doors in Part 9 Buildings

(1)

Forming part of Appendix C

Location

Climatic Data Specified Loads NAFS

1/5

DRWP

1/50 HWP DRWP Wind Load Required Fenestration Performance

Pa kPa Pa Pa (psf) DP PG Water Resist.

100 Mile House 60 0.35 60 709 14.80 720 15 140

Abbotsford 160 0.44 160 891 18.61 960 20 180

Agassiz 160 0.47 160 952 19.88 960 20 180

Alberni 220 0.32 220 648 13.53 720 15 220

Ashcroft 80 0.38 80 770 16.07 960 20 150

Bamfield 280 0.50 280 1013 21.15 1200 25 290

Beatton River 80 0.30 80 608 12.69 720 15 140

Bella Bella 350 0.50 350 1013 21.15 1200 25 360

Bella Coola 350 0.39 350 790 16.49 960 20 360

Burns Lake 100 0.39 100 790 16.49 960 20 150

Cache Creek 80 0.39 80 790 16.49 960 20 150

Campbell River 260 0.52 260 1053 21.99 1200 25 260

Carmi 60 0.38 60 770 16.07 960 20 150

Castlegar 60 0.34 60 689 14.38 720 15 140

Chetwynd 60 0.40 60 810 16.92 960 20 150

Chilliwack 160 0.47 160 952 19.88 960 20 180

Colwood 220 0.63 220 1276 26.64 1440 30 220

Comox 260 0.52 260 1053 21.99 1200 25 260

Courtenay 260 0.52 260 1053 21.99 1200 25 260

Cranbrook 100 0.33 100 668 13.96 720 15 140

Crescent Valley 80 0.33 80 668 13.96 720 15 140

Crofton 160 0.40 160 810 16.92 960 20 180

Dawson Creek 100 0.40 100 810 16.92 960 20 150

Dease Lake 380 0.30 380 608 12.69 720 15 400

Dog Creek 100 0.35 100 709 14.80 720 15 140

Duncan 180 0.39 180 790 16.49 960 20 180

Elko 100 0.40 100 810 16.92 960 20 150

Fernie 100 0.40 100 810 16.92 960 20 150

Fort Nelson 80 0.30 80 608 12.69 720 15 140

Fort St. John 100 0.39 100 790 16.49 960 20 150

Glacier 80 0.32 80 648 13.53 720 15 140

Gold River 250 0.32 250 648 13.53 720 15 260

Golden 100 0.35 100 709 14.80 720 15 140

Grand Forks 80 0.40 80 810 16.92 960 20 150

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix C Climatic and Seismic Information for Building Design in Canada

Division B

British Columbia Building Code 2018

Prince Rupert 240 0.54 240 1094 22.84 1200 25 260

Princeton 80 0.36 80 729 15.23 960 20 150

Qualicum Beach 200 0.53 200 1073 22.42 1200 25 220

Queen Charlotte City 360 0.61 360 1235 25.80 1440 30 360

Quesnel 80 0.31 80 628 13.11 720 15 140

Revelstoke 80 0.32 80 648 13.53 720 15 140

Salmon Arm 80 0.39 80 790 16.49 960 20 150

Sandspit 500 0.78 500 1580 32.99 1680 35 510

Sechelt 160 0.48 160 972 20.30 1200 25 180

Sidney 160 0.42 160 851 17.76 960 20 180

Smith River 40 0.30 40 608 12.69 720 15 140

Smithers 120 0.40 120 810 16.92 960 20 150

Sooke 220 0.48 220 972 20.30 1200 25 220

Squamish 160 0.50 160 1013 21.15 1200 25 180

Stewart 180 0.36 180 729 15.23 960 20 180

Tahsis 300 0.34 300 689 14.38 720 15 330

Taylor 100 0.40 100 810 16.92 960 20 150

Terrace 200 0.36 200 729 15.23 960 20 220

Tofino 300 0.68 300 1377 28.76 1440 30 330

Trail 60 0.35 60 709 14.80 720 15 140

Ucluelet 280 0.68 280 1377 28.76 1440 30 290

Vancouver Region

Vancouver - Burnaby (Simon Fraser Univ.) 160 0.47 160 952 19.88 960 20 180

Vancouver - Cloverdale 160 0.44 160 891 18.61 960 20 180

Vancouver - Haney 160 0.44 160 891 18.61 960 20 180

Vancouver - Ladner 160 0.46 160 932 19.45 960 20 180

Vancouver - Langley 160 0.44 160 891 18.61 960 20 180

Vancouver - New Westminster 160 0.44 160 891 18.61 960 20 180

Vancouver - North Vancouver 160 0.45 160 911 19.03 960 20 180

Vancouver - Richmond 160 0.45 160 911 19.03 960 20 180

Vancouver - Surrey (88 Ave. & 156 St.) 160 0.44 160 891 18.61 960 20 180

West Vancouver 160 0.48 160 972 20.30 1200 25 180

Vernon 80 0.40 80 810 16.92 960 20 150

Victoria Region

Table C-5 (continued)

Required Performance of Windows and Doors in Part 9 Buildings

(1)

Forming part of Appendix C

Location

Climatic Data Specified Loads NAFS

1/5

DRWP

1/50 HWP DRWP Wind Load Required Fenestration Performance

Pa kPa Pa Pa (psf) DP PG Water Resist.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Fire-Performance Ratings Division B – Appendix D

British Columbia Building Code 2018 Division B

Section D-1 General

The content of this Appendix was prepared on the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Fire Protection, which was

established by the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes (CCBFC) for this purpose.

D-1.1. Introduction

D-1.1.1. Scope

1) This fire-performance information is presented in a form closely linked to the performance requirements and the

minimum materials specifications of this Code.

2) The ratings have been assigned only after careful consideration of all available literature on assemblies of common

building materials, where they are adequately identified by description. The assigned values based on this information will, in most

instances, be conservative when compared to the ratings determined on the basis of actual tests on individual assemblies.

3) The fire-performance information set out in this Appendix applies to materials and assemblies of materials that comply in

all essential details with the minimum structural design standards described in Part4. Additional requirements, where appropriate,

are described in other Sections of this Appendix.

4) SectionD-2 assigns fire-resistance ratings for walls, floors, roofs, columns and beams related to CAN/ULC-S101,

“Fire Endurance Tests of Building Construction and Materials,” and describes methods for determining these ratings.

5) SectionD-3 assigns flame-spread ratings and smoke developed classifications for surface materials related to

CAN/ULC-S102, “Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials and Assemblies,” and CAN/ULC-S102.2,

“Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Flooring, Floor Coverings, and Miscellaneous Materials and Assemblies.”

6) SectionD-4 describes noncombustibility in building materials when tested in accordance with CAN/ULC-S114,

“Test for Determination of Non-Combustibility in Building Materials.”

7) SectionD-5 contains requirements for the installation of fire doors and fire dampers in fire-rated stud wall assemblies.

8) SectionD-6 contains background information regarding fire test reports, obsolete materials and assemblies, assessment of

archaic assemblies and the development of the component additive method.

D-1.1.2. Referenced Documents

1) Where documents are referenced in this Appendix, they shall be the editions designated in TableD-1.1.2.

Table D-1.1.2.

Documents Referenced in Appendix D, Fire-Performance Ratings

Issuing Agency Document Number

(1)

Title of Document

(2)

Code Reference

ANSI A208.1-2009 Particleboard D-3.1.1.

ASTM C 330/C 330M-13 Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete D-1.4.3.

ASTM C 840-13 Application and Finishing of Gypsum Board D-2.3.9.

ASTM C 1396/C 1396M-14 Gypsum Board D-1.5.1.

D-3.1.1.

CCBFC NRCC 30629 Supplement to the National Building Code of Canada

1990

D-6.2.

D-6.3.

D-6.4.

CGSB 4-GP-36M-1978 Carpet Underlay, Fiber Type D-3.1.1.

CGSB CAN/CGSB-4.129-97 Carpets for Commercial Use D-3.1.1.

CGSB CAN/CGSB-11.3-M87 Hardboard D-3.1.1.

CGSB CAN/CGSB-92.2-M90 Trowel or Spray Applied Acoustical Material D-2.3.4.

CSA A23.1-14/A23.2-14 Concrete Materials and Methods of Concrete

Construction/Test Methods and Standard Practices for

Concrete

D-1.4.3.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix D Fire-Performance Ratings

Division B

CSA A23.3-14 Design of Concrete Structures D-2.1.5.

D-2.6.6.

D-2.8.2.

CSA CAN/CSA-A82-14 Fired Masonry Brick Made from Clay or Shale D-2.6.1.

CSA A82.22-M1977 Gypsum Plasters D-3.1.1.

CSA CAN/CSA-A82.27-M91 Gypsum Board D-1.5.1.

D-3.1.1.

CSA A82.30-M1980 Interior Furring, Lathing and Gypsum Plastering D-1.7.2.

D-2.3.9.

D-2.5.1.

CSA A165.1-14 Concrete Block Masonry Units D-2.1.1.

CSA O86-14 Engineering Design in Wood D-2.11.2.

CSA O112.10-08 Evaluation of Adhesives for Structural Wood Products

(Limited Moisture Exposure)

D-2.3.6.

CSA O121-08 Douglas Fir Plywood D-3.1.1.

CSA O141-05 Softwood Lumber D-2.3.6.

D-2.4.1.

CSA O151-09 Canadian Softwood Plywood D-3.1.1.

CSA O153-13 Poplar Plywood D-3.1.1.

CSA O325-07 Construction Sheathing D-3.1.1.

CSA O437.0-93 OSB and Waferboard D-3.1.1.

CSA S16-14 Design of Steel Structures D-2.6.6.

NFPA 80-2013 Fire Doors and Other Opening Protectives D-5.2.1.

ULC CAN/ULC-S101-14 Fire Endurance Tests of Building Construction and

Materials

D-1.1.1.

D-1.12.1.

D-2.3.2.

ULC CAN/ULC-S102-10 Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building

Materials and Assemblies

D-1.1.1.

ULC CAN/ULC-S102.2-10 Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of Flooring,

Floor Coverings, and Miscellaneous Materials and

Assemblies

D-1.1.1.

D-3.1.1.

ULC CAN/ULC-S112.2-07 Fire Test of Ceiling Firestop Flap Assemblies D-2.3.10.

D-2.3.11.

ULC CAN/ULC-S114-05 Test for Determination of Non-Combustibility in Building

Materials

D-1.1.1.

D-4.1.1.

D-4.2.1.

ULC CAN/ULC-S702-09 Mineral Fibre Thermal Insulation for Buildings D-2.3.4.

D-2.3.5.

D-2.6.1.

ULC CAN/ULC-S703-09 Cellulose Fibre Insulation for Buildings D-2.3.4.

ULC CAN/ULC-S706-09 Wood Fibre Insulating Boards for Buildings D-3.1.1.

Notes to TableD-1.1.2.:

(1) Some documents may have been reaffirmed or reapproved. Check with the applicable issuing agency for up-to-date information.

(2) Some titles have been abridged to omit superfluous wording.

Table D-1.1.2. (continued)

Documents Referenced in Appendix D, Fire-Performance Ratings

Issuing Agency Document Number

(1)

Title of Document

(2)

Code Reference

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Fire-Performance Ratings Division B – Appendix D

British Columbia Building Code 2018 Division B

D-1.1.3. Applicability of Ratings

The ratings shown in this document apply if more specific test values are not available. The construction of an assembly that is the

subject of an individual test report must be followed in all essential details if the fire-resistance rating reported is to be applied for use

with this Code.

D-1.1.4. Higher Ratings

The authority having jurisdiction may allow higher fire-resistance ratings than those derived from this Appendix, where supporting

evidence justifies a higher rating. Additional information is provided in summaries of published test information and the reports of fire

tests carried out by NRC, which are included in SectionD-6, Background Information.

D-1.1.5. Additional Information on Fire Rated Assemblies

Assemblies containing materials for which there is no nationally recognized standard are not included in this Appendix. Many such

assemblies have been rated by Underwriters Laboratories (UL), Underwriters’ Laboratories of Canada (ULC), or Intertek Testing

Services NA Ltd. (ITS).

D-1.2. Interpretation of Test Results

D-1.2.1. Limitations

1) The fire-performance ratings set out in this Appendix are based on those that would be obtained from the standard

methods of test described in the Code. The test methods are essentially a means of comparing the performance of one building

component or assembly with another in relation to its performance in fire.

2) Since it is not practicable to measure the fire resistance of constructions in situ, they must be evaluated under some agreed

test conditions. A specified fire-resistance rating is not necessarily the actual time that the assembly would endure in situ in a

building fire, but is that which the particular construction must meet under the specified methods of test.

3) Considerations arising from departures in use from the conditions established in the standard test methods may, in some

circumstances, have to be taken into account by the designer and the authority having jurisdiction. Some of these conditions are

covered at present by the provisions of the Code.

4) For walls and partitions, the stud spacings previously specified as 16 or 24inch have been converted to 400 and 600mm,

respectively, for consistency with other metric values; however, the use of equivalent imperial dimensions for stud spacing is

permitted.

D-1.3. Concrete

D-1.3.1. Aggregates in Concrete

Low density aggregate concretes generally exhibit better fire performance than natural stone aggregate concretes. A series of tests on

concrete masonry walls, combined with mathematical analysis of the test results, has allowed further distinctions between certain low

density aggregates to be made.

D-1.4. Types of Concrete

D-1.4.1. Description

1) For purposes of this Appendix, concretes are described as TypesS, N, L, L

, L

, L40S, L

20S or L

20S as described in

Sentences(2) to(8).

2) TypeS concrete is the type in which the coarse aggregate is granite, quartzite, siliceous gravel or other dense materials

containing at least 30% quartz, chert or flint.

3) TypeN concrete is the type in which the coarse aggregate is cinders, broken brick, blast furnace slag, limestone, calcareous

gravel, trap rock, sandstone or similar dense material containing not more than 30% of quartz, chert or flint.

4) TypeL concrete is the type in which all the aggregate is expanded slag, expanded clay, expanded shale or pumice.

5) TypeL

concrete is the type in which all the aggregate is expanded shale.

6) TypeL

concrete is the type in which all the aggregate is expanded slag, expanded clay or pumice.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix D Fire-Performance Ratings

Division B

7) TypeL40S concrete is the type in which the fine portion of the aggregate is sand and low density aggregate in which the

sand does not exceed 40% of the total volume of all aggregates in the concrete.

8) TypeL

20S and TypeL

20S concretes are the types in which the fine portion of the aggregate is sand and low density

aggregate in which the sand does not exceed 20% of the total volume of all aggregates in the concrete.

D-1.4.2. Determination of Ratings

Where concretes are described as being of TypeS, N, L, L

or L

, the rating applies to the concrete containing the aggregate in the

group that provides the least fire resistance. If the nature of an aggregate cannot be determined accurately enough to place it in one of

the groups, the aggregate shall be considered as being in the group that requires a greater thickness of concrete for the required

fire resistance.

D-1.4.3. Description of Aggregates

1) The descriptions of the aggregates in TypeS and TypeN concretes apply to the coarse aggregates only. Coarse aggregate

for this purpose means that retained on a 5mm sieve using the method of grading aggregates described in CSA A23.1/A23.2,

“Concrete Materials and Methods of Concrete Construction/Test Methods and Standard Practices for Concrete.”

2) Increasing the proportion of sand as fine aggregate in low density concretes requires increased thicknesses of material to

produce equivalent fire-resistance ratings. Low density aggregates for TypeL and TypesL-S concretes used in loadbearing

components shall conform to ASTM C 330/C 330M, “Lightweight Aggregates for Structural Concrete.”

3) Non-loadbearing low density components of vermiculite and perlite concrete, in the absence of other test evidence, shall

be rated on the basis of the values shown for TypeL concrete.

D-1.5. Gypsum Board

D-1.5.1. Types of Gypsum Board

1) Where the term “gypsum board” is used in this Appendix, it is intended to include – in addition to gypsum board –

gypsum backing board and gypsum base for veneer plaster as described in

a) CAN/CSA-A82.27-M, “Gypsum Board,” or

b) ASTM C 1396/C 1396M, “Gypsum Board.”

2) Where the term “TypeX gypsum board” is used in this Appendix, it applies to special fire-resistant board as described in

a) CAN/CSA-A82.27-M, “Gypsum Board,” or

b) ASTM C 1396/C 1396M, “Gypsum Board.”

D-1.6. Equivalent Thickness

D-1.6.1. Method of Calculating

1) The thickness of solid-unit masonry and concrete described in this Appendix shall be the thickness of solid material in the

unit or component thickness. For units that contain cores or voids, the Tables refer to the equivalent thickness determined in

conformance with Sentences(2) to(10).

2) Where a plaster finish is used, the equivalent thickness of a wall, floor, column or beam protection shall be equal to the

sum of the equivalent thicknesses of the concrete or masonry units and the plaster finish measured at the point that will give the

least value of equivalent thickness.

3) Except as provided in Sentence(5), the equivalent thickness of a hollow masonry unit shall be calculated as equal to the

actual overall thickness of a unit in millimetres multiplied by a factor equal to the net volume of the unit and divided by its

gross volume.

4) Net volume shall be determined using a volume displacement method that is not influenced by the porous nature of

the units.

5) Gross volume of a masonry unit shall be equal to the actual length of the unit multiplied by the actual height of the unit

multiplied by the actual thickness of the unit.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Fire-Performance Ratings Division B – Appendix D

British Columbia Building Code 2018 Division B

6) Where all the core spaces in a wall of hollow concrete masonry or hollow-core precast concrete units are filled with grout,

mortar, or loose fill materials such as expanded slag, burned clay or shale (rotary kiln process), vermiculite or perlite, the equivalent

thickness rating of the wall shall be considered to be the same as that of a wall of solid units, or a solid wall of the same concrete type

and the same overall thickness.

7) The equivalent thickness of hollow-core concrete slabs and panels having a uniform thickness and cores of constant cross

section throughout their length shall be obtained by dividing the net cross-sectional area of the slab or panel by its width.

8) The equivalent thickness of concrete panels with tapered cross sections shall be the cross section determined at a distance

of 2 t or 150mm, whichever is less, from the point of minimum thickness, where t is the minimum thickness.

9) Except as permitted in Sentence(10), the equivalent thickness of concrete panels with ribbed or undulating surfaces

shall be

a) t

for s less than or equal to 2t,

b) t+(4t/s – 1)(t

– t) for s less than 4t and greater than 2t, and

c) t for s greater than or equal to 4t

where

t = minimum thickness of panel,

= average thickness of panel (unit cross-sectional area divided by unit width), and

s = centre to centre spacing of ribs or undulations.

10) Where the total thickness of a panel described in Sentence(9), exceeds 2 t, only that portion of the panel which is less

than 2 t from the non-ribbed surface shall be considered for the purpose of the calculations in Sentence(9).

D-1.7. Contribution of Plaster or Gypsum Board Finish to Fire Resistance of

Masonry or Concrete

D-1.7.1. Determination of Contribution

1) Except as provided in Sentences(2),(3),(4) and(5), the contribution of a plaster or gypsum board finish to the fire

resistance of a masonry or concrete wall, floor or roof assembly shall be determined by multiplying the actual thickness of the finish

by the factor shown in TableD-1.7.1., depending on the type of masonry or concrete to which it is applied. This corrected

thickness shall then be included in the equivalent thickness as described in SubsectionD-1.6.

2) Where a plaster or gypsum board finish is applied to a concrete or masonry wall, the calculated fire-resistance rating of the

assembly shall not exceed twice the fire-resistance rating provided by the masonry or concrete because structural collapse may occur

before the limiting temperature is reached on the surface of the non-fire-exposed side of the assembly.

3) Where a plaster or gypsum board finish is applied only on the non-fire-exposed side of a hollow clay tile wall, no increase

in fire resistance is permitted because structural collapse may occur before the limiting temperature is reached on the surface of the

non-fire-exposed side of the assembly.

4) The contribution to fire resistance of a plaster or gypsum board finish applied to the non-fire-exposed side of a monolithic

concrete or unit masonry wall shall be determined in conformance with Sentence(1), but shall not exceed 0.5times the

contribution of the concrete or masonry wall.

Table D-1.7.1.

Multiplying Factors for Masonry or Concrete Construction

Type of Surface Protection

Type of Masonry or Concrete

Solid Clay Brick, Unit

Masonry and Monolithic

Concrete, TypeN or S

Cored Clay Brick, Clay Tile,

Monolithic Concrete,

TypeL40S and Unit

Masonry, TypeL

20S

Concrete Unit Masonry,

TypeL

or L

20S and

Monolithic Concrete,

TypeL

Concrete Unit Masonry,

TypeL

Portland cement-sand plaster or lime

sand plaster

1 0.75 0.75 0.50

Gypsum-sand plaster, wood fibred

gypsum plaster or gypsum board

1.25 1 1 1

Vermiculite or perlite aggregate plaster 1.75 1.5 1.25 1.25

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix D Fire-Performance Ratings

Division B

5) When applied to the fire-exposed side, the contribution of a gypsum lath and plaster or gypsum board finish to the fire

resistance of masonry or concrete wall, floor or roof assemblies shall be determined from TableD-2.3.4.-A orD-2.3.4.-D.

D-1.7.2. Plaster

1) Gypsum plastering shall conform to CSA A82.30-M, “Interior Furring, Lathing and Gypsum Plastering.”

2) Portland cement-sand plaster shall be applied in 2coats: the first coat containing 1part Portland cement to 2 parts sand

by volume, and the second coat containing 1part Portland cement to 3parts sand by volume.

3) Plaster finish shall be securely bonded to the wall or ceiling.

4) The thickness of plaster finish applied directly to monolithic concrete without metal lath shall not exceed 10mm on

ceilings and 16mm on walls.

5) Where the thickness of plaster finish on masonry or concrete exceeds 38mm, wire mesh with 1.57mm diam wire and

openings not exceeding 50mm by 50mm shall be embedded midway in the plaster.

D-1.7.3. Attachment of Gypsum Board and Lath

Gypsum board and gypsum lath finishes applied to masonry or concrete walls shall be secured to wood or steel furring members in

conformance with ArticleD-2.3.9.

D-1.7.4. Sample Calculations

The following examples are included as a guide to the method of calculating the fire resistance of concrete or hollow masonry walls

with plaster or gypsum board protection:

Example (1)

A 3h fire-resistance rating is required for a monolithic concrete wall of TypeS aggregate with a 20mm gypsum-sand plaster finish on

metal lath on each face.

a) The minimum equivalent thickness of TypeS monolithic concrete needed to give a 3h fire-resistance rating=158mm

(TableD-2.1.1.).

b) Since the gypsum-sand plaster finish is applied on metal lath, SentenceD-1.7.1.(5) does not apply. Therefore, the

contribution to the equivalent thickness of the wall of 20mm gypsum-sand plaster on each face of the concrete is

20×1.25=25mm (seeSentencesD-1.7.1.(1) to(4)).

c) The total contribution of the plaster finishes is 2×25=50mm.

d) The minimum equivalent thickness of concrete required is 158 mm-50 mm=108mm.

e) From TableD-2.1.1., the 108mm equivalent thickness of monolithic concrete gives a contribution of less than 1.5h.

Thisis less than half the rating of the assembly so that the conditions in SentenceD-1.7.1.(2) are not met. Thus the

equivalent thickness of monolithic concrete must be increased to 112mm to give 1.5h contribution.

f) The total equivalent thickness of the plaster finishes can then be reduced to 158mm-112 mm=46mm.

g) The total actual thickness of the plaster finishes required is therefore 46 mm÷1.25=37mm (SentencesD-1.7.1.(1)

to(4)) or 18.5mm on each face.

h) Since the thickness of the plaster finish on each face exceeds 16mm, metal lath is still required (SentenceD-1.7.2.(4)).

i) Since this wall is symmetrical with plaster on both faces, the contribution to fire resistance of the plaster finish on either

face is limited to one-quarter of the wall rating by virtue of SentenceD-1.7.1.(2). Under these circumstances, the

conditions in SentenceD-1.7.1.(4) are automatically met.

Example (2)

A 2h fire-resistance rating is required for a hollow masonry wall of TypeN concrete with a 12.7mm TypeX gypsum board finish on

each face.

a) Since gypsum board is used, SentenceD-1.7.1.(5) applies. The 12.7mm gypsum board finish on the fire-exposed side is,

therefore, assigned 25min by using TableD-2.3.4.-A.

b) The fire resistance required of the balance of the assembly is 120min – 25min=95min.

c) Interpolating between 1.5h and 2h in TableD-2.1.1. for 95min fire resistance, the equivalent thickness for hollow

masonry units required is 95mm+(18 mm×5/30)=95 mm+3 mm=98mm.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Fire-Performance Ratings Division B – Appendix D

British Columbia Building Code 2018 Division B

d) The contribution to the equivalent thickness of the wall of the 12.7mm gypsum board finish on the non-fire-exposed side

using TableD-1.7.1.=12.7×1.25=16mm.

e) Equivalent thickness required of concrete masonry unit=98-16=82mm.

f) The fire-resistance rating of a concrete masonry wall having an equivalent thickness of 82mm=1h for

73mm+(9mm×30/22)=1h 12min.

As this is more than 1h, the conditions of SentenceD-1.7.1.(2) are met and the rating of 2h is justified.

Example (3)

A 2h fire-resistance rating is required for a hollow masonry exterior wall of TypeL

20S concrete with a 15.9mm TypeX gypsum

board finish on the non-fire-exposed side only.

a) According to TableD-2.1.1., the minimum equivalent thickness for TypeL

20S concrete masonry units needed to

achieve a 2h rating is 94mm.

b) Since gypsum board is not used on the fire-exposed side, SentenceD-1.7.1.(5) does not apply. Thecontribution to the

equivalent thickness of the wall by the 15.9mm TypeX gypsum board finish applied on the non-fire-exposed side is

15.9×1≈16mm (seeSentenceD-1.7.1.(1) and TableD-1.7.1.).

c) Therefore, the equivalent thickness required of the concrete masonry unit is 94−16=78mm.

d) The contribution to fire resistance of a 78mm L

20S concrete hollow masonry unit is 85min. Thecontribution of the

TypeX gypsum board finish is 120−85=35min, which does not exceed half the 85min contribution of the masonry

unit or 42.5min, so that the conditions in SentenceD-1.7.1.(4) are met.

e) The rating of the wall (120min) is less than twice the contribution of the masonry unit (170min) so that the conditions

in SentenceD-1.7.1.(2) are also met.

D-1.8. Tests on Floors and Roofs

D-1.8.1. Exposure to Fire

All tests relate to the performance of a floor assembly or floor-ceiling or roof-ceiling assembly above a fire. It has been assumed on the

basis of experience that fire on top will take a longer time to penetrate the floor than one below, and that the fire resistance in such a

situation will be at least equal to that obtained from below in the standard test.

D-1.9. Moisture Content

D-1.9.1. Effect of Moisture

1) The moisture content of building materials at the time of fire test may have a significant influence on the measured fire

resistance. In general, an increase in the moisture content should result in an increase in the fire resistance, though in some

materials the presence of moisture may produce disruptive effects and early collapse of the assembly.

2) Moisture content is now controlled in standard fire test methods and is generally recorded in the test reports. In earlier

tests, moisture content was not always properly determined.

D-1.10. Permanence and Durability

D-1.10.1. Test Conditions

The ratings in this Appendix relate to tested assemblies and do not take into account possible changes or deterioration in use of the

materials. The standard fire test measures the fire resistance of a sample building assembly erected for the test. No judgment as to the

permanence or durability of the assembly is made in the test.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Division B – Appendix D Fire-Performance Ratings

Division B

D-1.11. Steel Structural Members

D-1.11.1. Thermal Protection

Since the ability of a steel structural member to sustain the loading for which it was designed may be impaired because of elevated

temperatures, measures shall be taken to provide thermal protection. The fire-resistance ratings, as established by the provisions of this

Appendix, indicate the time periods during which the effects of heat on protected steel structural members are considered to be within

acceptable limits.

D-1.12. Restraint Effects

D-1.12.1. Effect on Fire-Resistance Ratings

In fire tests of floors, roofs and beams, it is necessary to state whether the rating applies to a thermally restrained or thermally

unrestrained assembly. Edge restraint of a floor or roof, structural continuity, or end restraint of a beam can significantly extend the

time before collapse in a standard test. A restrained condition is one in which expansion or rotation at the supports of a load-carrying

element resulting from the effects of fire is resisted by forces or moments external to the element. An unrestrained condition is one in

which the load-carrying element is free to thermally expand and rotate at its supports.

Whether an assembly or structural member can be considered thermally restrained or thermally unrestrained depends on the type of

construction and location in a building. Guidance on this subject can be found in AppendixA of CAN/ULC-S101, “Fire Endurance

Tests of Building Construction and Materials.” Different acceptance criteria also apply to thermally unrestrained and thermally

restrained assemblies. These are described in CAN/ULC-S101.

The ratings for floors, roofs, and beams in this Appendix meet the conditions of CAN/ULC-S101, “Fire Endurance Tests of Building

Construction and Materials,” for thermally unrestrained specimens. In a thermally restrained condition, the structural element or

assembly would probably have greater fire resistance, but the extent of this increase can be determined only by reference to behavior in

a standard test.

Effective December 10, 2018 to December 11, 2019

Fire-Performance Ratings Division B – Appendix D

British Columbia Building Code 2018 Revision 2.01 Division B