No wood is "fire-rated"; only assemblies that prevent the spread of fire during a certain period of time can have such a designation.

Wood can be fire-retardant treated and most jurisdictions consider such wood to be non-combustible.

It can also have a slow rate of flame-spread. I would guess that IPE is too dense to accept fire-retardant chemicals but would be highly rated for flame spread and smoke contribution.

It doesn't matter what an architect signs off on; only the local building official can approve a design. However, if a "design alternative" (something not in the code but equivalent to it) is proposed to the building official, it is usually required to be stamped by an architect.

Yes, the McNichols stuff is very pricy. You might want to ask your architect to recommend an alternate brand that is less expensive.

There are some nice interlocking teak wood patio "tiles" that might be nice to soften up a metal deck (or make it more pleasant on a hot day).

You could always put them away during the...uh...fire season?

(Is the need for a non-combustible deck for meeting code or do you personally feel there is a fire risk?)

"Class A" is not a "Fire Rating"; it is a "Flame Spread Rating" and Class A means the surface of the material burns very slowly or not at all.

OldTimeCarpenter is not only ignorant of fire-resistance of structural elements in buildings but is also a SPAMMER who wants you to go to an unrelated website.

The OP is apparently talking about a balcony rather than a deck and I assume that because it is within a certain distance of another building, it must be constructed of non-combustible materials. Fire-resistance treated wood is often considered non-combustible but that varies with the state code. Grilles on balconies are also restricted in many states.

"Class A" is not a "Fire Rating"; it is a "Flame Spread Rating" and Class A means the surface of the material burns very slowly or not at all.

OldTimeCarpenter is not only ignorant of fire-resistance of structural elements in buildings but is also a SPAMMER who wants you to go to an unrelated website.

The OP is apparently talking about a balcony rather than a deck and I assume that because it is within a certain distance of another building, it must be constructed of non-combustible materials. Fire-resistance treated wood is often considered non-combustible but that varies with the state code not your architect. Oak has a Flame Spread Rating of Class B (100) so it is highly unlikely that IPE has a rating of Class A (0-25) or that it is considered non-combustible by the code.

Grilles on balconies are also restricted in many states.

This post was edited by Renovator8 on Tue, May 28, 13 at 17:27

Actually, the standard under which the TimberSil material was tested was ASTM E84 which classifies materials according to their surface burning characteristics

One of these is resistance to flame spread, but this is just one of the factors rated. It also tests resistance to ignition, resistance to the spread of smoke and fumes, and resistance to heat transfer.

Under the criteria specified in ASTM E84 (and E84 20-Minute Extended) the material was rated at the highest level for

- Fire retardation (Class A)
- Resistance to ignition (Class A)
- Resistance to the spread of flame and smoke (Meets or exceeds standards), and
- Resistance to heat transfer (Resistance greater than that of the non-flammable control material)

Renovator8, sorry my use of the word "fire rating" confused you. It is commonly used in the trades as a shorthand description of the multiple ratings under E84, so I did not think it would confound an experienced person such as yourself.

Thanks for the corrected link. TimberSil appears to be a fire-resistance treated wood that may be superior to chemically treated fire-resistant wood since that material is not allowed to be exposed to the weather in NYC. In this installation the main desirable feature seems to be if the material is considered "non-combustible" and that should be verified with the building department for each treated wood material.

As for terms commonly misused by contractors, I am an architect first registered in '71 and I can tell you from personal experience that the building department in Manhattan is strict and unforgiving in the matter of fire safety so it would be wise for the OP to avoid the sloppy use of terms.

Here is a link that might be useful: Flame spread classes, roofing classes and hourly ratings

This post was edited by Renovator8 on Wed, May 29, 13 at 7:07

The test used to classify the Flame Spread Index of a material, ASTM E84, only considers flame spread on the surface materials of interior walls and ceilings not floors or exterior elements.

According to ASTM, E84 does not measure heat transmission through a tested surface like a Fire-Resistance Rating test would nor does it consider the effect of aggravated flame spread behavior of an assembly resulting from adjacent combustible materials.

More importantly, ASTM says that a Flame Spread Index number, by itself, does not classify or define a material as noncombustible.

To determine if a material is considered non-combustible it is advisable to ask the local building official.

By the way, the internet is full of claims that the Flame Spread Index of IPE wood is 25 or lower (Class A) and even claims that the Index is 0.

Unless a test result is offered as evidence these claims should not be taken seriously. A building department will require the test document so you should ask the manufacturer for it upfront to avoid problems later.

IPE describes a number of woods from various trees and various locations. I have provided a link to a test of one example of so-called IPE and the Flame Spread Index is shown as 25 (just barely Class A) and the Smoke Developed Index is 400 (only 50 below the limit). That's better than other hardwoods but it is certainly not the same a concrete as so many of the internet ads claim.

As for Timbersil, I don't believe the manufacturer has yet gotten an ICC-ES Evaluation Service Report so it could be used as decking where an ICC code has no performance requirements like fire-resistance or flame-spread classification but probably not in the OP's circumstance.

All of this should have been explained to the OP by the architect of record if not the building department.

Here is a link that might be useful: IPE E84 test results

This post was edited by Renovator8 on Thu, May 30, 13 at 10:27

Here is the ICC ES report search site

Here is a link that might be useful: ICC ES reports

Thanks again for the input on fire rating etc. - I learned awhile ago that there USED to be a type of ipe that was considered sufficiently "fire rated" (I am SURE I'm mis-using this term so forgive me) to be permissible in New York City as a "non-combustible" material, but then the classifications changed perhaps around 2009 (give or take) and now the company that sold that type of ipe can't guarantee any ipe as permissible for that purpose.

There's a NYC based forum brownstoner.com where I found the name of the company that had that ipe - I called the company and asked and they said they get calls from a lot of municipalities and have to tell them, sorry, not anymore.

So for us it came down to steel or cement or a combination. We're doing cement footings and steel stairs and deck - we'll figure out maintenance and how to deal with hot days as we go (wood decking that is removable; carpeting, we shall see)

Thanks again for the input on fire rating etc. - I learned awhile ago that there USED to be a type of ipe that was considered sufficiently "fire rated" (I am SURE I'm mis-using this term so forgive me) to be permissible in New York City as a "non-combustible" material, but then the classifications changed perhaps around 2009 (give or take) and now the company that sold that type of ipe can't guarantee any ipe as permissible for that purpose.

There's a NYC based forum brownstoner.com where I found the name of the company that had that ipe - I called the company and asked and they said they get calls from a lot of municipalities and have to tell them, sorry, not anymore.

So for us it came down to steel or cement or a combination. We're doing cement footings and steel stairs and deck - we'll figure out maintenance and how to deal with hot days as we go (wood decking that is removable; carpeting, we shall see)

Just remember that no individual material can have a "fire rating"; that term can only apply to tested wall and floor-ceiling assemblies that separate building occupancies. The correct term is "fire-resistance rating" and it is given in the number of minutes or hours that the assembly can prevent the spread of fire and then withstand a fire hose stream.

A "Flame Spread Index" is not a fire rating, but a characteristic of an individual material used as an exposed finish on interior walls and ceilings.

But none of these classifications determine what materials qualify as "non-combustible". That information is not found on the internet or from manufacturers because it varies with the state or even the local municipality so you MUST ask the local building official.

Because no building code can anticipate all situations, they usually allow an architect or engineer to propose a "compliance alternative" (this may be what your architect meant regarding "signing off" on IPE decking) but the alternative must be accepted by the building official. I have been successful in getting fire-retardant-treated wood accepted for a roof deck on a Type I (non-combustible) building but I had to go hat-in-hand to the building department. It is extremely important to know what you are talking about when asking a building official to stick his neck out. It is also important to get a treatment that can withstand exterior exposure well.