York1 I got it inspected by the city engineer before I had my first fire.
I have had the City inspector out a few times to guide me through changes/upgrades I wanted to make. There is no charge and they tell me what I can change without having to do expensive upgrades elsewhere.
I had the power to the house upgraded to 200 amps from 100 amps and have done a lot of additional wiring myself. Even though it was not required the inspector was happy to pop by for a look. The fact they don't charge means more people are likely to have them come and have a look making for a safer City.
Brent
"All of the world's problems are the result of the difference between how we think and how the world works."
York1My woodburning fireplace has a double steel chimney pipe with cover and screen at the top. I do clean it every year. I built the fireplace and chase myself 20 years ago, and I got it inspected by the city engineer before I had my first fire. I clean it every year before use.
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
My woodburning fireplace has a double steel chimney pipe with cover and screen at the top. I do clean it every year. I built the fireplace and chase myself 20 years ago, and I got it inspected by the city engineer before I had my first fire. I clean it every year before use.
York1 John
And the lack of maintenance done on woodburning fireplaces and especially the chimneys. So many people will just go on and stick a few logs ina nd light them up without having an inspection or anything. My old house, I had the chimney inspected before attempting to use the fireplace. 3 dead squirrels and some major voids in the lining that could have easily set the structure alight had a fire been lit later, it became a decorative fireplace only. I don't think this house is in much better condition, so the fireplace is not used. I want to put in a gas insert - those get their own flue pipe that runs up inside the chimney, plus the gas line is right there since the furnace and water heater are right below the fireplace. No desire to bring wood and the critters associated with it in the house - plus there is a fire pit outside I can burn the wood from downed tree limbs and cutoffs.
EThanol plants might make great businesses to have on a modern era model railroad, but that stuff is garbage in the real world. Especially on small engines with diaphragm fuel pumps and little rubber fel lines, like blowers and trimmers. Add oxidizer to the fuel - great, on some old motors it will reduce pollution, but any modern car that has any sort of feedback air/fuel system - with oxygen sensors in the exhaust - it just makes them burn more fuel to maintain the correct ratio. Gas companies didn't complain much, the additives are cheaper than gas, and it makes the consumer use more of their product. Luckily the Wawa near me has ethanol free gas available, my truck gets significantly better mileage using it, and has more power. Unfortunately, the octane rating is too low for my car. I also use this for my small engines.
--Randy
Modeling the Reading Railroad in the 1950's
Visit my web site at www.readingeastpenn.com for construction updates, DCC Info, and more.
In keeping with the title of this thread, I'll pretend to be an expert.
I believe the codes surrounding woodburning fireplaces is that most municipalities no longer allow them for new construction. And if a previous homeowner made the unfortunate decision to convert it to gas logs, you're not allowed to convert it back. (I assume out of concern that the "contractor" re-conversion might not totally eliminate the gas line as opposed to any environmental agenda? Kaboom!)
- Douglas
It sounds like I'd better enjoy my wood-burning fireplace this winter before someone decides it's forbidden.
True, my former comunity touted TODS (trasit orentated development) even though it was proven they did not work in affluent comunitys which they had.
Lastspikemike Or just drive a gasoline fuelled car.... And while youre at it, fit a nice clean burning natural gas fireplace (or better yet, a virtual fireplace and a gas fired central heating system). My City depends on as many people as possible engaging in rational behaviour when it comes to utilizing PNG.
Or just drive a gasoline fuelled car....
And while youre at it, fit a nice clean burning natural gas fireplace (or better yet, a virtual fireplace and a gas fired central heating system).
My City depends on as many people as possible engaging in rational behaviour when it comes to utilizing PNG.
And take the Ethanol out of the gasoline so the car gets better mileage.......
Which will also save millions in small engine repairs made necessary by the damage Ethonal does to small engine carburetors and fuel systems.
Nobody sees the unintended consequences, and then they are never willing to reverse bad choices.
Sheldon
LastspikemikeHow much longer before environmentally driven wood burning returns London to those days?
In a quadruple irony, probably the greatest of them all, the issue with diesel and GDI is far less with typical 'particulates' (which are largely a nuisance) than with nanoparticulates, smaller than about 35nm. These go right through most 'diesel particulate filters' and have a range of disturbing effects on biological tissue and systems, somewhat akin to blue asbestosis. Note that the nanoparticulates remain easily suspended and constitute an ongoing risk to everyone, inside and outside, masked or unmasked, that breathes.
In my opinion the 'correct' way to get rid of these is to crank up both the pressure and temperature of the diesel engine (which incidentally gives far better thermal efficiency) and then use additional urea in SCR to knock down the resulting higher NOx. This also has the effect of reducing HC under almost all conditions to minuscule levels, which leverages the reduction of photochemical effects that lower levels of emitted NO are supposed to accomplish.
ATLANTIC CENTRAL rrebell No, there are always give and takes in the building codes and people who interpit them in a way they were not intended. I took a torch to bare foam and threw lighted matches on it, hot irons, electrical shorts and everything else I could think of, it mostly melted. Would I leave it exposed on a wall, no, but we are talking layouts here. There are a lot less fires now since smoking is prohibited in multi family dewlings and smoking in general is way down. Fireplaces are not alowed most places now too where I live. As a building designer and construction professional dealing with older properties, agreed, except for that last line...... I'm personally not a fireplace guy, but I'm not sure I want to live in a nanny state where they are outlawed...... Sheldon
rrebell No, there are always give and takes in the building codes and people who interpit them in a way they were not intended. I took a torch to bare foam and threw lighted matches on it, hot irons, electrical shorts and everything else I could think of, it mostly melted. Would I leave it exposed on a wall, no, but we are talking layouts here. There are a lot less fires now since smoking is prohibited in multi family dewlings and smoking in general is way down. Fireplaces are not alowed most places now too where I live.
No, there are always give and takes in the building codes and people who interpit them in a way they were not intended. I took a torch to bare foam and threw lighted matches on it, hot irons, electrical shorts and everything else I could think of, it mostly melted. Would I leave it exposed on a wall, no, but we are talking layouts here. There are a lot less fires now since smoking is prohibited in multi family dewlings and smoking in general is way down. Fireplaces are not alowed most places now too where I live.
As a building designer and construction professional dealing with older properties, agreed, except for that last line......
I'm personally not a fireplace guy, but I'm not sure I want to live in a nanny state where they are outlawed......
gmpullmanI've seen with huge expanses of polystyrene makes me wonder where all that stuff is going to go when the layout gets dismantled?
The recycle depot, with all the mailorder we get now I have two big drum bags of the stuff to take back every month.
Re: Misinformation
I may never know what I'm talking about, but at least I'm consistent.
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
gmpullman I used to be one of those "save all packing material" in case you a)have to return an item for service or b) want to sell an item and retain some value. So, my attic in our ranch house was pretty well stuffed with LARGE boxes from garden railway G scale equipment, speakers, just about all the stereo/AV equipment I've ever owned and lots of other stuff (patio cushions!) and hundreds of boxes from HO train stuff. I'm sure the volume would easily fill a decent siced box truck/moving van. Some of the cardboard and expanded polystyrene had baked in that 130° attic for years. In January of 2011 the fire came. Oh yeah! That polystyrene with the aid of the bone-dry courrigated cardboard went up like a solid fuel booster rocket. You'd be amazed at the stuff that really kicks in during a fire that contributes to the heat and toxic gases. Dozens of aerosol cans were shooting fire to the ceiling when the little plastic valves melted away. I emptied one whole extinguisher on the plastic window trim on an exterior door. It gets so hot it simply re-ignites when you're done with the extinguisher. I still save the boxes for most of my more valuable locomotives but they are in a separate building away from the house. Looking at some of the layouts I've seen with huge expanses of polystyrene makes me wonder where all that stuff is going to go when the layout gets dismantled? Cheers, Ed
I used to be one of those "save all packing material" in case you a)have to return an item for service or b) want to sell an item and retain some value.
So, my attic in our ranch house was pretty well stuffed with LARGE boxes from garden railway G scale equipment, speakers, just about all the stereo/AV equipment I've ever owned and lots of other stuff (patio cushions!) and hundreds of boxes from HO train stuff.
I'm sure the volume would easily fill a decent siced box truck/moving van. Some of the cardboard and expanded polystyrene had baked in that 130° attic for years.
In January of 2011 the fire came. Oh yeah! That polystyrene with the aid of the bone-dry courrigated cardboard went up like a solid fuel booster rocket.
You'd be amazed at the stuff that really kicks in during a fire that contributes to the heat and toxic gases. Dozens of aerosol cans were shooting fire to the ceiling when the little plastic valves melted away. I emptied one whole extinguisher on the plastic window trim on an exterior door. It gets so hot it simply re-ignites when you're done with the extinguisher.
I still save the boxes for most of my more valuable locomotives but they are in a separate building away from the house. Looking at some of the layouts I've seen with huge expanses of polystyrene makes me wonder where all that stuff is going to go when the layout gets dismantled?
Cheers, Ed
And again, as an experianced building designer and construction professional, I strongly discourage people form using unfinished attics that are not "walk ups" as storage.
Even semi finished "3rd floor" walk up spaces should not be "jamb packed" with stuff.
It is bad for the house, and bad for safety in so many ways........
And usually bad for what you put up there......
Re: egress. I see several new homes in my area that require either a large window or walk-out door from the basement. Thinking of my own situation, for all the time I spend in my basement, if the upper floor was involved in a fire I'd really have a tough time getting out.
I know this was a problem for many railroad signal towers with only one door/stairway to the top floors. I've read of derailments killing or injuring tower operators because they couldn't escape out the one door. Some towers had second doors and stairways added in later years after legislation required it.
Lastspikemike rrebell dehusman A lot of people misinterpret the danger too. Burning foam (or any plastic) gives off poisonous gas. The problem isn't necessarily standing next to a burning layout, its what happens if the layout catches fire at 300am while you are asleep. The real answer to "foam isn't safe" is a smoke detector or detectors. If the foam is on fire, the problem is the foam is ON FIRE. GET OUT OF THE ROOM or building! Safety shouldn't be ignored, one just has to evaluate the risks. Power tools, from Dremels up to circular saws need to be treate with respect. Dangerous solvents need to be treated with respect. I read post of people saying that certain chemicals aren't hazardous because they are found in nature or food. They are, but in really small amounts. There is a difference in being exposed to a thousandth of a drop of a chemical and a quart. Now there is a voice of reason, just read of a guy who surcomed to eating too much black liquorice. A famous case where I live, a radio station had a contest to drink water, someone drank two gallons and died, gave them an electrolite imbalance. Back to fire safety, smoke and cabon monoxide detectors are required here and have been for a long time. Last we seem to always confuse house construction with layout building, they are not the same. Getting out is the second step. The first step is waking up and knowing instantly that you need to get out and how to do that. That's the basis for mandatory fire drills for all office buildings. But, strangely, not private residences. Time and again the fatalities result from the time delays in deciding to exit, finding the exit and implementing the escape plan. Actually getting out is the easy part. Most of us successfully exit our homes daily without difficulty. Set the house on fire and it's a different story. That is the whole science behind fire retardant materials and designs in fire safety. It gives people the time we have found they must have to implement their escape plan. They also limit the rate of fire spread to adjacent buildings which is not, as commonly believed, to protect property or to give the fire department "extra time" to get "there". Have a look at the Great Fire of London. I truly cannot believe we are having this discussion. There is no "other point of view" here. Anybody know the facts relating to the specific risk I describe?
rrebell dehusman A lot of people misinterpret the danger too. Burning foam (or any plastic) gives off poisonous gas. The problem isn't necessarily standing next to a burning layout, its what happens if the layout catches fire at 300am while you are asleep. The real answer to "foam isn't safe" is a smoke detector or detectors. If the foam is on fire, the problem is the foam is ON FIRE. GET OUT OF THE ROOM or building! Safety shouldn't be ignored, one just has to evaluate the risks. Power tools, from Dremels up to circular saws need to be treate with respect. Dangerous solvents need to be treated with respect. I read post of people saying that certain chemicals aren't hazardous because they are found in nature or food. They are, but in really small amounts. There is a difference in being exposed to a thousandth of a drop of a chemical and a quart. Now there is a voice of reason, just read of a guy who surcomed to eating too much black liquorice. A famous case where I live, a radio station had a contest to drink water, someone drank two gallons and died, gave them an electrolite imbalance. Back to fire safety, smoke and cabon monoxide detectors are required here and have been for a long time. Last we seem to always confuse house construction with layout building, they are not the same.
dehusman A lot of people misinterpret the danger too. Burning foam (or any plastic) gives off poisonous gas. The problem isn't necessarily standing next to a burning layout, its what happens if the layout catches fire at 300am while you are asleep. The real answer to "foam isn't safe" is a smoke detector or detectors. If the foam is on fire, the problem is the foam is ON FIRE. GET OUT OF THE ROOM or building! Safety shouldn't be ignored, one just has to evaluate the risks. Power tools, from Dremels up to circular saws need to be treate with respect. Dangerous solvents need to be treated with respect. I read post of people saying that certain chemicals aren't hazardous because they are found in nature or food. They are, but in really small amounts. There is a difference in being exposed to a thousandth of a drop of a chemical and a quart.
A lot of people misinterpret the danger too. Burning foam (or any plastic) gives off poisonous gas. The problem isn't necessarily standing next to a burning layout, its what happens if the layout catches fire at 300am while you are asleep. The real answer to "foam isn't safe" is a smoke detector or detectors.
If the foam is on fire, the problem is the foam is ON FIRE. GET OUT OF THE ROOM or building!
Safety shouldn't be ignored, one just has to evaluate the risks. Power tools, from Dremels up to circular saws need to be treate with respect. Dangerous solvents need to be treated with respect. I read post of people saying that certain chemicals aren't hazardous because they are found in nature or food. They are, but in really small amounts. There is a difference in being exposed to a thousandth of a drop of a chemical and a quart.
Now there is a voice of reason, just read of a guy who surcomed to eating too much black liquorice. A famous case where I live, a radio station had a contest to drink water, someone drank two gallons and died, gave them an electrolite imbalance. Back to fire safety, smoke and cabon monoxide detectors are required here and have been for a long time. Last we seem to always confuse house construction with layout building, they are not the same.
Getting out is the second step. The first step is waking up and knowing instantly that you need to get out and how to do that. That's the basis for mandatory fire drills for all office buildings. But, strangely, not private residences.
Time and again the fatalities result from the time delays in deciding to exit, finding the exit and implementing the escape plan. Actually getting out is the easy part. Most of us successfully exit our homes daily without difficulty. Set the house on fire and it's a different story.
That is the whole science behind fire retardant materials and designs in fire safety. It gives people the time we have found they must have to implement their escape plan.
They also limit the rate of fire spread to adjacent buildings which is not, as commonly believed, to protect property or to give the fire department "extra time" to get "there".
Have a look at the Great Fire of London.
I truly cannot believe we are having this discussion. There is no "other point of view" here.
Anybody know the facts relating to the specific risk I describe?
Wow, now I am really happy that I don't like using foam.........
But I already knew about its fire ratings and "proper" uses.
I spent 25 years living in this 1901 tinder box:
But then again, I did not use any foam insulation when I restored it 25 years ago.
And it had nice big windows.........and an attic ladder at the ready.
Properly rated foam is perfectly acceptable in attics and crawl spaces. I consider crawl spaces one of the very few things it is good for, gluing to crawl space concrete walls.
Egress windows are as much about the fire department being able to get you out, as they are about you getting out on your own.
I now live in a new house, it is only 56 years old, and it does not have any foam either. Nor does it have egress windows, but the living space is all on one floor and there are 5 doors to the outside.........
And, our little town has one of the fastest fire department response times in the nation, 5 square miles, 5 fire houses, I kid you not.
Build with whatever works, just be safe and use common sense.
Having grown up with a volunteer fire fighter, I learned about fire safety early.....
My kids bedrooms are the two on the upper left. The roof is steel so if they do get out through the windows they will be fried like a couple of eggs on the steel roof that has been heated by the raging inferno inside. If they manage to make it to the ground they will have to get passed the 10,000 volt electric fence that surrounds the property designed to keep things in.
They're doomed.
Doughless Smaller openings for fire escape may be a dcent trade off of risks given the alternative of an object traveling at 200 mph through a bigger opening.
The frames/structure of the new windows is almost 5 inches wide between the "glass" opening and the wall opening. The old frames were only about an inch wide. Basically, the new windows are 8 inches smaller in height and width in the same size wall opening.
I am sure if I have a fire motivating me, I will get out the window!
DoughlessHe was probably worried more about mitigating the risks from burglars.
I did not consider that, now it does not seem so dumb. No burgler is getting through that tree.
**edit** My wife was reading over my shoulder, and she said that he planted the tree to keep boys from sneaking in his daughter's window.
-Kevin
Living the dream.
SeeYou190 One of my neighbors has a Meyer Lemon tree planted right outside a bedroom window. Getting through those deadly spikes will be impossible in a fire. That was dumb. -Kevin
One of my neighbors has a Meyer Lemon tree planted right outside a bedroom window. Getting through those deadly spikes will be impossible in a fire. That was dumb.
He was probably worried more about mitigating the risks from burglars........
With the alarm over using foam for layouts because of toxic gases, I'm assuming there is greater risk if one were to build a 2000 sf layout out of foam rather than a 200 SF layout.
Risks tend to be measured in terms of quantities.
The second method of egress is called a back door. Code in most places. And if there is an attached garage, that would be a third.
I'm assuming secondary bedrooms are designed with the idea that children would be occupying them. Smaller openings for fire escape may be a dcent trade off of risks given the alternative of an object traveling at 200 mph through a bigger opening.
OvermodIt does not help that many buildings are built without regard to second means of egress.
My new category 5 hurricane windows have much smaller openings than the windows they replaced, and we are getting older.
Egress through these new windows will not be easy.
Better for hurricanes, better for burglers, better for HVAC, better for privacy, better for sound control, but worse for fires.
LastspikemikeThe first step is waking up and knowing instantly that you need to get out and how to do that. That's the basis for mandatory fire drills for all office buildings. But, strangely, not private residences.
It does not help that many buildings are built without regard to second means of egress. I made the mistake of buying one house that had three staircases, all of which funneled to within 15' of each other before actually getting to a ground-floor exit that an adult could comfortably get through without tools. And its upstairs had the second stairs all the way at a far end of a common space communicating with an open main stair tower, a perfect chimney and chase for combustion gas and poisons. All the windows for the rooms on the south side second floor were over 35' above ground level, a charming prospect for an emergency ladder out a window. It pays to think of these things before you build ... or before you buy.
I have a practical solution. Don't use foam on your layout.
Rich
Alton Junction
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
TBH, to assess foam 'danger' you have to know the polymer and additives (e.g. plasticizers) in the foam itself, and you have to know the blowing agent(s) used to expand it. (Incidentally, the 'flame retardant' in some of these materials can itself constitute a toxic hazard if heated in an enclosed space -- something to remember when assessing "danger"...)
As some of you will recall from the Browns Ferry incident, there is a difference between 'supporting combustion' and 'sustaining combustion', and a key point is that there is more danger if foam is exposed to a continuous current of air during "heating to dangerous temperature" than if it is in relatively still, or even open, air. If it were to be contained behind a foil barrier and wallboard in a vertical stud cavity which, for some reason, became a vertical flame channel, I think it might become massively more risky than if exposed to 'radiation' from some relatively distant heat or flame source. On the other hand, a combination of wallboard, foil barrier, and perhaps a good dead-air space inside a wall will act for an extended time as a block to radiant uptake, outgassing, or heat or pyrolytic degradation of the foam.
Much depends on the sort of fire that might develop, and how it might be accelerated by other materials. I'd naively say, though, that anyone with exposed foam might do well to foil-face it with something reflective surfaced both in visible and IR.
Geeez! I guess it was a good thing that Gomez Adams didn't use foam on his layout! Then again, maybe he missed an opportunity to make the fires really spectacular!!!
Cheers!!
Dave
I'm just a dude with a bad back having a lot of fun with model trains, and finally building a layout!
LastspikemikeFoam needs to be encapsulated in a non flammable material for fire safety. This is my main concern in using styrofoam for a layout.
Is this really a practical concern?
Is the layout going to catch fire from a derailed loco? If someone drops a cigarette on your layout, will it burst into flames? Maybe it will, but if your Christmas tree bursts into flames, and you can see it on numerous public service videos, calling 911 is already too late.
Henry
COB Potomac & Northern
Shenandoah Valley