Help with Code Question

[blueridgeview]

I need some help from all the building code experts. I need to know if it is possible for me install my Jotul Oslo in my current prefab chimney so that it will meet code. Here is what I currently have:

My house is about 4 years old and has a wood-framed chimney that contains a double wall pre-fab chimney pipe. It runs about 35 feet from the basement ceiling to about 3 feet past the top of the roof. The inner pipe is 8” stainless steel, the outer is 12” galvanized. The pipe has never been hooked up to a stove or fireplace before. The problem is that the pipe is only UL-127 (1700 degrees, I think) approved for use in a factory manufactured wood fireplace insert. The pipe was apparently designed to be used with a DESA International (DESA seems to be owned by FMI now) factory prefab fireplace only, but the pipe was actually installed with the incorrect assumption that it could be used for a wood stove. The Jotul Manual says the pipe must meet UL-103 to be used with the Oslo.

So I was hoping that my installer could run a 6” or 5.5” flex pipe like Duraflex or Foreverflex inside the 8” Stainless steel DESA pipe. However, I was told this does not meet code - which may very well be true. If I can’t run the flex pipe up the 8” DESA due to code, could I remove the 8” DESA pipe and run insulated 6’ flex pipe or something else inside the 12” galvanized? I have been told this wouldn’t meet code either.

Is there anything I can do to make it so I can install my Oslo so that it meets code without having to pull both the 12” and the 8” out and start from scratch?

Here is a link to the pipe that is currently installed:

Http://doitbest.com/Chimney+Components-Desa+International-model-48-8DM-doitbest-sku-400881.dib

Top view here: (broken link removed)

Sorry for the long post... and thanks in advance for the suggestions.

 

[ansehnlich1]

I'm no code enforcement officer, but it sounds to me like you'd be greatly served to find one and ensure your new installation meets his/her expectations, and code.

I'd ONLY use the chase if I were able to run code approved pipe up through it with appropriate clearances, period!

We are talking fire ya know

 

[humpin iron]

Just pull it all and do Class A chimney. It's not that big a deal, yea some $$ but it will be RIGHT. The amount of time you have already spent trying to figger a way around the problem, is more time than it would have taken to solve the problem.
Always try to exceed code.

 

[firefighterjake]

I appreciate the idea of trying to save some time, money and labor . . . but bear in mind that many codes come out of real-life tragedies where lessons have been learned at the expense of life or loss of property. While this may or may not be the case, codes in the US are generally created with a consensus building effort in which folks from many differing areas of expertise get together and come up with the minimum standards at which point they think something should be done to keep people safe.

Me, I'm a big believer in exceeding the minimum standards when it comes to keeping myself and my family safe . . . and when we're talking about installing something in my house that is capable of generating temps close to and in some cases perhaps even exceeding 1,000 degrees you can betcha I will follow the codes to the letter and not try to scrimp on the money, time or work required to make sure things are installed safely. Remember: you're not installing a plasma TV here where a messed up conection just means poor or no reception . . . we're talking about having a messed up connection that could potentially lead to property loss or loss of life.

My opinion . . . it was a good thought . . . and I hate to have to get into a big project, but you might as well yank things out and do a correct install . . . you'll be safe . . . and sleep better at night . . . and we'll get to keep you around a lot longer as a hearth.com member.

 

[53flyer]

My only comment is irt the creation of codes and someone wanting to exceed them. If you simply meet code you are, in a way, exceeding the min required safety levels required. This is because when coming up with safety limitations a so called "safety factor" of as much as 20-40% is built in. This means that the material &/or code accounts for something causing the limitation to be exceeded by the amount of that safety factor. Basically I'm saying that there's no need to be concerned with purposely trying to exceed the minimum code unless you just like spending more.

Regarding just what the min codes actually "are" in this case (or what parts you can use) I have no idea and am trying to figure that out myself on an insert install. You may already know this but if not: keep in mind that sometimes local codes are stricter than federal ones so as far as getting it approved by an inspector you'd need to verify that locally but you should be able to get an idea of the federal minimums on this site because I've read posts from some pretty knowledgeable people. You might also call a few pipe sellers who should be able to tell you what you need to know. Good luck to you.

 

[blueridgeview]

First of all, thank you all for your advice.

That said, I hear most of you saying, "Pull it all out and install Class A". I may not be an expert, but it really seems overkill. Think about it, I'm proposing putting a liner inside an 8" stainless steel pipe, which is itself inside a 12" metal pipe?? I surely don't know nearly as much about all of this as most of you, but it really seems overkill.

So if anyone knows how to make this pass code, I would still appreciate the advice. Thanks again.. and be gentle.

 

[Fsappo]

If it was my own house, I would buy one of those insulated liners that Magnaflex sells, 6" and drop it down the exisiting 8" ss pipe. Not saying code or not, but it would be safe enough for me and my family.

 

[blueridgeview]

If it was my own house, I would buy one of those insulated liners that Magnaflex sells, 6" and drop it down the exisiting 8" ss pipe. Not saying code or not, but it would be safe enough for me and my family.

I have to confess that I have considered doing something like this. I guess I was just hoping there was a way to do it so that it meets code (piece of mind). The other part of me says, "Why in the world WOULDN'T it meet code?!"

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

Technically, you can not line that pipe unless the pipe manufacture specifically allows a Ul1777 liner to be installed in it. Liners can be listed to go in the exisiting chimney, but if the existing chimney does not have the same listing you are out of code compliance. Even if it was legal, i would still replace it with a new class A chimney. It will be easier to clean, and the proper diameter for most modern stoves.

 

[blueridgeview]

Technically, you can not line that pipe unless the pipe manufacture specifically allows a Ul1777 liner to be installed in it. Liners can be listed to go in the exisiting chimney, but if the existing chimney does not have the same listing you are out of code compliance.

Thanks for the reply! That is the same thing I was told by the installer. Thanks for the confirmation. Now here's my question: Why is this the case? "if the existing chimney does not have the same listing you are out of code compliance" . That makes no sense to me at all, even though I concede that you are correct. Code allows certain pipe installs to be run through walls with combustibles all around it, yet when someone wants to run a properly rated pipe/liner up a 8" SS 1700deg pipe that is surrounded by 12" pipe, they can't because THAT doesn't meet code. I can't wrap my mind around it. Maybe I just don't have a good enough grasp of the fundamentals of chimneys and wood stoves.

 

[deck2]

I had though about droping a liner down an existing 8inch stainless chimney I had, but when i figuared out the cost the savings was not all that much, about $150 and I was going to have to find a was to connect it to the new stove and make it look good enought to be in my livingroom. So I went to Lowes and bought a new chimney with all the connectors, etc.. for like $500 with a 10% off coupon, the liner would have been around $350 with shipping so I did it the right way and it didn't cost that much more. When the building inspector came, he just took a quick look and that was that.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

the ratings have to do with how the chimney handles a chimney fire. For a liner to meet current code, it needs to be insulated and wrapped to meet the 3 10 min test @2100. The manufacture of the pipe you have installed only guarentees that it will hold a 1700* fire during the same test. If the liner fails, and the fire breaches the liner, then the pipe holding the liner is not listed to hold that same 2100* fire and your house could burn down. Who is liable at that point? Is it the liner manufacture? the liner manufacture said it was ok to install in a 1700* flue, but the manufacture of the triple wall said it was NOT ok to install in there flue. The fault of the house fire is hard to lay blame on when one half the equation says its ok, and the other half says its not. Zero clearance fireplaces and there chimneys are one of the most dangerous, heaviest regulated, products in our industry, so code goes above and beyond to make sure that you dont burn your house down in a chimney fire. If you have a 2100* chimney fire in a 1700* rated pipe, the fire can breach the pipe and burn your house down. Start over with new type HT (class a) pipe of your choice.

 

[blueridgeview]

I had though about droping a liner down an existing 8inch stainless chimney I had, but when i figuared out the cost the savings was not all that much, about $150 and I was going to have to find a was to connect it to the new stove and make it look good enought to be in my livingroom.

It will cost me about 2-3K extra because the labor involved in getting out that old install will be difficult. Plus the Class A material is much more expensive than the flex pipe, especially considering my 35 foot run.

 

[blueridgeview]

the ratings have to do with how the chimney handles a chimney fire. For a liner to meet current code, it needs to be insulated and wrapped to meet the 3 10 min test @2100. The manufacture of the pipe you have installed only guarentees that it will hold a 1700* fire during the same test. If the liner fails, and the fire breaches the liner, then the pipe holding the liner is not listed to hold that same 2100* fire and your house could burn down. Who is liable at that point? Is it the liner manufacture? the liner manufacture said it was ok to install in a 1700* flue, but the manufacture of the triple wall said it was NOT ok to install in there flue. The fault of the house fire is hard to lay blame on when one half the equation says its ok, and the other half says its not. Zero clearance fireplaces and there chimneys are one of the most dangerous, heaviest regulated, products in our industry, so code goes above and beyond to make sure that you dont burn your house down in a chimney fire. If you have a 2100* chimney fire in a 1700* rated pipe, the fire can breach the pipe and burn your house down. Start over with new type HT (class a) pipe of your choice.

MountainStoveGuy, thanks for the explanation. I guess I am out of luck since I cannot afford the extra 3K for the class A. Oh well Stove goes back I guess.

$2050 for stove
~$6000 for old pipe removal, 35+ feet of new class A materials, install of new materials, and install of stove.
= too much money and way over my original estimates. I guess that's life.

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

you asked how code applies. I responded with the current law. Common sense can take place but does not offer full protection like you asked. If you can stuff a 5.5 or 6" liner with a insulation wrap down that 8" chimney, you would have in fact made your own 2100* class A chimney. However, its not tested and listed.... doesnt mean that it wont protect your home from a chimney fire, it will. But if for some reason it fails and your house burns.. well no one tested it so no one will take responsibility..

 

[MountainStoveGuy]

of course the other issues are how do you get that 1700* pipe to adapt to connector pipe in a safe way. Thats the biggest challenge in my eyes.

 

[theheatelement]

Can be done or can't be done, it's all based on what the manufacture says of the original pipe, if it's duravent double wall and they say you can, then you can.

 

[smokingolf]

I'm surprised no one has suggested this yet You are going to pull a permit from your local town. Why not ask them what they think, or your local Fire Marshall. I happen to know the Windsor, CT Fire Marshall and the assistant and they will bend over backwards to answer any question as far as codes and fire prevention goes as I think they feel they are saving the town Fire dept. from coming out later to put out a fire.

Just my thought. I do think I know how you feel as it seems logical in our mind to put a liner in a dual piped chimney

Good luck.

Brian

 

[blueridgeview]

I'm surprised no one has suggested this yet You are going to pull a permit from your local town. Why not ask them what they think, or your local Fire Marshall. I happen to know the Windsor, CT Fire Marshall and the assistant and they will bend over backwards to answer any question as far as codes and fire prevention goes as I think they feel they are saving the town Fire dept. from coming out later to put out a fire.

Just my thought. I do think I know how you feel as it seems logical in our mind to put a liner in a dual piped chimney

Good luck.

Brian

I live in the county next to a small city. I actually know the fire marshal personally in the city and work with him from time to time. But that doesn't really help me in the county. In fact, the building inspector in the county where I live is the one who signed off on the DESA pipe for use with a wood burning stove at construction 4 years ago. Yeah, not very impressive.

Normally your suggestion is a good idea, but where I live it wont really help unfortunately.

 

[blueridgeview]

you asked how code applies. I responded with the current law. Common sense can take place but does not offer full protection like you asked. If you can stuff a 5.5 or 6" liner with a insulation wrap down that 8" chimney, you would have in fact made your own 2100* class A chimney. However, its not tested and listed.... doesnt mean that it wont protect your home from a chimney fire, it will. But if for some reason it fails and your house burns.. well no one tested it so no one will take responsibility..

Good points.

 

[53flyer]

the ratings have to do with how the chimney handles a chimney fire. .

You seem to be one of the very knowledgeable people around here and I appreciate reading your replies. I bet your right irt it not working with codes but it seems even more crazy to me because your example stated:

For a liner to meet current code, it needs to be insulated and wrapped to meet the 3 10 min test @2100. The manufacture of the pipe you have installed only guarentees that it will hold a 1700* fire during the same test. If the liner fails, and the fire breaches the liner, then the pipe holding the liner is not listed to hold that same 2100* fire and your house could burn down.

However, "if" the 2100* pipe failed (which it shouldn't and if it does it has failed its rated tolerance) it would have to penetrate 2 more pipes (8in "&" 12in) right? I think it's amazing to most people that a lined 6" flex inside 8" inside 12" won't work because it seems super protected by all those layers (the first one being the flex pipe that millions of stoves are hooked up to). As you mentioned it hasn't been tested. That's probably because they "never imagined" someone wanting/needing to do such a thing. If it "were" ever tested it would probably pass but since no one can really say for sure you won't find anyone wanting to say it's ok and that's to be expected. CYA and all that.

Thanks again for the good info.

 

[blueridgeview]

Can be done or can't be done, it's all based on what the manufacture says of the original pipe, if it's duravent double wall and they say you can, then you can.

Yeah, thats what my installer said. Unfortunately, the product desciption from DESA for the original product seemed to suggest that their pipe shouldnt used for anything else but their prefab factory fireplaces.

 

[DAKSY]

However, "if" the 2100* pipe failed (which it shouldn't and if it does it has failed its rated tolerance) it would have to penetrate 2 more pipes (8in "&" 12in) right?

The problem is that if your 2100* F liner fails, the surrounding 8" & 12"
pipes do NOT hafta fail to create a dangerous situation.
The clearance to your outside diameter (12") pipe is 2".
The clearance to the unprotected liner is 18" - same as single-wall
connector (tell me if I'm wrong on this), & the heat TRANSFER thru the
8 & 12" pipes may allow those framing members within the 2" of your 1700*
rated pipe to get dangerously hot & ignite.

 

[blueridgeview]

However, "if" the 2100* pipe failed (which it shouldn't and if it does it has failed its rated tolerance) it would have to penetrate 2 more pipes (8in "&" 12in) right?

The problem is that if your 2100* F liner fails, the surrounding 8" & 12"
pipes do NOT hafta fail to create a dangerous situation.
The clearance to your outside diameter (12") pipe is 2".
The clearance to the unprotected liner is 18" - same as single-wall
connector (tell me if I'm wrong on this), & the heat TRANSFER thru the
8 & 12" pipes may allow those framing members within the 2" of your 1700*
rated pipe to get dangerously hot & ignite.

Yeah, I see the logic behind that. I just seems like a stretch in my mind that all that would happen, although I am admittedly unexperienced in this arena.

Also, wouldn't there be a significant sign that the 2100* liner had failed? That would not only be rare, but severe - would it not?

Thanks.

 

[blueridgeview]

I have a brief update:

I have talked to an installer that installed Jotul stoves in Alaska for 10 years. After talking over our options, he thinks that he can install a foreverflex 5.5" liner with insulating wrap inside the existing 8" stainless steel pipe. With that insulation on the flexliner, the flexpipe would now be a zero clearance install, which should therefore make the 8" 1700* DESA pipe -- for all intents and purposes -- irrelevant.

According to http://www.chimneysweeponline.com, the ForeverFlex Pipe combined with their Super Wrap insulation will only have an OD of 7". The 8" desa pipe is an actual ID of 8.25" or so. The 8" pipe is smooth SS and the sections are snap locked together, so there shouldn't be any obstructions to getting the flex pipe inside.

What do you think of this idea? This will still be thousands of dollars cheaper than trying to put in a new Class A chimney, yet should still be WAY more than adequate for my setup. Am I missing something or should this work out just fine? Thanks again for everyone's help.