Occupant Load

Comments

10 comments

  • Avatar
    Melody McKool

    this is off the top of my head but I believe you would also need to take into account the circulation for the room. For a lecture hall the 1SF is for when they are stationary (i.e. in their seat listening to a lecture)

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Derek Mason

    For the lecture hall, the occupant load is determined by the number of seats. If there are 100 seats then the load is 100. However, there are other areas that would need to be taken into account. 

    What is the area of the stage? Is there any loading area inside the lecture hall before the seating? As what Melody mentioned, circulation within the room. I'm sure there is a formula out there to accommodate for seating and articulation, but I don't know. 

    On the exams, you will be given all the needed information to be able to answer the question.  

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Clayton Cowell

    Normally you would have the sq footage to find the occupant load so you can size egress and not use occupancy load to determine sq. footage unless you are designing based on population. Either way, Lecture halls are assumed to be an A-3 Assembly. For Assembly occupancies with fixed seating, the seats are counted to determine the occupant load.  Seating for benches without dividing arms (for example, bleachers) is calculated at 18 linear inches of seating length per person.  Additional occupiable space (for example, a waiting area) is calculated using the occupant load factor for that space, which is then added to the number of fixed seats. REF IBC 1004.4

    Several additional occupant load factors are listed for Assembly occupancies without fixed seating.  Unconcentrated or less concentrated use (15 net square feet per person) may have tables and chairs, concentrated use may be set up with chairs only (7 net square feet per person), and standing space is addressed by the IBC with an occupant load factor of 5 net square feet per person.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Ronaldo Guimaraes

    Joining the conversation regarding occupant load, pease can someone clarify the question I got on Ballast book?

    Please see attached images.

    The answer considers 100sf for business, however Table 1004.5 considers 150sf.

    Am I missing something?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Ruben Cabanillas Ramos

    based on IBC 2015 1004.1.2 I get 100 gross. I hope this helps

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    David Kaplan

    Ronaldo,

    I believe you are looking at IBC 2018, which does in fact say 150 SF.  However, the test is based on IBC 2015.  Make sure you reference the correct version!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Ronaldo Guimaraes

    Hi David and Ruben.

    For my surprise I didn't know NCARB's test refers to an old code.

    Unless the sample question I posted, which comes from the Ballast book is not updated.

    Is it fact that NCARB's test is based on 2015 IBC Code?

    If so, Is there any reasons for that?
    The only reason that come to my mind is the adoption of not a current IBC code in some state jurisdiction?

    At our office we use 2018 IBC Code, which I am currently most familiar with.

    Any guidance on that?

    Thank you both for the help.

    Regards.

     

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    David Kaplan

    Ronaldo,

    It's 100% the 2015 IBC.  There should be a list of resources in the ARE 5.0 Handbook which states which versions of all codes you should be referencing/studying.  I don't know the "reason" for that other than that is what NCARB is using for now and it is what it is.  

    Although you have in fact discovered one difference between 2018 and 2015 with your original Business Use SF question, I don't believe there are too many differences between the two, so your knowledge of 2018 will help.  But, just know that on the test you will be getting excerpts from 2015 and make sure you reference that moving forward.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Matthew Dirksen

    "

    The only reason that come to my mind is the adoption of not a current IBC code in some state jurisdiction?

    At our office we use 2018 IBC Code, which I am currently most familiar with."

     

    Some state jurisdiction? You mean most states. As of a year ago, only two states (and two US terretoires) have adopted 2018 IBC:

    https://cdn-web.iccsafe.org/wp-content/uploads/Master-I-Code-Adoption-Chart-DEC.pdf

    And even though more states may have adopted 2018 over the past year, I suspect the 2015 code will stick around for a while.

    But that's why it's always important to have the latest copy of the ARE5 Handbook, since it will list the relevant codes that are referenced on the exam (at the end of every section.) When I was doing my exams from 5/2018 to 5/2019, half of the exams I took were based on the AIA 2007 contract documents. And then they switched to 2017 earlier this past year. The only way folks knew about this change was from the revised ARE 5.0 handbook that was released with up to date info on each exam section.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Matthew Dirksen

    I might also add that one of my personal favorite references for the entire exam was the 2015 IBC WITH COMMENTARY

    The commentary section was extremely helpful with answering the question "why" behind most code sections, and offering much better insight into how to interpret various sections.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk