1' Leaf of Pair - Panic Hardware?

[LGreene]

This is a pair of doors at the bottom of an exit stair in a high rise building - a 3' leaf and a 1' leaf. Two of the upper floors of the building are an Assembly occupancy with a load of more than 50, which means that the doors would need panic hardware. The only way to put panic hardware on a 1' wide door is to use a crossbar style (the "vintage" look) and cut the bar down to about 6" wide. The other option would be to put panic hardware on the 3' leaf with automatic flush bolts on the 1' leaf - this would mean that the 1' leaf is free to push open once the 3' leaf is open but it also requires the opening to have a coordinator. The auto flush bolt / coordinator combo can be problematic to maintain. Two other options would be to change the doors to a 4' wide single or a larger pair (3' + 2').

Edit: I forgot to mention...the small leaf is required for egress width. The 3' door is not enough for the occupant load.

How would you interpret the 2009 IBC? Here's the section on panic hardware:

1008.1.10 Panic and fire exit hardware. Doors serving a Group H occupancy and doors serving rooms or spaces with an occupant load of 50 or more in a Group A or E occupancy shall not be provided with a latch or lock unless it is panic hardware or fire exit hardware.

Exception: A main exit of a Group A occupancy in compliance with Section 1008.1.9.3, Item 2.

Electrical rooms with equipment rated 1,200 amperes or more and over 6 feet (1829 mm) wide that contain overcurrent devices, switching devices or control devices with exit or exit access doors shall be equipped with panic hardware or fire exit hardware. The doors shall swing in the direction of egress

travel.

Section 1008.1.9.3 has an exception which allows automatic flush bolts on the inactive leaf of pairs (#3):

1008.1.9.3 Locks and latches. Locks and latches shall be permitted to prevent operation of doorswhere any of the following exists:

1. Places of detention or restraint.

2. In buildings in occupancy Group A having an occupant load of 300 or less, Groups B, F, Mand S, and in places of religious worship, the main exterior door or doors are permitted to be equipped with key-operated locking devices from the egress side provided:

2.1. The locking device is readily distinguishable as locked;

2.2. A readily visible durable sign is posted on the egress side on or adjacent to the door stating: THIS DOOR TO REMAIN UNLOCKED WHEN BUILDING IS OCCUPIED. The sign shall be in letters 1 inch (25 mm) high on a contrasting background; and

2.3. The use of the key-operated locking device is revocable by the fire code official for due cause.

3. Where egress doors are used in pairs, approved automatic flush bolts shall be permitted to be used, provided that the door leaf having the automatic flush bolts has no doorknob or surface-mounted hardware.

4. Doors from individual dwelling or sleeping units of Group R occupancies having an occupant load of 10 or less are permitted to be equipped with a night latch, dead bolt or security chain, provided such devices are openable from the inside without the use of a key or tool.

5. Fire doors after the minimum elevated temperature has disabled the unlatching mechanism in accordance with listed fire door test procedures.

What say you?

a) Both leaves need panic hardware - use the 6" wide crossbar device.

b) The 1' leaf can have automatic flush bolts as long as there is no doorknob/lever/dummy bar on that door, and panic hardware on the 3' leaf.

c) The door size should be changed to accommodate the panic hardware - either a 4' single or a 3' + 2' unequal pair.

 

[Coug Dad]

Is the occupant load using the stair large enough to require the 1 foot section in additon to the 3 foot door?

 

[cda]

Am I the only one not seeing the picture??

 

[globe trekker]

Lori,

IMO, Option b) would be the most compliant (lowest costs). Option a) seems

to have too much associated hardware to be compliant (for me, I would desire

simplicity of operation). Option c) makes the most sense (highest cost)

for ease of operation (one door, ..one operation).

.

 

[fatboy]

I would accept scenario B, if as dad says, the 3' width compliant with the OL.

cda, a paired opening, only 1' on one of the doors, I would assume for moving things through the door easier.

 

[LGreene]

Am I the only one not seeing the picture??

Sorry - no picture this time. I was trying to paint a picture for you with words.

 

[LGreene]

Is the occupant load using the stair large enough to require the 1 foot section in additon to the 3 foot door?

Sorry - I left out that very important detail. The 1' leaf is required for egress width - the 3' door is not enough for the occupant load.

 

[LGreene]

Lori,IMO, Option b) would be the most compliant (lowest costs). Option a) seems

to have too much associated hardware to be compliant (for me, I would desire

simplicity of operation). Option c) makes the most sense (highest cost)

for ease of operation (one door, ..one operation).

Thanks globe trekker. Option a is more expensive than b, but the operation and maintenance is probably less complicated. Because option b requires a coordinator to make sure that the doors close in the proper sequence and auto flush bolts can be problematic, we (hardware consultants) try to stay away from that application whenever possible. I would vote for changing the door size. This is a new building so the cost of that change is probably not outrageous.

Does my added information about the 1' leaf being required for egress width affect your opinion on the use of option b?

 

[LGreene]

I would accept scenario B, if as dad says, the 3' width compliant with the OL.cda, a paired opening, only 1' on one of the doors, I would assume for moving things through the door easier.

I think the 1' leaf was an attempt at meeting the egress width requirement more than for moving large items through. They have decided to change to a 3'+2' pair with a panic device on each leaf, but I'm still very interested in everyone's thoughts on whether the intent of the code is for panic hardware on both leaves if both leaves are required for egress. If the small leaf was not required for egress I'd feel better about the auto flush bolts, but the panic hardware section doesn't give me any exceptions for the small leaf.

 

[cda]

Oh must be Monday or something stayed in Vegas

Make door bigger

Yes I would say all required exit width shall have panic hardware or other approved means

 

[fatboy]

Sounds like the 3' + 2' doors will be the best option then.......

 

[globe trekker]

Lori,

Is is my opinion that the panic hardware will be a better fit for the

two separate door leaves. Like it or not, but most able bodied people

become conditioned to "connecting the dots" with panic hardware.

If panic hardware is installed, they will tend to use that door more often

than one without it. To me, it makes sense to have fully operational

panic hardware on both leaves. In an emergency, when people are in

more of a hurried / harried state, to not have a panic bar on one of the

leaves might just means that that particular door might not open.

I would not stand there and contemplate why the panic hardware is

not there, rather, I would continue navigating through the door with

the hardware installed.

Just my 1.5 cents worth!

.

 

[cda]

how about some type of set up with mag locks, electric touch bar, and proximty sensor, if the one foot and three foot door is used??

 

[Coug Dad]

1008.1.1 - Minimum width for EACH door is 32 inches. If you need that extra foot for egress there may be a problem.

 

[LGreene]

how about some type of set up with mag locks, electric touch bar, and proximty sensor, if the one foot and three foot door is used??

The electronic touch bars don't qualify as panic hardware so I don't think that would help if we were stuck with the 1' leaf.

 

[LGreene]

1008.1.1 - Minimum width for EACH door is 32 inches. If you need that extra foot for egress there may be a problem.

Why is 32" clear width required for each leaf?

1008.1.1 Size of doors. The minimum width of each door

opening shall be sufficient for the occupant load thereof and

shall provide a clear width of 32 inches (813 mm). Clear openings

of doorways with swinging doors shall be measured

between the face of the door and the stop, with the door open 90

degrees (1.57 rad). Where this section requires a minimum

clear width of 32 inches (813 mm) and a door opening includes

two door leaves without a mullion, one leaf shall provide a clear

opening width of 32 inches (813 mm). The maximum width of

a swinging door leaf shall be 48 inches (1219 mm) nominal.

Means of egress doors in a Group I-2 occupancy used for the

movement of beds shall provide a clear width not less than 411/2

inches (1054 mm). The height of door openings shall not be

less than 80 inches (2032 mm).

 

[cda]

The electronic touch bars don't qualify as panic hardware so I don't think that would help if we were stuck with the 1' leaf.

Forgot also that dealing with assembly

Come on don't go old school on me

PANIC HARDWARE. A door-latching assembly incorporating a device that releases the latch upon the application of a force in the direction of egress travel.

Can't use equal or alternative??

 

[Coug Dad]

I believe that provision refers to a common condition in hospital rooms where one door provides the required 41.5 and the small companion door allows the easier movement of equipment.

 

[LGreene]

I believe that provision refers to a common condition in hospital rooms where one door provides the required 41.5 and the small companion door allows the easier movement of equipment.

I see unequal pairs all the time, where the larger leaf provides the required 32" clear and the additional leaf provides the rest of the required egress width as long as the additional leaf has automatic flush bolts or panic hardware.

 

[LGreene]

Forgot also that dealing with assemblyCome on don't go old school on me

PANIC HARDWARE. A door-latching assembly incorporating a device that releases the latch upon the application of a force in the direction of egress travel.

Can't use equal or alternative??

That would be up to the AHJ and I have been burned once on this where mag-locks were installed instead of panic hardware on an auditorium and the AHJ enforced the panic hardware. I saw it again recently where someone used a touch-actuated bar with a mag-lock. The AHJ allowed it but it was touch-and-go. The architect always gives us (the hardware consultants) heck if we do anything that draws the AHJ's attention so we are pretty cautious.

 

[cda]

It opens the door!!! What more do they want???

 

[tmurray]

If a door is equipped with a latching mechanism, a device that will release the latch and allow the door to swing wide open when a force of not more than 90 N is applied to the device in the direction of travel to the exit shall be installed on

a) every exit door from a floor area containing an assembly occupancy having an occupant load more than 100,

b) every door leading to an exit lobby from an exit stair shaft, and every exterior door leading from an exit stair shaft in a building having an occupant load more than 100, and

c) every exit door from a floor area containing a high-hazard industrial occupancy.

While option B would not meet the letter of the code here in Canada, I would approve it as an alternate solution.