• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Is there an accepted code definition of a "latch"?

Hi Michael -

I read through the other thread and that's a really great question! I checked the A117.1 Commentary to see if there was something that would clarify this and I didn't find anything. In my opinion, a deadbolt is not a latch, and I don't think a door with a closer and deadbolt should require the additional maneuvering clearance because the user is not holding the latch retracted and pushing against the force of the closer simultaneously.

I would like to get a staff opinion from the ICC and then I will report back. It can take up to a week to get an answer.

- Lori
 
LGreene said:
In my opinion, a deadbolt is not a latch, and I don't think a door with a closer and deadbolt should require the additional maneuvering clearance because the user is not holding the latch retracted and pushing against the force of the closer simultaneously.
Click to expand...
That's my logic also. Thank you for your assistance. I look forward to hearing what you discover.
 
LGreene said:
I talked with an ICC staff member today, and she agreed that a deadbolt is not a latch. So a door with a closer and a deadbolt would not require the additional maneuvering clearance needed when a door has a closer and a latch.
Click to expand...
Lori, does your IIC staff member have anything in writing to substantiate this point? Apparently, we're not allowed to simply apply logic and common sense.
 
Common Lock Functions
ANSI F and E
http://amdoor.com/public_html/functions.htm

Two types of latches ANSI/BHMA A156.13
A lockset may incorporate a latchbolt, a deadbolt, or may integrate both into a single lockset.
Latchbolt
The latchbolt is spring-loaded, allowing the door to be closed without first retracting the bolt. In addition, the bolt may be fitted with a guardbolt, which is arranged to prevent the unwanted retraction of the latchbolt by an intruder; in this case the latchbolt is called a deadlocking latchbolt. There may be a provision on the inside handle to disable (lock) the outside handle from operating the latchbolt; this is referred to in the table below as the "inside locking mechanism". This mechanism may consist of a push button or turn button in the inside handle.
Deadbolt
A deadbolt may be projected (thrown) only once the door is in the closed position; it will resist being forcibly retracted once it is in its projected position, hence is known as a deadlock. If it is projected or retracted by a handle (rather than by a key), that handle is referred to in the table below as a "thumbturn".
 
Aside from the debate of deadbolts and latches (note panic bars are considered latches because of the spring loaded return of the latchbolt as M.H. noted above), another option could be to provide spring or gravity hinges (think of window sash cords).

Are spring hinges and gravity hinges considered “closers” in determining the size of maneuvering clearances?

No. Some approaches require additional maneuvering clearances when a door or gate is equipped with a closer because of the additional force that must be counteracted in proceeding through doors. Since spring and gravity hinges do not significantly impact the opening force of doors, they are not considered “closers” for purposes of specifying door maneuvering clearance.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/guide-to-the-ada-standards/chapter-4-entrances,-doors,-and-gates
 
Last edited:
Francis Vineyard said:
Aside from the debate of deadbolts and latches (note panic bars are considered latches because of the spring loaded return of the latchbolt as M.H. noted above), another option could be to provide spring or gravity hinges (think of window sash cords).
Click to expand...
I had thought about spring or gravity hinges. However, they introduce several other problems:
  • There is no delay mechanism before closing.
  • There is no soft close mechanism. That door will slam against the stops every time.
  • There is the risk of someone getting hit or pinched by the door. Especially children.
  • It wouldn't satisfy the requirement for a closer (in jurisdictions where closers are required).
Frankly, I think having a free-swinging door with no self-closing mechanism would be preferable to spring or gravity hinges, provided local regulations permit a restroom door to not have a closer.
 
The only time I know of that a closer is required by the unamended IBC is when the restroom opens onto a corridor serving more than 30 people in an unsprinklered building.
 
Paul Sweet said:
The only time I know of that a closer is required by the unamended IBC is when the restroom opens onto a corridor serving more than 30 people in an unsprinklered building.
Click to expand...
That's good to know. Our establishment is not restricted by either of those conditions (our restroom will not open into a corridor serving more than 30 people, and our space has sprinklers). But I still haven't found whether there's a local requirement for a closer on a restroom door.

Nevertheless, it seems like a good idea to have a closer on a restroom door; as it prevents people from leaving the door open after they've "done their business." That said, if the AHJ is unreasonable about the clear floor space requirements for a door with a closer and only a deadbolt, then our alternate solution is to simply not install a closer (assuming that's permitted here).
 
Francis Vineyard said:
Aside from the debate of deadbolts and latches (note panic bars are considered latches because of the spring loaded return of the latchbolt as M.H. noted above), another option could be to provide spring or gravity hinges (think of window sash cords).

Are spring hinges and gravity hinges considered “closers” in determining the size of maneuvering clearances?

No. Some approaches require additional maneuvering clearances when a door or gate is equipped with a closer because of the additional force that must be counteracted in proceeding through doors. Since spring and gravity hinges do not significantly impact the opening force of doors, they are not considered “closers” for purposes of specifying door maneuvering clearance.

https://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/buildings-and-sites/about-the-ada-standards/guide-to-the-ada-standards/chapter-4-entrances,-doors,-and-gates
Click to expand...
For ADA
Some do consider them a closer, talk with local AHJ.
 
Michael.L said:
Lori, does your IIC staff member have anything in writing to substantiate this point? Apparently, we're not allowed to simply apply logic and common sense.
Click to expand...

The staff member can send me her answer in an email, but it is still just one staff member's opinion. With that said, this was THE staff member when it comes to A117.1. I have never gone through the process to get a formal committee interpretation, but I think that would be the next step if the staff opinion is not enough.
 
LGreene said:
The staff member can send me her answer in an email, but it is still just one staff member's opinion. With that said, this was THE staff member when it comes to A117.1. I have never gone through the process to get a formal committee interpretation, but I think that would be the next step if the staff opinion is not enough.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I would greatly appreciate it if you could forward the email to me, as that would certainly carry a lot more weight than just my word. I'll email you via iDigHardware.com so you have my contact information.

Even if my AHJ accepts the email, I think it would be a good idea to get a formal committee interpretation for the benefit of everyone. The less ambiguous the standards, the better for all.
 
Michael.L said:
Thank you. I would greatly appreciate it if you could forward the email to me, as that would certainly carry a lot more weight than just my word. I'll email you via iDigHardware.com so you have my contact information.

Even if my AHJ accepts the email, I think it would be a good idea to get a formal committee interpretation for the benefit of everyone. The less ambiguous the standards, the better for all.
Click to expand...

I will ask the staff member to send me an email. My email address is lori.greene@allegion.com if you want to send me your email address.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top