Panic Hardware Needed?

[ryan81]

Please see floor plan in the image link below. I have a question on whether doors 103a, 103b and 103c require panic hardware. My hardware consultant says yes and I tend to agree, but our client is questioning it.

My understanding, based on the 2015 IBC commentary is that when a combined occupant load of assembly spaces is 50 or more, panic hardware is required on latching or locking doors "serving" those spaces. Based on the plan, occupants of the assembly spaces would likely use door 149a to exit the building, however, that isn't guaranteed. If that door is blocked, for example, occupants will need to find another route and those assembly spaces would then potentially be "served" by doors 103a,b,c.

Another question. We've got paths to egress doors on both sides of door 142a and 142b. Which direction should they swing? Again - If door 149a is blocked, then the higher concentrated assembly areas will use those doors in their egress path. Should they swing the other way?

Image Link: https://photos.app.goo.gl/kR4MKoYycjA3d8RL8

Thanks!

 

[RLGA]

Panic hardware is not required. It is not a Group H, nor do you have 50 or more occupants in a Group A or E occupancy (Section 1010.1.10, 2018 IBC).

 

[cda]

I do not see an assembly space,,,,

Not over 50 , part of the B or are a B

 

[ryan81]

I do not see an assembly space,,,,

Not over 50 , part of the B or are a B

Good Lord...I got tunnel vision and overlooked 303.1.2 (small assembly spaces under 50 occupants/under 750 SF classified as Group B occupancy....). Sorry for bugging you all with something so elementary without having thought through the entire equation.

For the sake of argument...had those spaces been larger (or over 49 people) and thus classified as assembly, would you agree that doors 103a,b,c require panic as they potentially "serve" that space for egress purposes?

Again...for sake of argument (and assuming the conference and break were larger and classified as assembly), given that doors 142a and 142b are within a path of egress to exits on both sides of them, which way should they swing and what dictates this?

Thanks in advance.

Ryan

 

[ryan81]

Panic hardware is not required. It is not a Group H, nor do you have 50 or more occupants in a Group A or E occupancy (Section 1010.1.10, 2018 IBC).

RLGA - before the realization that these spaces are technically business occupancy (as called out by cda above), I was assuming over 50 people when combining the break room and conference. This is based on my interpretation of the 2015 commentary. See links below - specifically the second page. Thanks for your response!

Page one of commentary: https://photos.app.goo.gl/CBEq6GvgfyMtXBMz9

Page two of commentary:https://photos.app.goo.gl/xW2ChxPPwuZXd83Q8

 

[RLGA]

RLGA - before the realization that these spaces are technically business occupancy (as called out by cda above), I was assuming over 50 people when combining the break room and conference. This is based on my interpretation of the 2015 commentary. See links below - specifically the second page. Thanks for your response!

Page one of commentary: https://photos.app.goo.gl/CBEq6GvgfyMtXBMz9

Page two of commentary:https://photos.app.goo.gl/xW2ChxPPwuZXd83Q8

Technically, those spaces could not egress through the hatched area because the doors (142a and 142b) do not swing in the direction of egress travel. However, you do have a dead end situation. A door should be provided to the exterior by DBL Office 143 and Supply 126. If you want to avoid providing that exterior door, your only option is to reverse the swing of door 142b since the occupant load for that back area exceeds 50 (Section 1010.1.2.1, 2018 IBC).

 

[JPohling]

like RLG indicated you have other exiting issues.

 

[cda]

RLGA - before the realization that these spaces are technically business occupancy (as called out by cda above), I was assuming over 50 people when combining the break room and conference. This is based on my interpretation of the 2015 commentary. See links below - specifically the second page. Thanks for your response!

Page one of commentary: https://photos.app.goo.gl/CBEq6GvgfyMtXBMz9

Page two of commentary:https://photos.app.goo.gl/xW2ChxPPwuZXd83Q8

That is commentary and not law

Space for whatever reason, is not defined in the IBC

 

[RLGA]

I agree with CDA. The code specifically states "Group A and E"--not "assembly or educational spaces." Assembly spaces with less than 50 occupants are not Group A occupancies.

 

[ryan81]

Sorry to keep going on this, but I have another twist on the question of occupancy load in the "area" plus an additional question:

1. Directly plan-north of the breakroom is an area which will be lined with lockers along the plan-east wall for use by staff to secure their belongings. Currently, this area is contiguous with both the corridor and the breakroom. With 150 SF load factor, there will be 2 occupants in the "locker area". The Breakroom (@ a 15 SF load factor) accounts for 48 occupants. In addition, the single occupant in the Supply room 155 has to egress through the Breakroom. The intent is for the the breakroom function to end at the imaginary line between the two spaces, but technically, it is one physical space or "area" with greater than 49 occupants combined. Given the number of occupants in this "area", would now exceed 49, would this assembly function now be classified as an assembly occupancy and not part of the Business occupancy? Would it then follow that doors 103a,b,c would require panic hardware?

2. Given the relatively narrow width of the locker area, is it safe to say that this area could be perceived as a corridor, and given that this narrow space opens into the break room, could the breakroom, by extension be considered a dead-end corridor? The building is fully sprinklered, but the most remote corner of the breakroom will be greater than 50-feet.

I'm thinking that a wall and door should be located such to close off the breakroom from the locker area. It would keep the breakroom "area" under 50 occupants and prevent us from exceeding the maximum dead-end corridor length.

Thoughts?

I'm sharing the floor plan again here for convenience: https://photos.app.goo.gl/mWhhJ9gBJWEgdpEL9

 

[cda]

Sorry to keep going on this, but I have another twist on the question of occupancy load in the "area" plus an additional question:

1. Directly plan-north of the breakroom is an area which will be lined with lockers along the plan-east wall for use by staff to secure their belongings. Currently, this area is contiguous with both the corridor and the breakroom. With 150 SF load factor, there will be 2 occupants in the "locker area". The Breakroom (@ a 15 SF load factor) accounts for 48 occupants. In addition, the single occupant in the Supply room 155 has to egress through the Breakroom. The intent is for the the breakroom function to end at the imaginary line between the two spaces, but technically, it is one physical space or "area" with greater than 49 occupants combined. Given the number of occupants in this "area", would now exceed 49, would this assembly function now be classified as an assembly occupancy and not part of the Business occupancy? Would it then follow that doors 103a,b,c would require panic hardware?

2. Given the relatively narrow width of the locker area, is it safe to say that this area could be perceived as a corridor, and given that this narrow space opens into the break room, could the breakroom, by extension be considered a dead-end corridor? The building is fully sprinklered, but the most remote corner of the breakroom will be greater than 50-feet.

I'm thinking that a wall and door should be located such to close off the breakroom from the locker area. It would keep the breakroom "area" under 50 occupants and prevent us from exceeding the maximum dead-end corridor length.

Thoughts?

I'm sharing the floor plan again here for convenience: https://photos.app.goo.gl/mWhhJ9gBJWEgdpEL9

It is Only Monday,,,

You are in “ over thinking mode” already.

Yes you can design to your hearts content, put walls and doors wherever….. as long as you meet code.

No other thoughts

 

[ADAguy]

Corridors cannot be blocked by falling shelving or cabinet contents.