Panic Hardware on Bronze Doors

[LGreene]

The attached rendering was sent to me by an architect, who asked if a thin sheet of bronze could be applied to a Von Duprin Inpact device (recessed panic device) to make it look the same as the doors. I offered to get your feedback on the application. These doors are a required means of egress from a university chapel with an occupant load of about 125. We have talked here before about the color of the panic hardware vs. the door, but it has always been a flush door so that panic hardware was visible even though the color was the same. Your thoughts?

View attachment 1623

View attachment 1623

/monthly_2011_12/572953e4546f5_BronzeDoors.jpg.a1d12ee1da244dda5e905f97de08fb15.jpg

 

[mark handler]

First blush I say no.

In extreme situations, including low visibility, smoke and fire you may not be able to find the hardware. IMHO the hardware is a part of the "Means of egress" and shall be readily distinguishable from the adjacent construction and finishes.

Is the hardware flush with the door?

Where are the exit signs?

What is the room occupancy?

 

[fatboy]

Chapel = A, most likely.

I agree with Mark on all other counts. The exit signs, or lack thereof, are what really hit me.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

I assume this was a rendering for just the doors, and that is why an exit sign does not show up. Not sure if a glow in the dark paint, similar to that seen in stairwells, would work, but might be an option for the panic bars to increase visibility. I think they need to be distinguishable, and at a minimum that might mean contrasting with their background. Perhaps the design of the door could be reconsidered to include complimentary color for the panic bars, rather than a monolithic solution. After all it is a design alteration we are talking about at this point, aren't we?

 

[mtlogcabin]

We have talked here before about the color of the panic hardware vs. the door, but it has always been a flush door so that panic hardware was visible even though the color was the same. Your thoughts?

I do not find anything specific in the code that requires panic hardware or other latching mechanisms to be contrasting colors. The code requires specific mounting heights so being able to acutually see the panic bar during an emergency is not needed. The codes have "trained" the public where door knobs and panic hardware heights are "naturally" found.

Quick survey all 4 here agree it is not a good design but not a code violation.

 

[imhotep]

The attached rendering was sent to me by an architect, who asked if a thin sheet of bronze could be applied to a Von Duprin Inpact device (recessed panic device) to make it look the same as the doors. I offered to get your feedback on the application. These doors are a required means of egress from a university chapel with an occupant load of about 125. We have talked here before about the color of the panic hardware vs. the door, but it has always been a flush door so that panic hardware was visible even though the color was the same. Your thoughts?

I'd ask the DP if the manufacturer will accept the modification. What does application of a thin sheet of bronze do to the UL 305 listing? Other than the UL listing I would have no interest.

2009 IBC

1008.1.10.1 Installation. Where panic or fire exit hardware is installed, it shall comply with the following:

1. Panic hardware shall be listed in accordance with UL 305;

 

[mark handler]

http://totaldoor.com/systems/hardware

If this works, then your bronze doors should work

Stainless Steel

 

[tbz]

I have to say location, location, location as to the color contrast of the hardware is not a code requirement.

I do remember back in 2001 that the ANSI A117.1 committee was reviewing proposals that would require handrails to be of a contrasting color to the location they were installed in.

I asked the committee one question, what if they paint the walls after the handrails are installed, who is responsible?

It is good practice to keep the hardware visible in contrast, but not required.

 

[LGreene]

Here are links to the other two applications we discussed previously, in case anyone is curious and/or wants to comment.

http://idighardware.com/2009/12/stainless-steel/

http://www.idighardware.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/img_4254.jpg

 

[LGreene]

The rendering doesn't include the exit sign but I'm sure there will be one. It will be an Assembly occupancy. The hardware is not completely flush - it projects more than an inch when it is not dogged. I asked the manufacturer about applying the bronze and they said it was ok with them. I have seen something about a contrasting color in one of the European or Australian codes but there's nothing in the IBC or NFPA 101 about it.

 

[cda]

more than likely could live with it

plus once installed, it should contrast a little

if you lean or hit it the door will open, and sounds like not a rated door, so may be proped open anyway alot of the time

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

more than likely could live with itplus once installed, it should contrast a little

if you lean or hit it the door will open, and sounds like not a rated door, so may be proped open anyway alot of the time

I wonder how natural use will patina the latch side and panic paddle? They will probably end up different colors than the rest of the door if not sealed. As others have stated, there is nothing specific in any of our adopted codes (IBC/ANSI) to require the panic hardware to be contrasting, although my initial response would lean towards the intent of the code, specifically those portions limiting the width on balanced doors. I am presuming this is to indicate to the user which side to push on, and this may not be evident if the panic bar is concealed or blended to be less visible. That is my concern with using a similar material for the panic hardware. I would find it difficult to enforce however.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

The rendering doesn't include the exit sign but I'm sure there will be one. It will be an Assembly occupancy. The hardware is not completely flush - it projects more than an inch when it is not dogged. I asked the manufacturer about applying the bronze and they said it was ok with them. I have seen something about a contrasting color in one of the European or Australian codes but there's nothing in the IBC or NFPA 101 about it.

I noticed in your shared link you had raised the concern, "The codes aren’t specific on this issue so it comes down to each code official’s definition of what’s an obvious means of operation." Is there a section of code which requires this to be an obvious means of operation? Your question is very interesting, especially in the example from your article with the white door, white panic bar, and white walls. I have always wondered how the ANSI A117.1 standards help those with visual disabilities or impairments locate egress components such as doors in non-assembly spaces or spaces not required to have audible alarms. A thought provoking thread. Thanks.

 

[Papio Bldg Dept]

http://totaldoor.com/systems/hardware

If this works, then your bronze doors should work

Stainless Steel

I am not sure the stainless steel example works, as it does not appear to comply with 1008.1 of the IBC (2006) stating "Mirrors or similar reflecting materials shall not be used on means of egress doors.

Furthermore, one would also have to interpret if the bronze doors where in some way concealed by decoration or similar materials. In my opinion this would be more of a stretch...and a code grey area. I guess my next question would be more of hypothetical example. If it is okay to decorate the rest of the door to look like the paddle hardware, why not have a door that is decorated with door levers? Do all the levers have to work for this design to be acceptable? Would this design meet the intent of the code? Similarly, would a door designed to have the panic paddle match or blend seamlessly with the other panels, also have to have all other panels of the door release the door latch? I think I have posted enough, and will sit back and listen to any more thoughts on this...sorry for getting carried away here, but I find it interesting.

 

[High Desert]

You realize it's called "panic hardware" because in a "panic" the people trying to use the doors will automatically hit the panic bar and the door will open. I don't see a code violation.

 

[RLGA]

What code edition is applicable? IBC 2009 and 2012 require that panic devices comply with UL 305. This may have an impact on what is required.

I don't have a copy of the standard to check. UL wants over $400 for a PDF version of the 16-page standard--absolutely ridiculous--and ICC doesn't sell the UL standards book for the 2009 (or 2012) edition like they did for the 2006 edition.

 

[FM William Burns]

but there's nothing in the IBC or NFPA 101 about it.

Not yet.......... this issue begs for a proposal especially in applicable occupancies and conditions where panic and fire exit hardware are required. Something a new appointee on the 101 MOE TC will be very interested in. Doors can still be designed to provide the aesthetics without compromising safety while still providing identifiable exit hardware.

 

[tbz]

FM,

Until you can regulate the color of the door and that changing it's color is a violation accenting colors will be turned down in code changes.

It is not that saying the panic hardware needs to be an offset color it is that the door or wall has no restrictions, thus future painting becomes the problem.

 

[permitguy]

It is not that saying the panic hardware needs to be an offset color it is that the door or wall has no restrictions, thus future painting becomes the problem.

But we do regulate wall and door finishes (including paint) that obscure the means of egress. Gymnasium murals are a good example. If your 25'x25' eagle mural makes the door too difficult to distinguish, it is not compliant.

I can see the logic in extending that principle to panic hardware on the door itself.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Obscuring a means of egress door is a big problem. Requiring contrasting colors on door hardware that is not recessed or mounted flush with the door face is not warranted. Once you reach the door, the hardware should be installed on the door face on the right or left side or in the middle of a double door 34 to 48 inches above the floor. As I stated earlier society has been trained where a door knob or panic bar will be located. Blindfold 100 people and stand them in front of a door and they will open it within seconds becuase they "know" instictively where the lactches should be.

 

[permitguy]

I understand that logic as well. However, people without sight learn to rely on other senses, including touch. You put a person with sight in a panic situation and they may waste time looking for the hardware visually before they try to open it. This is all assuming they recognize it as a door at all. They may hesitate as they approach, trying to process conflicting information - "there's an exit sign, but that doesn't look like a door!". Then again, people are usually familiar with their access point as a means of egress.

I'm not completely sold either way. I understand where both sides are coming from. I do agree that, as written, there is no direct code violation if the hardware still complies with UL 305.

 

[Big Mac]

Mirrors or similar reflecting materials shall not be used on means of egress doors. Section 1008.1. It sure seeems to me that bronze doors would constitute a reflecting surface, unless perhaps they were brushed bronze. I don't think I have ever seen that.

 

[FM William Burns]

I see the logic also however...I really don't care what color the door is unless it obstructs the ability to identify it as a door (hence mural scheme like Permit mentions). The trained public argument is also good as long as someone is not visually, spacial or color impaired as many develop in aging. This situation reminds me of the arguments on floor proximity stuff. All is good as long as one can see and recognize a door is there and that there is a push pad/bar there.......oh yea....no chains also. The issue is from one's approach can one discern it. Going off the visibility requirements for signage, I can tell you for fact that the wood grain door with black trim pads would not be clear to me beyond 40 feet. In an emergency (not just fire) I may choose another route due to the lack of identifiable door exit hardware and head to a more dangerous exit. Now take the same door with smoke obnstruction to signage and well.....figure out where you would head

 

[mtlogcabin]

If everything is code compliant there should be an exit sign above the exit door. If a person is visually, spacial or color impaired does it matter what color the door hardware may be?

Going off the visibility requirements for signage, I can tell you for fact that the wood grain door with black trim pads would not be clear to me beyond 40 feet

Agree but the exit sign above that door is what would lead you to it not the hardware on the door. Heck some doors with exit signage above do not even have latching hardware.