• 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.

Second floor egress fall height

Bob Denver

REGISTERED
Joined
Sep 12, 2022
Messages
4
Location
California
Minimum sill height and window size clearance is well specified, and size needs to be larger at the second floor (5.0 vs 5.7) but why are there no provisions for the fall height from the window down to ground/grade? Even if one second floor window opens towards a roof or platform and the other does not, there is nothing in code mandating the window with the lower drop be the assigned egress window. It gets even worse if there is a large window well below.

Is it assumed it is better to break your legs than being trapped anyway? But if there is a window well below and you break your legs you won't be able to use the ladder.

Am I missing something, or this one area the building department trust our common sense?
 
I should mention that I have read the thread from July 25 on max height from grade, but my curiosity lies primarily with the window wells that are becoming more and more common in my area. It would seem that adds another complexity as you not only risk breaking your legs, but you do so one level below grade.
 
2018 IRC
R312.2 Window fall protection. Window fall protection
shall be provided in accordance with Sections R312.2.1 and
R312.2.2.
R312.2.1 Window sills. In dwelling units, where the top of
the sill of an operable window opening is located less than
24 inches (610 mm) above the finished floor and greater
than 72 inches (1829 mm) above the finished grade or
other surface below on the exterior of the building, the
operable window shall comply with one of the following:
1. Operable window openings will not allow a 4-inchdiameter
(102 mm) sphere to pass through where the
openings are in their largest opened position.
2. Operable windows are provided with window fall prevention
devices that comply with ASTM F2090.
3. Operable windows are provided with window opening
control devices that comply with Section
R312.2.2.
R312.2.2 Window opening control devices. Window
opening control devices shall comply with ASTM F2090.
The window opening control device, after operation to
release the control device allowing the window to fully
open, shall not reduce the net clear opening area of the window
unit to less than the area required by Section R310.2.1.
 
Thanks Rick. I'm familiar with R312 but nothing here addresses the exterior fall height unless your sill is below 24" above inside floor, which I would guess is not common in a typical bedroom.
 
Who said you had to jump, closing the bedroom door can give many minutes of time in a relatively safe area, untill someone arrives with a ladder.
 
Or in the case of a light well something to walk on in order to cross the void I guess. Still, it is odd code doesn’t stipulate that the window with lowest fall height should be designated egress.
 
Once you get above grade level it usually becomes a rescue opening and not an emergency escape opening. The code is a minimum and is not intended to cover every possible scenario that people may think should be addressed under code requirements. The code like the military and traffic engineers used to consider acceptable losses when evaluating a code change or when a military operation should proceed or not or when a traffic light should be installed or an interchange should be redesigned. Unfortunately IMHO that thought process is disappearing quickly within the different code adoption processes.
 
Once you get above grade level it usually becomes a rescue opening and not an emergency escape opening. The code is a minimum and is not intended to cover every possible scenario that people may think should be addressed under code requirements. The code like the military and traffic engineers used to consider acceptable losses when evaluating a code change or when a military operation should proceed or not or when a traffic light should be installed or an interchange should be redesigned. Unfortunately IMHO that thought process is disappearing quickly within the different code adoption processes.
Yes, the "if it saves just one life, it's worth it" mentality is wonderful as a personal moral guide for "what should I do next". But makes for horrible public policy - - otherwise the top speed limit on all our roads should always be 5 mph, because at some point it will save "just one life".
Everything in public policy has tradeoffs.
 
Back
Top