Just when I was thinking about what to post for Wordless Wednesday, my friend Rachel Smith tagged me in a photo from her recent trip to Nashville. These doors are serving an assembly occupancy – a museum that receives more than 1 million visitors per year.
What do you think? Would you consider these doors “readily distinguishable” and “easily recognizable”? Ok, or No Way?
You need to login or register to bookmark/favorite this content.
I think that if there is a ‘line’ for acceptability for the covering it’s right on it if not over. A better Exit sign with emergency lights would be in order as that cover on the door is going to blend into the smoke.
OH H@#& NO…
I don’t think they are appropriate. When I first looked at the photo,, and although i knew I would be looking at some fire feature, it took about 10 seconds to finally see the hardware and recognize the photo was of a fire exit pair of doors. In a panic situation with smoke and confusion, people may turn away, regardless of the exit sign in my opinion.
NO Way!!! The only doors that I have allowed to be “altered” are in a Memory Care facility so the residents don’t open the doors and leave. Yes they have an authorized delay but there have been a few that keep trying to push open the door. They have disguised the door enough without totally obscuring it as an exit.
Easy choice. Clearly a NO WAY!
Just spit balling here… I’m willing to go out on a limb and take a guess this museum probably has someone “in charge” of Security and no one in charge of Safety… because “safety is everyone’s job”.
Let’s hope this museum exhibit isn’t about historic Nashville fires!
Where are the doors?
We don’t see what the rest of the wall looks like, but these don’t look like doors. That’s enough for them to not be recognizable
It is a museum and most are above the Law, as I have often seen both building and fire inspectors turn a blind eye to this sort of thing for the sake of art, science and history. It’s wrong and I often point out the liability risk they take in doing so.
How often do deaths or injuries occur because of difficulty locating exits in buildings with sprinkler systems? There have been numerous fires in non-sprinklered buildings where an extra 30 seconds spent finding an exit would make the difference between life and death, but if exits like the above would be dangerous even in buildings with sprinklers, I would think it should be possible to cite multiple cases where they have caused injury or death, or would have done so in the absence of counterbalancing good fortune.
Depending upon visual context, I think the door’s problem may not be that it’s not recognizable as an exit, but rather that people might interpret the picture as an invitation to use the exit in non-emergency situations.
If these doors were glass doors leading to the outside is this not a possibility of what you may see through them?
The walls appear to be white and the frame and door is inset from the face of the wall. The door hardware does have contrast to the walls and is labeled.. The door hardware on any glass door only contrasts to the door based on the image and light of the exterior as viewed through the door. So I would say if you were in a building with solid walls and glass doors for entrance and exits these may complie.
The door just may not be a fire rated exit. I also agree with John’s comment on stats on sprinklered buildings, not that following codes should be over looked.