I’m sure someone thought this was an ingenious Fixed-it Friday “fix” to prevent the use of these doors, but blocking the egress route is never acceptable. Thank you to Tim Weller of Allegion for the photo.
You need to login or register to bookmark/favorite this content.
Is this a trade show or car show or other display, located in an assembly hall
Seems to have enough doors to block
And you can also add it that whole activating portion of the exit device needs to be half the width of the door or greater is totally unnecessary when you block the exit doors. But the painter did a nice job graining the doors.
Hi Paul –
I’m wondering whether the touchpad needs to be half the width of the door if the doors are not required to have panic hardware (assuming that this is a business occupancy). What do you think?
– Lori
That’s Fuch’d up!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuchs_wheel
I see what you did there, Grant! 🙂
– Lori
P.S. Sorry for the delay in processing your comment…I was traveling and got caught in the software problem mess.
Just the ‘wood’ vinyl on the door is enough for me to not see that there was an exit door available. wow
I agree! Are these doors readily distinguishable??
– Lori
Check out the exit device size. Looks like 3′ exits on 4′ doors (maybe wider). Push pad does not cover half the width of the door.
Good eye, Tony! I’m wondering though…if this is a business occupancy and the panic hardware is not required by code, whether an AHJ would require the touchpad to measure half the width of the door. On one hand, the IBC says, “Where panic or fire exit hardware is installed, it shall comply with the following…(3) The actuating portion of the releasing device shall extend not less than one-half of the door leaf width.” On the other hand, this is in a subparagraph of the section that states where panic hardware is required. So maybe it only applies where the panic hardware is required?
I’ll put this on my list of things to think about. 🙂
– Lori
I guess that would be called a “Mag Block”.
Sorry – dad joke!!
😀