There is a clarification in the 2018 International Building Code (IBC) that helps to answer the following questions:
On a door that is be required to have panic hardware, is it acceptable to install an electromagnetic lock INSTEAD of panic hardware since the mag-lock does not latch?
Do the model codes prohibit the installation of a mag-lock in addition to panic hardware since an additional locking device is not allowed on doors with panic hardware?
If a door has panic hardware and a mag-lock, can either a sensor or door-mounted hardware be used to release the mag-lock for egress?
I have written about these topics in the past, but I always like to have some prescriptive code language to point to rather than saying, “because I said so.” The BHMA Codes & Government Affairs Committee gathers ideas from its members (including me) and from others who have run into door-related code requirements that are difficult to interpret. We then submit code change proposals and nurture them through the code development process.
In the 2018 edition of the IBC, Section 1010.1.10 addresses panic hardware and fire exit hardware. The sections that cover mag-locks are 1010.1.9.9 (sensor release) and 1010.1.9.10 (door hardware release). Although the 2015 edition of the IBC does include a reference in the panic hardware section to one of the sections addressing mag-locks, it wasn’t clear whether this meant that the mag-lock section could be used instead of panic hardware, or whether the other mag-lock application was prohibited on doors with panic hardware because it was not specifically referenced.
Here is the paragraph that has been added to the 2018 IBC:
1010.1.10 – Exception 2: Doors provided with panic hardware or fire exit hardware and serving a Group A or E occupancy shall be permitted to be electrically locked in accordance with Section 1010.1.9.9 or 1010.1.9.10.
This clarifies that:
a) Panic hardware is still required for doors which lock or latch when serving assembly or educational occupancies with an occupant load of 50 people or more. The reason I say this is because the new language says, “Doors PROVIDED with panic hardware…”
b) Because both of the sections that typically apply to mag-locks are referenced in the new language, the doors with panic hardware can also have mag-locks which are released by EITHER the sensor OR the door-mounted hardware, as long as all of the criteria of the applicable section are met.
For more information about the code requirements that apply to mag-locks and panic hardware, check out these videos:
.
Any questions?
You need to login or register to bookmark/favorite this content.
3.Operation of the door hardware directly interrupts the power to the electric lock and unlocks the door immediately.
So can this be my “touch bar”???
And with all the modern technology, the code still has a push button release???
Anyway, just a pet peeve.
I not a hardware consultant so I’m trying to understand why in the world you would ever need both a maglock and a panic device on the same door. Please describe a scenario that would call for this.
Hi Dan –
It’s definitely not my preference, but it is done. Maybe people think the mag-lock provides extra security, or it’s easier to add access control using a mag-lock. The question I was most interested in getting an answer to was whether it’s acceptable to use a mag-lock instead of panic hardware (no). This was not uncommon back in the BOCA days – I think BOCA may have said panic hardware was required for doors that latch, not “lock or latch”. On one of my old projects, the architect wanted mag-locks instead of panics on an auditorium, but the AHJ vetoed that idea. The IBC is just catching up to the most common interpretation in the field.
Maybe someone will have other ideas about why a mag-lock might be installed along with panic hardware.
– Lori
Hi Lori
Can I use an exit device with a REX and a maglock on a class A occupancy exterior door. I know that in reading the IBC, it is a little clearer, but the NBC does not mention exit devices allowing release, just that the maglock must not have latches or pins
Regards
Hi Les –
I’m not sure what the NBC allows, so I would recommend that you email one of our Canada code experts:
Canada – Eastern – Shane Fitzgerald – shane.fitzgerald@allegion.com
Canada – Western – Steve Isaac – steve.isaac@allegion.com
– Lori
Lori,
You mentioned where else would someone want a Panic and Maglock together? How about at a High School that the administration wants to control the egress out a tertiary pair of doors that leave the school building. The school needs exits on these, but need to control high school teenager traffic. Maglock is their idea that I’m not fond of? What do you have in mind? I’m headed there tomorrow morning.
Hi Brent –
If the door is a required means of egress (if it needs panics, that tells me it is), then the mag-locks can’t be used to impede egress. On egress doors, except certain health care locations like memory care, mag-locks have to unlock via either a sensor above the door or a switch in the door-mounted hardware. Neither of these applications would allow the school to control teen traffic on the egress side of the door.
– Lori
Positive latching is still the criteria for most doors in this application. All other hardware is just for access control .
I have what I think is a unique situation related to this. I have a gym that is shared by a school and park district building. The gym has 4 exit doors (3 to exterior, 1 into the school corridor). Owner would like the 1 door into school corridor to be locked during non-school hours so that the public cannot get into school. A few questions: 1) is panic hardware required on the 4th door (door into corridor) since the room has more than 50 people (and serves education/assembly space) even though this door is not needed for egress (less than 500 people in room – only 3 doors req’d. We meet all egress criteria such as remoteness of exits)? 2) assuming panic hardware is required, is there a way to secure this door from the school side without using delayed egress or “alarm will sound if door is used? A few more wrinkles to take it a step further; door does need to latch as it is a rated door and owner would like to ability to also lock the door from the gym side in a lock-down event to prevent entry into gym FROM corridor side. Curious to hear people’s thoughts.
This one would really be up to the local code official. I don’t like to give that as an answer, but since the doors to the corridor are used as the main entrance/exit during the school day, the IBC would require the doors to meet the means of egress requirements.
– Lori
I am struggling with a similar situation. I have a string of CAP projects in which architects are requiring exit devices on the doors from the classrooms to the hallway, and on the doors from the classroom to the exterior.
I then have a low voltage guy coming in and adding a mag lock to these doors with exits. He ties the mag into the fire alarm and mounts a push button at light switch height. The true intent is keep small kids from leaving the rooms, but he is arguing that it is code compliant because the mag lock meets “mag lock codes”. I am arguing that it needs to be a delayed egress system, or the exit devices need to be removed.
Can anyone help me better formulate or back up my argument? Or if I am wrong and this is code compliant I’ll lay down the fight.
Hi Josh –
It sounds like the low-voltage guy is missing a critical component of the “mag lock codes”, which is the sensor on the egress side that detects a building occupant approaching the door and unlocks the mag-lock. I realize this defeats the purpose, but it’s what protects life safety. The 2018 IBC allows delayed egress locks on classroom doors serving less than 50 people. This is an expensive solution so the intent would be for this to be used where there is a high risk of little kids or kids with special needs running out to a non-contained area. Otherwise I would use an alarm.
I’m on the road today but feel free to email me if you need more info. lori.greene@allegion.com
– Lori
Lori
I agree completely! I just want to make sure I wasn’t missing something. Thank you!