h a l f b a k e r yI CAN HAZ CROISSANTZ?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Fire doors have a push bar on one side and a handle on the other.
The push bar is much more convenient and sanitary, but on the other side pushing would do no good because the door frame is in the way. Having a two-way door of the restaurant variety would probably violate fire code regulations.
Therefore, take a perfectly good fire door and cut a rectangular hole in it. Then buy a slightly smaller fire door and mount it in the hole, pushbar on the larger door's handle side. That way the sub-door or main door can be chosen according to handle preference.
Part of the rationale for the one-way fire doors is to direct evacuation. Assuming perfectly rational escapees with perfect information, there could be more optimal routes for escape given certain places on fire and starting locations.
NFPA
http://www.nfpa.org...323&src=NFPAJournal
[mouseposture, Oct 31 2010]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
By the logical fallacy that devices meeting regulations are superposable to produce new devices meeting the same regulations. |
|
| |
Wouldn’t the smaller door hit the push-bar? |
|
| |
I imagine it is possible to make a 2 way door that complies with regulations but this isn't how one should go about it. |
|
| |
The National Fire Prevention Association (who claim to be
an
authority on the subject) say "the door cannot be
modified
in the field except for the items noted in NFPA 80" a copy
of
which is available for a mere $40.50. |
|
| |
As to what modifications may be made at the factory,
perhaps the problem there is loss of certification. You
could
no longer claim the door passed pressure- and
temperature-
tests specified in the code, without going to the
expense of repeating those tests. |
|
| |
I didn't say it would be easy. |
|
| |
// Assuming perfectly rational escapees with perfect
information // |
|
| |
One should never assume that. |
|
| |