Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

1999 NEC section 110.16 egress requirements

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    1999 NEC section 110.16 egress requirements

    We are trying to determine if the egress from several electrical rooms is correct regarding direction of door swing and door hardware installed in a 2001 construction project. What does NEC require for various sizes of equipment items in these rooms? I believe the tipping point for egress criteria is at 1,200A and/or 6-feet in width of a room. Thank you for any help you can provide.

    #2
    I don't have my older code books at the office. So I can't answer your question. I can say, however, that the rules for egress doors, including such details as ampere rating of the equipment and width of the equipment, changed back and forth several times over the last several cycles. So you do have to make sure you get your answer from the right code edition.
    Charles E. Beck, P.E., Seattle
    Comments based on 2017 NEC unless otherwise noted.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by DNGreen View Post
      We are trying to determine if the egress from several electrical rooms is correct regarding direction of door swing and door hardware installed in a 2001 construction project. What does NEC require for various sizes of equipment items in these rooms? I believe the tipping point for egress criteria is at 1,200A and/or 6-feet in width of a room. Thank you for any help you can provide.
      In the 1999 NEC, for equipment rated 1200A or more and over 6ft wide that contains overcurrent devices...there shall be one entrance not less than 24"wide and 6.5ft high at each end of the working space. There is the same exceptions for continuous and unobstructed way of exit travel and doubled working space.

      There was no requirements for direction of door swing and door hardware in the 1999 NEC.

      Comment


        #4
        Thank you very much. We did a little more research after I posted yesterday and reached the same conclusion. The back and forth seemed to be intended to bring the other egress codes into the mix in order to reach a universally agreeable solution that could be enforced as a code eventually. I have my guidance now and again, thanks very much for your quick responses. This is an awesome resource that I will pass along to the other 20+ offices in my firm.

        Comment

        Working...
        X