110.26(C),3

[mshields]

This paragraph is entitled Personnel Doors and required panic hardware and doors opening outward where equipment is rated 800A or more. I have long been under the impression, apparently incorrectly so, that all electric room doors must meet these requirements regardless of size and ampacity.

Is it in fact true, that these requirement only apply when you have equipment rated 800A or more. It seems clear yet I can't help but to think I'm missing something, such is the case when one is disavowed of a long held belief be it true or false.

Thanks,

Mike

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The equipment must be rated 1200 amps or more not 800 amps. I do believe unless you meet the criterion of 110.26(C)(3) then the door may open in. In general most of the rooms I see have the door swing out of the room simply to have more space in the room for equipment.

 

[mgookin]

Building codes have always allowed an egress door to open inward when serving 50 or fewer persons.

The electric code says we don't care how many people are in there; we care how many amps are in there.

 

[mshields]

change in 2014 NEC

change in 2014 NEC

The new version of the NEC reduced the ampacity from 1200 Amps to 800 Amps

 

[charlie b]

I know a few architects who are not going to like that. They all seem to like having all doors leading to corridors opening inward. I don't know if it is more visually appealing, or whether they is some other reason. There might be a building code consideration at play, perhaps something to do with open doors blocking the egress paths throughout the building.

 

[mshields]

code issues

code issues

it is indeed an issue with opening into corridors. There is a specific requirement having to do with what percentage of the overall width of the corridor is blocked with the door fully open. Don't know if it's all hallways or only paths of egress.

 

[mgookin]

it is indeed an issue with opening into corridors. There is a specific requirement having to do with what percentage of the overall width of the corridor is blocked with the door fully open. Don't know if it's all hallways or only paths of egress.

There's the fully open provision (7" I think?) and then there's the "during any part of the swing" where it can't obstruct more than 1/2 the REQUIRED width of the corridor. A 3068 door and a 44" corridor don't get along!

 

[Gregg Harris]

it is indeed an issue with opening into corridors. There is a specific requirement having to do with what percentage of the overall width of the corridor is blocked with the door fully open. Don't know if it's all hallways or only paths of egress.

If the corridor that the door is opening into is a means of egress then IBC 1005.2 would apply

 

[Ragin Cajun]

Well, I have not seen many exit doors into stair wells that meet the clearance criteria. The building I am in now the exit door into the stair well just clears the handrails, and this building is less than 15 or so years old. Seems to me that's typical?

What am I missing here?

RC

 

[mgookin]

Here's what I"m finding in Florida, the basis of which is the ICC bldg code:

1008.1.6 Landings at doors.

Landings shall have a width not less than the width of the stairway or the door, whichever is greater. Doors in the fully open position shall not reduce a required dimension by more than 7 inches (178 mm). When a landing serves an occupant load of 50 or more, doors in any position shall not reduce the landing to less than one-half its required width. Landings shall have a length measured in the direction of travel of not less than 44 inches (1118 mm).

...

1008.1.9.11

During its swing, any door in a means of egress shall leave unobstructed at least one half of the required width of an aisle, corridor, passageway, or landing, nor project more than 7 inches (178 mm) into the required width of an aisle, corridor, passageway or landing, when fully open. Doors shall not open immediately onto a stair without a landing. The landing shall have a width at least equal to the width of the door. See Section 1031 for door swing in Group E occupancies.


All this is moot when you have an electric room with 801 amps and a building with 2 people in it; that's what the issue is.

 

[texie]

The new version of the NEC reduced the ampacity from 1200 Amps to 800 Amps

Well, sort of. While I don't have my 2014 handy, I believe it now requires 1 exit door for 800 amps (as before) but it must open out and have listed panic hardware (new). When you get to 1200 amps then you need 2 doors (as before), both with listed panic hardware. In other words, you don't need 2 doors less than 1200 amps, but in either case the door(s) must have listed panic hardware. In previous editions it was not clear that LISTED panic hardware must be used or that you even needed panic hardware below 1200 amps.

I'm dealing from memory here from a 2014 class, so any one with a 2014 book handy can correct me if I'm off here.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

It is also important to note that the rule may cover more than just the electrical room exit door. It applies to all doors in the egress path that are less than 25' from the nearest edge of the working space.