Access Control & Electric Strikes Peratining to NFPA101

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mro31472

New member
I have a customer asking to have an access control system installed on there tenant space at the front and rear doors. The doors are egress and open out of the tenant space for the proper flow of egress. we proposed utilizing electric strikes and the AHJ's Fire Marshall refused approval and referred me to NFPA101 7.2.1.6.2 where it has a listing of 8 requirements, which included request to exit motion, manual override, and fire alarm tie-in for door release in the event of an alarm. My understanding was if you utilized electric door strikes they were not recognized as "access controlled egress doors" and you were not bound by section 7.2.1.6.2. as long as you could exit through that door with one motion. I believe 7.2.1.6.2 refers to a electromagnetic lock rather than an electric strike. Can someone tell me where i may find in the nfpa101 where it confirms or retracts my statement above
 
Which side is the locked side? the tenant space? and if you are using electric strikes the tenant will just turn the door knob to exit which would not require any other device to unlock the door. If the tenant space is the locked side of the door then additional requirements are needed. Sorry i do not have that code book in front of me, but I will look at it later today
 
Is it possible that the AHJ is concerned that you might be proposing fair safe strikes? A fail safe strike will unlock and unlatch during a power outage and the door may lose its fire rating (if it has one).
Be clear with the AHJ if you are changing the handset hardware making it more than the existing egress motions.
 
The AHJ's issue is most likely regarding emergency access into the building if it is understood that panic hardware is provided allowing occupant egress.

Private sector projects in So. Cal do not use 101, but our local AHJ always requires FA interface to auto unlock, a manual unlock at the FACP is required for high-rise applications.....
 
What jurisdiction is the project that 101 is the code of record? The code section referenced is pretty clear with these requirements. If you can get a hold of the Handbook, it includes nonmandatory annex material and explains the reasons behind some of the requirements.

It is important to know the occupancy classification of the particular project....the referenced section states: "Use of access controlled egress doors require specific occupancy chapter permission".

Sorry, but this section is too large to study at this time to come up with any more usefull info.
 
What are the strikes for specifically? Delayed egress, free egress, remote access?

If you install an electric strike on an external door with or without panic hardware you would need a RTE motion and the bypass. The fire alarm interface requirement may be an local thing in conjunction with NPFA 72, besides 101. I know that even if the doors allow free egress its required.
 
STHOMAS said:
The AHJ's issue is most likely regarding emergency access into the building if it is understood that panic hardware is provided allowing occupant egress.

Private sector projects in So. Cal do not use 101, but our local AHJ always requires FA interface to auto unlock, a manual unlock at the FACP is required for high-rise applications.....
Click to expand...

It shouldn't be about the access into the building (If it's fail secure) thats why they put the Knox Box on the outside. An inspector shouldn't have any issues with door strikes....Mag locks for sure..but not strikes. If it's a main egress / Fire route then all that should be required is a 1 handed operation. Lever sets, Emergency panic/crash bars should be no issue. As far as the request to exit, that should be a moot point since 99% of Access control installations do not use the RTE device to unlock doors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top