Windows as means of escape

Builderfromhell

Windows in 1st floor habitable rooms in houses need to be designed so as to provide alternative means of escape. I am installing windows in a bedroom of a house being renovated. The windows comply with regulations in terms of size of opening and distance from floor to cill.
The problem is there is a danger the children could then easily open the window and climb out.
It is my understanding that by fitting a lock or other restraint to the opening windows we would then be in breach of building regs. as the window cannot easily be used as an escape in event of fire.
So it seems by making room safer for escape from fire I risk a child climbing out the window.
Any ideas??

gsxr1

Builderfromhell wrote: »

Windows in 1st floor habitable rooms in houses need to be designed so as to provide alternative means of escape. I am installing windows in a bedroom of a house being renovated. The windows comply with regulations in terms of size of opening and distance from floor to cill.
The problem is there is a danger the children could then easily open the window and climb out.
It is my understanding that by fitting a lock or other restraint to the opening windows we would then be in breach of building regs. as the window cannot easily be used as an escape in event of fire.
So it seems by making room safer for escape from fire I risk a child climbing out the window.
Any ideas??

In most new window I have dealt with lately. They had catches the only let them open a few inches. These could be unlatched easily for an adult and then open fully.

muffler

The 800mm from floor to bottom of opening is there to prevent kids from climbing out.

Im not being flippant here but if they are big enough to reach the handle then they are surely big enough to understand not to climb out of a window on the first floor.

MacTheKnife1

muffler wrote: »

The 800mm from floor to bottom of opening is there to prevent kids from climbing out.

Im not being flippant here but if they are big enough to reach the handle then they are surely big enough to understand not to climb out of a window on the first floor.

Is there anyway you can have a window on the 1st floor that does not have 80mm height? Can you put a bar accross the lower part of the window????

sydthebeat

all windows now are supposed to be fitted with a restrictor that restricts the opening to 100mm, and can be easily released...

this usually comes in the form of a hook type metal slip that catches a bar either on the window base of top... i have alos seen ones that have a button type restrictor on the top...


if your windows do not have these, they do not comply to regulations and should be removed....

sydthebeat

MacTheKnife1 wrote: »

Is there anyway you can have a window on the 1st floor that does not have 80mm height? Can you put a bar accross the lower part of the window????

the glazing can go lower, but the section of the window that opens shouldnt go below 800mm......

Quazzie

sydthebeat wrote: »

the glazing can go lower, but the section of the window that opens shouldnt go below 800mm......

I think I am right in saying that any glass below the 800mm is to be toughened glass.. Maybe Syd or Muffler can confirm this

muffler

Q2002 wrote: »

I think I am right in saying that any glass below the 800mm is to be toughened glass.. Maybe Syd or Muffler can confirm this

Yeah thats it. Of the top of my head I think the relevant code is BS6262 although there may be an Irish equivalent.

MacTheKnife1

muffler wrote: »

Yeah thats it. Of the top of my head I think the relevant code is BS6262 although there may be an Irish equivalent.

Ouch, my plans show a window which is just 400mm off the first floor, and it opens (via a latch which is 1100 mm high).

Looks like it is going to be moved!

muffler

MacTheKnife1 wrote: »

Ouch, my plans show a window which is just 400mm off the first floor, and it opens (via a latch which is 1100 mm high).

Looks like it is going to be moved!

Depends.

Is it a bedroom or inner room window?
Is it on ground floor or first floor?

Just to note as stated above that its the opening part of the window that has to be 800 - 1100mm from floor. The window (fixed glazing) itself can go right to the floor if necessary subject to safety glass being included.

Do-more

How wide is the opening supposed to be for a bedroom window?

I'm renting a house at the moment, it's a new build, we were the first occupants in June this year.

The window in smallest "bedroom" allows an opening of a maximum of 250mm wide. We don't use it as a bedroom at the moment, but I'm guessing that it can't legally be classifed as a bedroom. And the house should be considered a 3 bed rather than the 4 bed we're being charged for!

muffler

Min width is 450mm

MacTheKnife1

muffler wrote: »

Depends.

Is it a bedroom or inner room window?
Is it on ground floor or first floor?

Just to note as stated above that its the opening part of the window that has to be 800 - 1100mm from floor. The window (fixed glazing) itself can go right to the floor if necessary subject to safety glass being included.

Window is on 1st floor, bedroom.

Builderfromhell

sydthebeat wrote: »

all windows now are supposed to be fitted with a restrictor that restricts the opening to 100mm, and can be easily released...

this usually comes in the form of a hook type metal slip that catches a bar either on the window base of top... i have alos seen ones that have a button type restrictor on the top...


if your windows do not have these, they do not comply to regulations and should be removed....

Thanks for that.
I was not aware of this requirement and will now try to locate a restrictor. The window handle is too high for the kid to reach and the window opening is 800mm from floor. However, the client is still concerned that he could climb onto the deep windowboard, open the window and do his batman impression.

Quazzie

My sister done that except that she was sleepwalking. She was in hospital on her back after landing on concrete for about four months after it. Thats why I have real interest in this particular aspect of building design.

sydthebeat

Builderfromhell wrote: »

Thanks for that.
I was not aware of this requirement and will now try to locate a restrictor. The window handle is too high for the kid to reach and the window opening is 800mm from floor. However, the client is still concerned that he could climb onto the deep windowboard, open the window and do his batman impression.

well, you cannot legislate for that!

the opening of the window can be by means of a push button type... and if the kids is:
(a) able to reach the handle
(b) able to disconnect the restrictor
(c) tall enough to get onto the windowboard

he should stop thinking about batman and start thinking about girls!

you have to make sure YOU are covered builder... tell him its illegal to put lockable handles on the windows... if he does so himself after.. on his head be it!

imagine sitting in a court witness box saying the client was worried about his (possibly dead) sons batman antics so you decided to put lockable handles on the windows......!!??!!

muffler

Let him apply for an exemption. I can see and hear the roars of laughter in the BC office when the guys read the reason given.

Slig

This has always been a problem, During my time in the LA a house burned down killing 2 kids. it was found that a window restrictor had been retrofitted in place. I'm not going into details but those kids would be alive today if the windows were FULLY part M compliant.

However the chances of a child jumping out a window are probably higher than that of the house burning down. But the same child could just as easily climb a tree, car, wall etc and do the same thing.

I know that lockable handles are definately not allowed but remember that 800mm is the minimum, you can go up to 1100 (which is the height of a handrail) with the opening section if there is an issue.

muffler

The regs are more than adequate as they are. Christ almighty if people have problems with their kids behavior then they cant blame building regulations for it.

What next - paladine fencing along the top of the stairs to stop them climbing over it :eek:

Poor Uncle Tom

muffler wrote: »

...paladine fencing along the top of the stairs to stop them climbing over it :eek:

Interesting design angle there..:D

Agreed, If the children are old enough to be left unsupervised, they should be capable of understanding the behavioural basics of not climbing out windows.

Builderfromhell

Good humour guys.

We've decided to put a bouncy castle outside the window - permanently. What the hell - one at bottom of stairs too.:p

I understand from the above posts that a restrictor which can be easily opened by an adult or a fireman from outside is in fact mandatory.

sydthebeat

Builderfromhell wrote: »

Good humour guys.

We've decided to put a bouncy castle outside the window - permanently. What the hell - one at bottom of stairs too.:p

I understand from the above posts that a restrictor which can be easily opened by an adult or a fireman from outside is in fact mandatory.

builder...

part of the reg states:

"The opening section of the window should be[/SIZE]

secured by means of fastenings which are readily
openable from the inside and should be fitted
with safety restrictors. Safety restrictors can be
either an integral part of the window operating
gear or separate items of hardware which can be
fitted to a window at the time of manufacture or
at installation. Restrictors should operate so that
they limit the initial movement of an opening
section to not more than 100 mm. Lockable
handles or restrictors, which can only be
released by removable keys or other tools,

should not be fitted to window opening sections."
[/I]
read the whole reg here... see section 1.5.6
http://www.environ.ie/en/Publications/DevelopmentandHousing/BuildingStandards/FileDownLoad,1640,en.pdf

RKQ

This might help explain abit of the above to the layperson.
RKQ ESCAPE WINDOWS.pdf UK Building Reg notes.

I agree with Muffler, regarding unsupervised kids! An electric fence wire, a 12v battery..... guess the rest!:D

sydthebeat

RKQ...

Locks (with or without removable keys) and stays may be fitted to egress windows, subject to the stay being fitted with a release catch, which may be child resistant.

RKQ

Do-more wrote: »

How wide is the opening supposed to be for a bedroom window?

I'm renting a house at the moment, it's a new build, we were the first occupants in June this year.

The window in smallest "bedroom" allows an opening of a maximum of 250mm wide. We don't use it as a bedroom at the moment, but I'm guessing that it can't legally be classifed as a bedroom. And the house should be considered a 3 bed rather than the 4 bed we're being charged for!

Syd

Plain English is easy to understand - Safety restrictors can be either an integral part of the window operating gear or separate items of hardware which can be fitted to a window at the time of manufacture or at installation

The pdf is simply to answer a very common question, that constantly pops up on these pages.

sydthebeat

ah now.. no.. thats not what is stated on that document...


It clearly states that (as bolded above) "locks with removable keys may be fitted to egress windows".....

you differentiate between locks and stays in the first part, but only refer, in the second part, to stays being 'fitted with a release catch'...

im maybe suggesting that to a layperson they may read this document (presumabely its your own) as i have shown above..... not really a good situation to be in???...

just an opinion....

RKQ

sydthebeat wrote: »

im maybe suggesting that to a layperson they may read this document (presumabely its your own) as i have shown above..... not really a good situation to be in???...

Why presume that, its a 2007 UK building reg document, as clearly indicated.

District surveyor notes. Our Irish regulations are based on theirs and will follow no doubt, as the escape size has followed the UK. (No longer 550 x 800 or so!) Our regulations are based on British Standard codes. Just look at Document K & M.

I felt the drawings aided the laypersons visual understanding, as requested by Do-more.

Your quote of the TGD is correct, I didn't assume it was your document!

"Locks (with or without removable keys) and stays may be fitted to egress windows, subject to the stay being fitted with a release catch, which may be child resistant."

Just an opinion....

sydthebeat

i just presumed because it was titled "RKQ ESCAPE WINDOWS".....


i completely agree that the diagrams are more intrepretive than words.. but i was just afraid that someone might read it and think key-lockable windows were ok.. which of course they are not....

RKQ

Its title refers to my pdf notes - my UK build reg folder of my personal collection, (almost 650MB - must edit it down!)
Must refrain from posting from it in future, even if it is convenient. A picture tells a thousand words.

I will continue to answer off the top of my head.... it may be less confusing.

kitser

to sydthebeat and RKQ. this is a real contention point on the fire escape saga. the environ.ie doc differs in the wording, should as opposed to may.
i asked my window manufacturer what their take on this issue is.

they work off the may use, and do not fit child locks unless asked. they do not like the idea of fitting child locks from a fire safety point of view. i tend to agree with them. if you are trying to open a window that is fitted with any sort of child resistant stay, i should think that the catch might become quite difficult to undo if you are choking and blinded by heavy smoke, let alone the panic you'd be in.


we also still use keyed push lock handles, but don't leave the key in, and advise the customer of the hazards of locking the window during occupancy. people do like to lock windows when going away.

i offer child locks as an option, even though i don't like them as stated above.

and i think that the regulation was geared more towards new builds, and replacement of existing is only now starting to come under scrutiny.

my manufacturer is not a cowboy operation, and they have asked the questions, and have been told it is not compulsory. i wonder what the e.u. directive says, as the irish and the uk regulation will be based of this.

muffler

kitser wrote: »

i asked my window manufacturer what their take on this issue is...........they work off the may use, and do not fit child locks unless asked. they do not like the idea of fitting child locks from a fire safety point of view.

we also still use keyed push lock handles, but don't leave the key in, and advise the customer of the hazards of locking the window during occupancy.

i offer child locks as an option, even though i don't like them as stated above.


my manufacturer is not a cowboy operation

A lot of contradictions there my friend. In one sentence you state that you have had windows made for you while in another sentence you talk about giving advice to your customers.

Just for clarity could you confirm that you are in the "window business". Dont worry you wont get kicked off the site unless you try to promote a business or gain from posting here.

kitser

muffler
i am in the business, so no contradiction implied or intended. i will be asking a few more questions today. but to be honest, restrictions with fire escape are a bad idea. i have often turned down jobs because the potential customer wanted windows which would be a fire hazard - mock bay windows into small openings in the bedrooms, so i am concerned by compliance issues.

i'll post an update later mate

ps. in the business - more like self un-employed the way things are going out there.

sydthebeat

kitser wrote: »

1. if you are trying to open a window that is fitted with any sort of child resistant stay, i should think that the catch might become quite difficult to undo if you are choking and blinded by heavy smoke, let alone the panic you'd be in.


2 we also still use keyed push lock handles, but don't leave the key in, and advise the customer of the hazards of locking the window during occupancy. people do like to lock windows when going away.

3 i offer child locks as an option, even though i don't like them as stated above.

4 and i think that the regulation was geared more towards new builds, and replacement of existing is only now starting to come under scrutiny.

my manufacturer is not a cowboy operation, and they have asked the questions, and have been told it is not compulsory. i wonder what the e.u. directive says, as the irish and the uk regulation will be based of this.

1. its much easier to undo a catch that to try to break a double glazed unit

2. a push-button type lock is fine, but anything with a removable key is not. Did you ever query a client as to the reason they lock windows when not arround??? do your windows have handles on the external??

3. if you offer one with a removable key you are in breach of a legal regulation

4. replacement windows are specifically dealt with in the regulations.... 'thinking' they are just geared at new builds is incorrect.

kitser

i stand by statement that catches would be a very difficult if panic stricken, blinded by choking smoke. any sort of restraint on a fire exit is a contradiction in itself.

people feel more secure when windows are locked when on holiday. peace of mind. more so upstairs over a flat roof as an example.

i will still use whateverhandle i am supplied with. feck the regulation

no handles on the outside - a childish quip

sydthebeat

kitser wrote: »

i stand by statement that catches would be a very difficult if panic stricken, blinded by choking smoke. any sort of restraint on a fire exit is a contradiction in itself.

people feel more secure when windows are locked when on holiday. peace of mind. more so upstairs over a flat roof as an example.

i will still use whateverhandle i am supplied with. feck the regulation

no handles on the outside - a childish quip

that speaks for itself.....

muffler

kitser wrote: »

i stand by statement that catches would be a very difficult if panic stricken, blinded by choking smoke. any sort of restraint on a fire exit is a contradiction in itself.

people feel more secure when windows are locked when on holiday. peace of mind. more so upstairs over a flat roof as an example.

i will still use whateverhandle i am supplied with. feck the regulation

no handles on the outside - a childish quip

You are neither helping yourself or this forum with an attitude like that. This is the type of comments we dont want to see. If you feel bitter about something or other or you feel your opinion supersedes the statutory laws of this country then you need time to reflect.

I can help you a little here in that I am removing your access from this forum for a couple of days so you can have the time to reflect on your contributions and the way you intend to be part of a community here that gives their time voluntarily to help others by giving the best advice available which is in accordance with statutory requirements.

Mellor

kitser wrote: »

i stand by statement that catches would be a very difficult if panic stricken, blinded by choking smoke. any sort of restraint on a fire exit is a contradiction in itself.

people feel more secure when windows are locked when on holiday. peace of mind. more so upstairs over a flat roof as an example.

i will still use whateverhandle i am supplied with. feck the regulation

no handles on the outside - a childish quip

With an attitude like that, its a wonder you have any work.
"feck the regulation"
Thats a really pathetic comment, the reg is there to protect young children. Ignoring it is dangerous, but what the feck do you care, you saved €2 per unit.

bakerbhoy

My windows in the bedrooms of a bungalow have a catch that needs to be opened from two sides at once to open the window, nearly impossible for a child. My arch has told me they are against regs and will be removed before we move in ,handy at the mo for drying out plasterwork but would be a danger even for an adult in a situation.

MacTheKnife1

Are there regs concerning groundfloor windows. Can the bottom of the window be within 650 mm of the ground for example???

muffler

MacTheKnife1 wrote: »

Are there regs concerning groundfloor windows. Can the bottom of the window be within 650 mm of the ground for example???

Its not so much the bottom of the window (which can be any height of the floor) but more the bottom of the opening sash of the window that fire regs are applicable to.

There was a thread about this some time ago and if the window cill on the outside is less than 1400mm from the ground then the height of the sash (bottom) can be anything from 1mm to 1100mm off the floor.

muffler

This thread should help.

Monti Redux

muffler wrote: »

You are neither helping yourself or this forum with an attitude like that. This is the type of comments we dont want to see. If you feel bitter about something or other or you feel your opinion supersedes the statutory laws of this country then you need time to reflect.

I can help you a little here in that I am removing your access from this forum for a couple of days so you can have the time to reflect on your contributions and the way you intend to be part of a community here that gives their time voluntarily to help others by giving the best advice available which is in accordance with statutory requirements.

He does have a couple of valid point. The guidance (and bear in mind that it is guidance and not to be confused with Regulation) states that; “Lockable handles or restrictors, which can only be released by removable keys or other tools, should not be fitted to window opening sections.” . It does not say ‘shall not’ or ‘can not’ be fitted. England & Wales AD-K was recently updated to allow keyable handles “Also, it is now acceptable for locks (with or without removable keys) and child resistant stays to be provided on escape windows.” - NHBC Standards Extra August 2007. That decision would not have taken lightly and the precedent would almost certainly stand here. I was looking at a large house in Rathmichael last week and all windows were fitted with keyed locks. It wasn’t one of the smaller window companies that supplied the units either. FWIW I wouldn’t recommend the practice

The other valid point he has concerns opening windows with restrictors in a panic situation. I recently surveyed windows in one of the new blocks in Adamstown and the restrictor was typically fitted to the top of the sash on side-hinged casements. The lintel was at 2100 above FFL so the restrictor was >2000. Not at all easy for anybody much less then 5’10 to comfortable reach and operate.



This is a grey area.

Montgomery

Monti Redux

muffler wrote: »

This thread should help.

Up to a point. Mellors omnibus post is wrong on several points despite being a “sucker for for completeness of info”
His words not mine.

Montgomery

kitser

finally. someone can see where i'm coming from. have the regulators actually done field tests on restrictors in a fire situation.

anyone at home with child locks can do this little exercise.

1. put a blindfold on. - simulate dense smoke
2. tie a plastic bag around your head. - simulate dense smoke on breathing
3. spin around in a circle until dizzy to disorientate yourself

try to find the window and undo your child lock.

Poor Uncle Tom

Monti Redux wrote: »

Mellors omnibus post is wrong on several points

Can you explain that please, Monti.

From my reading of his points, it looks spot on.

smashey

Monti Redux wrote: »

Up to a point. Mellors omnibus post is wrong on several points despite being a “sucker for for completeness of info”
His words not mine.

Montgomery

I'd like you to back that up as well please.

sydthebeat

Monti Redux wrote: »

; “Lockable handles or restrictors, which can only be released by removable keys or other tools, should not be fitted to window opening sections.” . It does not say ‘shall not’ or ‘can not’ be fitted.

maybe you need to read the guideline again monti... it says 'should not'...
that means it should not have removable keys...
its readily acceptable that 'should not' means 'must not' in the guidelines. They use the phrase 'should not' to allow other solutions outside of what is proposed in the guidelines.

your UK reference is moot... we do not live in the Uk...

At the end of the day, handles should not be lockable by means of a removable key... full stop, end of story.

A restictor is required as part of the regs so they must be incorporated in order for the windows to be certified.... Thank god we do not allow window manufacturers to self-certify their work!!!!

RKQ

sydthebeat wrote: »

your UK reference is moot... we do not live in the Uk...

We live in the Republic thank God!
"Moot" is not really true considering our Building Regulations are a direct copy of the UK regs. (TGD L is slightly different but Document B - Fire - is based on British Codes of Practise. BS 9999 has just been revised - BS 9999 will supersede DD 9999, and the entire BS 5588 series)

Look at Documents K & M - exact copies of UK Doc K & M! - QED

I think to be fair Kitser & Monti Redux have a point and they are entitled to their opinion. This could be an interesting debate if negative comments were left out.

In fairness child restrictors at a height of 2m is crazy. I am constantly weary of getting my fingers stuck in them, approaching them like a Bomb desposal expert!

Common sense will prevail and we will follow the lastest UK Code of Practice , so look up the revised codes and follow "best" practice where possible. Their (UK) rules today will be ours tomorrow - as always.

Monti Redux

kitser wrote: »

finally. someone can see where i'm coming from. have the regulators actually done field tests on restrictors in a fire situation.

anyone at home with child locks can do this little exercise.

1. put a blindfold on. - simulate dense smoke
2. tie a plastic bag around your head. - simulate dense smoke on breathing
3. spin around in a circle until dizzy to disorientate yourself

try to find the window and undo your child lock.

Do that little exercise ??? Isn’t that what did for the bloke from INXS ?

I can see where you’re coming from but I wouldn’t agree with where you’re going. You don’t ignore regulations or best practice because its inconvenient for you or your customer doesn’t like it. If you are going to deviate from accepted norms then you had better have a very well referenced justification should you ever have the misfortune to end up in a coroners court.

Monti

Monti Redux

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

Can you explain that please, Monti.

From my reading of his points, it looks spot on.

He's ok on escape windows but confused on Guarding. Its another tricky subject - I don't know of a codified test to determine if a window is compliant with barrier loadings - but getting back to where he drifted off the track;

To state that the glazing must be toughened is wrong.

BS 6180 ‘Barriers in and about Buildings’ is the reference document.
“8.2.1 Glass Types
Laminated glass is a safety glass suitable for all barriers where the glass is used fully framed."
Para 8.6.4 goes on to note
The designer should select materials that will not break when the barrier is subjected to the normal design loads that may be applied and will not be penetrated at the required impact class. Since BS 6206 classifies toughened glass as a safety glass only for safe breakage when impact tested and does not classify it for resistance against penetration, the following recommendations are given as guidance for the selection of toughened glass:
class C to BS 6206 : 1981 (no penetration) min. 6 mm toughened glass;
class A to BS 6206 : 1981 (no penetration) min. 10 mm toughened glass.
Other types of safety glass, e.g. laminated glass, will normally be classified as a safety glass because of their resistance to penetration.”

Laminated glass although physically less strong then toughened glass offers better containment which is the essence of the barrier requirement. Going through 4mm toughened glass from 5 floors up and landing on small nuggets of glass isn’t ideal as I'm sure you'll agree.

To state that it must be fixed is also wrong.
“8.1.2
Where the barrier is or contains an opening window, the barrier should also be in accordance with this British Standard when the window is in the open position. When there is an unrestricted opening below the level of 800 mm a barrier or rail should be provided not less than 800 mm from the floor.”

An unrestricted opening requires a barrier. A restricted opening does not. As an example think of a tilt & turn window at 2100 high restricted to the tilt position. If this has suitable glass it will comply because it is only at the very top the opening will come close to 100mm. Below 1100mm the opening will be negligible and present no danger. No rail is required.

I have seen many instances where the architect has specified toughened safety glass in full-height windows and ended up getting two panes of 4mm toughened in units that can easily be 1.5m x 2.0m or even bigger. Scary when you are 4 or 5 floors up and consider that BS6180 recommends an absolute minimum of 6mm thick glass - and thats before you factor in wind load! To compound the situation if the glass is not marked (common enough for windows coming from god knows where over the last few years) an accurate risk assessment is not possible at a later stage.

Monti

Monti Redux

sydthebeat wrote: »

A restictor is required as part of the regs so they must be incorporated in order for the windows to be certified.... Thank god we do not allow window manufacturers to self-certify their work!!!!

I'm not arguing for no restictors. I'm just pointing out that some of those installed - and presumably certified by architects - are potential death traps.

Monti