Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:
Technical Note (National Research Council of Canada. Division of Building Research), 1958-11-01
READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE.
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright
Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider. Pour communiquer directement avec un auteur, consultez la première page de la revue dans laquelle son article a été publié afin de trouver ses coordonnées. Si vous n’arrivez pas à les repérer, communiquez avec nous à PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca.
Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at
PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information.
NRC Publications Archive
Archives des publications du CNRC
For the publisher’s version, please access the DOI link below./ Pour consulter la version de l’éditeur, utilisez le lien DOI ci-dessous.
https://doi.org/10.4224/20358812
Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at
Dead-End Corridor Regulations
Brass, A. E.
https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits
L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB.
NRC Publications Record / Notice d'Archives des publications de CNRC:
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=919f6f74-720d-4050-b9b2-23e8dd481aa0 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=919f6f74-720d-4050-b9b2-23e8dd481aa0
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA
DIVISION OF BUILDING RESEARCH
ｾ
ｾｉ
FOR INTERNAL USE APPROVED BY NoB.R. CHECKED BYN B.R.
'Jr
E
C
lHI
Ii
II
CAlL
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
PREPARED BY A.E. Brass
PREPARED FOR Panel on Exits of the
Advisory Fire Group
DATE November 1958
SUBJECT
Dead-End Corridor Regulations
At the first meeting of the Panel on Exits of the Advisory Fire Group in October 1956, it was agreed that there were funda-mental gaps in the exit regulations of the National Building Code of Canada (1953), and that one of the items needing attention was the extant to which dead-end corridors should be permitted.
This was discussed further at the second meeting of the Panel in May 1957, and it was agreed that some suggestions should be
developed on this question and submitted to the members for their consideration at the next meeting.
The matter was investigated at the Division of Building Research and brought forward for discussion at the third meeting of the Panel in October 1957. The following is an outline of the argument presented for discussion at that time.
An investigation in 1935 of statistics of the causes of fire deaths (1) indicated that the greatest loss of life was due to inadequate exits and rapid spread of fire which cut off the exits. The importance of these factors is reflected in two types of regulations in bUilding codes: one requires that two separate and independent means of egress be provided from every area of a building so that should one exit become blocked during a fire, there will be an alternative route to safety for the occupants; and the other requires that the maximum travel distances to the exits be fixed according to considerations of type of occupancy, hazards and type of construction. These requirements are cardinal principles tor life safety in buildings and adherence to them is of utmost importance.
Nevertheless, in recent years code writers concerned with exit requirements have included in their regulations allowances for dead-end Gorridors of lengths from 20 ft to 40 ft, depending on the occupancy of the building, and it is difficult to determine
anything other than an arbitrary basis for the allowances selected. They could be based on economic reasons since the allowable dead-ends may necessitate fewer stairs in buildings of certain sizes,
- j Ｍｾ
2
-or provide f-or buildings larger than those possible with stairs at their maximum spacing but with no dead-ends. Another factor might be the provision of greater freedom to designers of buildings with regard to the placement of stairs.
Whether it is for these or other reasons, should some occupants of a bUilding be provided with two independent means of egress in the event of fire, while others have only one? And should pockets of any size be allowed where people can be trapped in the event of fire?
If it is generally agreed that the existing regulations concerning dead-end corridors in the National BUilding CQde of Canada (1953) are too restrictive and that some change should be made, could the problem not be solved by increasing the permissible travel distances to exits while maintaining the requirements for two separate and independent means of egress? Additional travel time to reach an exit appears to be a less critical consideration than the absence of an escape route to some occupants if their path to one exit becomes blocked.
It is interesting to note this same reasoning applied to the regulations for schools recently prepared by the Ontario Fire Marshal; they prohibit dead-end corridors but allow increased travel distances to exits (2).
It is the opinion of the writer, however, that any changes in the eXisting regulations should be made only after further detailed study of the problem reveals more factual information on how both fire and human beings will act under varying conditions in a variety of occupancies.
References
1. Design and Construction of BUilding EXits, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publication M 151, issued
Oct. 10, 1935.
2. Ontario Fire Marshal's Office, Fire Safety Design ReqUirements for Schools in Ontario. Martin S. Hurst, Deputy Fire
Marshal, The Fire Engineering Division, Fire Marshal's Office, Toronto, Ontario.
