Category Archives: Security/Doors

Loading
loading...

door (n.)

ICC Group A Monograph (April 2024)

Note 80 school-related entrance and egress concepts (Search term: “School”)

2024 Group A Proposed Changes to the I-Codes (October 2024)

Note 40 school-related entrance and egress concepts (Search term: “School”)

Doors have long since been a simple “opening” or “fenestration”.   Doors are “portals”; nodes on the geometry of the Internet of Small Things.  There are 100’s of thousands of these nodes on any single college, university or school district.  First costs run from $1000 per door in a classroom to $100,000 per door in hospitals with maintenance and operation costs commensurate with complexity of the hardware and software needed to maintain integration of the door with building security and energy systems.

We find the bulk of best practice identified in the catalogs of the following accredited standards developers for the United States construction markets:

ASTM International

Conflicting Requirements of Exit Doors

Standard Practice for Installation of Exterior Windows, Doors and Skylights

Standard Consumer Safety Specification for Child Safety Locks and Latches for Use with Cabinet Doors and Drawers

Repair Methods for Common Water Leaks at Operable Windows and Sliding Glass Doors

Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association

International Code Council

International Building Code Chapter 10:

Doors, Gates and Turnstiles

Chapter 24: Glass and Glazing

Accessibility Requirements (Referenced from ICC A117.1)

Energy Efficiency (Referenced from IECC)

IEEE Current Issues and Recent Research

National Fire Protection Association

Steel Door Institute

University of Michigan Design Guideline 4.7: Building Access Control

University of Michigan Electrical Division 28: Electronic Safety and Security

The US federal government and all 50-states adapt safety and sustainability concepts from the foregoing publishers; either partially or whole cloth.

Today at the usual hour we examine the moment in the standard of care for doors in education communities in the United States.   Join the colloquium with the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Standards Michigan Office Ann Arbor Michigan | 2723 South State Street Suite 150


K-12 School Security

CLICK ON IMAGE (Note that the link may move around quite a bit)

 

Clery Act

"What are you afraid of losing, when nothing in the world actually belongs to you." -- Marcus Aurelius

Security 300

I think every school needs a protection plan with a either police officer or certified armed security. - Wayne LaPierre

Today we run a status check on the stream of technical and management standards evolving to assure the highest possible level of security for education communities.  The literature expands significantly from an assortment of national standards-setting bodies, trade associations, ad hoc consortia and open source standards developers.  CLICK HERE for a sample of our work in this domain.

School security is big business in the United States.  A few years ago we could deal with physical security separately from cybersecurity.  Not so much anymore.  In today’s colloquium — essentially a survey module presenting a broad overview — we seek to understand product and interoperability standards for the following technologies:

Video surveillance: indoor and outdoor cameras, cameras with night vision and motion detection capabilities and cameras that can be integrated with other security systems for enhanced monitoring and control.

Access control: doors, remote locking, privacy and considerations for persons with disabilities.

As time permits, we will reckon with first cost and long-term maintenance cost, including software maintenance.

According to a report by Markets and Markets, the global school and campus security market size was valued at USD 14.0 billion in 2019 and is projected to reach USD 21.7 billion by 2025, at a combined annual growth rate of 7.2% during the forecast period.  Another report by Research And Markets estimates that the US school security market will grow at a compound annual growth rate of around 8% between 2020 and 2025, driven by factors such as increasing incidents of school violence, rising demand for access control and surveillance systems, and increasing government funding for school safety initiatives.

Noteworthy: The combined annual growth rate of the school and campus security market is greater than the growth rate of the education “industry” itself.


Education Community Safety catalog is one of the fast-growing catalogs of best practice literature.  We link a small sample below and update ahead of every Security colloquium.

Executive Order 13929 of June 16, 2020 Safe Policing for Safe Communities

Clery Act

Clery Compliance | 2024 Nova Southeastern University Public Safety Department

National Center for Education Statistics: School Safety and Security Measures

International Code Council

2021 International Building Code

Section 1010.1.9.4 Locks and latches

Section 1010.2.13 Delayed egress.

Section 1010.2.14 Controlled egress doors in Groups I-1 and I-2.

Free Access: NFPA 72 National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code

Free Access: NFPA 731 Standard for the Installation of Premises Security Systems

IEEE: Design and Implementation of Campus Security System Based on Internet of Things

APCO/NENA 2.105 Emergency Incident Data Document 

C-TECC Tactical Emergency Casualty Care Guidelines

Department of Transportation Emergency Response Guidebook 2016

NENA-STA-004.1-2014 Next Generation United States Civic Location Data Exchange Format

Example Emergency Management and Disaster Preparedness Plan (Tougaloo College,  Jackson, Mississippi)

Partner Alliance for Safer Schools

Federal Bureau of Investigation Academia Program

Most Dangerous Universities in America

Federal Bureau of Investigation: Uniform Crime Reporting Program

ICYMI: Guide to Campus Security

 


Security 100

Security 200

Security 400

Guide to Premises Security

School of Aristotle | Gustav Spangenberg

Managing capital‐intensive campus infrastructure embedded within a politically sensitive community presents challenges not present in private industry real assets. Differences in everything from department culture to annual facility use patterns mean that facility managers cannot implement the same safety approaches in all buildings.  Approaches must be scaled and tailored to the occupancy type and informed by the interconnectedness and the specifics of a given facility.  Accordingly, the original University of Michigan standards advocacy enterprise (see ABOUT) began following the development of safety concepts in both NFPA 730 and NFPA 731 with the release of the 2008 Edition.   Thereafter, it collaborated with trade associations and subject matter experts from other universities (notably Georgetown University and Evergreen State University) to advocate user-interest concepts in the 2011 revisions.

Since 2008, campus security issues have only become more complex technically; across an expanding minefield of sensitivities.   Since 2008 we have observed the emergence of about one-hundred new consensus products being developed by the same number of new trade associations and producers presenting campus security solutions.

NFPA 730 Guide to Premise Security is a consensus document that describes construction, protection, occupancy features, and practices intended to reduce security vulnerabilities to life and property.  Related document — NFPA 731 Standard for the Installation of Electronic Premises Security Systems covers the application, location, installation, performance, testing, and maintenance of electronic premises security systems and their components.   The first is a performance document; the second a prescriptive document for the construction, operation and maintenance of electrotechnologies that support premise security.

Public consultation on the 2023 revision closed January 5, 2022 however the NITMAM process permits additional comment at the 2023 NFPA Annual meeting in Las Vegas in June 2023.

The 2026 Edition is now open for public input until January 4, 2024.

Public Comment on the First Draft of the 2026 Edition will be received until January 3, 2025

As always, we encourage direct participation by user-interests supporting the education facility industry.   You may do so by CLICKING HERE.

It is never a bad idea to key in comments on your own but if you would like some insight into our advocacy vectors since 2008 you are welcomed to click in our periodic Risk and Public Safety colloquia during which time we pick through technical, policy and enforcement specifics.   We have been hammering on Chapters 11 and 12, Education and Healthcare Facilities, respectively; for five cycles.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

 

Issue: [10-3], [11-58], [14-44] and [16-127]

Category: Electrical, Telecommunications, Information & Communications Technology, Public Safety, Risk Management, #SmartCampus

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey, Richard Robben


More

Department of Homeland Security: K-12 School Security

National Campus Safety and Security Project

NFPA 730 2023 Public Input Report

NFPA 730 730_F2019_PMM_AAA_FD_PIresponses

NFPA 730_F2019_PMM_AAA_SD_PCresponses

ARCHIVE / NFPA 730 Guide to Premises Security

 

Operations Desk

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

Ingress

https://youtu.be/--o8EDKWOhM?si=Ez0ffMk4sMvCwkIJ

We have shouted from the mountaintops — beginning in the 2002 National Electrical Code and later in the International Building Code — that “ingress” concepts (the opposite of the canonical term “egress”; meaning the way INTO a building during an emergency) should become part of the vocabulary when exploring best practice concepts for security in education settlements.

Alas, so far without success.  Evidently, the term “ingress” has been appropriated by a variant — accessibility — which re-directs the discussion toward the American with Disabilities Act?

What about people who are not disabled who seek to enter a building?

We cite a 1981 study, sponsored by what is now the National Institute of Standards and Technology — Crowd ingress to Places of Assembly: Summary and Proceedings of an Experts’ Workshop –– to enlighten understanding how ingress is different from the term access.

We maintain this topic on all of our Security related colloquia; hosted on days that appear on our CALENDAR.  Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.

Entrance door to Standards Michigan Ann Arbor office

Means of Egress

 

 

Americans with Disabilities Act

U.S. Department of Justice

Following is the current text of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), including changes made by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-325), which became effective on January 1, 2009.

The ADA was originally enacted in public law format and later rearranged and published in the United States Code. The United States Code is divided into titles and chapters that classify laws according to their subject matter. Titles I, II, III, and V of the original law are codified in Title 42, chapter 126, of the United States Code beginning at section 12101. Title IV of the original law is codified in Title 47, chapter 5, of the United States Code. Since this codification resulted in changes in the numbering system, the Table of Contents provides the section numbers of the ADA as originally enacted in brackets after the codified section numbers and headings.

CHAPTER 126—EQUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES

 

 

Revolving Pedestrian Doors

Gone are the days when a door was just a door (or “opening”) — at least insofar as public safety expectations are  concerned.   As we explain in our School Security Standards post the pace of standardization in public safety management and technology has increased; driven by events.  Some of the risk management can be accomplished with integrated electrotechnology solutions that are complex and more expensive to design, build, operate and maintain.  Architects, electrical and information and communications technology professionals usually have to collaborate on the application of the technology owing to the blistering pace of cross-disciplinary integration.

The Builders Hardware Manufacturers Association (BHMI) is an ANSI accredited consensus standards developer for building access and egress technology standards that facility managers may see incorporated by reference deep in the architectural and electrical sections of construction contract specifications.    An example of how BHMA standards show up in enforceable contracts can be found in most master construction contracts in the education facility industry.*on Page 38 Master Construction Contract

The front door to the BHMA public commenting facility is linked below:

BHMA Standards Home Page

No drafts have been released for public consultation at this time; however we maintain the BHMA catalog on our daily scan of building construction standards.

We always encourage direct participation in the BHMA standards development process by facility managers and those with oversight on campus security.  You may obtain an electronic copies of any of the foregoing from MTierney@kellencompany.com and send comments to the same (with copy to psa@ansi.org).

All education facility security standards can be discussed any day at our daily 11 AM Eastern time teleconference.  We also set aside one hour every month to review the status of the rapidly evolving “fabric” of school security standards.  See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; always using the same login credentials and always open to everyone.

Issue: [19-52]

Category: Architectural, Electrical, Facility Asset Management, Telecommunication, Public Safety, #SmartCampus, Risk Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jim Harvey. Jim Vibbart

Source: ANSI Standards Action

* See Page 38: Master Construction Specifications (Samples) (E.729) : Note the requirement to “Use date of standard in effect as of Bid date”.  Standards  in this space are moving quickly, and integrate with other electrotechnology standards.   It is an uphill battle for architects, engineers, specifiers and contractors to keep pace with them.  Compliance authorities usually keep pace with them, however, because the compliance interest is very strong in all standards development committees and compliance revenue originates from enforcing them.


LEARN MORE:

 

Report: Revolving Door Usage

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

Real Time Door Security System With Three Point Authentication

 

Real Time Door Security System With Three Point Authentication

 

N. S. Vinoth Kumar – Lakshmi Narayanan K – Bharathi V – Naresh R

College of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai

Vasim Babu M

KKR & KSR Institute of Technology and Sciences, Vinjanampadu, Andhra Pradesh

 

Abstract:  A smart way to solve the common problem of conventional door-locking system is proposed using conventional lock key methodology and it can be cloned and used by anyone. The proposed system is to make a secure door lock security system with two factor authentications. The user has to use Radio Frequency Identification tag. The tag’s data will be saved in a database. When the tag is read by the Radio Frequency Identification reader, the user has to input a pass code. After the pass code is entered, the user will receive a One-time password on his mobile device to unlock the door. The biggest advantage of proposed system is that the introduction of two factor authentication to gain the access to the door, which makes it more secure.

 

Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
Standards Michigan
error: Content is protected !!
Skip to content