Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    dan orourke's Avatar
    dan orourke Guest

    Default Opening at bottom of guardrail

    Last edited by dan orourke; 01-02-2008 at 08:21 AM.
    Certified Master Inspector CMI

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    1,222

    Default Re: Opening at bottom of guardrail

    I believe that the 4" spacing came about to prevent babies from getting their heads stuck between the guardrail and the floor. It also is to keep kids from falling through, but if that were the only basis the spacing probably would have stayed at the larger size.

    Jim Robinson
    New Mexico, USA

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,822

    Default Re: Opening at bottom of guardrail

    Rule of Thumb, If a 4" ball can roll through it, over it, under it, the child will follow the ball. I used to throw a ball out the front door whenever my X walked by. That eventually worked, but took a little finesse.


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Rockwall Texas
    Posts
    4,517

    Talking Re: Opening at bottom of guardrail

    Wayne,

    If we understand you correctly, she went for the bigger balls.


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,822

    Default Re: Opening at bottom of guardrail

    OH YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I think they were made in TEXAS! HAHA Good one!!


  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Ormond Beach, Florida
    Posts
    25,317

    Default Re: Opening at bottom of guardrail

    In Florida, first in South Florida, then all of Florida, the bottom rail had a maximum height of 2" above the floor.

    This was to keep bottles from rolling out from balconies and under the railing bottom.

    This happened on numerous occasions (drunken students on spring break) so that was added to the South Florida Building Code many years ago.

    It made it into the 2001 Florida Building Code, but did not make it into the 2004 Florida Building Code.

    It's not in the 'I'-codes either.

    Thus, 4" is the limitation.

    I believe they found that a typical 2 year old could squeeze into an opening larger than 4", then get stuck, sometimes not being able to get out. Once the opening size was reduced to 4", the 'typical' 2 year old could not squeeze themselves into the opening. However, a 'smaller then typical' 2 year old still can get stuck in there, so the 4" dimension is not a fail safe feature, it only covers 'the large majority' of small children that age.

    Jerry Peck, Construction / Litigation Consultant
    Construction Litigation Consultants, LLC ( www.ConstructionLitigationConsultants.com )
    www.AskCodeMan.com

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •