Opening at bottom of guardrail - InspectionNews

dan orourke · #1 (**permalink**) 05-07-2007, 01:30 PM

..........

Jim Robinson · #2 (**permalink**) 05-07-2007, 01:44 PM

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.

wayne soper · #3 (**permalink**) 05-07-2007, 03:15 PM

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.

Rick Hurst · #4 (**permalink**) 05-07-2007, 04:34 PM

Wayne,

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

wayne soper · #5 (**permalink**) 05-07-2007, 04:51 PM

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

Jerry Peck · #6 (**permalink**) 05-07-2007, 06:29 PM

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.