Re: Electric Lock choice

["Jackcsg" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> >"J. Sloud" <jsloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit dans le message
de
> >news: fgrpe1luvhd1adm2h7oufdaf0gi5fpuoqh@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> On 29 Jul 2005 18:53:11 -0700, bhnjr@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Not so different.  Maglocks aren't suited for high security
> applications on exterior doors anywhere.

I disagree with that statement. If you said electric strikes, I would agree.
Strikes offer NO, NONE, ZIP NOTTA, form of Access Control, period.
Physically dis-allowing access to a door, is what access control is all
about. Now I agree that there are very few individuals, and companies that
know how to correctly install a mag lock, but I also blame the AHJ's who
also have no clue about Maglocks either, or their correct disconnect means.
Anything, and I mean anything, that is electronically driven to de-energize
a maglock is incorrect right off the bat. Including touch bars, REX motions,
Timers, etc., anything that is powered to work, period. Only a manual
physical means of disconnect will be 100%, in 100% of any application.
(Along with an FACP interface).

  Although it's a common
> practice here.  If you have controlled egress (swipe a card to get out
> of a building), then there must be an approved emergency exit device
> such as a touch sense bar or a pressure sensitive maglock that will
> release after an audible alarm sounds for 20 seconds.

That can fail to work. This is were companies get in trouble. Don't relie on
anything electronically powered to always work correctly, period.

>
> I don't discuss techniques to compromise security systems here, so
> suffice to say, maglocks on exterior doors aren't a good idea.  The
> practice is so bad here, that some companies actually mount the
> maglock on the unsecured side of an inswinging door because they are
> too stupid or too lazy to know what a Z bracket is.

You said it: Too Stupid.