EN 1125 Panic plunger rods may be withdrawn in the base area for glass doors by breaking the glass and/or by skilful wire feeding, and were therefore inadmissible in combination with burglary protection.
As a solution to this dilemma, the use of shatter-proof glass made of polycarbonate or the use of an electrically lockable panic bar is offered.
Originally, the glass industry and also testing institutes refused to test polycarbonate glass.
Justification: The Plexiglas proportion contained oils that give off extreme smoke in fire protection tests. In addition, polycarbonate glass would be 2-3 times more expensive than standard fire protection glass, and is therefore not taken into consideration.
Information
In 2015, Schüco tested such a glass on an ad hoc basis such and the smoke development was limited.
The use of polycarbonate-glass has since been tested up to RC2 and is admissible.
EN 179 RC2
Here, polycarbonate glass or a non-transparent filling must anyway be used.
EN 1125 RC2 - Variant 1
Use of polycarbonate glass or non-transparent filling.
EN 1125 RC2 - Variant 2
The Schüco EVT panic bar was added to the programme as an alternative. This item, which can be used simultaneously as emergency exit protection, cannot be defeated by the aforementioned tricks (wires through the base or through the glass) due to the electrical barrier and so it is permissible for RC2.
Also to be noted in addition
According to the drawings KM 05.15 from Z-6.20-1888 (Schüco production catalogue 3-1.1 07.2016) and KM 05.16 from Z-6.20-1888 (Schüco production catalogue 3-1.1 07.2016) for single-leaf doors, the lower door rebate is made extremely narrow (3.5 mm inside and/or 4.0 mm outside) and in this way the door element is secured.
