Magnetic Locks vs. Fail-Secure Hardware for Access Control

Magnetic locks are common in commercial access control, but they are usually not our first choice for a standard latching door. A maglock requires continuous power to remain secure and introduces release, egress and fire-alarm coordination that may be unnecessary when positive-latching electrified hardware can control the opening.

Avenger Security generally prefers fail-secure electric strikes, electrified locksets or motorized latch-retraction exit hardware for typical commercial doors. Magnetic locks remain appropriate for selected special applications when the approved design, listed equipment and authority having jurisdiction permit them.

How a magnetic lock works

A magnetic lock uses an energized electromagnet and an armature plate to hold the door closed. Most access-control maglocks are fail-safe: when power is removed, the lock releases.

Fail-safe behavior supports release during a power interruption, but it also means the door is no longer secured by the maglock. The complete opening may still have separate mechanical or fail-secure hardware depending on the approved design.

Why maglocks add design complexity

A standard positive-latching door can often be controlled at the latch or exit device. Adding a maglock may require additional listed release devices, wiring, power coordination, signage or fire-alarm interfaces based on the occupancy and adopted code.

The permitted arrangement depends on the door, occupancy, path of egress and approved plans. It is not accurate to apply one release method to every maglocked door.

Free egress must be preserved

Occupants must have the required means of egress. On a standard mechanically free-egress opening, a person should be able to operate the lever or crash bar and leave without depending on software, a credential or an access-control request-to-exit sensor as the sole unlocking method.

A request-to-exit device is commonly used to monitor egress and suppress a forced-door alarm when someone leaves. It should not be treated as the only means occupants depend on to unlock and exit from a door that is intended to provide mechanical free egress.

Door-position and forced-door monitoring

Every controlled opening should be evaluated for a door-position switch. The controller needs to know whether the door actually opened, closed, was forced or remained propped beyond the allowed time.

Door-position and request-to-exit events create a useful audit trail and allow door-forced and door-held-open notifications to be configured. A reader and lock without door monitoring provide limited information after an incident.

Preferred fail-secure alternatives

For many standard commercial openings, positive-latching fail-secure hardware provides a simpler security arrangement while retaining mechanical egress from the protected side.

• Fail-secure electric strikes: The latch is released when access is granted, while the exterior remains secure during a power loss.
• Electrified locksets: The lock controls access while maintaining the required inside operation.
• Motorized latch retraction: Appropriate exit-device hardware retracts the latch for authorized entry while preserving crash-bar egress.
• Electrified trim or handles: The outside trim is controlled without defeating the mechanical exit device.

The correct hardware depends on the door and frame material, latch, fire rating, exit device, closer, handing and condition of the opening.

Maglocks in controlled-egress applications

Controlled egress is a specialized arrangement used in certain occupancies and approved situations. It should not be confused with ordinary access control.

For Austin projects where controlled egress is approved, Avenger Security follows the arrangement accepted by Austin Fire Engineering and the project plans. That may include a fail-safe magnetic lock combined with fail-secure positive-latching hardware, free egress by crash bar where required, and limitations on the number of controlled-egress doors in an exit path.

For the controlled-egress configurations we have coordinated with Austin Fire Engineering, the maglock is not provided with battery backup so it releases on loss of power. The fail-secure hardware can continue to secure entry while occupants retain the approved mechanical means of egress.

These project-specific directions should not be treated as a universal rule for every jurisdiction or maglock. The final arrangement must follow the approved plans and AHJ requirements.

Fire alarm and power coordination

Where the adopted code or approved design requires release on a fire-alarm signal, the interface should use listed equipment and be coordinated with the licensed fire-alarm contractor. Power supplies, relays and wiring must be selected for the required function.

Access control should not be connected casually to a fire alarm output. The sequence of operations, supervision, reset behavior and failure mode should be documented and tested.

Fire-department key access

A Knox Box or other fire-department key-access arrangement does not replace compliant egress or proper lock release. The key provided for emergency access should operate the opening as intended under the approved design.

Door hardware, access control, fire alarm and fire-department access should be reviewed as one coordinated opening rather than as unrelated components.

Choose hardware after surveying the door

Before specifying a lock, inspect the door, frame, latch, exit hardware, closer, fire label, cable pathway and available power. Repairing a dragging or misaligned door may be necessary before electrified hardware can operate reliably.

Read our fail-safe versus fail-secure guide or our commercial access control planning guide for more information.