In the team discussion after, I explained my understanding that a double of an intervention after 1NT is for penalties because of the limited range and shape of this bid. Our team mates told me that they play a double for take-out in this position and therefore after a pass expect a re-opening double by opener on most hands. The more I have thought about this, the more attractive it seems. Had we been playing this on the actual hand I think we should still have got a penalty since after 2♦, now I must double (of course now for penalties) because it is now more likely partner had clubs with his spades.
What are the views generally on pass for a re-opening double after a response of 1NT and intervention? btw we play 1NT response 6-9 because we open 12-14 NT. Our team mates play EHAA!! mini NT, (don't laugh)I don't know their 1NT response range.
btw on another hand I opened a weak 2♠, LHO overcalled 3♣ partner doubled, intending it for take-out. We had not discussed this but I thought it was normal good bridge for a double of a pre-empt to be for penalties. As it happened it was the same auction with out team mates but the double here was for business (K9, KJ98, A54, A1097) We took the contract 1-off but worse that our opps who took it 2 off. Does anybody take a double of a weak 2 for take-out?

Help

A hand again from the Swiss pairs at Brighton. The competitive bidding against us was crazy but we didn't take advantage. It was:
S W N E
1♠ x 1NT 2♣
p 2♦ p 2♥
p p p