F33 - Detention and Correctional Facilities

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for corrections administration officials is the resistance of security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities to certain types of physical attack that it is reasonable to expect in the field. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying a level of physical security for anchor systems used to install fixed detention hollow metal vision systems and door assemblies.  
4.2 These test methods are not intended to measure resistance to attack by corrosive agents, high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a vision system to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks, fire extinguishers, or tables; hand guns up to and including the .44 magnum; and fires started by using mattresses, books, and similar flammable materials.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of this standard is to provide detailed test methods that approximate the levels of abuse to which it is possible that vision system and door assembly anchor systems become subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to give ensurance of protection to the public, to prison administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves in the event of such attack.
Note 1: It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventive maintenance programs to enable hollow metal vision systems to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover anchor systems used for the installation of fixed detention hollow metal vision systems and door assemblies of various materials and types of construction. These anchor systems are used to install fixed hollow metal vision systems and door assemblies in wall openings in detention and correctional institutions designed to incarcerate inmates.  
1.2 Anchor systems individual components investigated under these test methods include detention security hollow metal frames, frame anchoring, security glazing, panels, and removable glazing stops.  
1.3 These test methods are designed to test the capability of anchor systems used to install a fixed detention hollow metal vision system or door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape; to limit or control access to unauthorized or secured areas; and prevent passage of contraband.  
1.4 These test methods apply primarily to anchor systems used to install detention hollow metal vision systems or door assemblies between secure areas generally found inside a detention/correctional facility such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports. These test methods are applicable to anchor systems used to install vision systems and door assemblies other than hollow metal, provided testing and reporting procedures are followed.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The fire performance of a material or product is affected by a combination of its fire-test-response characteristics. Two of the most commonly determined fire-test-response characteristics of cushioning materials are the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D3675, and the specific optical density of smoke, in accordance with Test Method E662.  
5.2 Cushioning materials used in upholstery applications are potentially exposed to leaching of the active ingredients due to (1) water solubility of the treating agents or (2) exposure to high humidity.  
5.3 In view of the importance that the fire performance of the cushioning materials used in upholstery applications remain constant throughout their intended service life, this test method provides a means to test for the potential change in two fire-test-response characteristics due to leaching.
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method covers a procedure for leaching cushioning materials with water and determining changes in two specific fire-test-response characteristics: (1) the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D3675, and (2) the specific optical density of smoke generated, in accordance with Test Method E662.  
1.2 In view of the wide variation in potential service conditions, it is likely that results of this leaching test will not give a direct correlation with service performance for all applications. However, the test method yields comparative data on which to base judgments as to expected service of cushioning materials and is useful in research and development work.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.4 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific precautionary statements, see Section 7.  
1.6 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The information presented provides the user with guidance on identification of test methods, and related documents, which are potentially useful to determine fire-test-response characteristics of upholstery products, and the materials of which they are made, present inside detention cells, in detention and correctional facilities. Some information is given about every standard included, so as to allow a judgment as to the potential usefulness of the original method.  
5.2 The detention environment has some unique features which potentially require the use of modifications of standard test methods or the application of particular techniques. Some guidance to that effect is also presented.
SCOPE
1.1 This is a fire-test-response guide.  
1.2 This guide is intended to provide guidance for the selection of test methods that are applicable to determining fire-test-response characteristics of upholstered furniture items contained within a detention cell.  
1.3 This guide is intended for use by those interested in assessing the fire properties of the upholstery products and their component materials or composites, within cells and other areas (such as isolation lounges) of detention and correctional occupancies.  
1.4 This guide includes standard test methods promulgated by ASTM, NFPA, Underwriters Laboratories, trade associations and government agencies and other proposed test methods. It does not include industrial materials specification tests. The guide indicates some means by which modifications of standard test methods lead to potential achievement of certain testing goals.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to regarded as standard; see IEEE/ASTM SI 10 for further details. The units given in parentheses are for information only. Some individual standards referenced use inch-pound units for referee decisions.  
1.6 This guide contains four types of test methods, namely: (1) generic small-scale methods, (2) specific applications of small-scale test methods to particular products or composites of products, associated with upholstery items, (3) real-scale test methods where actual upholstery products are exposed to heat or flame, and (4) guides explaining the concepts involved with room-scale testing.  
1.7 The main fire-test-response characteristics investigated in this guide are: ignitability, ease of extinction, flame spread, heat release, smoke obscuration and toxic potency of smoke.  
1.8 This guide measures and describes the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.9 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.11 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method provides a means to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including the time to sustained flaming and the heat release rate, of composites exposed to a prescribed initial test heat flux in the cone calorimeter apparatus, after they have been vandalized in a prescribed manner, to expose the filling material.  
5.2 It is clearly impossible to predict the manner in which a mattress or furniture will be vandalized. The objective of this test method is to develop data indicating the effect of violating the integrity of the fabric (or the fabric plus interliner composite) protection and exposing the padding to the source of heat (see Appendix X3).  
5.3 Quantitative heat release measurements provide information which is useful for product design and product development, for mattresses or furniture destined for correctional occupancies.  
5.4 Heat release measurements provide useful information for product development by giving a quantitative measure of specific changes in fire performance caused by component and composite modifications. Heat release data from this method will not be predictive of product behavior if the product will not spread flame over its surface under the fire exposure conditions of interest.  
5.5 The use of test specimens simulating vandalism allows the investigation of the variation in response between the system as designed by the manufacturer and the way the system is occasionally present in actual use, with the filling material exposed to the incident energy.  
5.6 This test method allows alternative strategies to be employed for producing a product (mattress or upholstered furniture) with the required fire-test-response characteristics for the scenario under consideration.  
5.7 Limitations:  
5.7.1 The test data are invalid if any of the events in 5.7.1.1 or 5.7.1.2 occur.
5.7.1.1 Explosive spalling.
5.7.1.2 The specimen swells sufficiently prior to ignition to touch the spark plug or swells up ...
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method is designed for use to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including ignitability and heat release rate, from composites of mattresses or furniture, or correctional facilities, which have been vandalized in a prescribed manner to expose the filling material, by using a bench scale oxygen consumption calorimeter.  
1.2 This test method provides for measurements of the time to sustained flaming, heat release rate, peak and total heat release, and effective heat of combustion at a constant radiant initial test heat flux of 35 kW/m2. See 5.7 for limitations.  
1.3 The apparatus used in this test method is also capable of determining heat release data at different initial test heat fluxes.  
1.4 The specimen is oriented horizontally and a spark ignition source is used.  
1.5 All fire-test-response characteristics are determined using the apparatus and the procedures described in Test Method E1354.  
1.6 The tests are done on bench-scale specimens combining the mattress or furniture outer layer components. Frame elements are not included.  
1.7 The vandalism is simulated by causing a prescribed cut on the outer layer of the composite, deep enough to expose the filling material to the incident radiation.  
1.8 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.9 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of sliding devices used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to devices for sliding door assemblies.  
4.2 These test methods evaluate the resistance of a sliding door assembly to attacks using battering devices, prying devices, smoke, and fire. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a sliding device under simulated operating conditions. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of the device subjected to attack by chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack. These test methods do not measure the resistance or performance of the device when subjected to environmental elements such as humidity, temperature, rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements may be a factor the manufacturer should be consulted for proper application.  
4.3 The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which devices are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.  
4.4 Preventative maintenance programs shall be provided in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation to enable sliding device assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.  
4.5 These test methods do not measure the performance or cycle life of the local or remote mechanical emergency release mechanism, or both, due to their design variables and low user requirements.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault, smoke, and fire conditions of sliding device assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. These test methods give an indication of the performance characteristics of devices in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention sliding devices perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates and to delay and frustrate escape attempts and resist vandalism. However, these test methods do not address door construction. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door assemblies shall be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F1450.  
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for administration officials is security of barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to identify the security levels for ventilation grilles mounted within these barriers.  
4.2 The purpose of these tests is to approximate levels of abuse to which grilles will potentially be subjected in the field, and to provide assurance of protection to the public, facility administrative personnel, and inmates.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of ventilation grilles used in secure areas, including detention and correctional facilities. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of specimen grilles and mounting systems. It is recognized that, in order to meet the intent of these test methods, ventilation grilles must be compatible with the level of performance require by Test Methods F2322.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to ensure that security ventilation grilles meet minimum performance levels to control the passage of unauthorized materials into secure areas, to confine inmates, to resist vandalism, and to delay or frustrate escape, or both. It is also the responsibility of the user of these test methods to insure that the grille selected is appropriate, based on relevant regulatory, health, and safety concerns and requirements. Such concerns include, but are not limited to, injury and suicide avoidance. These test methods do not quantify such concerns.  
1.3 Take care to provide access to return and exhaust ducts for cleaning as required by NFPA 90A. If access cannot be provided though an interstitial space behind walls or ceiling, the use of filter grilles needs to be considered as an option. When filter grilles are provided, filters shall have a minimum UL-900 class 2 rating, and a filter replacement program needs to be in place at the facility.  
1.4 Airflow performance shall be catalogued in accordance with ASHRAE 70–91. Manufacturer’s catalog data must include grade level achieved.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The predictable and reliable performance of detention glazing used in detention and correctional facilities is a major concern. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security to glazing used in window and door assemblies based upon objective tests which can be consistently duplicated.  
4.2 These test methods identify four security grades, corresponding to the four security grades established in Test Methods F1450. The intent is to establish a comparable level of performance for opening assemblies which incorporate detention glazing in conjunction with window and door assemblies. Test methods for detention glazing differ in sequencing a variety of attack tools and temperatures.  
4.3 These test methods evaluate the resistance of detention glazing to attacks using blunt and sharp impact devices and fire. These test methods evaluate the performance of glazing in hot and cold environments. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of glazing subjected to attack by ballistics, chemical agents, explosives or other extreme methods of attack. Where such elements are a factor, consult the manufacturer.  
4.4 The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which detention glazing is subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The desired result of these test methods is to provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.  
4.5 Detention and correctional facility administrative staff are encouraged to provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable detention glazing assemblies to function as intended.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods, including a fire test response method, cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of detention glazing used in window and door assemblies in detention and correctional facilities; thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of detention glazing in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered except as otherwise included in this test method.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention glazing performs at or above minimum acceptable levels to restrict inmate passage to unauthorized areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts and to resist vandalism.  
1.3 Tools defined in these test methods are representative of similar tools or materials, which may become available to inmates within the secure perimeter of detention and correctional facilities, and which could be used to inflict similar product damage.  
1.4 These test methods should not be used to establish or confirm the absolute prevention of forced entries or exits. These test methods define five factors (tool, temperature, techniques, time, and number of impacts) used to determine resistance to defined attacks.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values in stated parentheses are for information only.  
1.6 In these test methods, the specimens are subjected to one or more specific sets of laboratory test conditions. If different test conditions are substituted or the end-use conditions are changed, it is not always possible by or from these test methods to predict changes in the physical attack, or fire-test-response characteristics measured, or both; therefore, the results are valid only for the physical attack, or fire-test-exposure conditions, or both, described in these test methods.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, a...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for prison administrative officials is security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies.  
4.2 The construction and size of test doors and all hardware components are representative of the application under investigation, and are the same construction and size throughout all of the tests.  
4.3 These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a door assembly subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a door assembly to violent attacks using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables; by handguns up to and including .44 magnum, UL-752 Level 3; by prying devices; by devices used to deform the door and render it inoperable; and by fires started by using mattresses, books, and other flammable materials.  
4.4 The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which door assemblies are potentially subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide insurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.  
4.5 It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for mechanical tests, simulated service test, and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies of various styles and types of construction for use in wall openings designed to incarcerate inmates in detention/correctional institutions.  
1.2 These test methods test the capability of a swinging door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape, to limit or control access to unauthorized or secure areas, and to resist common types of vandalism.  
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to detention door assemblies to and from secure areas generally found inside detention/correctional facilities, such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports.  
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

ABSTRACT
These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of various types and shapes of steels designated for use in detention and correctional facilities as fixed barriers to prevent egress and to control passage. These test methods are designed to identify levels of physical security for openings such as fixed and operable exterior and interior windows, bar gratings, grilles for mechanical ducts, and so forth in walls that enclose or separate secure areas. Drop-weight test, cutting test, deflection test, and hardness test shall be performed to meet the requirements prescribed.
SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities are a major concern for their administrative officials. These test methods are designed to identify levels of physical security for openings such as fixed and operable exterior and interior windows, bar gratings, grilles for mechanical ducts, and so forth in walls that enclose or separate secure areas.  
4.2 These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of these barriers to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks or tables, and so forth to bend or break the steel bars and to surreptitious attacks by cutting/abrading the steel bars over prolonged periods of time using handheld grit-type cutting/abrading media such as tungsten carbide rod saws. External attacks and attacks by corrosive agents and other means not typically available to inmates are not addressed in this standard.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which these physical security barriers will potentially be subjected in the correctional/detention facility. The desired result of its use is to help provide a degree of assurance of protection to the public, facility personnel, and inmates.  
4.4 It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administrators provide for adequate training, supervision, regular inspection, and preventive maintenance programs to enable the barriers to function as intended throughout their expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of various types and shapes of steels designated for use in detention and correctional facilities as fixed barriers to prevent egress and to control passage.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that opening assemblies such as detention security windows, grilles, bar grating, and other physical barriers incorporating steel bars perform at or above minimum acceptable levels for control of passage to unauthorized or secure areas, for confinement of inmates and to delay or frustrate escape attempts. To meet the intent of these test methods, opening assembles must perform to grade requirements shown in Tables X1.1 and X1.2 in Appendix X1.  
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to the steels used as essential components of detention security windows, grilles, bar grating, and so forth, in opening assemblies enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.  
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The SI values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.5 This standard updates and combines two previous standards, ASTM Specifications A627 – 95 and A629 – 94, establishing new security grades and time durations.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardizatio...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of hinges used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to hinges for swinging door assemblies.  
4.2 These test methods evaluate the effect on hinges of battering attacks on the door simulating assault conditions as well. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a hinge under simulated normal operation. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of a hinge to attack by the following: chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack, such as direct impact or manipulation on the hinges or to environmental elements such as rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements are a potential factor, consult the manufacturer.  
4.3 The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse conditions and normal operating conditions to which hinges are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. These test methods attempt to do this through the different grade levels associated with cycle and impact testing. The desired result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operating performance characteristics and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of hinges used in swinging door assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. These types of hinges are described in detail in 3.1.6, 3.1.9, and 3.1.22. Thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of hinges in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions which have a potential impact on performance characteristics are not considered.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention hinges (reference to hinges is inclusive of a continuous hinge) perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts, and to resist vandalism and assault conditions. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door, frame and lock assemblies must be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F1450 and F1577.  
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.  
1.4 Consult NFPA 80 for Fire Doors & Windows concerning hinge requirements on fire doors.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for corrections administration officials is the resistance of security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities to certain types of physical attack that it is reasonable to expect in the field. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying a level of physical security for fixed detention hollow metal vision systems.  
4.2 These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a vision system subjected to attack by corrosive agents, high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a vision system to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks, fire extinguishers, or tables; hand guns up to and including the .44 magnum; and fires started by using mattresses, books, and similar flammable materials.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of this standard is to provide detailed test methods that approximate the levels of abuse to which it is possible that vision systems become subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to give assurance of protection to the public, to prison administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves in the event of such attack.  
4.4 It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover fixed detention hollow metal vision systems of various materials and types of construction. These fixed hollow metal vision systems are used in wall openings in detention and correctional institutions designed to incarcerate inmates.  
1.2 Frame assemblies investigated under these test methods include individual components including detention security hollow metal frames, frame anchoring, security glazing, panels, and removable glazing stops.  
1.3 These test methods are designed to test the capability of a fixed detention hollow metal vision system to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape; to limit or control access to unauthorized or secured areas; and prevent passage of contraband.  
1.4 These test methods apply primarily to detention hollow metal vision systems between secure areas generally found inside a detention/correctional facility such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports. These test methods are applicable to vision systems other than hollow metal, provided testing and reporting procedures are followed.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 This specification provides five test methods suitable for assessing the safety and performance characteristics of cantilevered steel bunks for detention and correctional facilities.  
1.2 These test methods address impact from the top of the bunk, the application of a static force from the top, sides, in various directions, and a force applied from the bottom of the bunk.  
1.3 The forces applied simulate those that are foreseeable from abuse by up to two individuals.  
1.4 The tests are intended to be used to aid in identifying the appropriate level of physical security associated with various configurations of cantilevered bunk design.  
1.5 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for administrative officials is the security of barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for walls which enclose or separate secure areas. This does not apply to the passage of contraband.  
4.2 These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a wall subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a wall to violent attacks by sustained manpower using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables, and by handguns up to and including .44 magnum. Attacks from the outside and fire resistance ratings are not addressed in this standard.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which walls will potentially be subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide assurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.  
4.4 It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable walls to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of walls designed to incarcerate inmates in detention and correctional institutions. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of two sample fixed barriers side-by-side, one with no openings and one equipped with a representative penetration in accordance with the American Correctional Association (ACA) standard for clear view area of 3 ft2  (0.279 m2), 12 in. (305 mm) wide by 36 in. (914 mm) high.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention security walls perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage of unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts, and to resist vandalism. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, opening assemblies within these walls must be compatible with the level of performance required by: Test Methods F1450, F1592, and F1643.  
1.3 These test methods apply to walls enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.  
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values given in parentheses are approximate and for information only.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of locks used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to locks for swinging door assemblies.  
4.2 These test methods evaluate the resistance of a lock to attacks using battering devices, prying devices, and fire. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a lock under simulated operating conditions. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of a lock subjected to attack by chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack. These test methods do not measure the resistance or performance of the device when subjected to environmental elements such as rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements may be a factor, the manufacturer should be consulted for proper application.  
4.3 The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which locks are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The desired result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.  
4.4 It is recommended that the detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of locks used in swinging door assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. Thus, they give only an indication of the performance characteristics of locks in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention locks perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, and to delay and frustrate escape attempts and resist vandalism. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door and frame assemblies must be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F1450.  
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Electric security fences, in view of their high-deterrent impact, are a safe method to reduce security costs or enhance existing security. They are deployed in a wide variety of environments and geographies. In particular, electric security fences are used to decrease the need for security guards and other security systems.  
4.2 This practice provides information to users and manufacturers of electric security fences, filling a void.  
4.3 International standards exist at the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the British Standards Institution (BSI) (see Section 2) that cover some aspects of these systems.  
4.4 A standard issued by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) (UL 69) covers electric-fence controllers to be used on lighting or line circuits in accordance with the National Electrical Code, NFPA 70. However, UL 69 covers specifically electric-fence controllers used only for the control of animals. Its requirements cover portable and permanently mounted electric fence controllers with peak-discharge or sinusoidal-discharge output for indoor or outdoor use, including battery operated controllers intended to operate from battery circuits of 42.4 V or less, line-operated controllers intended to operate from circuits of 125 V or less, combination controllers intended to operate from either a battery or a line circuit, and photovoltaic module battery operated controllers. The scope states that the requirements of UL 69 do not cover electric fence controllers for the continuous (uninterrupted) current type or intermediate equipment, such as a converter, a rectifier, or the like, that is sometimes used between the primary source of supply and an electric fence controller and is investigated only as part of a complete controller. UL 69 also states that the requirements do not cover electric fence controllers for use with electrified security fences.  
4.5 In contrast to UL 69, this practice specifically addresses the use of electric security fences...
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this practice is to provide advice for the selection and use of electric security fences to deter, detect, and delay an unauthorized breach of the perimeter in a commercial application.  
1.2 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. The tolerance on physical dimensions is ±10 % unless otherwise specified.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Electric security fences, in view of their high-deterrent impact, are a safe method to reduce security costs or enhance existing security. They have broad applications for situations in which both minimum or maximum security are needed. They are deployed in a wide variety of environments and geographies. In particular, electric security fences are used to decrease the need for security guards and other security systems.  
4.2 This practice provides information to users and manufacturers of electric security fences, filling a void.  
4.3 International standards exist at IEC and BSI (see Section 2) that cover some aspects of these systems.  
4.4 A standard issued by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) (UL 69) covers electric fence controllers to be used on lighting or line circuits in accordance with NFPA 70. However, UL 69 covers, specifically, electric fence controllers used only for the control of animals. Its requirements cover portable and permanently mounted electric fence controllers with peak-discharge or sinusoidal-discharge output for indoor or outdoor use, including battery operated controllers intended to operate from battery circuits of 42.4 V or less, line-operated controllers intended to operate from circuits of 125 V or less, combination controllers intended to operate from either a battery or a line circuit, and photovoltaic module battery operated controllers. The scope states that the requirements of UL 69 do not cover electric fence controllers for the continuous (uninterrupted) current type or intermediate equipment, such as a converter, a rectifier, or the like, that is sometimes used between the primary source of supply and an electric fence controller and is investigated only as part of a complete controller. UL 69 also states that the requirements do not cover electric fence controllers for use with electrified security fences.  
4.5 In contrast to UL 69, this practice specifically addresses the use of electric security fences in detention ...
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this practice is to provide advice for the selection and use of non-lethal electric security fences to deter, detect, and delay an unauthorized breach of the perimeter.  
1.2 The intended applications of this practice are detention and correctional facilities.  
1.3 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard. The tolerance on physical dimensions is ±10 % unless otherwise specified.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide is intended to be informative in terms of the types and uses of security fasteners in detention and corrections facilities. Useful information related to products and types of fasteners, materials in which fasteners are fabricated and other technical information that will give owners, architects, and end users adequate decision making criteria for the selection and application of such fasteners.
SCOPE
1.1 The purpose of this guide is to provide technical information related to understanding the features, types of materials, and benefits of various types of security fasteners and provide guidance in the selection and application of security fasteners in detention and corrections facilities.  
1.2 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The fire performance of a material or product is affected by a combination of its fire-test-response characteristics. Two of the most commonly determined fire-test-response characteristics of cushioning materials are the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D3675, and the specific optical density of smoke, in accordance with Test Method E662.  
5.2 Cushioning materials used in upholstery applications are potentially exposed to leaching of the active ingredients due to (1) water solubility of the treating agents or (2) exposure to high humidity.  
5.3 In view of the importance that the fire performance of the cushioning materials used in upholstery applications remain constant throughout their intended service life, this test method provides a means to test for the potential change in two fire-test-response characteristics due to leaching.
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method covers a procedure for leaching cushioning materials with water and determining changes in two specific fire-test-response characteristics: (1) the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D3675, and (2) the specific optical density of smoke generated, in accordance with Test Method E662.  
1.2 In view of the wide variation in potential service conditions, it is likely that results of this leaching test will not give a direct correlation with service performance for all applications. However, the test method yields comparative data on which to base judgments as to expected service of cushioning materials and is useful in research and development work.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.4 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific precautionary statements, see Section 7.  
1.6 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The information presented provides the user with guidance on identification of test methods, and related documents, which are potentially useful to determine fire-test-response characteristics of upholstery products, and the materials of which they are made, present inside detention cells, in detention and correctional facilities. Some information is given about every standard included, so as to allow a judgment as to the potential usefulness of the original method.  
5.2 The detention environment has some unique features which potentially require the use of modifications of standard test methods or the application of particular techniques. Some guidance to that effect is also presented.
SCOPE
1.1 This is a fire-test-response guide.  
1.2 This guide is intended to provide guidance for the selection of test methods that are applicable to determining fire-test-response characteristics of upholstered furniture items contained within a detention cell.  
1.3 This guide is intended for use by those interested in assessing the fire properties of the upholstery products and their component materials or composites, within cells and other areas (such as isolation lounges) of detention and correctional occupancies.  
1.4 This guide includes standard test methods promulgated by ASTM, NFPA, Underwriters Laboratories, trade associations and government agencies and other proposed test methods. It does not include industrial materials specification tests. The guide indicates some means by which modifications of standard test methods lead to potential achievement of certain testing goals.  
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to regarded as standard; see IEEE/ASTM SI 10 for further details. The units given in parentheses are for information only. Some individual standards referenced use inch-pound units for referee decisions.  
1.6 This guide contains four types of test methods, namely: (1) generic small-scale methods, (2) specific applications of small-scale test methods to particular products or composites of products, associated with upholstery items, (3) real-scale test methods where actual upholstery products are exposed to heat or flame, and (4) guides explaining the concepts involved with room-scale testing.  
1.7 The main fire-test-response characteristics investigated in this guide are: ignitability, ease of extinction, flame spread, heat release, smoke obscuration and toxic potency of smoke.  
1.8 This guide measures and describes the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.9 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for corrections administration officials is the resistance of security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities to certain types of physical attack that it is reasonable to expect in the field. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying a level of physical security for anchor systems used to install fixed detention hollow metal vision systems and door assemblies.  
4.2 These test methods are not intended to measure resistance to attack by corrosive agents, high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a vision system to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks, fire extinguishers, or tables; hand guns up to and including the .44 magnum; and fires started by using mattresses, books, and similar flammable materials.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of this standard is to provide detailed test methods that approximate the levels of abuse to which it is possible that vision system and door assembly anchor systems become subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to give ensurance of protection to the public, to prison administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves in the event of such attack.
Note 1: It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventive maintenance programs to enable hollow metal vision systems to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover anchor systems used for the installation of fixed detention hollow metal vision systems and door assemblies of various materials and types of construction. These anchor systems are used to install fixed hollow metal vision systems and door assemblies in wall openings in detention and correctional institutions designed to incarcerate inmates.  
1.2 Anchor systems individual components investigated under these test methods include detention security hollow metal frames, frame anchoring, security glazing, panels, and removable glazing stops.  
1.3 These test methods are designed to test the capability of anchor systems used to install a fixed detention hollow metal vision system or door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape; to limit or control access to unauthorized or secured areas; and prevent passage of contraband.  
1.4 These test methods apply primarily to anchor systems used to install detention hollow metal vision systems or door assemblies between secure areas generally found inside a detention/correctional facility such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports. These test methods are applicable to anchor systems used to install vision systems and door assemblies other than hollow metal, provided testing and reporting procedures are followed.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This test method provides a means to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including the time to sustained flaming and the heat release rate, of composites exposed to a prescribed initial test heat flux in the cone calorimeter apparatus, after they have been vandalized in a prescribed manner, to expose the filling material.  
5.2 It is clearly impossible to predict the manner in which a mattress or furniture will be vandalized. The objective of this test method is to develop data indicating the effect of violating the integrity of the fabric (or fabric-interliner) protection and exposing the padding to the source of heat (see Appendix X3).  
5.3 Quantitative heat release measurements provide information which is useful for product design and product development, for mattresses or furniture destined for correctional occupancies.  
5.4 Heat release measurements provide useful information for product development by giving a quantitative measure of specific changes in fire performance caused by component and composite modifications. Heat release data from this method will not be predictive of product behavior if the product will not spread flame over its surface under the fire exposure conditions of interest.  
5.5 The use of test specimens simulating vandalism allows the investigation of the variation in response between the system as designed by the manufacturer and the way the system is occasionally present in actual use, with the filling material exposed to the incident energy.  
5.6 This test method allows alternative strategies to be employed for producing a product (mattress or upholstered furniture) with the required fire-test-response characteristics for the scenario under consideration.  
5.7 Limitations:  
5.7.1 The test data are invalid if any of the events in 5.7.1.1 or 5.7.1.2 occur.
5.7.1.1 Explosive spalling.
5.7.1.2 The specimen swells sufficiently prior to ignition to touch the spark plug or swells up to the plane of the...
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method is designed for use to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including ignitability and heat release rate, from composites of mattresses or furniture, or correctional facilities, which have been vandalized in a prescribed manner to expose the filling material, by using a bench scale oxygen consumption calorimeter.  
1.2 This test method provides for measurements of the time to sustained flaming, heat release rate, peak and total heat release, and effective heat of combustion at a constant radiant initial test heat flux of 35 kW/m2. See 5.7 for limitations.  
1.3 The apparatus used in this test method is also capable of determining heat release data at different initial test heat fluxes.  
1.4 The specimen is oriented horizontally and a spark ignition source is used.  
1.5 All fire-test-response characteristics are determined using the apparatus and the procedures described in Test Method E1354.  
1.6 The tests are done on bench-scale specimens combining the mattress or furniture outer layer components. Frame elements are not included.  
1.7 The vandalism is simulated by causing a prescribed cut on the outer layer of the composite, deep enough to expose the filling material to the incident radiation.  
1.8 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.9 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and de...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for administrative officials is the security of barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for horizontal fixed barriers, which serve to enclose or separate secure areas. This does not apply to the passage of contraband or vandalism.  
4.2 These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a ceiling subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods not typically available to inmates. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a ceiling to violent attacks by sustained manpower using battering devices, such as benches, barbells, bunks, or tables; and by an upward static force such that could be applied by an inmate pushing against the ceiling with his hands, feet, or back (that is, squat position on a top bunk in a cell). Attacks from outside the facility and fire resistance ratings are not addressed in this standard.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which horizontal fixed barriers could possibly be subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide assurance of protection to the public, to facility personnel, and to the inmates themselves.  
4.4 It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventive maintenance programs to enable horizontal fixed barriers to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of horizontal fixed barriers designed to incarcerate inmates in detention and correctional institutions. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of sample barriers and installation systems.  
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention security horizontal fixed barriers perform at or above minimum acceptable levels for control of passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, and to delay and frustrate escape attempts. Provide security grilles, access doors, light fixtures, and similar assemblies compatible with these levels of performance, with test apparatus adjustments as required to suit the particular product.  
1.3 These test methods apply to horizontal fixed barriers enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.  
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversion to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern for corrections administration officials is the resistance of security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities to certain types of physical attack that it is reasonable to expect in the field. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying a level of physical security for fixed detention hollow metal vision systems.  
4.2 These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a vision system subjected to attack by corrosive agents, high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a vision system to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks, fire extinguishers, or tables; hand guns up to and including the .44 magnum; and fires started by using mattresses, books, and similar flammable materials.  
4.3 The primary purpose or result of this standard is to provide detailed test methods that approximate the levels of abuse to which it is possible that vision systems become subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to give assurance of protection to the public, to prison administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves in the event of such attack.  
4.4 It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover fixed detention hollow metal vision systems of various materials and types of construction. These fixed hollow metal vision systems are used in wall openings in detention and correctional institutions designed to incarcerate inmates.  
1.2 Frame assemblies investigated under these test methods include individual components including detention security hollow metal frames, frame anchoring, security glazing, panels, and removable glazing stops.  
1.3 These test methods are designed to test the capability of a fixed detention hollow metal vision system to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape; to limit or control access to unauthorized or secured areas; and prevent passage of contraband.  
1.4 These test methods apply primarily to detention hollow metal vision systems between secure areas generally found inside a detention/correctional facility such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports. These test methods are applicable to vision systems other than hollow metal, provided testing and reporting procedures are followed.  
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of sliding devices used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to devices for sliding door assemblies.
These test methods evaluate the resistance of a sliding door assembly to attacks using battering devices, prying devices, smoke, and fire. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a sliding device under simulated operating conditions. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of the device subjected to attack by chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack. These test methods do not measure the resistance or performance of the device when subjected to environmental elements such as humidity, temperature, rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements may be a factor the manufacturer should be consulted for proper application.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which devices are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
Preventative maintenance programs shall be provided in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendation to enable sliding device assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
These test methods do not measure the performance or cycle life of the local or remote mechanical emergency release mechanism, or both, due to their design variables and low user requirements.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault, smoke, and fire conditions of sliding device assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. These test methods give an indication of the performance characteristics of devices in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention sliding devices perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates and to delay and frustrate escape attempts and resist vandalism. However, these test methods do not address door construction. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door assemblies shall be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F1450.
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for administration officials is security of barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to identify the security levels for ventilation grilles mounted within these barriers.
The purpose of these tests is to approximate levels of abuse to which grilles will potentially be subjected in the field, and to provide assurance of protection to the public, facility administrative personnel, and inmates.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of ventilation grilles used in secure areas, including detention and correctional facilities. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of specimen grilles and mounting systems. It is recognized that, in order to meet the intent of these test methods, ventilation grilles must be compatible with the level of performance require by Test Methods F2322.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to ensure that security ventilation grilles meet minimum performance levels to control the passage of unauthorized materials into secure areas, to confine inmates, to resist vandalism, and to delay or frustrate escape, or both. It is also the responsibility of the user of these test methods to insure that the grille selected is appropriate, based on relevant regulatory, health, and safety concerns and requirements. Such concerns include, but are not limited to, injury and suicide avoidance. These test methods do not quantify such concerns.
1.3 Take care to provide access to return and exhaust ducts for cleaning as required by NFPA 90A. If access cannot be provided though an interstitial space behind walls or ceiling, the use of filter grilles needs to be considered as an option. When filter grilles are provided, filters shall have a minimum UL-900 class 2 rating, and a filter replacement program needs to be in place at the facility.
1.4 Airflow performance shall be catalogued in accordance with ASHRAE 70–91. Manufacturer’s catalog data must include grade level achieved.
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of hinges used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to hinges for swinging door assemblies.
These test methods evaluate the effect on hinges of battering attacks on the door simulating assault conditions as well. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a hinge under simulated normal operation. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of a hinge to attack by the following: chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack, such as direct impact or manipulation on the hinges or to environmental elements such as rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements are a potential factor, consult the manufacturer.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse conditions and normal operating conditions to which hinges are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. These test methods attempt to do this through the different grade levels associated with cycle and impact testing. The desired result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operating performance characteristics and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of hinges used in swinging door assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. These types of hinges are described in detail in 3.1.6, 3.1.9, and 3.1.22. Thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of hinges in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions which have a potential impact on performance characteristics are not considered.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention hinges (reference to hinges is inclusive of a continuous hinge) perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts, and to resist vandalism and assault conditions. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door, frame and lock assemblies must be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F1450 and F1577.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 Consult NFPA 80 for Fire Doors & Windows concerning hinge requirements on fire doors.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The predictable and reliable performance of detention glazing used in detention and correctional facilities is a major concern. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security to glazing used in window and door assemblies based upon objective tests which can be consistently duplicated.
These test methods identify four security grades, corresponding to the four security grades established in Test Methods F1450. The intent is to establish a comparable level of performance for opening assemblies which incorporate detention glazing in conjunction with window and door assemblies. Test methods for detention glazing differ in sequencing a variety of attack tools and temperatures.
These test methods evaluate the resistance of detention glazing to attacks using blunt and sharp impact devices and fire. These test methods evaluate the performance of glazing in hot and cold environments. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of glazing subjected to attack by ballistics, chemical agents, explosives or other extreme methods of attack. Where such elements are a factor, consult the manufacturer.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which detention glazing is subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The desired result of these test methods is to provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
Detention and correctional facility administrative staff are encouraged to provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable detention glazing assemblies to function as intended.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods, including a fire test response method, cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of detention glazing used in window and door assemblies in detention and correctional facilities; thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of detention glazing in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered except as otherwise included in this test method.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention glazing performs at or above minimum acceptable levels to restrict inmate passage to unauthorized areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts and to resist vandalism.
1.3 Tools defined in these test methods are representative of similar tools or materials, which may become available to inmates within the secure perimeter of detention and correctional facilities, and which could be used to inflict similar product damage.
1.4 These test methods should not be used to establish or confirm the absolute prevention of forced entries or exits. These test methods define five factors (tool, temperature, techniques, time, and number of impacts) used to determine resistance to defined attacks.
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values in stated parentheses are for information only.
1.6 In these test methods, the specimens are subjected to one or more specific sets of laboratory test conditions. If different test conditions are substituted or the end-use conditions are changed, it is not always possible by or from these test methods to predict changes in the physical attack, or fire-test-response characteristics measured, or both; therefore, the results are valid only for the physical attack, or fire-test-exposure conditions, or both, described in these test methods.
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the a...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of locks used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to locks for swinging door assemblies.
These test methods evaluate the resistance of a lock to attacks using battering devices, prying devices, and fire. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a lock under simulated operating conditions. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of a lock subjected to attack by chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack. These test methods do not measure the resistance or performance of the device when subjected to environmental elements such as rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements may be a factor, the manufacturer should be consulted for proper application.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which locks are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The desired result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
It is recommended that the detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of locks used in swinging door assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. Thus, they give only an indication of the performance characteristics of locks in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention locks perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, and to delay and frustrate escape attempts and resist vandalism. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door and frame assemblies must be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F1450.
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for prison administrative officials is security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies.
The construction and size of test doors and all hardware components are representative of the application under investigation, and are the same construction and size throughout all of the tests.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a door assembly subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a door assembly to violent attacks using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables; by handguns up to and including .44 magnum, UL-752 Level 3; by prying devices; by devices used to deform the door and render it inoperable; and by fires started by using mattresses, books, and other flammable materials.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which door assemblies are potentially subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide insurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for mechanical tests, simulated service test, and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies of various styles and types of construction for use in wall openings designed to incarcerate inmates in detention/correctional institutions.
1.2 These test methods test the capability of a swinging door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape, to limit or control access to unauthorized or secure areas, and to resist common types of vandalism.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to detention door assemblies to and from secure areas generally found inside detention/correctional facilities, such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for administrative officials is the security of barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for walls which enclose or separate secure areas. This does not apply to the passage of contraband.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a wall subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a wall to violent attacks by sustained manpower using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables, and by handguns up to and including .44 magnum. Attacks from the outside and fire resistance ratings are not addressed in this standard.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which walls will potentially be subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide assurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable walls to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of walls designed to incarcerate inmates in detention and correctional institutions. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of two sample fixed barriers side-by-side, one with no openings and one equipped with a representative penetration in accordance with the American Correctional Association (ACA) standard for clear view area of 3 ft2  (0.279 m2), 12 in. (305 mm) wide by 36 in. (914 mm) high.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention security walls perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage of unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts, and to resist vandalism. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, opening assemblies within these walls must be compatible with the level of performance required by: Test Methods F1450, F1592, and F1643.
1.3 These test methods apply to walls enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values given in parentheses are approximate and for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for administrative officials is the security of barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for walls which enclose or separate secure areas. This does not apply to the passage of contraband.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a wall subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a wall to violent attacks by sustained manpower using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables, and by handguns up to and including .44 magnum. Attacks from the outside and fire resistance ratings are not addressed in this standard.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which walls will potentially be subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide assurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable walls to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of walls designed to incarcerate inmates in detention and correctional institutions. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of two sample fixed barriers side-by-side, one with no openings and one equipped with a representative penetration in accordance with the American Correctional Association (ACA) standard for clear view area of 3 ft2 (0.279 m2), 12 in. (305 mm) wide by 36 in. (914 mm) high.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention security walls perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage of unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts, and to resist vandalism. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, opening assemblies within these walls must be compatible with the level of performance required by: Test Methods F 1450, F 1592, and F 1643.
1.3 These test methods apply to walls enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values given in parentheses are approximate and for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
WITHDRAWN RATIONALE
These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of walls designed to incarcerate inmates in detention and correctional institutions.
Formerly under the jurisdiction of Committee F33 on Detention and Correctional Facilities, these test methods were withdrawn in January 2012 in accordance with section 10.5.3.1 of the Regulations Governing ASTM Technical Committees, which requires that standards shall be updated by the end of the eighth year since the last approval date.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for prison administrative officials is security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies.
The construction and size of test doors and all hardware components are representative of the application under investigation, and are the same construction and size throughout all of the tests.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a door assembly subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a door assembly to violent attacks using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables; by handguns up to and including .44 magnum, UL-752 Level 3; by prying devices; by devices used to deform the door and render it inoperable; and by fires started by using mattresses, books, and other flammable materials.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which door assemblies are potentially subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide insurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for mechanical tests, simulated service test, and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies of various styles and types of construction for use in wall openings designed to incarcerate inmates in detention/correctional institutions.
1.2 These test methods test the capability of a swinging door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape, to limit or control access to unauthorized or secure areas, and to resist common types of vandalism.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to detention door assemblies to and from secure areas generally found inside detention/correctional facilities, such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The information presented provides the user with guidance on identification of test methods, and related documents, which are potentially useful to determine fire-test-response characteristics of upholstery products, and the materials of which they are made, present inside detention cells, in detention and correctional facilities. Some information is given about every standard included, so as to allow a judgment as to the potential usefulness of the original method.
The detention environment has some unique features which potentially require the use of modifications of standard test methods or the application of particular techniques. Some guidance to that effect is also presented.
SCOPE
1.1 This is a fire-test-response guide.
1.2 This guide is intended to provide guidance for the selection of test methods that are applicable to determining fire-test-response characteristics of upholstered furniture items contained within a detention cell.
1.3 This guide is intended for use by those interested in assessing the fire properties of the upholstery products and their component materials or composites, within cells and other areas (such as isolation lounges) of detention and correctional occupancies.
1.4 This guide includes standard test methods promulgated by ASTM, NFPA, Underwriters Laboratories, trade associations and government agencies and other proposed test methods. It does not include industrial materials specification tests. The guide indicates some means by which modifications of standard test methods lead to potential achievement of certain testing goals.
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to regarded as standard; see  for further details. The units given in parentheses are for information only. Some individual standards referenced use inch-pound units for referee decisions.
1.6 This guide contains four types of test methods, namely: (1) generic small-scale methods, (2) specific applications of small-scale test methods to particular products or composites of products, associated with upholstery items, (3) real-scale test methods where actual upholstery products are exposed to heat or flame, and (4) guides explaining the concepts involved with room-scale testing.  
1.7 The main fire-test-response characteristics investigated in this guide are: ignitability, ease of extinction, flame spread, heat release, smoke obscuration and toxic potency of smoke.  
1.8 This guide measures and describes the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.
1.9 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
Security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities are a major concern for their administrative officials. These test methods are designed to identify levels of physical security for openings such as fixed and operable exterior and interior windows, bar gratings, grilles for mechanical ducts, and so forth in walls that enclose or separate secure areas.
These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of these barriers to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks or tables, and so forth to bend or break the steel bars and to surreptitious attacks by cutting/abrading the steel bars over prolonged periods of time using handheld grit-type cutting/abrading media such as tungsten carbide rod saws. External attacks and attacks by corrosive agents and other means not typically available to inmates are not addressed in this standard.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which these physical security barriers will potentially be subjected in the correctional/detention facility. The desired result of its use is to help provide a degree of assurance of protection to the public, facility personnel, and inmates.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administrators provide for adequate training, supervision, regular inspection, and preventive maintenance programs to enable the barriers to function as intended throughout their expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of various types and shapes of steels designated for use in detention and correctional facilities as fixed barriers to prevent egress and to control passage.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that opening assemblies such as detention security windows, grilles, bar grating, and other physical barriers incorporating steel bars perform at or above minimum acceptable levels for control of passage to unauthorized or secure areas, for confinement of inmates and to delay or frustrate escape attempts. To meet the intent of these test methods, opening assembles must perform to grade requirements shown in Tables X1.1 and X1.2 in Appendix X1.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to the steels used as essential components of detention security windows, grilles, bar grating, and so forth, in opening assemblies enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The SI values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard updates and combines two previous standards, ASTM Specifications A627-95 and A629-94, establishing new security grades and time durations.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
This test method provides a means to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including the time to sustained flaming and the heat release rate, of composites exposed to a prescribed heat flux in the cone calorimeter apparatus, after they have been vandalized in a prescribed manner, to expose the filling material.
It is clearly impossible to predict the manner in which a mattress or furniture will be vandalized. The objective of this test method is to develop data indicating the effect of violating the integrity of the fabric (or fabric-interliner) protection and exposing the padding to the source of heat (see Appendix X3).
Quantitative heat release measurements provide information which is useful for product design and product development, for mattresses or furniture destined for correctional occupancies.
Heat release measurements provide useful information for product development by giving a quantitative measure of specific changes in fire performance caused by component and composite modifications. Heat release data from this method will not be predictive of product behavior if the product will not spread flame over its surface under the fire exposure conditions of interest.
The use of test specimens simulating vandalism allows the investigation of the variation in response between the system as designed by the manufacturer and the way the system is occasionally present in actual use, with the filling material exposed to the incident energy.
This test method allows alternative strategies to be employed for producing a product (mattress or upholstered furniture) with the required fire-test-response characteristics for the scenario under consideration.
Limitations:  
The test data are invalid if any of the events in 5.7.1.1 or 5.7.1.2 occur.
Explosive spalling.
The specimen swells sufficiently prior to ignition to touch the spark plug or swells up to the plane of the heater base during combustion.
This test method is not applicable t...
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method is designed for use to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including ignitability and heat release rate, from composites of mattresses or furniture, or correctional facilities, which have been vandalized in a prescribed manner to expose the filling material, by using a bench scale oxygen consumption calorimeter.
1.2 This test method provides for measurements of the time to sustained flaming, heat release rate, peak and total heat release, and effective heat of combustion at a constant radiant heat flux of 35 kW/m2. See 5.7 for limitations.
1.3 The apparatus used in this test method is also capable of determining heat release data at different heat fluxes.
1.4 The specimen is oriented horizontally and a spark ignition source is used.
1.5 All fire-test-response characteristics are determined using the apparatus and the procedures described in Test Method E1354.
1.6 The tests are done on bench-scale specimens combining the mattress or furniture outer layer components. Frame elements are not included.
1.7 The vandalism is simulated by causing a prescribed cut on the outer layer of the composite, deep enough to expose the filling material to the incident radiation.
1.8 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.
1.9 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regula...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The fire performance of a material or product is affected by a combination of its fire-test-response characteristics. Two of the most commonly determined fire-test-response characteristics of cushioning materials are the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D3675, and the specific optical density of smoke, in accordance with Test Method E662.
Cushioning materials used in upholstery applications are potentially exposed to leaching of the active ingredients due to (1) water solubility of the treating agents or (2) exposure to high humidity.
In view of the importance that the fire performance of the cushioning materials used in upholstery applications remain constant throughout their intended service life, this test method provides a means to test for the potential change in two fire-test-response characteristics due to leaching.
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method covers a procedure for leaching cushioning materials with water and determining changes in two specific fire-test-response characteristics: (1) the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D3675, and (2) the specific optical density of smoke generated, in accordance with Test Method E662.
1.2 In view of the wide variation in potential service conditions, it is likely that results of this leaching test will not give a direct correlation with service performance for all applications. However, the test method yields comparative data on which to base judgments as to expected service of cushioning materials and is useful in research and development work.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.4 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific precautionary statements, see Section 7.
1.6 Fire testing is inherently hazardous. Adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for prison administrative officials is security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a door assembly subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a door assembly to violent attacks using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables; by handguns up to and including .44 magnum; by prying devices; by devices used to deform the door and render it inoperable; and by fires started by using mattresses, books, and other flammable materials.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which door assemblies are potentially subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide insurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for mechanical tests, simulated service test, and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies of various styles and types of construction for use in wall openings designed to incarcerate inmates in detention/correctional institutions.
1.2 These test methods test the capability of a swinging door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape, to limit or control access to unauthorized or secure areas, and to resist common types of vandalism.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to detention door assemblies to and from secure areas generally found inside detention/correctional facilities, such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of ventilation grilles used in secure areas, including detention and correctional facilities. The testing equipment provides for the setup and testing of specimen grilles and mounting systems. It is recognized that, in order to meet the intent of these test methods, ventilation grilles must be compatible with the level of performance require by Test Methods F 2322.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to ensure that security ventilation grilles meet minimum performance levels to control the passage of unauthorized materials into secure areas, to confine inmates, to resist vandalism, and to delay or frustrate escape, or both. It is also the responsibility of the user of these test methods to insure that the grille selected is appropriate, based on relevant regulatory, health, and safety concerns and requirements. Such concerns include, but are not limited to, injury and suicide avoidance. These test methods do not quantify such concerns.
1.3 Take care to provide access to return and exhaust ducts for cleaning as required by NFPA 90A. If access cannot be provided though an interstitial space behind walls or ceiling, the use of filter grilles needs to be considered as an option. When filter grilles are provided, filters shall have a minimum UL-900 class 2 rating, and a filter replacement program needs to be in place at the facility.
1.4 Airflow performance shall be catalogued in accordance with ASHRAE 70-91. Manufacturers catalog data must include grade level achieved.
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parenthesees are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The fire performance of a material or product is affected by a combination of its fire-test-response characteristics. Two of the most commonly determined fire-test-response characteristics of cushioning materials are the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D 3675, and the specific optical density of smoke, in accordance with Test Method E 662.
Cushioning materials used in upholstery applications are potentially exposed to leaching of the active ingredients due to (1) water solubility of the treating agents or (2) exposure to high humidity.
In view of the importance that the fire performance of the cushioning materials used in upholstery applications remain constant throughout their intended service life, this test method provides a means to test for the potential change in two fire-test-response characteristics due to leaching.
SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method covers a procedure for leaching cushioning materials with water and determining changes in two specific fire-test-response characteristics: (1) the surface flammability, in accordance with Test Method D 3675, and (2) the specific optical density of smoke generated, in accordance with Test Method E 662.
1.2 In view of the wide variation in potential service conditions, it is likely that results of this leaching test will not give a direct correlation with service performance for all applications. However, the test method yields comparative data on which to base judgments as to expected service of cushioning materials and is useful in research and development work.
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.4 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific precautionary statements, see Section 7.

SCOPE
1.1 This fire-test-response test method is designed for use to determine various fire-test-response characteristics, including ignitability and heat release rate, from composites of mattresses or furniture, or correctional facilities, which have been vandalized in a prescribed manner to expose the filling material, by using a bench scale oxygen consumption calorimeter.
1.2 This test method provides for measurements of the time to sustained flaming, heat release rate, peak and total heat release, and effective heat of combustion at a constant radiant heat flux of 35 kW/m 2. See 5.7 for limitations.
1.3 The apparatus used in this test method is also capable of determining heat release data at different heat fluxes.
1.4 The specimen is oriented horizontally and a spark ignition source is used.
1.5 All fire-test-response characteristics are determined using the apparatus and the procedures described in Test Method E 1354.
1.6 The tests are done on bench-scale specimens combining the mattress or furniture outer layer components. Frame elements are not included.
1.7 The vandalism is simulated by causing a prescribed cut on the outer layer of the composite, deep enough to expose the filling material to the incident radiation.
1.8 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard.
1.9 This standard is used to measure and describe the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific safety precautions, see Section 7.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The information presented provides the user with guidance on identification of test methods, and related documents, which are potentially useful to determine fire-test-response characteristics of upholstery products, and the materials of which they are made, present inside detention cells, in detention and correctional facilities. Some information is given about every standard included, so as to allow a judgment as to the potential usefulness of the original method.
The detention environment has some unique features which potentially require the use of modifications of standard test methods or the application of particular techniques. Some guidance to that effect is also presented.
SCOPE
1.1 This is a fire-test-response guide.
1.2 This guide is intended to provide guidance for the selection of test methods that are applicable to determining fire-test-response characteristics of upholstered furniture items contained within a detention cell.
1.3 This guide is intended for use by those interested in assessing the fire properties of the upholstery products and their component materials or composites, within cells and other areas (such as isolation lounges) of detention and correctional occupancies.
1.4 This guide includes standard test methods promulgated by ASTM, NFPA, Underwriters Laboratories, trade associations and government agencies and other proposed test methods. It does not include industrial materials specification tests. The guide indicates some means by which modifications of standard test methods lead to potential achievement of certain testing goals.
1.5 Use the SI system of units in referee decisions associated with this guide; see Practice E 380. The units given in parentheses are for information only. Some individual standards referenced use inch-pound units for referee decisions.
1.6 This guide contains four types of test methods, namely: (1) generic small-scale methods, ( 2) specific applications of small-scale test methods to particular products or composites of products, associated with upholstery items, (3) real-scale test methods where actual upholstery products are exposed to heat or flame, and (4) guides explaining the concepts involved with room-scale testing.
1.7 The main fire-test-response characteristics investigated in this guide are: ignitability, ease of extinction, flame spread, heat release, smoke obscuration and toxic potency of smoke.
1.8 This guide measures and describes the response of materials, products, or assemblies to heat and flame under controlled conditions, but does not by itself incorporate all factors required for fire hazard or fire risk assessment of the materials, products, or assemblies under actual fire conditions.
1.9 Fire testing of products and materials is inherently hazardous, and adequate safeguards for personnel and property shall be employed in conducting these tests. This test method may involve hazardous materials, operations, and equipment.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for prison administrative officials is security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying levels of physical security for swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a door assembly subjected to attack by corrosive agents, by high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a door assembly to violent attacks using battering devices, such as benches, bunks, or tables; by handguns up to and including .44 magnum; by prying devices; by devices used to deform the door and render it inoperable; and by fires started by using mattresses, books, and other flammable materials.
The primary purpose or result of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse to which door assemblies may be subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to help provide insurance of protection to the public, to facility administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves.
It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for mechanical tests, simulated service test, and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies of various styles and types of construction for use in wall openings designed to incarcerate inmates in detention/correctional institutions.
1.2 These test methods test the capability of a swinging door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape, to limit or control access to unauthorized or secure areas, and to resist common types of vandalism.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to detention door assemblies to and from secure areas generally found inside detention/correctional facilities, such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of locks used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to locks for swinging door assemblies.
These test methods evaluate the resistance of a lock to attacks using battering devices, prying devices, and fire. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a lock under simulated operating conditions. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of a lock subjected to attack by chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack. These test methods do not measure the resistance or performance of the device when subjected to environmental elements such as rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements may be a factor, the manufacturer should be consulted for proper application.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which locks are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The desired result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
It is recommended that the detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable door assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of locks used in swinging door assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. Thus, they give only an indication of the performance characteristics of locks in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention locks perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates, and to delay and frustrate escape attempts and resist vandalism. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door and frame assemblies must be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Method F 1450.
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for corrections administration officials is the resistance of security barriers used in detention/correctional facilities to certain types of physical attack that it is reasonable to expect in the field. These test methods are designed to aid in identifying a level of physical security for fixed detention hollow metal vision systems.
These test methods are not intended to provide a measure of resistance for a vision system subjected to attack by corrosive agents, high-powered rifles, explosives, sawing, or other such methods. These test methods are intended to evaluate the resistance of a vision system to violent attacks using battering devices such as benches, bunks, fire extinguishers, or tables; hand guns up to and including the .44 magnum; and fires started by using mattresses, books, and similar flammable materials.
The primary purpose or result of this standard is to provide detailed test methods that approximate the levels of abuse to which it is possible that vision systems become subjected in the field. The desired result of its use is to give ensurance of protection to the public, to prison administrative personnel, and to the inmates themselves in the event of such attack.
Note 1—It is recommended that detention/correctional facility administration provide adequate training, supervision and preventive maintenance programs to enable hollow metal vision systems to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover fixed detention hollow metal vision systems of various materials and types of construction. These fixed hollow metal vision systems are used in wall openings in detention and correctional institutions designed to incarcerate inmates.
1.2 Frame assemblies investigated under these test methods include individual components including detention security hollow metal frames, frame anchoring, security glazing, panels, and removable glazing stops.
1.3 These test methods are designed to test the capability of a fixed detention hollow metal vision system to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape; to limit or control access to unauthorized or secured areas; and prevent passage of contraband.
1.4 These test methods apply primarily to detention hollow metal vision systems between secure areas generally found inside a detention/correctional facility such as: day rooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports. These test methods are applicable to vision systems other than hollow metal, provided testing and reporting procedures are followed.
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of sliding devices used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to devices for sliding door assemblies.
These test methods evaluate the resistance of a sliding door assembly to attacks using battering devices, prying devices, smoke, and fire. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a sliding device under simulated operating conditions. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of the device subjected to attack by chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack. These test methods do not measure the resistance or performance of the device when subjected to environmental elements such as humidity, temperature, rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements may be a factor the manufacturer should be consulted for proper application.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which devices are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
Preventative maintenance programs shall be provided in accordance with the manufacturer’recommendation to enable sliding device assemblies to function as intended throughout the expected service life.
These test methods do not measure the performance or cycle life of the local or remote mechanical emergency release mechanism, or both, due to their design variables and low user requirements.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault, smoke, and fire conditions of sliding device assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. These test methods give an indication of the performance characteristics of devices in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention sliding devices perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to control passage to unauthorized or secure areas, to confine inmates and to delay and frustrate escape attempts and resist vandalism. However, these test methods do not address door construction. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door assemblies shall be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F 1450.
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
A major concern for detention and correctional administrative officials is the reliable operation of hinges used in their facilities. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security and performance to hinges for swinging door assemblies.
These test methods evaluate the effect on hinges of battering attacks on the door simulating assault conditions as well. These test methods also evaluate the performance of a hinge under simulated normal operation. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of a hinge to attack by the following: chemical agents, ballistics, explosives, or other extreme methods of attack, such as direct impact or manipulation on the hinges or to environmental elements such as rain, snow, or wind-carried dust or sand. Where such elements are a potential factor, consult the manufacturer.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse conditions and normal operating conditions to which hinges are subjected in detention and correctional institutions. These test methods attempt to do this through the different grade levels associated with cycle and impact testing. The desired result of these test methods will provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operating performance characteristics and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of hinges used in swinging door assemblies in detention and correctional institutions. These types of hinges are described in detail in , , and . Thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of hinges in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions which have a potential impact on performance characteristics are not considered.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention hinges (reference to hinges is inclusive of a continuous hinge) perform at or above minimum acceptable levels to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts, and to resist vandalism and assault conditions. It is recognized that in order to meet the intent of these test methods, door, frame and lock assemblies must be compatible with the level of performance required by Test Methods F 1450 and F 1577.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
1.3 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values in parentheses are for information only.
1.4 Consult NFPA 80 for Fire Doors Windows concerning hinge requirements on fire doors.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
The predictable and reliable performance of detention glazing used in detention and correctional facilities is a major concern. These test methods aid in assigning a level of physical security to glazing used in window and door assemblies based upon objective tests which can be consistently duplicated.
These test methods identify four security grades, corresponding to the four security grades established in Test Methods F 1450. The intent is to establish a comparable level of performance for opening assemblies which incorporate detention glazing in conjunction with window and door assemblies. Test methods for detention glazing differ in sequencing a variety of attack tools and temperatures.
These test methods evaluate the resistance of detention glazing to attacks using blunt and sharp impact devices and fire. These test methods evaluate the performance of glazing in hot and cold environments. These test methods do not provide a measure of the resistance or performance of glazing subjected to attack by ballistics, chemical agents, explosives or other extreme methods of attack. Where such elements are a factor, consult the manufacturer.
The primary purpose of these test methods is to approximate the levels of abuse and operating conditions to which detention glazing is subjected in detention and correctional institutions. The desired result of these test methods is to provide a measure of assurance of protection to the correctional personnel, public, and inmates.
Detention and correctional facility administrative staff are encouraged to provide adequate training, supervision, and preventative maintenance programs to enable detention glazing assemblies to function as intended.
SCOPE
1.1 These test methods, including a fire test response method, cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of detention glazing used in window and door assemblies in detention and correctional facilities; thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of detention glazing in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered except as otherwise included in this test method.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention glazing performs at or above minimum acceptable levels to restrict inmate passage to unauthorized areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts and to resist vandalism.
1.3 Tools defined in these test methods are representative of similar tools or materials, which may become available to inmates within the secure perimeter of detention and correctional facilities, and which could be used to inflict similar product damage.
1.4 These test methods should not be used to establish or confirm the absolute prevention of forced entries or exits. These test methods define five factors (tool, temperature, techniques, time, and number of impacts) used to determine resistance to defined attacks.
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values in stated parentheses are for information only.
1.6 In these test methods, the specimens are subjected to one or more specific sets of laboratory test conditions. If different test conditions are substituted or the end-use conditions are changed, it is not always possible by or from these test methods to predict changes in the physical attack, or fire-test-response characteristics measured, or both; therefore, the results are valid only for the physical attack, or fire-test-exposure conditions, or both, described in these test methods.
This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicabil...

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for mechanical tests, simulated service test, and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of swinging detention hollow metal door assemblies of various styles and types of construction for use in wall openings designed to incarcerate inmates in detention/correctional institutions.
1.2 These test methods test the capability of a swinging door assembly to prevent, delay, and frustrate escape, to limit or control access to unauthorized or secure areas, and to resist common types of vandalism.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to detention door assemblies to and from secure areas generally found inside detention/correctional facilities, such as: dayrooms, control rooms, cells, and sally ports.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods, including a fire test response method, cover the apparatus, procedures, and acceptance conditions for evaluating the normal operational performance and the performance characteristics under assault conditions of detention glazing used in window and door assemblies in detention and correctional facilities; thus, these test methods only give an indication of the performance characteristics of detention glazing in actual service. Such variables as installation and maintenance conditions are not considered except as otherwise included in this test method.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that detention glazing performs at or above minimum acceptable levels to restrict inmate passage to unauthorized areas, to confine inmates, to delay and frustrate escape attempts and to resist vandalism.
1.3 Tools defined in these test methods are representative of similar tools or materials, which may become available to inmates within the secure perimeter of detention and correctional facilities, and which could be used to inflict similar product damage.
1.4 These test methods should not be used to establish or confirm the absolute prevention of forced entries or exits. These test methods define five factors (tool, temperature, techniques, time, and number of impacts) used to determine resistance to defined attacks.
1.5 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as the standard. The SI values in stated parentheses are for information only.
1.6 In these test methods, the specimens are subjected to one or more specific sets of laboratory test conditions. If different test conditions are substituted or the end-use conditions are changed, it is not always possible by or from these test methods to predict changes in the physical attack, or fire-test-response characteristics measured, or both; therefore, the results are valid only for the physical attack, or fire-test-exposure conditions, or both, described in these test methods.
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SCOPE
1.1 These test methods cover requirements for simulated service tests and testing equipment for determining the performance characteristics of various types and shapes of steels designated for use in detention and correctional facilities as fixed barriers to prevent egress and to control passage.
1.2 It is the intent of these test methods to help ensure that opening assemblies such as detention security windows, grilles, bar grating, and other physical barriers incorporating steel bars perform at or above minimum acceptable levels for control of passage to unauthorized or secure areas, for confinement of inmates and to delay or frustrate escape attempts. To meet the intent of these test methods, opening assembles must perform to grade requirements shown in Tables X1.1 and X1.2 in Appendix X1.
1.3 These test methods apply primarily to the steels used as essential components of detention security windows, grilles, bar grating, and so forth, in opening assemblies enclosing or separating secure areas of detention/correctional facilities.
1.4 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The SI values given in parentheses are for information only.
1.5 This standard updates and combines two previous standards, ASTM Specifications A 627-95 and A 629-94, establishing new security grades and time durations.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.