Appendix F Doors and Hardware That Passed the Missile Impact Tests The tables on the following pages document the performance of some available doors and door hardware that passed the wind pressure and impact requirements of FEMA 320, Taking Shelter From the Storm. However, the testing program focused on a variety of doors and hardware systems rather than multiple tests of a single type of door system. The data presented are single-test results, which are intended to be used as indicators of expected performance. A residential shelter in FEMA 320 is considered an enclosed structure (“enclosed” and “partially enclosed” buildings are defined by ASCE 7-98), that uses an internal pressure coefficient of GCPi = ±0.18 for components and cladding (C&C) design. Although impact requirements have not changed, the pressure coefficients for C&C of a community shelter are different from those used in FEMA 320. A community shelter is a larger building that will react differently to wind loads, requiring a design approach using internal pressure coefficients for partially enclosed buildings (GCPi = ±0.55). The use of higher internal pressure coefficients is described in Section 5.3.2, on page 5-10. The change in pressure coefficients increased the design wind pressures for doors and windows in community shelters. Most of the door systems discussed in this manual and presented in this appendix have been successfully tested to wind pressure values associated with a 200-mph wind or Wind Zone III (Figure 2-2). However, many shelters will be located in Wind Zone IV (250 mph). The maximum wind pressures on a shelter occur at building corners. As of the time this manual was published, door/door hardware systems tested have not been tested to the maximum design pressures associated with Wind Zone IV at building corners. Therefore, any shelter door system in Wind Zone IV should be protected by an alcove or debris barrier until further testing can be performed or until other door and hardware systems are successfully tested for the design wind pressures. This manual attempts to identify door/door hardware systems that are readily available from manufactures. All doors in this appendix have passed the missile impact criteria. Chapter 6 discussed wide single-door systems (greater than 36 inches wide, specifically 44-inch width) and double-door systems. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDANCE FOR COMMUNITY SHELTERS F-1 APPENDIX F DOORS AND HARDWARE THAT PASSED THE MISSILE IMPACT TESTS The wide single-door systems failed at 1.19 psi, which is less than the design wind pressures associated with 250-mph wind pressures. The double-door systems (composed of two 3-foot by 7-foot doors) were tested to the wind pressures of 1.37 psi without failure (the FEMA 320 design criteria). These doors were not tested to the 250-mph wind pressure levels. It is important to note that the size of the door that is being tested will affect the design wind pressure to which a door should be designed. Specifically, the external pressure coefficient (GCP) will vary with location along the wall (proximity to the building corner) and with the area of the door when calculating C&C loads using ASCE 7-98. The testing of standard doors and door hardware will continue after the publication of this manual. The goal of this testing is to determine whether available doors and door hardware will be capable of resisting the highest of wind pressures associated with Wind Zone IV 250-mph winds. Updates on tested door systems will be posted on the Texas Tech University (TTU) web page at www.wind.ttu.edu. Questions regarding continued door testing may be directed to the TTU Outreach Center at 1-888-946-3287. The information presented in this appendix includes the test date, a description of the door and door hardware tested, a brief description of the test results, and the test pressures or the missile impact speeds. The designer should note that these test results were derived from door systems that used door hardware systems that may not be accepted for egress under some occupancy classifications. F-2 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY DOORS AND HARDWARE THAT PASSED THE MISSILE IMPACT TESTS APPENDIX F Results of Wind Pressure Tests on Doors With Individually Activated Latching Mechanisms Date Test Type Door Description Lock Description FailurePressure Pressurization Results 3/31/98Pressure14 ga. steel door with 20 ga. metal ribs. The door was installed and tested as a swing-outdoor. Sargent mortise lock with deadbolt function.0.97 psiLock held to 0.97psi. The lock failed internally when the bar connecting the deadbolt bent, allowing the door to swing open. 3/6/98Pressure14 ga. steel door with polystyrene infill. The door was installed and tested as a swing-outdoor. 1.37 psiThe door failed at a pressure of 1.37 psi. The door failure was due to the failure of the lockset; also, the door did open due to the pressure. 3/26/98Pressure14 ga. door with a polystyrene infill. The door was mounted and tested as a swing-in door. Yale mortise lock set with deadbolt function.1.2 psiThe door failed at a pressure of 1.2 psi. The door failure was due to the failure of the lockset; also, the door did open due to the pressure. 3/31/98Pressure20 ga. door, a honeycomb infill, with a 14 ga. steel plate mounted on the non-impact side. The door was mounted and tested as a swing- in door. Standard heavy-duty lock with three 1.2 in. slide bolts mounted opposite the hinges. 1.36 psiThe modified door held a pressure of 1.36 psifor 5 seconds. 4/1/98Pressure20 ga. door, a honeycomb infill, with a 14 ga. steel plate mounted on the non-impact side. The door was mounted and tested as a swing- in door. Standard heavy-duty lock with three 1.2 in. slide bolts mounted opposite the hinges. 1.46 psiThe modified door held a pressure of 1.46 psifor 5 seconds. 5/98PressureSix-panel metal-covered wood-frame doorwith a sheet of 14 ga. steel attached. Standard off-the-shelf doorknob with threedeadbolt locks placed opposite the hinges. 1.21 psiThe modified door failed at the location of thedeadbolts at 1.21 psi. The hardware appeared to cause the door to fail. 5/98PressureSolid-core wood door with a sheet of 14 ga. steel attached. Standard off-the-shelf doorknob with threedeadbolt locks placed opposite the hinges. 1.13 psiThe modified door failed at the location of thedeadbolts at 1.13 psi. The hardware appeared to cause the door to fail. 5/98 Pressure Six-panel solid-wood door with a sheet of 14ga. steel attached. Standard off-the-shelf doorknob with threedeadbolt locks placed opposite the hinges. 1.12 psi The modified door failed at the location of thedeadbolts at 1.12 psi. The hardware appeared to cause the door to fail. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDANCE FOR COMMUNITY SHELTERS F-3 APPENDIX F DOORS AND HARDWARE THAT PASSED THE MISSILE IMPACT TESTS Results of Missile Impact Tests on Doors With Individually Activated Latching Mechanisms Date Test Type Door Description Lock Description MissileThreshold(mph) Impact Results ImpactSpeed(mph) Missile14 ga. steel door with 20 ga. metal ribs. The door was installed and tested as aswing-out door. Sargent mortise lock with deadboltfunction. > 100The door withstood several impacts at themidpoint of the door next to the hardwareand at the upper and lower corners next tothe hinges and on the lock side, respectively. 82.3581.99104.83106.573/26/98Missile14 ga. door with a polystyrene infill. The door was mounted and tested as aswing-in door. Yale mortise lock with deadbolt function.81Door failed the impact test due to hardwarefailure. When modified with three slide bolt locks, mounted opposite the hinges, the door is successful. 81.3 3/31/98Missile20 ga. door, a honeycomb infill, with a 14 ga. steel plate mounted on the non-impact side. The door was mounted and tested as a swing-in door. Standard heavy duty lock with three 1/2in. slide bolts mounted opposite the hinges. 104There was a local failure of the hardware, but the redudndanies in the hardware heldthe door in place. The missile penetrated the impact skin, but did not perforate the non-impact side or the 14 ga. steel plate. There was permanent deformation. 103.884/1/98 Missile 20 ga. door, a honeycomb infill, with a 14 ga. steel plate mounted on the non-impact side. The door was mounted and tested as a swing-in door. 104 The missile did not penetrate the door, but it caused permanent deformation in theinternal door frame. (The door buckled around the standard lock set.) 104.09 F-4 FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY DOORS AND HARDWARE THAT PASSED THE MISSILE IMPACT TESTS APPENDIX F Results of Wind Pressure and Missile Impact Tests on Double-Door Set With Panic Bar Hardware and Single-Action Lever Hardware Date Test Type Door Description Hardware Description Test Results 5/00Pressureand Missile3 ft. x 7 ft steel 14 ga. door with 14 ga. steel channels as hinge and lock rails and 16 ga. channels at top and bottom (see page 6-14, Section 6.4.1.1). Polystyrene infill or honeycomb core. 14 ga. steel frame with 14 ga. center steel mullion (see page6-15, Section 6.4.1.3). Externally mounted three-point latching mechanismwith panic bar release, 5/8 in. headbolt and footbolt with 1 in. throw, and mortised center deadbolt. Pressure reached 1.37 psi without failure. Missile impact at 100 mph did not perforate. 5/00 Pressureand Missile 3 ft. x 7 ft steel 14 ga. door with 14 ga. steel channels as hinge and lock rails and 16 ga. channels at top and bottom (see page 6-14, Section 6.4.1.1). Polystyrene infill or honeycomb core. 14 ga. steel frame with 14 ga. center steel mullion (see page6-15, Section 6.4.1.3) Externally mounted three-point latching mechanismwith single-action lever release, 1 in. solid mortised center deadbolt with 1 in. throw, and two 1 in.x 3/8 in. solid hookbolts, one below and one above the deadbolt. Pressure reached 1.37 psi without failure of door, although top hookbolt failed. Missile imapct at 100 mph pushed door through frame, causing center mullion to rotate. Testing inconclusive; further testing required. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDANCE FOR COMMUNITY SHELTERS F-5