7/21/2014

UFC 4-010-01 PURPOSE

DOD MINIMUM ANTITERRORISM Brief history & summary of UFC 4-010-01
STANDARDS FOR BUILDINGS Clarify standoff distances confusions
Introduce design aids to assist design professionals to
Aids for Design Professionals determine appropriate Standoff Distances

9 July 2014 We only address building types that we usually encounter with DoD
projects
This presentation is not intended to be comprehensive
Presented by: Bennett Fung, P.E. Please read UFC 4-010-01 for details

HISTORY OF UFC 4-010-01 AT/FP APPLICABILITY

UFC 4-010-01 DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings Summary
UFC 4-010-02 DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standoff Distances for Buildings
(FOUO) Occupancy Level
Number of DoD Population Density
Personnel that routinely Greater than one person Level of Protection
Need to
Conform to Minimum
occupy the space per 430 sf AT/FP Standards
First published:
31 July 2002 Primary Gathering 50 or more, and YES Low Yes

8 October 2003 Inhabited 11 or more, and YES Very Low Yes

22 January 2007, Change 1 Low Occupancy Fewer than 11, or NO None Exempt

Major Revision: High Occupancy

13 units or more NA Low Yes
Family Housing
9 February 2012
Low Occupancy
12 units or fewer NA None Exempt
1 October 2013, Change 1 Family Housing

3 4

LEVELS OF PROTECTION
Window and Door Behaviors

Window Hazard
Level of Door Hazard Rating
Rating ASTM Window Description Glazing Injuries
Protection ASTM F2247 and ASTM F2927
F2912

Below AT Windows will fail Category V

High Lethal hazards
Standards catastrophically Doors will be thrown into rooms

Glazing will fracture,

Category IV
come out of the frame,
Potential to cause Doors will become dislodged from
Very Low Low and is likely to be
serious injuries the structure but will not create a
propelled into the
flying debris hazard
building
Category III
Glazing will fracture,
Doors will experience non-
potentially come out of Does not present a
Low Very Low catastrophic failure, but will have
the frame, but at reduced significant injury hazard
permanent deformation and may be
velocity
inoperable

Minimal hazard Category II

Minimal Hazard Glazing will fracture, but
Medium consisting of glass dust Door will be openable but will have
& No Hazard remain in the frame
and slivers permanent deformation

5 6

1
 7/21/2014

7 8

FIRST EDITION: CURRENT EDITION:

9 10

STANDOFF DISTANCES STANDOFF DISTANCES

For some wall There is an App for that!
typeswill require
iTunes Store:
window and door
Before
construction that is iStandoff (for iPad)
148 ft
significantly heavier and (45 m) iStandoff Lite (for
more expensive than
82 ft iPhone)
windows and doors
(25 m)
designed at the standoff
distances in previous 82 ft
Sorry, Android App is
versions. (25 m)
coming!
Tradeoffs will have to be 33 ft
analyzed when: (10 m)

<82 feet (25 m) for WI

<33 feet (10 m) for WII

11 12

2
 7/21/2014

CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION
STANDARD 1: STANDOFF DISTANCES PARAMETERS
Figures B-1 and B-2 have many Qualifications (PAGE 1/2)

Building structure must meet Conventional Construction Parameters to use

the conventional construction standoff distances provided in these tables
If the building structure does not meet Conventional Construction
Parameters OR if there is not adequate standoff distance, then the structure
needs specific analysis or hardening for blast effects at the available standoff
distance
Windows and doors must be designed for the applicable standoff distance
Windows and doors need to be properly anchored to the supporting
structure
The structures around the window and door openings need to be designed
for the increased applied loads due to larger tributary areas to the adjacent
supporting elements

13 14

CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION
PARAMETERS
THE PROBLEM
(PAGE 2/2)

CCP are fairly well How are we supposed to determine what is the
defined for exterior best Standoff Distance for our building?
walls unless you have
very tall walls How can we quickly get the window and door
Roof systems are supplier to give us a quote?
very limited. Most
commonly used roof What glazing size and type will work best for our
systems will need to project?
be designed for blast
pressure.

15 16

THE SOLUTION: DESIGN AIDS STANDOFF DISTANCES

For Window Protection
For Window Protection we created the following design aids
Appendix A - AT/FP Standoff Distance Charts
Standoff Distance Charts for Windows Primary Gathering Building (Low Level of Protection)
Dynamic Blast Pressure and Impulse Charts PVB Thickness Controlled Perimeter Parking and Roadways
(Explosive Weight I) (Explosive Weight II)
Window Out of Plane Reaction Forces
Combined Figure A Figure B
Design Blast Pressure and Impulses using SBEDS-W (Previously HAZL) 0.015, 0.03 & 0.06
0.015 Figure 1 Figure 4
For Various:
0.030 Figure 2 Figure 5
Window sizes - Glazing areas
0.060 Figure 3 Figure 6
Aspect ratios
Levels of protection
Inhabited Building (Very Low Level of Protection)
Explosive weights PVB Thickness Controlled Perimeter Parking and Roadways
(Explosive Weight I) (Explosive Weight II)
Glazing construction
Combined Figure C Figure D
All analysis assumed ground level windows and doors with explosive 0.015, 0.03 & 0.06
placed straight on 0.015 Figure 7 Figure 10
0.030 Figure 8 Figure 11
0.060 Figure 9 Figure 12

17 18

3
 7/21/2014

STANDOFF DISTANCES Old Standoff Distance = 45m (148 ft) STANDOFF DISTANCES
PRIMARY GATHERING, LOW LEVEL OF PROTECTION, CONTROLLED PERIMETER

For Window Protection

Figure 2
Explosive Weight I
Low Level of Protection
IGU + 2-1/8 with
0.03 PVB
Example:
4x5 window
Area = 20 sq ft
Aspect Ratio: 1.25
Find required standoff Fig 1: 0.015 PVB Fig 2: 0.03 PVB Fig 3: 0.06 PVB
distance

19 20

STANDOFF DISTANCES STANDOFF DISTANCES

For Window Protection
For Window Protection Appendix A - AT/FP Standoff Distance Charts

Figure A Primary Gathering Building (Low Level of Protection)

PVB Thickness Controlled Perimeter Parking and Roadways
Explosive Weight I (Explosive Weight I) (Explosive Weight II)

Low Level of Protection Combined Figure A Figure B

0.015, 0.03 & 0.06
0.015 Figure 1 Figure 4
0.030 Figure 2 Figure 5
0.060 Figure 3 Figure 6

Inhabited Building (Very Low Level of Protection)

PVB Thickness Controlled Perimeter Parking and Roadways
(Explosive Weight I) (Explosive Weight II)
Combined Figure C Figure D
0.015, 0.03 & 0.06
0.015 Figure 7 Figure 10
0.030 Figure 8 Figure 11
0.060 Figure 9 Figure 12

21 22

STANDOFF DISTANCES WINDOW FRAME ANCHOR

For Window Protection
For Window Protection
Figure 16
Figure 8
Explosive Weight I
Explosive Weight I
Low Level of Protection
Very Low Level of
Protection IGU + 2-1/8 with
0.03 PVB
IGU + 2-1/8 with
0.03 PVB Find Maximum out-of-
plane Reaction
Old Standoff Distance = 25m (82 ft)

23 24

4
 7/21/2014

DOOR BLAST DESIGN WINDOW & DOOR BLAST DESIGN

(Note: Semi-log scale)

Figures 13: Blast Pressure Figure 14: Impulse

25 26

UFC 4-020-01 *Special Structures include Religious Facilities,

SECURITY ENGINEERING FACILITIES UFC 4-020-01 Recreational Facilities, Commissaries and Exchanges
specified in Table 3-1 of UFC 4-020-01

PLANNING MANUAL Appendix A: New Construction Cost Tables

UFC 4-010-01, B-1 Site Planning

Planning level costs and requirements for building hardening are
addressed in UFC 4-020-01
UFC 4-010-01, B-1.1.1 Conventional Construction Standoff Distance
Those tradeoffs will generally need to be analyzed when standoff
distances are less than 82 feet (25 meters) for Explosive Weight I
and 33 feet (10 meters ) for Explosive Weight II. There are tools in
UFC 4-020-01 that can assist in evaluating those tradeoffs.

27 28

MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION TYPE

UFC 4-020-01 FOR VARIOUS BUILDING COMPONENTS TO COMPLY WITH AT/FP REQUIREMENTS

Appendix D of our report Appendix D of our report

Appendix D Minimum Construction Type and Cost Increase for Building AdminFacility,MedicalClinicandBarracks:
Components to Comply with AT/FP Standards Standoff ConstructionType
Distance Walls Windows Doors Roofs
Source: UFC 4-020-01 DoD Security Engineering Facilities Planning Manual, (feet) Thk. Reinf. Mat. Out.Pane InnerPane Laminate Door BackingWall Thk. Mat. Deck L W Sppt.Memb.
Appendix A 32.8 8" Heavy Conc. Glass 5x1/8"Glass 4x0.045"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
33.1 8" Heavy Conc. Glass 4x5/32"Glass 3x0.045"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
I. Minimum Construction Type for Building Components to Comply with AT/FP 33.5 10" Heavy CMU Glass 4x5/32"Glass 3x0.045"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
3443 12" Moderate CMU Glass 4x5/32"Glass 3x0.045"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
Level of Controlled Perimeter Parking and Roadways 4454 10" Moderate CMU Glass 4x5/32"Glass 3x0.045"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
Protection (Explosive Weight I) (Explosive Weight II) 5467 12" Light CMU Glass 4x5/32"Glass 3x0.045"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
Low Table 1 Table 2 6769 12" Light CMU Glass 2x3/16"Glass 0.060"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
Very Low Table 3 Table 4 6971 12" Light CMU Glass 2x5/32"Glass 0.060"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
7179 8" Moderate CMU Glass 2x5/32"Glass 0.060"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall 4.5" Conc. Metal 30' 6' 20K10
8096 8" Moderate CMU Glass 2x5/32"Glass 0.060"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall Metal 30' 4' 18LH02
II. Cost Increase for Building Components to Comply with AT/FP
96113 8" Moderate CMU Glass 2x1/8"Glass 0.030"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall Metal 30' 4' 18LH02
113116 8" Moderate CMU Glass 2x1/8"Glass 0.030"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall Metal 30' 6' 18LH02
Level of Controlled Perimeter Parking and Roadways
117131 8" Light CMU Glass 2x1/8"Glass 0.030"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall Metal 30' 6' 18LH02
Protection (Explosive Weight I) (Explosive Weight II)
131133 8" Light CMU Glass 2x1/8"Glass 0.030"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall Metal 30' 8' 18LH02
Low Table 5 Table 6
133160 8" Light CMU Glass 2x1/8"Glass 0.030"PVB HollowMetal BackingWall Metal 30' 8' 16K9
Very Low Table 7 Table 8 161+ 8" Light CMU Glass 2x1/8"Glass 0.030"PVB HollowMetal Metal 30' 8' 16K9

29 30

5
 7/21/2014

DISCLAIMER THANK YOU!

This presentation and accompanying report were prepared by SSFM
International, Inc. to serve as a design aid. It does not replace or override SSFM International, Inc.
the contents of UFC 4-010-01 or the advice of a professional engineer
experienced in the field of blast design. SSFM International does not 501 Sumner Street, Suite 620
guarantee or warrant the completeness, accuracy or reliability of the
information in this report. Users of this report are responsible for assessing Honolulu, HI 96817
the relevance and accuracy of the contents of this report and it shall be
used at your own risk. SSFM International will not be liable for any loss,
damage or expense incurred by any person(s) using or relying on the
information in this report. Bennett Fung, P.E.
bfung@ssfm.com
This presentation and accompanying report may not be copied for
commercial redistribution or dissemination without the explicit permission (808) 531-1308
of SSFM International.

31 32