1、Designation: F2656/F2656M 18aStandard Test Method forCrash Testing of Vehicle Security Barriers1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F2656/F2656M; the number immediately following the designation indicates the yearof original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revi
2、sion. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval.A superscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.INTRODUCTIONOriginal perimeter barrier test methods were first published in 1985 by the Bureau of DiplomaticSecurity to assess the crash pe
3、rformance of perimeter barriers and gates. Since that time, the frequencyand scale of attacks using vehicles with or without an explosive payload have increased bothinternationally and domestically. Therefore, there is a need to address a broad spectrum of possibleincident conditions such as credibl
4、e threat vehicle types for the locale, attack velocities of the differentvehicles, and different acceptable penetration limitations. Also, there are different evaluation criteriafor different agencies that fulfill their unique access control operations, aesthetics, and otherorganizational requiremen
5、ts. This test method was originally developed to expand the previousDepartment of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Securitys crash testing standard to meet the broader needsof multiple organizations responsible for the protection of U.S. assets domestically and abroad.Published test standards for vehicle
6、 perimeter security devices have previously been maintained bythe U.S. State Department, Bureau of Diplomatic Security. The Specification for Vehicle Crash Testof Perimeter Barriers and Gates was first published in 1985 as SD-STD-02.01. In that standard, the testvehicle was specified as a medium-dut
7、y truck weighing 6800 kg 15 000 lb. The payload was to besecurely attached to the frame and nominal impact velocities were 50, 65, and 80 km/h 30, 40, and50 mph. Penetration limits were 1, 6, and 15 m 3, 20, and 50 ft and were measured from the attackface of the perimeter security device to the fina
8、l resting position of the front of the frame rails of thetest vehicle.In 2003, the U.S. State Department, Bureau of Diplomatic Security issued an updated standard(SD-STD-02.01, Revision A) for the testing of perimeter barriers. This update was done for severalreasons. The foremost reason for change
9、was limited setback distances precluded the use of anydevices at their facilities or compounds that did not meet the highest test level, that is, those allowingmore than 1-m 3-ft penetration distance. Therefore, the revised standard only uses a 1-m 3-ftpenetration distance. Secondly, the method of r
10、igid attachment of the ballast to the test vehicle was notsimulating likely payload configurations and was altering the structural integrity of the test vehicle.Consequently, the updated standard requires a payload consisting of 208-L 55-gal steel drumsstrapped together that have been filled with so
11、il. This assembly is then strapped to the vehicle loadplatform. The third reason for change was based on the observation that the cargo bed of trucks couldeffectively penetrate certain types of barriers. Accordingly, the penetration distance is now measuredfrom the inside face or non-impact surface
12、of the barrier to the front of the cargo bed when the vehiclehas reached its final position. Lastly, it was determined that the trucks used different platforms withina given class affecting result consistency. The revised test standard required the use of very specificdiesel-powered medium-duty truc
13、ks.In 2007, ASTM first published Test Method F2656 for Vehicle Crash Testing of Perimeter Barriers.It included the same test vehicle as specified in the 2003 SD-STD-02.01, Revision A, but additionaltest vehicles were added. They were the small passenger car, a12-ton regular cab pickup, and a tandema
14、xle dump truck. In addition, penetration ratings were reestablished and included the highest ratingestablished by the 2003 SD-STD-02.01. Occupant risk values as established in NCHRP Report 350were also added.Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 1942
15、8-2959. United StatesThis international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for theDevelopment of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Techni
16、cal Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.1This latest version of Test Method F2656 incorporates two additional vehicles, the large passengersedan and a Class 7 cab-over with a single rear axle. Additionally, the small car and pickup have beenupdated to match the latest AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safet
17、y Hardware (MASH), the update toNCHRP Report 350. Class 7 cab-over is compatible with European standards and is designated C7.Additional definitions and recommendations have also been added and the word “perimeter” has beendeleted from the title to reflect more accurately all barriers tested under t
18、his test method. Since it wasdetermined that the P4 rating did not have substantial relevance, this rating has been eliminated. Tokeep up with current terminology, the term “reduced risk” is discussed in this version of Test MethodF2656.1. Scope1.1 This test method provides a range of vehicle impact
19、conditions, designations, and penetration performance levels.This will allow an agency to select passive perimeter barriersand active entry point barriers appropriate for use at facilitieswith a defined moving vehicle threat. Agencies may adopt andspecify those condition designations and performance
20、 levels inthis test method that satisfy their specific needs. Agencies mayalso assign certification ratings for active and passive perimeterbarriers based on the tests and test methodologies describedherein. Many test parameters are standardized to arrive at acommon vehicle type and mass, enhance te
21、st realism andreplication, and produce uniform rating designations.1.2 Compliance with these test procedures establishes ameasure of performance but does not render any vehicleperimeter barrier invulnerable to vehicle penetration. Cautionshould be exercised in interpreting test findings and in extra
22、po-lating results to other than test conditions. While computersimulations are powerful tools that are useful in the develop-ment of new and improved barriers or in estimating perfor-mance under differing conditions, use of only the results fromcomputer simulation for fielding a product is strongly
23、discour-aged. When performing a test, developers and users areencouraged to address specific or unusual site conditions asneeded. Often local terrain features, soil conditions, climate, orother items will dictate special needs at specific locations.Therefore, if site conditions are likely to degrade
24、 a barriersperformance, the agency in need of a vehicle perimeter barriershould require testing with the specific site conditions repli-cated for full-scale crash testing.1.3 Product/design certification under this test method onlyaddresses the ability of the barrier to withstand the impact ofthe te
25、st vehicle. It does not represent an endorsement of theproduct/design or address its operational suitability.1.4 The values in stated in either SI units or inch-poundunits are to be regarded separately as standard. The valuesstated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore,each system s
26、hall be used independently of the other. Combin-ing values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standard.1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish
27、appro-priate safety, health, and environmental practices and todetermine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior touse.1.6 This international standard was developed in accor-dance with internationally recognized principles on standard-ization established in the Decision on Principles for t
28、heDevelopment of International Standards, Guides and Recom-mendations issued by the World Trade Organization TechnicalBarriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.2. Referenced Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2C39 Test Method for Compressive Strength of CylindricalConcrete SpecimensD1556 Test Method for Density an
29、d Unit Weight of Soil inPlace by Sand-Cone MethodD4429 Test Method for CBR (California Bearing Ratio) ofSoils in Place (Withdrawn 2018)3D6938 Test Methods for In-Place Density and Water Contentof Soil and Soil-Aggregate by Nuclear Methods (ShallowDepth)2.2 AASHTO Standards4M147-65 Standard Specifica
30、tions for Transportation Materi-als and Methods of Sampling and Testing, Table 1 GradingRequirements for Soil-Aggregate Materials, Grading BT099 Standard Method of Test for Moisture-Density Rela-tions of Soils Using a 2.5-kg (5.5-lb) Rammer and a305-mm (12-in.) Drop2.3 ISO Standard5ISO/IEC 17025 Gen
31、eral requirements for the competence oftesting and calibration laboratories1This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F12 on Security Systems and Equipment and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee F12.10 onSystems Products and Services.Current edition approved June 1, 2018
32、. Published July 2018. Originally approved in 2007. Last previous edition approved in 2018 as F2656/F2656M 18. DOI:10.1520/F2656_F2656M18A.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume
33、 information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM website.3The last approved version of this historical standard is referenced onwww.astm.org.4Available from American Association of State Highway and TransportationOfficials (AASHTO), 444 N. Capitol St., NW, Suite 249, Washington,
34、 DC 20001,http:/www.transportation.org.5Available from International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 1 rue deVaremb, Case postale 56, CH-1211, Geneva 20, Switzerland, http:/www.iso.ch.F2656/F2656M 18a22.4 SAE Standard6J211-1 Instrumentation for Impact Test Part 1: ElectronicInstrumentationJ2
35、11-2 Instrumentation for Impact Test Part 2: Photo-graphic Instrumentation2.5 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers PDC Standard7List of DOD Certified Anti-Ram Vehicle Barriers82.6 U.S. Department of State DS9SD-STD-02.01 Specification for Vehicle Crash Test of Pe-rimeter Barriers and Gates, 1985SD-STD-02.01
36、, Revision A Test Method for Vehicle CrashTesting of Perimeter Barriers and Gates, 20033. Terminology3.1 Definitions:3.1.1 “A” pillar, nstructural member forming the forwardcorner of the cab or passenger compartment.3.1.2 accredited independent testing laboratory, ntestinglaboratory accredited to pe
37、rform the referenced testing proce-dures by a nationally recognized accrediting agency in accor-dance with ISO/IEC 17025 and led by a test director.3.1.2.1 DiscussionAccredited independent testing labora-tories may have no financial interest in or otherwise beaffiliated with companies or individuals
38、 for which they performaccreditation testing. Hereinafter, accredited independent test-ing laboratories are referred to as either accredited facilities ortesting laboratories. Other independent testing agencies ac-tively pursuing accreditation and whose testing protocols areaccepted by a federal age
39、ncy may also conduct tests for aperiod of one year after performing the first test using this testmethod.3.1.3 agency, nspecifier, responsible party, or owner.3.1.4 barrier, ngate, bollard, wedges, drop arms, walls,wire ropes, net, planter, other structure, or topographic feature(that is, berms, roc
40、ks, or trenches) that provides protectionagainst a vehicle trying to gain access overtly to a compoundor facility.3.1.4.1 DiscussionActive barriers can be deployed toserve as a security device and can be stored to allow trafficpassage while passive barriers are essentially permanent and donot move.
41、The perimeter is typically the outermost boundaryover which the facility has control and is normally defined bythe property line.3.1.5 berm, nmounded section of available material suchas soil, gravel, rock, and so forth.3.1.6 bollard, nhollow or solid section posts or series ofposts, usually metal,
42、concrete, wood, or combinations of same,used to channel or restrict vehicular traffic which includesfixed, removable, and operable/retractable posts.3.1.7 condition designation, nrelates vehicle type andvehicle velocity to the kinetic energy for which testing isconducted.3.1.8 continuous barrier, na
43、ny barrier that relies on acontinuous foundation or a continuous structural element toresist penetration by vehicles.3.1.9 debris, npost-impact barrier, ballast, and vehiclecomponents dispersed as a result of impact.3.1.10 disabled, adjused in conjunction with the vehicleand barrier description afte
44、r impact.3.1.10.1 DiscussionDisabled barrier pertains to an activebarrier that is not operable after impact as a result of damagecaused by the test impact. Disabled barrier also pertains to thepost-test barrier conditions if it is no longer in a deployedposition. Disabled vehicle pertains to the veh
45、icle being unableto proceed under its own power immediately after impact as aresult of damage caused by the test impact. It is appropriate andnecessary to discuss the level of damage to the vehicle indetermining what extent the vehicle is disabled, for example,the radiator or the oil pan or both may
46、 be ruptured that wouldultimately render the vehicle inoperable but would not imme-diately prevent the vehicle from proceeding under its ownpower, thus not being defined as disabled for the purposes ofthis test method. However, the vehicle is determined to bedisabled if it is unable to move under it
47、s own power immedi-ately after impact, for example, the motor is ejected or the axleis dislodged from the vehicle.3.1.11 ditch, nexcavation into existing grade with varyingcross sections such as “V” or “U” shaped.3.1.12 dynamic penetration distance, nduring the crashevent, the maximum horizontal pen
48、etration distance of thereference point on the test vehicle, as defined in 7.5.1,tothepre-test location of the barrier reference point.3.1.12.1 DiscussionSee Annex A1 for barrier referencepoint locations.3.1.13 final resting point, ndistance from the pre-impactreference point on a barrier to the por
49、tion of the protectivebarrier that is furthest away from the original reference point atfinal rest.3.1.13.1 DiscussionAdditionally, it is the distance fromthe pre-impact reference point on a barrier to the definedvehicle reference point at final rest. This distance may benegative if the vehicle reference point did not pass thepre-impact reference point on a perimeter barrier.3.1.14 override, ntype of crash in which a portion of avehicle goes over a barrier.3.1.15 penetration rating, nrating achieved by a barrierbased on maximum dynamic
