The DOS has different tests and standards for barriers to withstand impact from different vehicles, ranging from cars to heavy-haul trucks
Barriers certified by the U.S. Department of State can be trusted to withstand specified weights and speeds

This time of year, in the early spring, there pops up a plethora of trade shows in which security vendors can present their newest marvels to potential customers. Not to be outdone are the barriers manufacturers. Their products will range from a large metal planter to be placed in an area where no traffic is allowed to movable barriers which lower to let a car drive over and re-raise to protect the property. Some are so sophisticated that they can stop a 30-ton truck driven by terrorists at 50 mph.

Vehicle Barrier Testing By U.S. Department Of State

But how do you know those 65,000 pounds and 50 mph figures are not just marketing numbers? If you are planning to implement such protection, you need to know exactly what weight and speed your new system will meet. And, as you go up and down the trade show aisles, you will see many different claims.

That's why you want the figures to be certified and the leading institution doing such work is the U.S Department of State. In order to be certified by the DOS, vehicle barriers must be tested by an independent crash test facility. Certification is based on speed and penetration ratings. Originally, “K” indicated vehicle speed during the crash test; and “L” indicated the maximum allowed penetration of the barrier by the vehicle. 

For test purposes, K12 denoted a speed of up to 50 mph and L3 (the highest penetration rating) denoted a penetration of three feet or less. Other ratings included: K8 = 40 mph; K4 = 30 mph; L2 = 3 ft. to 20 ft.; and L1 = 20 ft. to 50 ft. Thus, penetration levels were set at 3 feet (1 m), 20 feet (6 m) and 50 feet (15 m), measured from the point of attack to the final resting place. In 2005, a revision (rev A) issued an update, eliminating all penetration levels except the 3 feet (1 m) standard. 

Importantly, it was also recognized that different types of vehicles use different platforms, which would affect results. So, a new test standard required the use of cars, pick-ups, medium sized trucks and trucks that haul heavy goods. They are referred to as the ASTM standards.

Use These ASTM Standards For Impact Condition Designations

Four types of vehicles are defined:

1. Small Passenger Car:  The car must have been manufactured in the last 10 years and weigh 2430 +/- 50 pounds (1100 +/- 22 kg).

2. Pickup Truck:  The truck must be a ¾-ton model, manufactured within the last 10 years and weigh 5070 +/- 100 pounds (2300 +/-46 kg).

3. Medium Duty Truck:  This vehicle must have a diesel engine with a vehicle mass of 15,000 +/- 300 pounds (6800 +/- 136 kg).

4. Heavy Goods Vehicle:  This must be a tandem axle dump truck or tandem axle with drop axle truck, tested at 65,000 +/- 1300 pounds (29,500 +/- 590 kg).

Most importantly, the new designations actually made some sense in that a car designation starts with a “C”, the pick-up is designated as a “P”, the medium duty truck gets an “M” and the heavy goods vehicle is labeled an “H”. The number following the letter is the speed, measured in mph. Thus, a “40” means the vehicle was tested at 38.0 to 46.9 mph. An H30 designation thus defines a heavy goods vehicle traveling at approximately 30 mph.

Any claims made by barricade manufacturers should be backed up by independent crash tests and certifications
The BSI has their own vehicle barricade testing standard, which specifically addresses European cars which have heavier frameworks and lower centers of gravity

As a result, it is quite easy to determine the condition designation:

  • Car: C40, C50 and C60
  • Pick-up: P40, P50 and P60
  • Medium duty truck: M30, M40 and M50
  • Heavy goods: H30, H40 and H50

What Is The Difference?

It’s easiest to show the difference in designations with an example. For instance, the Delta DSC501 is presently DOS-rated as a K54-certified barrier. That means it has been tested to stop a 65,000-pound truck traveling at 50 mph dead in its tracks. That also means it took on 5.4 million foot-pounds. Under the ASTM system, the DSC501 would be designated as an H50.  

The British Standard Vs. US-Based DOS For Vehicle Barricades

The BSI (British Standards Institute) PAS 68 2007 was the first standard published for vehicle barricade testing in the United Kingdom. PAS 68: 2007 rates products by measuring the velocity and weight of the vehicle against the level of penetration of both the vehicle and any of its load past the vehicle control device. The maximum level of testing would see a 7.5 tonne (15,000 lb) vehicle traveling at 80 kph (50mph) with zero penetration.

This test differs from the U.S.-based DOS and ASTM tests by specifying a wider range of attack vehicles. Most significantly, though, it specifies European cars and trucks. European trucks have much heavier frame works and lower centers of gravity, which can significantly affect the test outcome. Marginal barricade designs that have passed U.S. tests have failed PAS 68 2007. Nonetheless, the K12 vehicle mass and speeds are very similar to the DOS and ASTM tests. The post crash measurements of penetration and general test result evaluations are also much the same.

Just remember, as you are going up and down the trade show aisles seeing the various claims, it behooves you and the people you intend to protect how and where they got those numbers. Listen for two very important terms - "independent crash test" and "certified."

To learn more about certification standards, attendees at the ISC West Exposition in Las Vegas, April 6-8, should stop by the Delta Scientific booth, #21134.

Download PDF version

Author profile

Greg Hamm Vice President, Sales and Marketing, Delta Scientific Corporation

As Vice President of Sales and Market for Delta Scientific, Greg Hamm plays a major role in the company's sales, project management, application engineering and corporate strategic planning. Under Hamm's leadership, Delta Scientific is delivering record numbers of vehicle access systems to customers around the globe.

In case you missed it

How Organizations Can Secure User Credentials From Data Breaches And Password Hacks
How Organizations Can Secure User Credentials From Data Breaches And Password Hacks

In the age of massive data breaches, phishing attacks and password hacks, user credentials are increasingly unsafe. So how can organizations secure accounts without making life more difficult for users? Marc Vanmaele, CEO of TrustBuilder, explains. User credentials give us a sense of security. Users select their password, it's personal and memorable to them, and it's likely that it includes special characters and numbers for added security. Sadly, this sense is most likely false. If it's anything like the 5.4 billion user IDs on haveibeenpwned.com, their login has already been compromised. If it's not listed, it could be soon. Recent estimates state that 8 million more credentials are compromised every day. Ensuring Safe Access Data breaches, ransomware and phishing campaigns are increasingly easy to pull off. Cyber criminals can easily find the tools they need on Google with little to no technical knowledge. Breached passwords are readily available to cyber criminals on the internet. Those that haven’t been breached can also be guessed, phished or cracked using one of the many “brute-force” tools available on the internet. It's becoming clear that login credentials are no longer enough to secure your users' accounts. Meanwhile, organizations have a responsibility and an ever-stricter legal obligation to protect their users’ sensitive data. This makes ensuring safe access to the services they need challenging, particularly when trying to provide a user experience that won’t cause frustration – or worse, lose your customers’ interest. After GDPR was implemented across the European Union, organizations could face a fine of up to €20 million, or 4% annual global turnover  Importance Of Data Protection So how can businesses ensure their users can safely and simply access the services they need while keeping intruders out, and why is it so important to strike that balance? After GDPR was implemented across the European Union, organizations could face a fine of up to €20 million, or 4% annual global turnover – whichever is higher, should they seriously fail to comply with their data protection obligations. This alone was enough to prompt many organizations to get serious about their user’s security. Still, not every business followed suit. Cloud Security Risks Breaches were most commonly identified in organizations using cloud computing or where staff use personal devices According to a recent survey conducted at Infosecurity Europe, more than a quarter of organizations did not feel ready to comply with GDPR in August 2018 – three months after the compliance deadline. Meanwhile, according to the UK Government’s 2018 Cyber Security Breaches survey, 45% of businesses reported breaches or attacks in the last 12 months. According to the report, logins are less secure when accessing services in the cloud where they aren't protected by enterprise firewalls and security systems. Moreover, breaches were most commonly identified in organizations using cloud computing or where staff use personal devices (known as BYOD). According to the survey, 61% of UK organizations use cloud-based services. The figure is higher in banking and finance (74%), IT and communications (81%) and education (75%). Additionally, 45% of businesses have BYOD. This indicates a precarious situation. The majority of businesses hold personal data on users electronically and may be placing users at risk if their IT environments are not adequately protected. Hackers have developed a wide range of tools to crack passwords, and these are readily available within a couple of clicks on a search engine Hacking Methodology In a recent exposé on LifeHacker, Internet standards expert John Pozadzides revealed multiple methods hackers use to bypass even the most secure passwords. According to John’s revelations, 20% of passwords are simple enough to guess using easily accessible information. But that doesn’t leave the remaining 80% safe. Hackers have developed a wide range of tools to crack passwords, and these are readily available within a couple of clicks on a search engine. Brute force attacks are one of the easiest methods, but criminals also use increasingly sophisticated phishing campaigns to fool users into handing over their passwords. Users expect organizations to protect their passwords and keep intruders out of their accounts Once a threat actor has access to one password, they can easily gain access to multiple accounts. This is because, according to Mashable, 87% of users aged 18-30 and 81% of users aged 31+ reuse the same passwords across multiple accounts. It’s becoming clear that passwords are no longer enough to keep online accounts secure. Securing Data With Simplicity Users expect organizations to protect their passwords and keep intruders out of their accounts. As a result of a data breach, companies will of course suffer financial losses through fines and remediation costs. Beyond the immediate financial repercussions, however, the reputational damage can be seriously costly. A recent Gemalto study showed that 44% of consumers would leave their bank in the event of a security breach, and 38% would switch to a competitor offering a better service. Simplicity is equally important, however. For example, if it’s not delivered in ecommerce, one in three customers will abandon their purchase – as a recent report by Magnetic North revealed. If a login process is confusing, staff may be tempted to help themselves access the information they need by slipping out of secure habits. They may write their passwords down, share them with other members of staff, and may be more susceptible to social engineering attacks. So how do organizations strike the right balance? For many, Identity and Access Management solutions help to deliver secure access across the entire estate. It’s important though that these enable simplicity for the organization, as well as users. Organizations need an IAM solution that will adapt to both of these factors, providing them with the ability to apply tough access policies when and where they are needed and prioritising swift access where it’s safe to do so Flexible IAM While IAM is highly recommended, organizations should seek solutions that offer the flexibility to define their own balance between a seamless end-user journey and the need for a high level of identity assurance. organizations’ identity management requirements will change over time. So too will their IT environments. organizations need an IAM solution that will adapt to both of these factors, providing them with the ability to apply tough access policies when and where they are needed and prioritising swift access where it’s safe to do so. Importantly, the best solutions will be those that enable this flexibility without spending significant time and resource each time adaptations need to be made. Those that do will provide the best return on investment for organizations looking to keep intruders at bay, while enabling users to log in safely and simply.

Top Ten Security Industry Expert Panel Discussions From 2018
Top Ten Security Industry Expert Panel Discussions From 2018

The security marketplace is talking about a lot of different subjects. Our website’s Expert Panel Roundtable discussions in 2018 reflected some of the “hot topics” in the industry.  The very most-clicked-on Expert Panel Roundtable discussion in 2018 was about privacy issues and GDPR’s impact on physical security systems. Other hot topics that made the Top-10 list of roundtable discussions included obstacles to adoption of mobile credentials, what’s new “on the edge,” and the value of physical security data. Here is a listing of the Top 10 Expert Panel Roundtable discussions posted in 2018, along with a “sound bite” from each discussion, and links back to the full articles. Thanks to everyone who contributed to Expert Panel Roundtable in 2018 (including the quotable panelists named and linked below). 1. How do privacy issues and GDPR impact physical security systems? "GDPR specifically restricts the capture and use of EU residents’ personal data and is in direct conflict with the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) platforms to track individual activities. The challenge for manufacturers will be to design solutions capable of capturing valuable information for security or business intelligence purposes while simultaneously anonymizing retained data.” - Peter Strom, March Networks 2. What are the security challenges of the hospitality market? "The primary challenge the hospitality industry faces is the fine balance between the delivery of exceptional customer service and maintaining a safe and secure environment. The industry sees a range of threats, including theft, terrorism and natural disasters, and more modern risks, such as those related to cybersecurity, liability and compliance." - Jumbi Edulbehram, Oncam 3. Where is it inappropriate to install video cameras? "The most obvious examples would be in bathrooms or bedrooms, but the more interesting cases are those that are not so obvious – such as religious institutions like a church or a mosque. An increase in the boldness of would-be thieves has led to a recent rise in surveillance outside of houses of worship." - Stuart Rawling, Pelco by Schneider Electric 4. What technology will impact security most in the rest of 2018? "The hottest trend we are currently seeing in 2018 is the continued adoption of intelligent devices and automation into the security framework. We have embraced a model where our software and hardware components continually get smarter and easier for security and IT teams to manage and deploy." - Stuart Tucker, AMAG Technology 5. What are the obstacles to adoption of mobile credentials for access control? "Mobile credentials have been slow to take off because legacy readers traditionally did not have Bluetooth or NFC capacity. However, upgrade kits will soon be available from some access control vendors, and customers will be able to easily upgrade their readers." - Derek Arcuri, Genetec 6. What’s new “on the edge” of security and video surveillance systems? "As more powerful in-camera chipsets are developed, edge devices are capable of even more powerful analytics that can inform operators in real-time of events requiring attention. Part of this significant evolution is from a form of artificial intelligence (AI) called deep learning." - Paul Kong, Hanwha Techwin America 7. Are integrators and end users overwhelmed by too many choices? "Being proactive in tracking new developments and networking with like-minded professionals are critical. Find out what your colleagues are using or testing, and get their feedback on what is working well, especially if their organization is similar to yours. Join local groups, attend industry conferences, and connect on social media to compare notes on emerging technologies." - Brandon Reich, Pivot3 8. What role does social media play in promoting security? "Social media can help us reduce false police dispatches by drawing in a personal circle of people that can validate an alarm, whether it be a neighbour looking out their window to see what’s going on, or a family member that knows your travel plans and is taking care of your house." - Wayne Jared, 3xLOGIC 9. How should your security company measure total cost of ownership (TCO)? “When looking at TCO you need to consider the obvious initial capital cost – compared to alternatives – and also the operational costs across the lifespan of the systems, across one, three and five years. On top of this, though, security can add additional value through integration.” - John Davies, TDSi 10. What is the value of physical security data? "While active protection is the primary job of a security system, the data generated by today’s networked solutions can provide a wealth of intelligence to help organisations optimize both their security strategies and their business operations.” - Mark Perkins, Boon Edam

Adapting Servers For IP Video Surveillance Systems: Why Manufacturers Struggle
Adapting Servers For IP Video Surveillance Systems: Why Manufacturers Struggle

Security integrators are often tasked with a multitude of responsibilities which could include a variety of installation, integration or design tasks made up of sprinkler systems, fire alarms, access control, HVAC, video surveillance systems and networks; and then pile on maintenance, training and analytics. Traditionally, most security integrators have installation backgrounds but are now expected to be IT savvy, too. Even the most proficient IT professionals may not fully grasp the complexity of adapting computer servers for use with video systems. It’s not the area of expertise of security integrators as the complexities between IT data and video data are significant. Therefore, security integrators depend on system builders to provide solutions to meet the needs of video systems expertly and with few hassles. It’s a simple enough ask, but not so easy to deliver. Tom Larson, Chief Technology Officer, BCDVideo, lists some of the challenges: The Gap Between Reality And Customer Expectations End users should expect a security integrator to provide services and a wide product line to ensure the right equipment for any size job Sometimes there is a gap between what a security integrator expects from a video surveillance solution (in terms of validation testing, dependability, technical support) and the performance of available choices, especially in the case of low-cost or generic equipment. Extra service and support are needed to bridge the gap. Unfortunately, some manufacturers entering the market have failed to deliver, and integrators (and their end user customers) have paid a price. The Network Is Often Overlooked Security integrators should pay special attention to engineering the network and calculating the bandwidth and storage needed for video projects, especially given how technology evolves so quickly. Security is an appliance-driven business, and integrators who just want to add another server to expand storage or functionality without configuring the network run the risk of i/o bottlenecks and other system failures. End users should expect a security integrator to provide services and a wide product line to ensure the right equipment for any size job. Unfortunately, traditional IT resellers are often married to a singular solution limiting their knowledge of a good fit for the job. Buying a video server based on a low price aggravates the problem, as “Frankensteined” or generic servers tend to generate additional costs over time Servers Are Mistakenly Considered A One-Time Expense One mistake purchasing agents make and security integrators have a hard time quantifying is viewing video storage as a capital expense (as one more component of a security system) rather than considering ongoing operating expenses. Buying a video server based on a low price aggravates the problem. “Frankensteined” or generic servers tend to generate additional costs over time, such as firmware or supply chain issues, and some systems builders have failed to provide support to offset those costs. In fact, the high costs over time of supporting inexpensive servers have been unsustainable for some system builders, who have left integrators and end users holding the bag, and in some cases, the liability. Adapting To Sustainable Strategies “Systems builders to the video surveillance market must adapt and invest to meet the demands of security integrators’ expectations, and they need a business model that enables them to provide a substantial level of support and commitment,” says Larson. “Working with high-quality manufacturers and providing tried-and-tested, certified equipment upfront ensures manageable costs over the life of the system. Products that are fully tested and contain no firmware bugs ensure smoother installations. By providing adequate technical support to the security integrator and managing IT variables over the life of the system, the systems builder makes it possible for a security integrator to specify and install a video server as easily as any other system component.” Keeping IT professionals on staff to deal with server issues is cost-prohibitive for security integrators Taking a longer-term view and considering total cost of ownership is a more sustainable strategy for integrators, says Larson. Investing upfront in a higher-quality server is rewarded by dependability and lower service costs over the life of the system. And the lower costs of supporting a higher-quality server create a more sustainable business model for the integrator, thus ensuring the integrator and end user will have ongoing support. Adapting Server Technology To Video Applications Security integrators deliver a different skill set than IT integrators, who tend to be more hands-on in terms of updating firmware and providing maintenance. Keeping IT professionals on staff to deal with server issues is cost-prohibitive for security integrators, who therefore depend on systems builders to provide that expertise. They develop a long-term relationship with a systems builder they can depend on to meet their needs for each job. Larson says the best scenario for a security integrator is a combination of a high-quality server systems builder that understands the specific needs of the security integrator market. Adapting server technology to video applications requires knowledge of both disciplines. Dependable technology adapted to the needs of the video channel ensures successful installations and happy, long-term customers.