Standard Historical Last Updated: Dec 31, 2010 Track Document
ASTM F2781-09

Standard Practice for Testing Forced Entry Resistance of Security Fence Systems

Standard Practice for Testing Forced Entry Resistance of Security Fence Systems F2781-09 ASTM|F2781-09|en-US Standard Practice for Testing Forced Entry Resistance of Security Fence Systems Standard new BOS Vol. 01.06 Committee F14
$ 68.00 In stock

Significance and Use

The success or failure of any attempt to forcefully penetrate a fence system is dependent upon three primary factors that collectively define the threatthe tools and devices employed, the number of aggressors, and their level of sophistication.

Normally, a test procedure of this scope would be supported by years of laboratory testing intended to qualify and accurately reproduce the destructive effects of a variety of tools, implements, and devices. However, rapidly changing social conditions have created an immediate need for building components resistant to evolving forced entry techniques. Accordingly, the procedures presented herein are based more on field experience than laboratory analysis. They are more representative than inclusive, are intended to provide a basis for the comparative evaluation of different fence systems using forced penetration procedures and are not intended to be used to establish or confirm the absolute prevention of forced entries.

TABLE 1 Schedule of TestingAll Levels of Threat Severity

Time of Application (minutes)
Structured TestingDiscretionary Testing
5 lb by 28 in. (2)
Cold Chisels and
Hammer (2)
Hacksaw and
Two HSS Blades
16 in. by 6 lb
Fire Axe
36 in. by 6 lb
Bolt Cutter (2)-3-53-5-0-550-55
Fire Axe
36 in. by 10 lb
Hole Saw 2 in. (1)-0-50-5-0-550-55
Pry Bar
30 in. Steel (2)
30 in. by 12 lb
Steel Wedge
6 in. long (2)
Circular Saw
8 in., 1100 W, and
3 Blades (1)
Disc Grinder
5 in., 1100 W, and 3 Blades (1)
Rotary and
Hammer Drill
750 W and 5 Drill Bits, ½ in. (1)
Hole Saw
Greater than 2 in. (1)
Steel Pinch
Bar 60 in. long (2)
Saw 750 W and
3 Carbide Blades (1)
30 in. by 15 lb (1)
Torch with 80 ft3 Oxygen and
40 ft3 Acetylene Tanks (1)
Cut-Off Saw
5 KW or HD Gasoline
18 in. Dia. and 3
Blades (1)
(1900 W) 30 lb with
3 Bits (1)
Scissor Jack 1500 lb
with 4 in. min
retraction and 8 in.
Stroke (1)
Tape (1)
Line (250)
Hook (1)
5-in. Knife (1)---0-550-550-55
8 in. Std and Self
Grip Pliers (2)
10 in. Multiple
Slip Pliers (2)
10 in. Pipe
Wrench (2)
1.660 in. O.D. by 12 ft.
pipe (2)
8 in. Plate
Shears (1)
---0-55 (1)0-55 (1)0-55 (2)
7 in.,10 in., and 16 in. (1)
Cordless ½ in. Drill with
spare power pack and
carbide bits (1)
Torch (1)
Rope (1)---0-550-550-55

TABLE 2 Forced Entry Resistant Ratings

Threat LevelActive Test
Resistance Time (minute)Rating
Structured TestDiscretionary TestCumulative
Low (L)2Less than 50Less than 5L0 to L4.9
5Less than 5Less than 10L5 to L9.9
55 to 9.9Less than 15L10 to L14.9
510 to 14.9Less than 20L15 to L19.9
520 to 2530L20 to L30
531 to 5560L31 to L60
Medium (M)2Less than 50Less than 5M0 to M4.9
5Less than 5Less than 10M5 to M9.9
55 to 9.9Less than 15M10 to M14.9
510 to 14.9Less than 20M15 to M19.9
520 to 2530M20 to M30
531 to 5560M31 to M60
Aggressive (A)4Less than 50Less than 5A0 to A4.9
5Less than 5Less than 10A5 to A9.9
55 to 9.9Less than 15A10 to A14.9
510 to 14.9Less than 15A15 to A19.9
520 to 2530A20 to A30
531 to 5560M31 to A60

The test requirements specified herein have been established for use in evaluating the penetration resistance characteristics of standard fence systems to be used in commercial, government and military installations.

The success of any forced entry threat is dependent on the cumulative effect of the implements used, the elapsed time, and the sophistication and motivation of the personnel affecting the forced entry.

Absolute penetration resistance from forced entry by a determined and well-equipped attack group is impossible.

Aggressor groups range from unsophisticated criminals and vandals to organized criminals.

Attempts to force an entry may be thwarted by increasing the time necessary to affect such an entry and by early detection. Intrusion sensors positioned as far as possible from the protected environment in conjunction with optimal structural and component design will maximize the time available for a response force to intercept the intruders.

The procedures of this test method are intended to evaluate the time necessary for vandals and unsophisticated criminals to forcefully penetrate security fence systems by using manually operated toolsdefined as a low, medium, or aggressive forced entry threat.


1.1 The forced entry resistance of fence systems is evaluated relative to three levels of forced entry threat using the limited hand tool inventory outlined in Table 1. It also establishes a system for rating the forced entry resistance of those systems (see Table 2). The tools specified to be used for testing at each threat level are those that are known to have a maximum destructive effect on structures and their sub-assemblies and are readily available to aggressors categorized as posing that level of threat.

1.1.1 Low Threat Level (L)Specifically exempted from the inventory of available tools for the low (L) threat level category are power tools (gasoline, electric or hydraulic), and devices requiring more than one person to transport and operate.

1.1.2 Medium Threat Level (M)Specifically exempted from the inventory of available tools for the medium (M) threat level category are power tools requiring an outside power source or self contained gasoline or battery driven tools and devices requiring more than two persons to transport and operate.

1.1.3 Aggressive Threat Level (A)Specifically exempted from the inventory of available tools for the high (H) threat level category are devices requiring more than two persons to transport and operate.

Contact Sales
Reprints and Permissions
Reprints and copyright permissions can be requested through the
Copyright Clearance Center
Book of Standards Volume: 01.06
Developed by Subcommittee: F14.50
Pages: 8
DOI: 10.1520/F2781-09
ICS Code: 13.310