Performance of Exterior Windows, Curtain Walls, Doors, and Impact Protective Systems Impacted by Windborne Debris in Hurricanes
Performance of Exterior Windows, Curtain Walls, Doors, and Impact Protective Systems Impacted by Windborne Debris in Hurricanes
for the
Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
Designation: E1996 − 23
3
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
1
This specification is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E06 on contact ASTM Customer Service at [email protected]. For Annual Book of ASTM
Performance of Buildings and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E06.51 Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
on Performance of Windows, Doors, Skylights and Curtain Walls. the ASTM website.
4
Current edition approved July 1, 2023. Published August 2023. Originally Available from American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 25 W. 43rd St.,
approved in 1999. Last previous edition approved in 2020 as E1996 – 20. DOI: 4th Floor, New York, NY 10036, http://www.ansi.org.
5
10.1520/E1996-23. Available from American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 1801 Alexander
2
See the Significance and Use Section of Test Method E1886. Bell Dr., Reston, VA 20191, http://www.asce.org.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
8. Product Qualification
8.1 When all test specimens submitted have met the require-
response; power generating stations; other public utility facili- ments of this specification based on the pass/fail criteria
ties required in an emergency; and buildings and other struc- described in Section 7, except in the case of 8.2, the set of test
tures having critical national defense functions. specimens shall be accepted according to the designated
6.2.1.2 Basic Protection—All buildings and structures ex- building classification, wind speed, and assembly elevation.
cept those listed in 6.2.1.1 and 6.2.1.3.
8.2 If any test specimen fails to meet the requirements of
6.2.1.3 Unprotected—Buildings and other structures that this specification based on the pass/fail criteria described in
represent a low hazard to human life in a windstorm including, Section 7, it shall be rejected and one additional identical test
but not limited to: agricultural facilities, production shall be performed on the additional specimen specified in
greenhouses, certain temporary facilities, and storage facilities. 4.1.1.3 or 4.1.2.3. Any additional failures shall constitute
6.2.2 Unless otherwise specified, select the wind zone based failure of the entire set of test specimens and it shall be
on the basic wind speed as specified in 6.2.2.1 – 6.2.2.3. For rejected.
Basic Protection buildings, use the ASCE/SEI 7 VULT map for 8.3 Impact protective system offset requirements:
risk category II. For Enhanced Protection buildings, use the 8.3.1 Porous impact protective systems that are tested inde-
ASCE/SEI 7 VULT map for risk category IV. pendently of the fenestration assembly shall be accepted for
6.2.2.1 Wind Zone 1—130 mph (58 m/s) ≤ basic wind speed installations in which they are offset from the fenestration
<140 mph (63 m/s), and Hawaii. assemblies by the greater of the following:
6.2.2.2 Wind Zone 2—140 mph (63 m/s) ≤ basic wind speed 8.3.1.1 The maximum dynamic deflection, as measured in
<150 mph (67 m/s) at greater than 1.6 km (one mile) from the 5.5 plus 25 %; or
coastline. The coastline shall be measured from the mean high 8.3.1.2 The sum of the maximum positive deflection and the
water mark. residual deflection, as measured in 5.5 plus 25 %.
ANNEXES
(Mandatory Information)
analysis or testing of additional specimen sizes can be con- A1.3.4.4 Multiple substituted elements that are individually
ducted to override these limitations. qualified by a single specimen test shall be allowed to be
A1.3.2.1 For curtain wall and storefront, any substitution of combined into a system when supported by engineering
an assembly of the same type as the three initial specimens analysis.
shall be allowed automatically, provided (1) the infill elements
are equal to or smaller in overall area, and (2) the rating is at A1.3.5 Anchorage:
equal or lower design pressures. Assemblies are allowed A1.3.5.1 Each method of anchoring shall be qualified by
automatically to be stretched in one dimension only, provided testing a single specimen in the condition that produces the
(1) the overall area of the originally tested specimens is not greatest load on the anchoring method, or qualified by engi-
exceeded, (2) the deflection and stress limits of any structural neering analysis.
member or component is not exceeded, and (3) the rating of the A1.3.5.2 Any substitution of the fastener within an anchor-
originally tested specimens is not exceeded. Testing of addi- ing method, supported by engineering analysis to be equal to or
tional specimen sizes can be conducted to override these stronger than the initial qualified fastener, shall be allowed
limitations. automatically provided the original spacing is not exceeded.
A1.3.3 For products qualified under 5.3.3, Small Missile A1.3.6 Insect Screens—If the initial specimens were tested
Test, substitutions of all elements that are not infill elements or without screens the addition of screens shall be allowed
anchorage shall be allowed automatically. automatically. If the initial specimens were tested with insect
A1.3.4 For products qualified under 5.3.1, Large Missile screens, substitution or elimination of the insect screen shall
Test, substitutions of all elements that are not infill elements or require single specimen testing.
anchorage shall be allowed according to the criteria below:
A1.3.4.1 Any substitution testing shall be qualified at a PREMISES FOR SUBSTITUTION—GLAZED
pressure equal to or greater than the design pressure at which PRODUCTS
the three initial specimens were qualified. However, the origi- A1.4 General
nally achieved qualified design pressure shall be maintained.
A1.3.4.2 Any substitution of an element shall not be al- A1.4.1 When substituting an element on the basis of a single
lowed if a failure occurs for any reason during a single specimen test refer to Fig. 1 (for large missile impact in Wind
specimen test of that substitution. Zones 1-3), Fig. X4.1 (for large missile impact in Wind Zone
A1.3.4.3 Automatically substituted elements shall be al- 4), or Fig. 2 (for small missile impact). Select the worst case
lowed to be combined into a system. for impact locations.
APPENDIXES
(Nonmandatory Information)
X1.1 Damage and Internal Pressurization—Windows, X1.1.1 ASCE/SEI 7 specifies that buildings in “windborne
doors, and curtain walls are building envelope components debris regions” having glazing in the bottom 60 ft that is not
(defined as “components and cladding,” in ASCE/SEI 7) often designed or protected from missile impact, have such glazing
subject to damage in windstorms. Windborne debris impact can be treated as openings for the purpose of classifying a building
not only cause failure of these building envelope components as “enclosed” or “partially enclosed.” This may require these
but can also expose a building’s contents to the damaging buildings to be designed for larger internal pressures if classi-
effects of continued wind and rain. From a structural fied as a “partially enclosed building.” It is the intent of this
perspective, a potentially more serious result can be internal specification to quantify the requirements for windborne debris
pressurization of the building. When the windward wall of a impact.
building is breached, the internal pressure in the building NOTE X1.1—Dade (1)7 and Broward (2) counties, Southern Building
increases resulting in larger outward acting pressure on the Code Congress International (SBCCI) Standard SSTD 12 (3), and The
Texas Department of Insurance Building Code for Windstorm Resistant
other walls and roof. Similarly, when a breached wall is subject
Construction (4) do not limit missile impact protection to the bottom
to leeward wall pressures, the internal pressure in the building 18.2 m (60 ft).
decreases possibly resulting in larger inward acting pressures
on the other walls and roof. Depending on the size of the X1.2 Design Pressure and Product Qualification Under This
breached envelope components, the building may be classified Specification:
as a “partially enclosed building” as defined in ASCE/SEI 7. X1.2.1 The air pressure cycling portion of Test Method
For this classification of building, the internal pressure coeffi- E1886 applies pressures that are a function of P, where P
cient increased to +0.55 (from +0.18 for an enclosed building) denotes the maximum inward (Ppos) and outward (Pneg) air
and to −0.55 (from −0.18 for an enclosed building) this pressure differentials, which are either specified or are equal to
represents more than a three fold increase in internal pressure
and, if not accounted for in design, can significantly increase
the net pressure (both positive and negative) for which the 7
The boldface numbers given in parentheses refer to a list of references at the
envelope components were designed. end of the standard.
X2.1 Summary of Risk Parameters in Twisdale et al (5)— tion (4). All of these are based on analysis and judgment of
The report discusses the following parameters that affect the experts after many years of windstorm study. The Twisdale et
risk of building damage from windborne debris: al study (5) represents new inputs into this body of analysis and
X2.1.1 Wind velocity, experience. Since it so far has covered only a very limited
range of buildings out of the total scope of this specification, its
X2.1.2 Type and quantity of missiles in the wind-field application to the development of this specification has also
generated from ground sources, required a degree of judgment.
X2.1.3 Type and quantity of missiles in the wind-field
generated from building sources, as function of the quality of X2.3.2 The energy and momentum curves included in the
construction, Twisdale et al (5) report are referenced to a zero energy or
momentum curve, that can be interpreted as the reliability
X2.1.4 Density of buildings, achieved at various wind speeds when no impact resistance is
X2.1.5 Shape and height of buildings, and provided. Other curves describe reliability versus wind speed
X2.1.6 Percentage of glazed openings. at increasing amounts of impact resistance, for example 10 lb,
20 lb, 50 lb, 100 lb, 200 lb, and 300 lb of momentum. All the
X2.2 The report combines a hurricane wind field model, a curves illustrated by Twisdale et al (5) including the zero
missile generation model, a missile trajectory model and an resistance curve, demonstrate reliability above 0.85 at 110 mph
impact model to produce a risk analysis. The output is wind speed. Reliability diminishes rapidly, with varying
expressed in terms of curves of specified impact energy slopes, at higher wind speeds.
resistance or impact momentum resistance levels plotted on a
X2.3.3 Two approaches can be taken to using these curves
graph with reliability (R) (from 0.75 to 1.00) on the vertical
to inform the specification process: the absolute reliability
axis and wind velocity (from 110 mph to 170 mph peak gusts)
approach, and the relative improvement approach.
on the horizontal axis. Plots have been generated for single
story detached residential buildings, for two different values X2.3.4 The absolute reliability approach establishes the
for the quality of construction and density of buildings, and objective of achieving a specified level of reliability, say 0.90,
three different values for percentage of glazed openings. by specifying the appropriate impact resistance for different
wind speeds, and, possibly, building types. This approach is
X2.3 The Performance Objective of This Specification attractive because it enables the definition of reliability to be
X2.3.1 This specification establishes missile impact criteria consistent with the reliability objective of traditional structural
for all building types and occupancies. The antecedents for this design. However, it has two disadvantages in this case:
effort are the criteria established in Australian National Stan- X2.3.4.1 The curves plotted are actually average values and
dards (6), in the Florida counties of Dade (1) and Broward (2), should be thought of as broad fuzzy bands with large confi-
in SBCCI Standard SSTD 12 (3), and in the Texas Department dence bounds due to the many uncertainties embedded in the
of Insurance Building Code for Windstorm Resistant Construc- analytical models that produce them. Therefore, establishing a
X3.1 Section 6.1 of this specification establishes assembly debris and structural debris are specified in the former (≤9.1 m
elevation above the ground as one of three parameters to be (30 ft)). Two g steel balls (small missiles) representative of roof
used in the selection of an applicable missile. Unless otherwise gravel are specified in the latter (>9.1 m (30 ft)). The assembly
specified, Table 3 is to be used. Table 3 uses two elevation elevation subject to large missiles may be increased by the
categories: ≤9.1 m and >9.1 m (30 ft and 30 ft). Various 2 in. specifying authority where it determines that the assembly is
by 4 in. lumber (large) missiles representative of ground-level exposed to structural debris from adjacent structures.
X4.1 The first edition of this specification, E1996-99, in- Zone 3 of this specification and with the following require-
cluded three Wind Zones (1, 2, and 3). The requirements for ments:
these Wind Zones were developed on the basis of the Impact X4.4.1 Additional Large Missile Impact Locations in Wind
Risk Analysis discussed in Appendix X2 and the relative Zone 4 (See Fig. X4.1):
improvement approach included therein. Wind Zone 4 was X4.4.1.1 Impact the same specimen specified in 5.3.1.1 of
added to the specification in its 2003 edition to provide this specification a second time with the center of the second
additional impact criteria that were generally based on some, missile within a 65 mm (21⁄2 in.) radius circle and with the
but not all, requirements of the Florida High Velocity Hurri- center of the circle located 150 mm (6 in.) from supporting
cane Zone (HVHZ), developed independently by Miami-Dade member at a corner.
County. The original intent was to harmonize the standards so X4.4.1.2 Impact the same specimen specified in 5.3.1.2 of
that Miami-Dade would be able to adopt Specification E1996. this specification a second time with the center of the second
However Miami-Dade has decided to continue to maintain missile within a 65 mm (21⁄2 in.) radius circle and with the
their own HVHZ standards. Therefore the Wind Zone 4 center of the circle located at the center of each type of infill.
requirements are now moved to this Appendix X4 as optional X4.4.1.3 Impact the same specimen specified in 5.3.1.3 of
information for those who desire to continue to test products to this specification a second time with the center of the second
Wind Zone 4 criteria. missile within a 65 mm (21⁄2 in.) radius circle and with the
X4.2 The specifying authority who wishes to specify addi- center of the circle located at the center of each type of infill
tional protection from hurricane damage may define a Wind except as specified in X4.4.2.1.
Zone 4. The IBC 2012 specifies Wind Zone 4 as areas where
the basic wind speed is greater than 160 mph. The 2010 Florida
Building Code specifies Wind Zone 4 as areas where the basic
wind speed is greater than 170 mph (76 m/s).
X4.3 The requirements specified in this Appendix X4 are
similar to, but not identical to, the requirements of the Florida
Building Code for the High Velocity Hurricane Zone. The
scope of these requirements, applicable to exterior windows,
glazed curtain walls, doors, and impact protective systems, is
more limited than the scope of the High Velocity Hurricane
Zone requirements.
FIG. X4.1 Additional Large Missile Impact Locations
X4.4 Comply with all the requirements applicable in Wind in Wind Zone 4
REFERENCES
(1) “Section 2315 Impact Tests for Windborne Debris,” South Florida (4) Building Code for Windstorm Resistant Construction, Texas Depart-
Building Code—Dade County Edition, Metro Dade County, Miami, ment of Insurance, 33 Guadalupe Street, Austin, TX 78714-9104,
FL, 1994, pp. 23–33 and 23–38. 1997.
(2) “Section 2315 Impact Tests for Windborne Debris and Section 2316 (5) Twisdale, L. A., Vickery, P. J., and Steckley, A. C., Analysis of
Impact Test Procedures,” South Florida Building Code—Broward Hurricane Windborne Debris Impact Risk for Residential Structures,
County Edition, Broward County Board of Rules and Appeals, Ft. Applied Research Associates, Inc., Raleigh, NC, March 1996 .
Lauderdale, FL, 1994, pp. 23–24 and 23–21. (6) Standards Association of Australia, SAA Loading Code, Part 2: Wind
(3) SBCCI Test Standard for Determining Impact Resistance from Wind- Loads, AS 1170.2, Australian Standards, North Sydney, New South
borne Debris, Southern Building Code Congress International, Inc., Wales, Australia, 1989.
900 Montclair Road, Birmingham, AL 35213-1206, 1994.
ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.
This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.
This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222
Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/