Scope & intent
Section 1 · Referenced documents (Section 2)
The code sets voluntary performance requirements and test methods for the resistance of windows and doors to forced entry. Its target is the everyday threat: the opportunistic intruder, working alone with common tools and limited time, who is unskilled or semi-skilled. It is deliberately not a standard for detention facilities, and it makes no claim about assemblies attacked by a professional, well-resourced intruder.
Complete window and door assemblies as manufactured, before installation — whatever the frame material or method of manufacture.
Secondary and storm windows and doors, and any bespoke high-security or professional-attack scenario.
Equivalent to the WANZ voluntary standard. Product crossing the Tasman must be certified by the receiving body — AWA into Australia, WANZ into New Zealand.
The code is a uniform guideline built on the research available at the time, intended to evolve as new information appears. All figures are stated in SI units as the standard; imperial values are shown only for reference. It leans on a small set of ASTM test methods for the mechanics of each product type:
| Reference | Applies to |
|---|---|
| ASTM F 588 | Forced-entry resistance of window assemblies (excluding glazing impact) |
| ASTM F 842 | Forced-entry resistance of sliding door assemblies (excluding glazing impact) |
| ASTM F 1233 | Security glazing materials and systems |
| ASTM F 476 | Security of swinging door assemblies |
| ASTM E 631 | Terminology of building construction (shared vocabulary) |
Three terms are defined locally: a door slab is a swinging panel, blank or leaf; an interlayer is the adhesive layer between glazing plies that adds performance such as impact resistance or acoustic control; and a lite is a single pane of glass.
The threat model
Appendix X.1 · X.2 (non-mandatory)
Because a window or door can be attacked in more than one way, the code evaluates products against an escalating threat rather than a single pass mark. Two attack routes drive everything that follows:
Working the frame, sash or lock: lifting, prising and jiggling the moving parts; stripping accessible fasteners; and manipulating the locking device with slim tools inserted from outside.
Attacking the glass itself, either to break through or to defeat the way the glazing is held in the frame. Introduced from Level 2 upward.
Where this code stops
High-crime settings and sophisticated, determined attackers are out of scope. Countering those needs a layered approach the code cannot capture in a single product test — alarms and surveillance, purpose-designed doors and hardware, impact-resistant glazing, and often bespoke methods tuned to the specific risk. A qualifying product is one honest layer of that defence, not the whole of it.
Performance levels
Section 4 · Appendix X.1
Five levels let a specifier match the test to the anticipated threat. Level 1 assumes an intruder who never touches the glass. Level 2 adds a glazing assault. Levels 3 to 5 keep the glazing assault and raise the frame, sash and lock manipulation grade in step.
At Level 2 and above, the glazing used must first pass the glazing material qualification test (Section 6.5), and the finished assembly must then pass the glazed-area retention test (Section 6.4). A minimum grade for the frame-and-lock work is called up from the relevant ASTM annex at each level.
Assembly requirement tiers
Section 4 · Table 1
Alongside the five-level scheme, the code summarises fixed requirements as three tiers — A B C — set separately for each product type. Tier C always adds the Section 6.4 glazing-retention test on top of the grade. The grades are drawn from the ASTM annex for that product type.
| Product type | Tier | Requirement | Glazing retention (6.4) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Windows test → 6.1 |
A | Grade 10 · ASTM F 588 Annex A1 | — |
| B | Grade 20 · ASTM F 588 Annex A1 | — | |
| C | Grade 40 · ASTM F 588 Annex A1 | required | |
| Sliding doors test → 6.2 |
A | Grade 20 · ASTM F 842 Annex A1 | — |
| B | Grade 25 · ASTM F 842 Annex A1 | — | |
| C | Grade 30 · ASTM F 842 Annex A1 | required | |
| Swinging doors test → 6.3 / Annex A1 |
A | Grade 20 · Annex A2 | — |
| B | Grade 30 · Annex A2 | — | |
| C | Grade 30 · Annex A2 | required |
Two views of the same intent
The level ladder (Section 4) and the tier table (Table 1) are two ways the code expresses the same idea — more threat means a higher grade and, once glazing is in play, a retention test. Read the two together and choose the wording that matches your specification.
Test methods
Sections 5 & 6 · Annex A1
One representative specimen is submitted per design, built to the largest size for which qualification is sought and carrying the full complement of panels, slabs, sashes, locking devices, hardware, interlocks, meeting rails and glazing. The same specimen carries through the whole test sequence.
The common step — hand manipulation 6.1.2
Every product type begins the same way. For a continuous five minutes, a technician lifts, pushes, pulls and otherwise works the sash or panel against the clearances in the frame, trying to open it by hand alone. Windows then follow the ASTM F 588 procedure; sliding doors follow ASTM F 842; swinging doors follow the code's own Annex A1.
Swinging doors — the full sequence Annex A1
Swinging doors get the most detailed treatment because they carry a discrete lock that can be attacked directly. The specimen is mounted in a timber surround (2×4 or 2×6) to the manufacturer's own installation instructions, then locked. Extra fixings between the lock jamb and the test frame are allowed only if they do not strengthen the lock-to-member connection beyond the maker's specification.
The static and impact tests apply a concentrated load L1 at each locking member (within 75 mm of the device, pushing in the opening direction), then repeat that while adding a second load L2 near a corner of the locking edge, then deliver 100 J impacts at the corners, the centre of each lite, and next to each locking device. Paired slabs are loaded both separately and simultaneously. Only after all of this, with loads removed, is the lock-manipulation attempt run once more.
Glazed-area retention — the glass stays put 6.4
Where a level calls for it, the assembly faces a steel pendulum impactor capable of a 100 J (74 ft·lb) horizontal blow, tipped with a removable hemispherical steel nose about 30 mm across. The impactor rests against the exterior face of the glazing, perpendicular to it, and is drawn back to the height that yields 100 J before release.
Glazing material qualification 6.5
Security glazing is also qualified in its own right, so materials can be procured on a common footing. A 600 mm × 600 mm specimen, mounted per ASTM F 1233, takes the Class 1 forced-entry sequence: ten impacts concentrated within a 150 mm-radius circle centred 150 mm from an edge. Qualifying glazing is what a Level 2-and-above assembly must be built from.
Grades & applied loads
Annex A2 · Table 2 (suggested)
Grade sets the force. For swinging doors the code suggests four load identifications — 10, 20, 30 and 40, lowest to highest — chosen to suit the security objective. The lock-manipulation time limit T1 stays at five minutes across every grade; only the concentrated loads L1 and L2 rise.
Pass / fail criterion
Section 7
Under all the manipulation and impact, the verdict comes down to one question: has a body-sized hole appeared anywhere in the specimen? The code answers it with a physical go / no-go gauge — a solid, uncompressible rectangular block. If that block can be passed freely through any opening made in the specimen, the specimen has failed.
Free passage of a 200 × 200 × 130 mm solid uncompressible shape through a hole in any part of the specimen is a failure.
Failure is body passage as defined in ASTM F 1233 §9.2.4.2 — a separate, glazing-specific criterion.
Qualification & substitution
Section 8
A product qualifies when its assembly passes the right test method against the Section 7 criteria and its glazing passes the glazing-material test. To avoid re-testing every variant, the code lets one successful test stand in for a defined family of related products — provided the glazing detail is unchanged.
Qualifies assemblies with thicker or equal glazing and interlayer of the same glass type and treatment.
Qualifies smaller sashes, panels or lites made the same way, not exceeding the tested width or height.
Qualifies tinted, heat-absorbing, reflective or otherwise cosmetically modified glazing of the same type and treatment.
A single-lite pass (monolithic or laminated) qualifies multiple-lite insulating units.
A thermally improved frame or sash qualifies the non-thermal version using the same extrusions.
Each style in a composite unit is tested as if standalone; tested assemblies may be combined only if the connections are designed for the required loads.
One substitution is never allowed · 8.2.7
Swapping the manufacturer of a glazing material component — the sealant, the laminated-glass interlayer or a plastic — voids the qualification. Those components must remain exactly as tested.
Compliance & reporting
Section 9
A compliance statement records two things for every product type: a detailed description of the specimen and its results per the report section of the governing ASTM method (F 588 for windows, F 842 for sliding and swinging doors), and a detailed description of the glazing — glass type, treatment, thickness and component manufacturers — with certified results against the Section 6.4 retention test.
| Product type | Specimen & results per | Glazing record |
|---|---|---|
| Windows | Report section of ASTM F 588 | type · treatment · thickness · maker · 6.4 certified |
| Sliding doors | Report section of ASTM F 842 | type · treatment · thickness · maker · 6.4 certified |
| Swinging doors | Section 11 reporting requirements | type · treatment · thickness · maker · 6.4 certified |
Egress & life safety
Appendix X.3 (non-mandatory)
A fair question about impact-resistant security glazing is whether it traps people in a fire or blocks rescue. The code addresses it head-on. Security glazing is impact-resistant by design — it either resists shattering or, when it does break, stays in the frame. During the development of the closely related hurricane-glazing standards, fire and rescue agencies ran their own independent tests and found no valid egress concern.
Codes never require breaking glass
Building codes achieve egress and fire-service ingress by opening operable windows and doors, with minimum opening sizes specified for the open position — never by shattering the glazing. And if rescuers do need to clear a pane for entry or smoke evacuation, standard fire-and-rescue equipment removes it readily.
Applying the code — a KEVOS note
Practitioner framing, original to KEVOS
Three things are worth keeping in front of mind when this code lands on a specification.
The five-level scheme exists so the test tracks the real risk. Specify the level against the anticipated intruder and the security objective — not the highest number available.
Qualification is for the assembly as manufactured, before installation. Fixing detail, substrate and building-code egress still govern on site — a qualified window fitted poorly is not a qualified opening.
The scheme is trans-Tasman: product moving between Australia and New Zealand must be certified by the body in the receiving market.