Menu
Although the exact dates are unknown, the earliest iterations of mechanical locks as we know them have been around for somewhere between four and six thousand years. With such a long history and millions of lock designs, and variations, how can you determine which lock to trust? The question is especially critical in situations like detention locks, where a locked door can be a matter of life and death. This was the question at hand when the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) began developing security product standards, including detention locks.
“Swinging door and frame assemblies mounted in a wall. This does not include swinging door assemblies when that assembly is part of a larger assembly (e.g. sliding fire door assembly) or when it is intended to be used as an elevator entrance. Door and frame hardware is also applicable to this standard. The test specimen (door assembly) is mounted in a test wall assembly, which typically consists of masonry or drywall and stud construction. The entire test assembly is then mounted to a test furnace and is exposed to specified temperatures throughout a specified time period.
Testing to UL 10C is conducted as a positive pressure fire test. For positive pressure applications, the neutral pressure plane will be established at 40 inches up from the bottom of the test specimen which will result in anything below the neutral pressure plane being exposed to negative furnace pressure and anything above the neutral pressure plane being exposed to positive furnace pressure. Areas under negative furnace pressure will result in ambient air from the unexposed side of the test assembly being drawn into the furnace between the door and frame interface and any other prep in the assembly (i.e. vision kit, etc.). Areas under positive furnace pressure will experience hot furnace gases being forced through the door and frame interface and other hardware preps leading to an increased possibility of test specimen degradation.
Following the fire endurance portion of the test, the side of the test assembly that was exposed to fire is then exposed to the cooling and erosion effects of the hose stream for a specified time period that is dependent on the test specimen size and the fire endurance time period. Generally speaking, conditions of acceptance include but are not limited to certain flaming requirements for the test specimen on the unexposed side of the assembly, certain deflection requirements for the door assembly, and no through openings developing during the fire endurance or hose stream tests.” – Intertek
UL1034 certification consists of various methods of testing including strength tests, pick tests, electrical transient tests and more. Further information about UL1034 can be found on Interk’s page.
UL 437 provides a rating for the security of keyed locks including key cylinders that must resist unauthorized opening by at least one or more of these methods: lockpicking, impressioning and/or destructive entry. More information on UL437 can be found on Lockwiki.
The Standard Test Methods for Hollow Metal Swinging Door Assemblies for Detention and Correctional Facilities identify the levels of physical security for these door assemblies by testing their resistance to violent attacks, including battering, prying, and fires. These methods ensure protection for the public, facility staff, and inmates and apply to doors in secure areas within detention facilities. For more information, visit ASTM’s website.
The Standard Test Methods for Locks in Swinging Door Assemblies for Detention and Correctional Facilities ensure reliable lock operation by testing their resistance to attacks using battering and prying devices, and fire. They simulate operating conditions but do not measure resistance to chemical agents, ballistics, or extreme environmental elements. These methods approximate the abuse locks face in facilities, ensuring protection for staff, the public, and inmates. They recommend training, supervision, and maintenance for optimal lock performance. The tests cover lock performance under normal and assault conditions, aiming to control access and prevent escape. For more information, visit ASTM’s website.
As long as there has been something that somebody did not want someone else to access, there have been attempts to secure said something. First attempts at securing valuables were likely made by hiding them in unlikely-to-be-found areas, such as underground. As society progressed and the need for securing more and larger resources developed, so did the methods used. For hundreds of years, rope was used to secure doors; while not entirely able to stop someone from entering (or exiting), it served as a visual indication if the rope had been tampered with. Weight-and leverage-based entry denial solutions, such as barring or bolting a door, were also popular. Evidence of the first mechanical door locks, made of wood, can be found approximately six thousand years ago in Egyptian Civilization, which utilized an ancient version of a lever and tumbler system. Not long after this creation, or geologically far from it, we can trace back to the earliest record of prisons.
Roman craftsmen took the next steps towards modern locks, utilizing bronze and iron which meant locks were less likely to be busted open. The Romans also began using springs within their locks, a trend that continues today. In the Middle Ages, a transformation to a more familiar form of criminal confinement began as large padlocks, handmade by blacksmiths, were used to secure cells within castles and keeps, which evolved into jails and prisons. During the 1700s, lock technology progressed further, including more complex internal components, which would be triggered by the bits on keys. In the same century, Robert Barron would create the double-acting tumbler, not long before Joseph Bramah designed his lock with a cylindrical key and keyhole, allowing for up to 470 million possible key combinations, creating the first high-security key. Linus Yale Sr furthered the concept of the high security lock with the Yale Cylinder Lock in the 1800s. As modernization continued and more and more iterations of locks were produced, it became harder to identify which locks could be trusted and for what purposes. That is why, in the mid-20th century, the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) began establishing the guidelines for various certifications, including detention locks.
At Willoughby Locking Systems, we remain on the cutting edge of innovation in the detention lock industry. We are constantly producing new locks and subjecting them to testing and certifications (check out our coming soon section to see what is in the pipeline). We engineer our locks to reliable designs to maximize security for staff, inmates, and facilities. By making our detention locks out of high-quality stainless steel, we increase lock’s durability, corrosion resistance, and overall reliability. These materials also minimize maintenance costs and provide long-term solutions in detention environments. Our products are subjected to various applicable certifications to ensure safety, durability, and performance, even in emergencies or the most stressful situations. As our product line grows, we will continue to innovate to address the trends and requirements of the correctional industry. Contact Willoughby Locking Systems today to learn more about our current or coming soon products, certifications, and more!