Attachment 1_WINGARD SOW_dtd 30 July 24.pdf

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BUREAU OF DIPLOMATIC SECURITY

PHYSICAL SECURITY DIVISION

SCOPE OF WORK FOR VERIFICATION OF

WINGARD EVALUATION AND TESTING

(WET) at REDUCED SETBACKS

30 July 2024

Background:

The U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS), Physical Security Division (PSD), Research and Development Branch (RD) has consistently conducted testing of structural systems, facades, windows, and blast effect mitigation technologies using the Department’s Design Basis Threat

(DBT).

DS/PSD/RD has a need to verify that forced entry/ballistic and blast resistant (FE/BBR) and blast resistant glazing layup designs using the WINGARD design software perform within predicted response limits when exposed to loading conditions that differ from historic Department loading conditions.

Charge and standoff combinations may also result in pressure and impulse conditions that are outside of the dataset used to validate and verify the WINGARD software during its development and therefore require verification.

RD conducted recent blast testing of laminated and delaminated glazing samples. This testing should be referenced for fully laminated (control samples) blast test results for comparison to WINGARD analysis as part of this research effort. Reporting, results, and data shall be provided upon contract award.

Effort:

The effort shall design glazing layups using the Department’s Bureau of Overseas Building Operations (OBO) specifications and design criteria and the WINGARD analysis software, design layups shall be procured, and then subjected to the various design loading environments in full-scale testing to verify performance of a U.S. General Services Administration, GSA performance condition 2, glass cracks stays in frame with no significant fragments i.e. dusting or very small fragments near sill or on floor acceptable.

Testing shall be designed to capture the following, at a minimum:

Capture time of arrival data of blast wave Measure blast pressures around each window system from at least three points Capture high speed video of interior and exterior glazing response Capture glazing deflection and response from accelerometers, strain gauges, high speed video with fiducials, or other recommended instrumentation methods Compare Pressure and Impulse measurements to WINGARD calculated values Capture glazing spall via high-speed video and witness panels categorized to GSA Glazing

Hazard Levels Compare measured glazing response to WINGARD calculated values Measure and record each window layup’s overall thickness and each interlayer thickness as accurately as possible and compare to designed layups

Test Configuration:

Rough opening in a concrete, non-responding wall or appropriate window test cubicle shall be fitted with steel inserts to accommodate designed window sizes with required bite depths as developed by WINGARD. Clearing effects shall be considered, calculated, documented, and minimized as much as feasible on the test glazing samples. Steel angles shall be utilized to create a captured glazing bite condition. Durometer thickness, hardness, and type/manufacture shall be consistently utilized for all window glazing installations. Durometer width may be matched specifically to WINGARD calculated bite depth as required.

The most efficient and cost-effective method for testing window samples shall be considered. A test arena format to test multiple glazing samples at once is desirable. Test structure fronts may be constructed for rough openings that fit each window size, or steel subframe systems maybe be utilized that would be capable of accepting multiple window shapes and sizes. Test front design and window installation methods should consider window sample install and removal methods to accommodate quick turnaround testing times.

Load Combinations:

All glazing layups shall be designed and tested against the following load combinations:

W3 at 30.5 meters (100 feet) W3 at 22.5 meters (73.82 feet) ¼W3 at 15 meters (49.21 feet)

Rectangular Shaped Window Design, Blast Resistant:

Windows shall be designed with the following aspect ratios:

1 to 1 2 to 1 3 to 1

Minimum of any window side shall be no less than 30 inches. Maximum of any window side shall be no more than 120 inches. Glazing designs shall be bound by minimum and maximum window sizing with the above aspect ratios. Approximate window sized desired for testing for 1 to 1 aspect ratios shall be 30” x 30” and 60” x 60”; for 2 to 1 aspect ratios shall be 30” x 60” and 60” x 120”; for 3 to 1 aspect ratio shall be 30” x 90”. True maximum size windows per aspect ratio may be limited to laminator or shipping restrictions.

Glass shall be Annealed or Heat Strengthened laminated with PVB. One (1) out of four (4), or 25%, of the layups shall have 8mil spall liner/interior film in a daylight application, post lamination to prevent spall while limiting strength increases to the glazing layups. Glazing layup designs and test matrix with 25% filmed test samples shall be discussed with DS/PSP/RD once completed in order to ensure filmed test samples are appropriate to meet the intent of WINGARD validation goals.

WINGARD glazing design shall adhere to OBO guidance for 8 break out of 1000 for Annealed glass strength, and 1 breaks out of 1000 for Heat Strengthened and Thermally Tempered glass strength.

Develop a design and test matrix resulting in two (2) glazing thickness/type for each aspect ratio shall be developed for each size at each charge and standoff. A total of 2 (glazing types) x 3 (aspect ratios) x 2 (aspect ratio sizes), equaling 12 windows, shall be tested for each DBT combination listed above (charge weight and standoff) for a total of 30 windows tested.

Rectangular Shaped Window Design, FEBR and Blast Resistant:

Develop and design a test matrix resulting in two (2) window sizes per aspect ratio guidelines above for the following FEBR layups to be tested. WINGARD analysis shall be conducted on the below layups.

For each glazing type and window size, the closest charge size and standoff that predicts a GSA condition 2 shall be used to test each of glazing. A total of 3 (layup types) x 3 (aspect ratios) x 1 (charge size), equaling 9 windows shall be tested at one charge configuration. Aspect ratios and glazing sizes shall be coordinated with DS/PSP/RD based on performance against charge size and standoff distances to ensure appropriate performance validation testing. Considerations of glazing stiffness, glazing size, aspect ratio, and WINGARD predictions of performance against the various load types shall be used to guide appropriate test samples required for validation.

FEBR Layup Type 1 (X in example matrix):

GL‐2 79mm Insulated Glass

1/4" Clear HS w/ Solarban 70 #2 (attack)

.060" Clear PVB

1/4" Clear HS

.060" Clear PVB

1/4" Clear HS

1/2" Air Space

3/16" Clear HS

0.50" Polyurethane

1/4" Polycarbonate

.025" Polyurethane

1/4" Polycarbonate

.025" Polyurethane

1/4" Polycarbonate

0.250" Polyurethane

3/16" Polycarbonate

0.250" Polyurethane

3/16" Polycarbonate

0.50" Polyurethane

3/16" Clear HS

.037" Spallshield®

FEBR Layup Type 2 (Y in example matrix):

GL‐56, 2.677" Thick, 1123

¼” Clear Heat Strengthened Glass

.060” PVB

¼” Clear Heat Strengthened Glass

.060” PVB

¼” Clear Heat Strengthened Glass

3/8” Air Space

3/16” Clear Heat Strengthened Glass

.050” Polyurethane

¼” Polycarbonate

.025” Polyurethane

3/8” Polycarbonate

.025” Polyurethane

¼” Polycarbonate

0.050" PTU

3/16” Clear Heat Strengthened Glass

.025" TPU

Kuraray Spallshield® CPET

FEBR Layup Type 3 (Z in example matrix):

NG255 HS (1/2" Airgap), 2.59" (66.5mm), 1123

1/4" HS

.030 PVB

1/4" HS

.030 PVB

1/4" HS

1/2” Air Gap

3/16” Clear HS

.050 Urethane

¼” Polycarbonate

.025 Urethane

¼” Polycarbonate

.025 Urethane

¼” Polycarbonate

.050 Urethane

3/16” Clear HS

.030" PVB

.007" Spall Shield (PET)

Example Test Matrix:

*Note: Heat Strengthened glass cannot be produced in ½” thickness.

# Aspect Ratio Size Layup Charge and Standoff Test Totals 1 1:1 30” x 30” 1-A W3@30.5m 2 1:1 30” x 30” 1-B W3@30.5m 3 1:1 30” x 30” 1-AA W3@22.5m 4 1:1 30” x 30” 1-BB W3@22.5m 5 1:1 30” x 30” 1-AAA 1/4W3@15m 6 1:1 30” x 30” 1-BBB 1/4W3@15m 7 1:1 60” x 60” 1-C W3@30.5m 8 1:1 60” x 60” 1-D W3@30.5m 9 1:1 60” x 60” 1-CC W3@22.5m 10 1:1 60” x 60” 1-DD W3@22.5m 11 1:1 60” x 60” 1-CCC 1/4W3@15m 12 1:1 60” x 60” 1-DDD 1/4W3@15m 13 2:1 30” x 60” 2-E W3@30.5m 14 2:1 30” x 60” 2-F W3@30.5m 15 2:1 30” x 60” 2-EE W3@22.5m 16 2:1 30” x 60” 2-FF W3@22.5m 17 2:1 30” x 60” 2-EEE 1/4W3@15m 18 2:1 30” x 60” 2-FFF 1/4W3@15m 19 2:1 60” x 120” 2-G W3@22.5m 30 3:1 30” x 90” 3-NNN 1/4W3@15m Total Blast Resistant 30 Samples Tested

1:1 X” x X” 1-X Charge Weight x Standoff 2:1 Y” x Y” 2-XX Charge Weight x Standoff 3:1 Z” x Z” 3-XXX Charge Weight x Standoff 1:1 X” x X” 1-Y Charge Weight x Standoff 2:1 Y” x Y” 2-YY Charge Weight x Standoff 3:1 Z” x Z” 3-YYY Charge Weight x Standoff 1:1 X” x X” 1-Z Charge Weight x Standoff 2:1 Y” x Y” 2-ZZ Charge Weight x Standoff 3:1 Z” x Z” 3-ZZZ Charge Weight x Standoff Total Forced Entry/Ballistic and

Blast Resistant 9 Samples Tested

Irregular Shaped Windows, Blast Resistant:

A steel insert for use in the rough opening test wall shall be designed to accommodate irregular shaped, triangular window glazing. Steel inserts to be fitted into existing rough openings. Inserts shall be designed and fabricated to accept two right triangle window glazing shapes; one right triangle with two 45-degree angles and one right triangle with the two angles being 30 and 60 degrees. Windows sizes shall follow the minimum of 30” and maximum of 120” guidelines, but only one layup per glazing type shall be designed, procured, and tested. Each window shall be tested to the three charge and standoff conditions. A total of 12 windows shall be tested. The performer shall utilize WINGARD to design glazing layups. Performer shall provide a presentation to DS/PSP/RD of the proposed design philosophy to be used to develop non-rectangular, blast-resistant glazing layups for approval prior to designing with WINGARD. DS/PSD/RD can provide examples of design methodology to bound the window shapes due to the limitations existing in the WIGNARD software. Window sizes are shown in the example test matrix below.

An example test matrix is below.

Shape Size Layup Charge and Standoff Test Totals 45˚ 30” Legs

Hypotenuse=42.4” R W3@30.5m

45˚ 30” Legs Hypotenuse=42.4”

RR W3@22.5m

45˚ 30” Legs Hypotenuse=42.4”

RRR 1/4W3@15m

30˚ 60˚ 90˚ b=30” a=52” c=60” S W3@30.5m 30˚ 60˚ 90˚ b=30” a=52” c=60” SS W3@22.5m 30˚ 60˚ 90˚ b=30” a=52” c=60” SSS 1/4W3@15m 45˚ 82” legs

Hypotenuse=116” T W3@30.5m

45˚ 82” legs Hypotenuse=116”

TT W3@22.5m

45˚ 82” legs Hypotenuse=116”

TTT 1/4W3@15m

30˚ 60˚ 90˚ b=60” a=104” c=120” U W3@30.5m 30˚ 60˚ 90˚ b=60” a=104” c=120” UU W3@22.5m 30˚ 60˚ 90˚ b=60” a=104” c=120” UUU 1/4W3@15m Totals 12 Samples Tested

Proposed CLIN Structure

The DS/PSD/RD proposes CLIN Structure for Tasks 1, 2 ,3 and 4 sequentially.

Task 1: Design and Construction for Rectangular and Irregular Shaped Windows Test Front Housing. The most economical and efficient design for materials and methods shall be considered

Task 1.A: Develop glazing layups for aspect ratios, sizes, and glazing types using WINGARD software for all Rectangular and Irregular Shaped Windows.

Task 1.B: Design concrete test fronts with rough openings and embeds, and steel inserts if applicable, to accommodate glazing samples and required bites for all Rectangular and Irregular Shaped Windows. OR propose existing test infrastructure and methods that can meet scope requirements.

Task 1.C: Develop construction drawings for concrete test fronts and embeds, and steel inserts if applicable, to accommodate Rectangular and Irregular Shaped Windows OR develop construction drawings for separate steel subframes/inserts to accommodate Rectangular and Irregular Shaped Windows in existing testing infrastructure.

Task 1.D: Construct and fabricate concrete test fronts and embed and steel inserts if applicable OR construct and fabricate steel subframes/inserts for installation into existing test infrastructure.

Task 2: Test Planning and Testing of Rectangular Shaped Windows (Blast only glazing) Task 2.A: Develop the test matrix.

Task 2.B: Develop a test plan that maximizes number of windows tested per shot and details all instrumentation necessary.

Task 2.C: Conduct testing.

Task 2.D: Submit Quick Look Reports for each test and results.

Task 2.E: Submit Final Report for all testing and comparison of predicted loads and glazing responses to measured testing results.

Task 3: Test Planning and Testing of Rectangular Shaped Windows (FEBR/Blast glazing) Task 3.A: Develop the test matrix.

Task 3.B: Develop a test plan that maximizes number of windows tested per shot and details all instrumentation necessary.

Task 3.C: Conduct testing.

Task 3.D: Submit Quick Look Reports for each test and results.

Task 3.E: Submit Final Report for all testing and comparison of predicted loads and

Task 4: Test Planning and Testing of Irregular Shaped Windows Task 4.A: Develop the test matrix.

Task 4.B: Develop a test plan that maximizes number of windows tested per shot and details all instrumentation necessary.

Task 4C: Conduct testing.

Task 4.D: Submit Quick Look Reports for each test and results.

Task 4.E: Submit Final Report for all testing and comparison of predicted loads and

Monthly Status Reports and Meetings:

Monthly Status Reports shall be submitted, an example acceptable format is provided in Appendix A.

One meeting a month to discuss design and progress shall be held at a minimum. Meeting frequency can be increased at performer’s discretion to support continued program progress.

Deliverables:

Monthly Status Report submitted by the tenth of every month. This shall be submitted throughout the effort through all testing of glazing samples.

WINGARD calculations for Task 1, Rectangular Shaped Windows, and Task 2, Irregular Shaped Windows, shall be submitted.

Construction drawings for non-responding wall, including rough opening size, and steel inserts to accept window glazing’s from Task 1 and Task 2 shall be provided prior to any construction.

A test plan shall be submitted for Task 2 and Task 4 testing. The test plan shall include glazing configurations, high speed video angles, pressure gauge locations and type, deflection measuring instrumentation, and any other instrumentation required.

Quick Look Report within 25 calendar days of test event.

A Final Report shall be developed for Task 2 and Task 4 testing comparing predicted WINGARD loads to measured loads, predicted glazing response to measured response including GSA Glazing Hazard Levels, plotted pressure to glazing predicted and measured response, plotted impulse to glazing predicted and measured response, and findings of the WINGARD software to design window glazing to the design loads.

Raw data files in DPlot format, High—speed video files of test event, pre and posttest photographs. This shall be submitted immediately post completion of testing in Task 2.C and again in Task 4.C. All shall be resubmitted along with curve fitted data, refined/finalized/processed High-speed video, and Final Report per Task 2.E and Task 4.E

General Provisions:

Blast Test Standard

Blast testing shall follow the most recent version of the Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security Blast Testing Standard Operating Procedures for DS/PSP/RD. The current version as of the date on this SOW is dated August 22, 2022. Attached

Classification

All of the work under this scope is Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU). Specifics of the DOS design basis threat for new construction are considered SBU Five Eye (FVEY). Specifics of the blast phenomena such as reflected pressure, impulse and duration are not classified.

Confidentiality

All information including photographs, reports and data developed shall remain the property of the United States Government and shall not be discussed with or made available to others for any purpose. The Test Center shall be aware of and take such precautionary measures as necessary to maintain the confidential nature of all information produced under this task order.

Appendix A:

Example Monthly Status Report

DS/C/PSP/PSD/RD – Project Name Task Manager: TBD

Developer PI: (Fill in name, phone number once contract is awarded) Contract Number: (fill in)

MONTHLY STATUS REPORT

1) TASK TITLE: ((fill in)

2) DESCRIPTION/REQUIREMENT: (fill in)

3) DEVELOPER(S): (add any significant subcontractors)

4) TECHNICAL APPROACH: (In five or six sentences, summarize the project’s technical approach.)

5) MILESTONES: (fill in relevant milestones)

Milestone Planned Rescheduled Actual Project Plan

Kickoff Meeting

Preliminary Design Review

Operations and Maintenance Manual

Critical Design Review

Test Plan

Test Report

Etc.

6) FUNDING & COSTS:

Project Funding History Funding Action Date Amount Comment Contract Award 7/15/2016 $68,000.00 Contract award, funds through Nov 2016 Mod 1 10/15/2016 $58,000.00 Incremental funding, funds through Dec 2016.

Mod 2 1/15/2017 $65,000.00 Fully funds effort

Funding Provided to Date

Expenditures (Current Month)

Accrued Expenditures (Cumulative)

Remaining Obligated Funds

Funding $100,000.00 $25,000.00 $100,000.00 $0.00 Total Funding Provided $200,000.00 Contract Value $300,000.00

Insert graph showing planned expenditures, current funding level, and actual expenditures here. The graph must cover from contract start date to end date. If a revised spend plan becomes necessary, be sure to include the original plan as well. (See sample below):

7) TASK STATUS / MONTHLY ACTIVITIES:

a. Report month –

b. Upcoming Month –

8) ISSUES: (Identify any issue that affects the progress of the project, funds requirements, payment of invoices, potential schedule problems. Include requirements for resolution of the issue.)

9) PHOTOS/VIDEO: (Include at least two current digital images of 300 pixel/inch quality or better, in

“.jpg”, “.tif”, or “.bmp” format that show a conceptual application, design, physical prototype, or other meaningful representation of the project progress. If applicable, provide video compatible with Windows Media Player.)