Gun safes: UL ratings and fireboard insulation

[Dr 9]

Hello folks. First post here. I have been looking at various real safes, and gun safes aka RSCs and noticed that the ones that use the poured cement in the walls of the safe are UL listed for 1 hr, 2hr etc., and NONE of the ones with fireboard insulation are UL listed. They mostly have some off the wall rating from some firm Ive never heard of stating its good for such and such temperature and so many minutes.

Is fireboard that bad of an insulator that it cant stand up to the UL tests?

 

[a1abdj]

I am familiar with hundreds if not thousands of safes that have passed the UL testing, and that use cast insulations.

I have never seen any safe using fireboard, ceramic, or any other material for its primary insulation that has ever passed the UL test.

With all of this said, there is currently no gun safe on the market that carries a UL fire rating.

 

[rbernie]

Is fireboard that bad of an insulator that it cant stand up to the UL tests?

There are at least two possibilities:

• Fireboard is inadequate to the task of providing the needed fire resistance called for in the UL tests
• The manufacturers of fireboard equipped firearm RSCs don't see the value in subjecting their RSC to the UL tests since they're specifically positioned for the residential market

I am of the belief that both of the above notions have some elements of truth to them. I am also convinced that manufacturers of poured-fill/cast safes use the poured fill because it functions both as an effective fire barrier and as a penetration-resistant structural element that helps them achieve the needed ratings in both fire and forced entry domains. Failing to use a cast fire barrier in favor of an alternative barrier (board, wool) will likely demand that, in turn, the safe manufacturer then upsize the steel wall thickness to still be able to obtain the requisite entry resistant rating.

 

[Ultra]

I am also convinced that manufacturers of poured-fill/cast safes use the poured fill because it functions both as an effective fire barrier and as a penetration-resistant structural element that helps them achieve the needed ratings in both fire and forced entry domains.

I questioned a safe expert on another site regarding "cast fill" He disagrees regarding your premise that they are a "penetration-resistant structural element." This was the video that got me to ask the question. It certainly does not seemed like it made a difference in this case.

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region_southeast_valley/mesa/thieves-break-into-shop-through-roof

 

[a1abdj]

I questioned a safe expert on another site regarding "cast fill" He disagrees regarding your premise that they are a "penetration-resistant structural element." This was the video that got me to ask the question. It certainly does not seemed like it made a difference in this case.

I'm glad you pointed this out. Pay close attention to what you're seeing in that video, as it teaches a very valuable lesson. Do not use a document safe to store valuables.

All fills, of any type, will add structure and strength to a safe. Even a document safe will a loose/damp fill (like you see in this video) will have more strength than a similar single walled safe with gypsum board stuck up against it on the inside. As far as fills go, the type used in this safe will be about the lightest (by strength, not by weight) available. There are also fills that provide 30,000 PSI of strength (the concrete in your house is probably 4,000 PSI +/-).

The safe in your video is specifically designed to prevent fire. It's construction is not meant to prevent theft. I am surprised his insurance company allowed it (assuming they paid the claim).

 

[al123]

Ultra wrote:
I questioned a safe expert on another site regarding "cast fill" He disagrees regarding your premise that they are a "penetration-resistant structural element." This was the video that got me to ask the question. It certainly does not seemed like it made a difference in this case.

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...p-through-roof

Thank you for the link to this video.

I know little about safes, but I did take notice of a couple of things:

I was expecting to see the sides/top/back of the safe in question to be penetrated, in particular looking for a large hole caused by brute force penetration. For me, that would be reveal some information about the cast-fill protection for the body of that particular safe.

Instead it looks like the thieves pushed the safe on its back, then just pried off the door. The door frame looks flimsy, and the door itself looks like sheet metal wrapped in whatever material was inside it. There seemed to be only two bolts, both bent backwards on the door itself. It is completely warped. I doubt a solid plate steel or high-strength concrete door/frame would be so easily damaged.

The article mentioned "cracking a safe". This appears it wasn't much of a challenge for a professional safe cracker.

 

[rockola]

Hello folks. First post here. I have been looking at various real safes, and gun safes aka RSCs and noticed that the ones that use the poured cement in the walls of the safe are UL listed for 1 hr, 2hr etc., and NONE of the ones with fireboard insulation are UL listed. They mostly have some off the wall rating from some firm Ive never heard of stating its good for such and such temperature and so many minutes.

Is fireboard that bad of an insulator that it cant stand up to the UL tests?

First post here too Dr 9,

Yes I've noticed that too. Also, have you noticed that there isn't a single gun safe with a UL fire rating? I've been down that path before and realized there are people out there that will say anything to sell a product.

Ultra, nice video! That cast safe was pried open too. I hope it didn't have an actual UL TL rating.

Actually here is an video of an real UL test of a cast safe that achieved a TL-30 rating. When I saw this video and the criteria UL was using to pass a test, I thought 'why didn't they just core drill the safe?' As the video shows, it takes them a little more than four minutes to cut a square out of the thin steel plate then after scoring the concrete, they beat the exposed cast with sledge hammers and pick axes to get to the inner liner before cutting again. For those who have core drilled before I'd think you'd agree that that safe would have had a hard time passing a TL-15 test if it were core drilled. Of course, I could be wrong.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtbGUbeM860

 

[a1abdj]

I've been down that path before and realized there are people out there that will say anything to sell a product.

This is more common among gun safe manufacturers and salespersons that other types of safes.

That cast safe was pried open too. I hope it didn't have an actual UL TL rating.

The safe in that video is at the complete opposite end of the safe spectrum as TL rated safes are.

Over here you have the residential document safes, then commercial document safes, and you can throw in most of the gun safes too. Then you go to B rate, then C rate, then E rate (TL-15 if tested by UL), etc....

You can't use a pried open document safe as an example of a defeated cast safe, as it was never designed to not be pried open. It has no burglary rating whatsoever, and would not be insurable for valuables commercially.

IMO, there is nothing quite like thick high quality steel

Although that is my preference as well, the truth is that there is stuff better than thick high quality steel. It's high density concrete. It's stronger than steel, lighter than steel, and cost less to produce than steel.

Just to compare it to the video, here's what a real TL rated safe looks like after your average burglars spend all night on it. Notice that it hasn't been pried open, nor did they make it through. This is a composite safe, using a cast fill in between light gauge steel. The concrete on this safe has to be equal in strength and resistance to 1" of A36 steel plate laminated to 1/2" of maganese steel.

 

[heeler]

That's some really amazing material inside the door and walls of that safe.
Have not ever heard of an Empire before.
How old do you think that safe is a1abdj?

 

[rbernie]

the truth is that there is stuff better than thick high quality steel. It's high density concrete. It's stronger than steel, lighter than steel, and cost less to produce than steel.

I assume that this high density concrete also functions as an effective fire barrier - no?

 

[Ultra]

Have not ever heard of an Empire before

It's probably Empire out of NYC. They've been in business since 1904. I've stopped in there and they have some very nice safes at not very nice prices!

I was looking for a B rated safe and I was not impressed by those. However there seemed to be a big difference in quality when you got to C rated and up. The sales woman I dealt with made a point of telling me these safes were not made in China so I asked her where they were made and she told me India!

 

[a1abdj]

How old do you think that safe is a1abdj?

They all look the same, so it's hard to tell just by looking at that photo. Chances are pretty darn good that it's less than 20 years old.

Have not ever heard of an Empire before

It's probably Empire out of NYC.

That's them. It's not unheard of for safe retailers to attach their name to the safe, or even have the safe built for them to sell.

I assume that this high density concrete also functions as an effective fire barrier - no?

Most of the composite safes with burglary ratings are tested into the 1,800 degree range for 2 hours. You will rarely see UL fire ratings on these safes as well, but not because they wouldn't pass the test. UL requires that manufacturers construct their fire safes identically to the unit submitted for testing. This is a problem with safes designed to prevent burglary as changing the design slightly from safe to safe increases the security.

The sales woman I dealt with made a point of telling me these safes were not made in China so I asked her where they were made and she told me India!

There are safes made all over the world that find there way here to the US. Many of the best safes available are built overseas. Where the safe is built is not as important as how it is built. I always like to use China as an example because they produce very nice safes, as well as complete trash.

 

[bomac11]

Dr. 9,

As Rockola mentioned, not a single gun safe has a U.L. rating so take their ratings with a grain of salt. U.L testing requires a long cool down process and that's where most of the safes fail during fire testing. The drywall and even concrete safes have large amounts of water that is driven off as stream. Once the waters gone, the temperature goes up quickly.

I have never seen any safe using fireboard, ceramic, or any other material for its primary insulation that has ever passed the UL test. [\quote]

Athough there are some low density (light weight / low strength) concrete safes that can pass U.L. lowest ratings (I.e., 350F) The higher rated fire safes needed for storing media have to also keep a low humidity level in the safe so they need ceramic, form or other dry insulation. Go check it yourself.

Although that is my preference as well, the truth is that there is stuff better than thick high quality steel. It's high density concrete. It's stronger than steel, lighter than steel, and cost less to produce than steel.

Wow, I hope you're not being serious. Although concrete is an excellent relatively low cost material; it can't hold a candle to steel, why do you think steel rebar is used in construction?

The thing about concrete is it's great in compression but weak in tension (pulling forces) and shear forces.

You also mentioned that there are concrete mixes achieving 30,000 PSI in strength. I'm not saying you're wrong but the strongest mix I know of can achieve around 21KPSI after around 1000 day curing time. But all that aside, 30,000 PSI is considered mild steel, there are high strength steel achieving 200,000 PSI. So much for concrete being stronger than steel.

I assume that this high density concrete also functions as an effective fire barrier - no?

No. The higher the density the faster the heat transfer. Better to have low density concrete if your primary purpose is fire protection. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself plenty of publications on the internet.

 

[a1abdj]

Athough there are some low density (light weight / low strength) concrete safes that can pass U.L. lowest ratings (I.e., 350F) The higher rated fire safes needed for storing media have to also keep a low humidity level in the safe so they need ceramic, form or other dry insulation. Go check it yourself.

Which is why I mentioned primary insulation. There are some of these materials used as secondary insulations, but they themselves are doing no heavy lifting. The ceramics used inside of data safes are being used to keep the 350 degree internal safe temperature down below 125 degrees. It is also used to seal out the moisture that results from the primary insulation being heated, as part of a data rating involves humidity control.

Wow, I hope you're not being serious. Although concrete is an excellent relatively low cost material; it can't hold a candle to steel, why do you think steel rebar is used in construction?

If we were talking about certain construction processes, I may agree. However, we are talking about building a wall that's very difficult to get through. Concrete has been used for most bank vault construction for the last 150 years. Since science has improved concrete lately, it is being used more in less quantity to achieve the same results.

You also mentioned that there are concrete mixes achieving 30,000 PSI in strength. I'm not saying you're wrong but the strongest mix I know of can achieve around 21KPSI after around 1000 day curing time. But all that aside, 30,000 PSI is considered mild steel, there are high strength steel achieving 200,000 PSI. So much for concrete being stronger than steel.

You're talking about concrete used in construction. I'm talking about concrete used for other purposes.

You can read an article here, from 2007 at that, that is talking about concrete mixes being used in bunkers that are rating at 50,000 to 60,000 psi:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007/04/irans_superconc/

I can tell you that I am also lucky enough to have an engineer that works in high strength concretes as a customer of mine here in the St. Louis area. When we were delivering his safes, he showed me several samples of "concrete" that were up into the 70,000 psi range. Most of the high PSI stuff is being used as some sort of armoring.

I'm certainly not saying that concrete is better than steel for all purposes. I am saying that concrete often outperforms steel when it comes to safe and vault construction.

No. The higher the density the faster the heat transfer. Better to have low density concrete if your primary purpose is fire protection. Don't take my word for it, look it up yourself plenty of publications on the internet.

Yet there are composite (high density concrete) safes that have passed UL fire tests. Don't take my word for it. Look at the UL tags on the door. =)

 

[Ultra]

You can read an article here, from 2007 at that, that is talking about concrete mixes being used in bunkers that are rating at 50,000 to 60,000 psi:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2007...ans_superconc/

I'm not sure I believe anything coming out of Tehran. Unless there's a more reputable source I doubt this super psi concrete exists.

 

[a1abdj]

Unless there's a more reputable source I doubt this super psi concrete exists.

Well I've held some in my own hands, that was made right here in the US. Several samples, some of which were for modular vault panels, and some were from military type applications.

 

[BUZ]

Just to compare it to the video, here's what a real TL rated safe looks like after your average burglars spend all night on it. Notice that it hasn't been pried open, nor did they make it through. This is a composite safe, using a cast fill in between light gauge steel. The concrete on this safe has to be equal in strength and resistance to 1" of A36 steel plate laminated to 1/2" of maganese steel.

You may have seen this already, another good example of a quality safe stopping thieves.

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2008/10/prweb1507244.htm

TRTL 30x6

http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2008/10/21/857734/S7300645.JPG

http://ww1.prweb.com/prfiles/2008/10/21/857734/S7300648.JPG