Wind Pressure Testing of Tornado Safe Room Components Made from Wood

Similar documents
Residential Tornado Safe Room from Commodity Wood Products

NRCS Standards and Criteria for Dead Animal Composting

Residential Tornado Safe Rooms from Commodity Wood Products

Water Talk Series

Detection and analysis of the stress relaxation properties of thin wood composites using cantileverbeam

ART & SCIENCE OF GRAZING MANAGEMENT Science. Art. This is NOT the Goal! Why Management-intensive Grazing (MiG)?

Factors Affecting Oxidative Stain in Soft Maple (Acer rubrum L.)

USDA Forest Products Laboratory s Debris Launcher

Evaluating Shrinkage of Wood Propellers in a High-Temperature Environment

Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors United States Department of Agriculture

Evaluation of the High-Heel Roof-to-Wall Connection with Extended OSB Wall Sheathing

Hungry Creek Watershed Road Maintenance and Stony Quarry Development

Decision Memo. Programmatic Forest Plan Amendment for Cultural Resource Protection Standards and Guidelines. United States Department of Agriculture

Lake Fire Restoration and Hazardous Tree Removal. Project Proposed Action and Scoping Document

WORKFORCE CONNECTIONS, INC. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES

Plans for Crash-Tested Bridge Railings for Longitudinal Wood Decks on Low-Volume Roads

Designation: TTU NWI DIF Air Bladder Standard Scope

Criterion 6, Indicator 30: Value and Volume in Round Wood Equivalents of Exports and Imports of Wood Products

Moonlight Aquatic Organism Passage Project

Lambson Draw On/Off Allotment Livestock Conversion Decision Notice

STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA

Rural Manufacturing at a Glance, 2017 Edition

Bastrop & Caldwell County Water Resources

SECTION FABRICATED WALL PANEL ASSEMBLIES. A. American Institute of Steel Construction (A.I.S.C.) "Manual of Steel Construction.

KENTUCKY UTILITIES SPECIAL USE AUTHORIZATION AMENDMENT: MOUNT VICTORY TRANSMISSION TOWER REPLACEMENT DECISION MEMO

General Location: Approximately 6 miles east of Huntsville, Utah along the South Fork of the Ogden River (Figure 1)

BACKGROUND DECISION. June 2016 Page 1 of 6

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. CHAPTER 34 Estimating Corn Seedling Emergence and Variability

Tower Fire Salvage. Economics Report. Prepared by: Doug Nishek Forester. for: Priest Lake Ranger District Idaho Panhandle National Forests

Recreation Report Kimball Hill Stands Management Gold Beach Ranger District, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Date: April 27, 2016

Softwood Lumber Prices for Evaluation of Small-Diameter Timber Stands in the Intermountain West

UPPER MIDWEST DAIRY NEWS

Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue

Assessment of the Treatability of Small-Diameter Grand Fir Posts

PFS Test Report TL-109

STRUCTURAL DESIGN CRITERIA

Duration of Load on Bolted Joints

Hurricane wind shelter retrofit room standards for existing houses

Lateral Load Performance of SIP Walls with Full Bearing

TRACKING EXPENSES. All Programs/SPSP

Hassayampa Landscape Restoration Environmental Assessment

Recent Research to Expand the Engineering Knowledge Base for SIPs

IMPACT RESISTANCE OF BRICK VENEER STRUCTURES TO HURRICANE DEBRIS

SIP Shear Walls. Cyclic Performance of High-Aspect-Ratio Segments and Perforated Walls. United States Department of Agriculture

2014 Farm Bill. FACT SHEET March Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program for 2015 and Subsequent Years

WORKFORCE CONNECTIONS, INC. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES

Impact of C&C loads due to ASCE/SEI Overview Revised 3/23/2017

OUTREACH NOTICE 2018 TEMPORARY POSITIONS BEAVERHEAD-DEERLODGE NATIONAL FOREST HOW TO APPLY: RECREATION POSITIONS BEING HIRED:

Structural Performance Tests of VHB Structural Glazing Tapes

CORN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES APPENDIX A. Corn Planting Guide

Specifications and Drawings for Underground Electric Distribution. SUMMARY: The Rural Utilities Service (RUS), a Rural Development agency of the U.S.

Dominant-Tree Thinning in New England Northern Hardwoods a Second Look

Prepared for Forest Product Laboratory, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Norbord Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada

MIDPLY Portal Frame as Lateral Bracing System in Light- Frame Wood Buildings

APA Report T2012L-16

DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF WOOD AND GYPSUM DIAPHRAGMS

OUR COMPANY OUR WARRANTY OUR GUARANTEE

BUDGET BASICS TRAINING TOPIC: DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS. Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)

CONTINUOUS TIMBER DIAPHRAGMS

NRCS Water Quality Practices

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PERFORMANCE TEST REPORT. Rendered to: BRICK-IT. SERIES/MODEL: Brick Veneer Panel Systems PRODUCT TYPE: Wall Panel Systems

ICC/NSSA STANDARD FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SHELTERS ICC

A REPORT ON THE EFFECTS OF WIND SPEED ON TIMBER CONSTRUCTION JOSHUA HUENEFELD. B.S., Kansas State University, 2012 A REPORT

Chapter 8 - Testing. Ernst W. Kiesling, P.E., Ph.D. Professor of Civil Engineering. and. Executive Director

Investigation of Wind Projectile Resistance of Insulating Concrete Form Homes. by Ernst W. Kiesling, Ph.D., P.E. Russell Carter, BSCE, EIT

Prepared for: American Frame Manufacturing Co Bristow Court, Unit B San Diego, CA Phone: Web:

Prepared for: American Frame Manufacturing Co Bristow Court, Unit B San Diego, CA Phone: Web:

Engineering Watershed, Soil, & Air

sheathing) fastened between four flatwise SPF stud grade 2x4s.

ROOFING APPLICATION STANDARD (TAS) No. 102(A)-95

Mid-Rise Engineering Considerations for Engineered Wood Products

WOOD I-JOIST AWARENESS GUIDE

GA GYPSUM BOARD TYPICAL MECHANICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

OVERALL STRUCTURAL SYSTEM

Wind Science & Engineering Research Center Debris Impact Test Facility P.O. Box Lubbock, Texas MANUFACTURER S IDENTIFICATION

Rural Development Environmental Regulation for Rural Infrastructure Projects

Metal-plate connections loaded in combined bending and tension

Date Oct 5, 2015 Page 1 of 13 Sample tag No -- Ambient: 29C Humidity Sample No. 1

Locally Led Conservation & The Local Work Group. Mark Habiger NRCS

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION TEST REPORT. Rendered to: CBT SUPPLY, INC. / D.B.A. SMARTDESKS

Load Design Charts. R-CONTROL SIPs STRUCTURAL INSULATED PANELS. CONTROL, NOT COMPROMISE.

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Exterior Brick Masonry Veneer Supported by Metal Plate Connected Wood Trusses (MPCWT) Overview Revised 11/17/2016

Feasibility of Fiberglass-Reinforced Bolted Wood Connections

FIRE RESISTANCE TESTS OF BRICK VENEER / WOOD FRAME WALLS J. GREGG BORCHELT

Product Test Summaries Nichiha Fiber Cement Products Sierra Premium Boards

5 Load Determination and Structural Design Criteria

Storrie and Rich Fire Area Watershed Improvement and Forest Road 26N67 Re-alignment Project

Contact your local USDA Farm Service Agency Service Center Office for more information and to apply.

Decision Memo for the City of Detroit Root Rot Timber Sale Project

TEST REPORT ON. TESTED FOR: Central States Manufacturing, Inc. 302 Jane Place Lowell, AR Telephone: (800) Fax: (800)

2001 COMPANY Co., ASCE 7 98 Wind Uplift Evaluation Form (Ask for Form - ASCE7dpi.doc)

CRITERIA FOR TESTING IMPACT & NON IMPACT RESISTANT BUILDING ENVELOPE COMPONENTS USING UNIFORM STATIC AIR PRESSURE

Committee Input No NFPA [ New Section after ]

Vault Toilet Interception Analysis Brenda Land, Sanitary Engineer

Decision Memo North Boundary Salvage

IAPMO ES. Cover Sheet. Evaluation Criteria of. COLD-FORMED STEEL or WOOD FRAMED / STEEL-SHEATHED SHEAR WALLS

Scope. resistance expressed as a moment

Timber products used to build U.S. single-family houses in 1988

Impact Resistance of Advanced Framed Wall Systems with Insulating Sheathing as the Primary Sheathing

Transcription:

United States Department of Agriculture Wind Pressure Testing of Tornado Safe Room Components Made from Wood Robert H. Falk Deepak Shrestha Forest Service Forest Products Laboratory Research Paper FPL RP 688 November 2016

Abstract To evaluate the ability of a wood tornado safe room to resist wind pressures produced by a tornado, two safe room components were tested for wind pressure strength. A tornado safe room ceiling panel and door were static-pressure-tested according to ASTM E 330 using a vacuum test system. Results indicate that the panels had load capacities from 2.4 to 3.5 times that required by the wind pressure calculations of ASCE 7. The panels sustained no damage at these elevated load levels. Keywords: wood, tornado, safe room, door, testing, ASTM E 330 Contents Introduction... 1 Materials and Methods... 1 Test Specimens... 1 Wind Load Calculation... 1 Test System... 3 Test Setup and Procedure... 3 Results... 4 Discussion... 5 Conclusions... 5 References... 5 November 2016 Falk, Robert H.; Shrestha, Deepak. 2016. Wind pressure testing of tornado safe room components made from wood. Research Paper FPL-RP-688. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 6 p. A limited number of free copies of this publication are available to the public from the Forest Products Laboratory, One Gifford Pinchot Drive, Madison, WI 53726-2398. This publication is also available online at www.fpl.fs.fed.us. Laboratory publications are sent to hundreds of libraries in the United States and elsewhere. The Forest Products Laboratory is maintained in cooperation with the University of Wisconsin. The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) of any product or service. In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA s TARGET Center at (202) 720 2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877 8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English. To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda/gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632 9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250 9410; (2) fax: (202) 690 7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov. USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

Wind Pressure Testing of Tornado Safe Room Components Made from Wood Robert H. Falk, Research Engineer Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, Wisconsin Deepak Shrestha, Senior Scientist PFS TECO, Cottage Grove, Wisconsin Introduction In addition to resisting impact loads generated by windblown debris, a safe room must be able to withstand high wind forces from tornados. The American National Standards Institute s Standard for the Design and Construction of Storm Shelters (ICC-500; ICC NSSA 2014) stipulates that wall, roof, and door assemblies are pressure-tested according to ASTM E 330 (ASTM 2014) and ASTM E 1886 (ASTM 2013) to simulate the required wind loads. ASTM E 330 deals with static testing, and ASTM E 1886 describes methodology for cyclic testing. ASCE/SEI 7-10 (ASCE 2013) is used to calculate wind pressure loads. In this study, two wood safe room components previously impact-tested were tested for wind pressure strength. A tornado safe room ceiling panel (Falk and others 2015) and door (Falk and Bridwell 2016) were static-pressure-tested according to ASTM E 330 using a vacuum test system developed by PFS TECO (Cottage Grove, Wisconsin). Materials and Methods Test Specimens Previous research (Falk and others 2015) summarized impact testing of wood walls constructed of nail-laminated nominal 2 by 8 (standard 38- by 184-mm) lumber and wood sheathing. For these walls, three 2 by 8s were nailed together to form a beam with a tongue and groove configuration (Fig. 1). The beams were then stacked and interlocked to create a wall (Fig. 2). The 2 by 8 wall was then sheathed with a wood-based panel (oriented strandboard (OSB) or plywood). The roof of the safe room was constructed the same way but was sheathed only on the interior (ceiling) surface. This asymmetrical design was necessary because fastening the sheathing to the roof surface would be difficult if the safe room was built in a basement with limited headroom. Because the roof panel was only sheathed on one side, it was deemed the weakest of the safe room panels and therefore chosen for pressure testing. Also, as will be seen in the load calculation section of this report, the calculated loads on this panel were greater than those on the wall sections. The 8- by 8-ft (2.4- by 2.4-m) panel tested as a ceiling was similar in construction to Wall No. 8 of Falk and others (2015, appendix). Construction adhesive was applied between each layer of 2 by 8s, between each nail-laminated wall panel beam, and to the 23/32-in. (18.26-mm) plywood sheathing. Also tested was a tornado safe room door (Fig. 3), which was constructed according to the diagram in Figure 4. The door was 43 by 84 in. (1.1 by 2.1 m) (to fit across a 36-in.- (0.9-m-) wide door opening) and was constructed of three layers of 23/32-in. (18.26-mm) plywood sheathing and faced front and back with a sheet of 18-gauge (0.05-in.- (1.27-mm-) thick) hot rolled steel. The layers of the door were held together with 1/4-in. bolts as shown in Figure 5 and as described in Falk and Bridwell (2016). Wind Load Calculation According to ASCE/SEI 7-10, for a main wind-force resisting system (MWFRS) low-rise building, velocity pressure is calculated as q z: q z = 0.00256 K z K zt K d V 2 ICC-500 assumes that the topographic effects factor, K zt, and the wind directionality factor, K d, are equal to 1. The basic wind speed for an EF-5 tornado is equal to 250 mph (402.3 km/h). K zt = 1.0 K d = 1.0 V = 250 mph From ASCE/SEI 7-10, chapter 28, table 28.3.1, and assuming the height of the structure, z, is less than 15 ft (4.6 m), K z = 2.01 (15/Z g) 2/α According to table 26.9-1, Exposure C, α = 9.5 Z g = 900

Research Paper FPL RP 688 Figure 1. Nail-laminated wall panel beam. therefore K z = 2.01 (15/900) 2/9.5 = 0.85 and q z = 0.00256(0.85)(1.0)(1.0)(250) 2 = 136 lb/ft 2 (6.5 kpa) Furthermore, the design wind pressure, p, is calculated from p = qgc p q i(gc pi) (ASCE /SEI 7-10, table 27.4-1) assuming the tornado shelter is an enclosed rigid building. For a windward wall, L/B = 1.0 for an 8 by 8 tornado shelter C p = 0.8 from ASCE/SEI 7-10, table 27.4-1 GC pi = ±0.55 per ICC-500, section 304.7 (exception) q = q z Figure 3. Safe room door. The most critical case occurs when the internal pressure coefficient (0.55) is negative: For a flat roof, p = 136(0.85)(0.8) 136 ( 0.55) = 167 lb/ft 2 (8 kpa) L/B = 1.0 for an 8 by 8 tornado shelter q i = q h G = 0.85 Figure 2. Assembled wall panel (without sheathing). Figure 4. Safe room door construction (1 in. = 25.4 mm; 18 gauge is 0.05 in. (1.27 mm) thick). 2

Wind Pressure Testing of Wood Tornado Safe Room Components Figure 6. Vacuum test system. Figure 5. Safe room door bolt pattern (1 in. = 25.4 mm). C p = 1.3 from ASCE/SEI 7-10, table 27.4-1 GC pi = ±0.55 per ICC-500, section 304.7 (exception) Therefore q = q h q i = q h G = 0.85 The most critical case occurs when the internal pressure coefficient (0.55) is positive: p = 136(0.85)( 1.3) 136(0.55) = 225 lb/ft 2 (10.8 kpa) Test System PFS TECO, a building materials test laboratory in Cottage Grove, Wisconsin, has developed a vacuum-based panel test system that will allow static pressure testing of panels according to ASTM E 330 loading sequence. This system can exert up to 700 lb/ft 2 (33.5 kpa) of static pressure on panels up to 8 by 24 ft (2.4 by 7.3 m) and can hold pressure to within 1 lb/ft 2 (0.05 kpa). This system uses a large vacuum pump connected to a steel I-beam frame that is sealed to the laboratory floor. The panel specimen is laid on the steel frame and supported such that a plastic membrane can be laid over the top of the specimen to seal it for testing. A computer controls the vacuum pump and the loading sequence (Fig. 6). Test Setup and Procedure According to ICC-500, the wall panel specimen (section 806.2) and the door specimen (section 806.3) shall be loaded to at least 1.2 times the wind load calculated from ASCE/SEI 7-10. As indicated earlier, the ceiling panel tested was asymmetrical in design because it had plywood glued and nailed to only one side. For this reason, the panel was tested twice, once with the plywood on the compression side and once with the plywood on the tension side. Figure 7 shows the test setup for the ceiling panel. The panel was supported Figure 7. Ceiling panel test configuration (in this case, the plywood is on the tension side). 3

Research Paper FPL RP 688 along each bottom edge on a 5.5-in. (139.7-mm) support beam to simulate the support provided in a safe room by adjoining walls. For the first test, the panel was tested with the plywood on the tension side. In accordance with ASTM E 330, the panel was preloaded to stabilize the vacuum test system at a load of 20 lb/ft 2 (0.96 kpa). The load was then applied in ten 30-lb/ft 2 (1.44-kPa) increments (30 300 lb/ft 2 (1.44 14.36 kpa)). The load was held at each load level for 5 minutes and then the load was removed. The panel was allowed to relax for 1 minute between loading increments. After the last load increment, the load was increased to the maximum possible. For the second test, the panel was oriented with the plywood on the compression side. The panel was again tested at increasing load increments. However, to decrease testing time, four 50-lb/ft 2 (2.39-kPa) load increments were used (50 200 lb/ft 2 (2.39 9.58 kpa)). The loading and unloading sequence was the same as the previous test. After the last load increment, the load was increased to the maximum possible. Panel deflection was monitored using three cable-extension transducers with a range of 20 in. (508 mm) and an accuracy of 0.15%. These were placed along the midline of the panel at quarter points. For the door, deflection was measured at the geometric center of the door, at the middle of the door at the unsupported threshold, and at a quarter point near the top of the door. For the door, the test setup and system were similar to that of the ceiling panel (Fig. 8). However, the door was supported on only three sides. The bottom of the door was unsupported to simulate the threshold of the door. The other edges of the door were supported on a 2.5-in. (63.5-mm) ledge to simulate the overlay of the door on the opening of the safe room wall. As with the ceiling panel, the door was preloaded to stabilize the vacuum test system. The load was Figure 9. Load and deflection for tested ceiling panel with plywood on tension side (1 lb/ft 2 = 47.9 Pa; 1 in. = 25.4 mm). then applied in nine 30-lb/ft 2 (1.44-kPa) increments (30 270 lb/ft 2 (1.44 12.93 kpa)). After the last load increment, the load was increased to the maximum the system would deliver. The loading and unloading sequence was the same as the ceiling panel tests. Results Figures 9 and 10 show the results of wind pressure testing of the ceiling panel. Load deflection curves were generated for each test. Figure 8. Door test configuration. Figure 10. Load and deflection for tested ceiling panel with plywood on compression side (1 lb/ft 2 = 47.9 Pa; 1 in. = 25.4 mm). 4

Wind Pressure Testing of Wood Tornado Safe Room Components Figure 9 shows the load deflection data for the ceiling panel with the plywood on the tension side. The panel in this orientation withstood the capacity of the test system (568 lb/ft 2 (27.2 kpa)) and deflected 0.47 in. (11.9 mm) at the center of the panel. Deflection of the panel at the 1/3 points was less (as expected) at about 0.30 in. (7.62 mm). Similar results were found when testing the panel with the plywood on the compression side. However, the maximum load reached was 635 lb/ft 2 (30.4 kpa) with a defection of 0.83 in. (21.1 mm). As expected, the maximum deflection was at the center of the panel farthest from any support. Again, the test system limited maximum load and the panel did not fail. For the safe room door, a maximum load of 575 lb/ft 2 (27.5 kpa) was reached and the door deflected 0.25 in. (6.35 mm) at the threshold (Fig. 11). Deflection at the midpoint of the door was 0.17 in. (4.3 mm), and at the 1/4 point (from top of the door), the deflection was 0.11 in. (2.8 mm). As with the ceiling panel tests, the test system limited the maximum load and the door did not fail. For both the ceiling panel and door tests, there was no reduction of load carrying capacity at the incremental load levels and the specimens did not exhibit any distress caused by the loading and unloading at each incremental load. Discussion As is expected with wood building components, the load deflection data exhibited nonlinear behavior with deflection increasing with greater loads. Unfortunately, the ultimate load of the panel and door could not be determined because the capacity of the test system was reached. Although the test system has successfully produced loads up to 700 lb/ft 2 (33.5 kpa), each test is limited by the level of vacuum that can be achieved for a given test setup. The level of vacuum is affected primarily by the number of small leaks that result from the plastic film being compressed over nail heads and other protrusions. Although every effort was made to cushion sharp corners and obvious protrusions, inevitably leaks occur, which limits the load level achieved. Despite these leaks, the test system was able to exert loads on the panel and door well in excess of that required. In the case of the ceiling panel with the plywood on the tension side, the load reached was 2.5 times the wind load pressure (and internal suction forces) required by ASCE/SEI 7-10 and ICC-500. Similarly, the ceiling panel with the plywood on the compression side reached a load 2.8 times the wind load pressure. The door exhibited even greater load capacity with a maximum load reached more than 3.4 times that required. Conclusions The results of the wind pressure testing on a wood tornado safe room ceiling panel and door indicated that these components can withstand the calculated wind loads for an EF-5 tornado (250 mph (402.3 km/h)) with a large margin of safety. The ceiling panel withstood more than 2.5 times the design load and the door withstood more than 3.4 times the design load with no damage, distress, or excessive deflection of the component. It is likely that the components could have withstood much greater loading. However, the capacity of the vacuum test system was reached before specimen failure. References ASCE. 2013. ASCE/SEI 7-10. Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA. www.pubs.asce.org. ASTM. 2014. E 330/E 330M-14. Standard test method for structural performance of exterior windows, doors, skylights and curtain walls by uniform static air pressure difference. American Society for Testing and Materials International, West Conshohocken, PA. www.astm.org. ASTM. 2013. E 1886-13a. Standard test method for performance of exterior windows, curtain walls, doors, and impact protective systems impacted by missile(s) and exposed to cyclic pressure differentials. American Society for Testing and Materials International, West Conshohocken, PA. www.astm.org. Figure 11. Load and deflection for tested door (1 lb/ft 2 = 47.9 Pa; 1 in. = 25.4 mm). Falk, R.H.; Bridwell, J.; Hermanson, J. 2015. Residential tornado safe rooms from commodity wood products: Wall development and impact testing. Res. Pap. FPL-RP-681. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 15 p. 5

Research Paper FPL RP 688 Falk, R.H.; Bridwell, J. 2016. Development of a tornado safe room door from wood products: Door design and impact testing. Res. Pap. FPL-RP-686. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory. 17 p. ICC NSSA. 2014. ICC-500. Standard for the design and construction of storm shelters. ICC NSSA, International Code Council (Country Club Hills, IL) and National Storm Shelter Association (Lubbock, TX). Approved by American National Standards Institute, Washington, DC. 6