Purpose of this white paper
This paper explains PAS 68 and PAS 69 in practical design and specification language. It is intended for consultants, architects, security planners, facilities teams, project managers and approving authorities who need to understand how impact-tested vehicle security barriers should be assessed, selected and incorporated into a high-security perimeter strategy.
| Subject | PAS 68 and PAS 69 for Hostile Vehicle Mitigation (HVM) |
| Audience | Security consultants, architects, engineers, asset owners and project specifiers |
| Application | Critical infrastructure, data centres, utilities, government facilities, airports, rail, industrial plants and public realm |
| Document status | Technical Paper |
Executive Summary
Hostile Vehicle Mitigation (HVM) is the discipline of preventing a hostile or errant vehicle from reaching a protected asset, crowded place, critical function or building facade. In high-security environments, perimeter protection is no longer a simple fencing exercise. It is a controlled risk-treatment strategy that combines threat assessment, vehicle dynamics, rated barriers, foundation design, operational access control and long-term maintenance.
PAS 68 and PAS 69 are commonly referenced in HVM specifications because they perform two different but connected roles. PAS 68 provides the impact-test and performance classification framework for vehicle security barriers. PAS 69 provides guidance on how to select, install and use those barriers in real project conditions. In plain language: PAS 68 tells consultants how a barrier performed under a defined impact test; PAS 69 helps consultants decide whether that barrier is suitable for a specific site.
A technically sound specification should avoid simply asking for a ‘PAS 68 bollard’ or ‘crash-rated gate’. Instead, it should define the threat vehicle, required impact speed, impact angle, acceptable penetration, debris risk, standoff distance, foundation constraints, operational duty cycle and integration requirements. This white paper provides a practical framework for doing exactly that.
Standards-status note
PAS 68:2013 and PAS 69:2013 are widely recognised and still regularly encountered in project specifications, but official listings identify both as withdrawn. Consultants should therefore verify the latest client, authority, insurer and project-specific requirements before finalising specifications. Where newer standards such as ISO 22343 or IWA 14 are required, equivalence should be reviewed by a competent HVM specialist.
PAS 68 vs PAS 69 at a Glance
|
Item
|
PAS 68
|
Happy APAS 69ddons
|
|---|---|---|
|
Primary role
|
Impact-test specification and performance classification for vehicle security barriers.
|
Guidance for selection, installation and use of vehicle security barrier systems.
|
|
Core question answered
|
How did this barrier perform when struck by a defined vehicle at a defined speed and angle?
|
How should the right barrier be selected, located, installed, operated and maintained for this site?
|
|
Main output
|
A rating/classification that describes vehicle type, mass, speed, angle, penetration and debris distance.
|
A design and application methodology for turning threat assessment into a workable HVM scheme.
|
|
Use in specification
|
Used to define required tested performance.
|
Used to define application logic, siting, foundations, integration and operational considerations.
|
|
Consultant takeaway
|
Do not treat all PAS 68-rated products as equal. Read the full rating.
|
Do not treat barrier selection as a catalogue choice. Make it site-specific.
|
Framework for Consultants
For early-stage design reviews, the following framework helps consultants translate standards language into project decisions.
|
Question
|
Consultant Focus
|
Expected Output
|
|---|---|---|
|
What?
|
What asset, function, crowd, facade, entry point or perimeter line must be protected?
|
Critical asset register, protected line, desired standoff and consequence profile.
|
|
Why?
|
Why is HVM required: terrorism, forced entry, ram raid, accidental vehicle impact, insurer requirement, authority requirement or corporate risk policy?
|
Threat basis and operational requirement.
|
|
Where?
|
Where can a vehicle generate speed, approach the asset, breach the perimeter or bypass existing controls?
|
Vehicle Dynamics Assessment and vulnerable approach map.
|
|
When?
|
When should HVM be considered: master planning, concept design, tender, retrofit, authority submission, post-incident review or asset upgrade?
|
Design-stage decision record and specification timing.
|
|
How?
|
How should barriers be rated, placed, installed, integrated, tested, operated and maintained?
|
Performance specification, product schedule, foundation/interface details and maintenance plan.
|
1. What PAS 68 Defines
PAS 68 defines a classification system and impact-test methods for vehicle security barrier systems and their supporting foundations when subjected to a single horizontal impact. It is primarily concerned with measurable impact performance. For consultants, PAS 68 is useful because it converts a crash test into a structured rating that can be compared and specified.
1.1 Scope in Practical Terms
- It applies to vehicle security barriers such as fixed bollards, removable bollards, rising bollards, road blockers, gates, barriers, fences and other products intended to resist vehicle impact.
- It considers the barrier system together with its foundation or supporting structure, because a barrier rating is only meaningful when the tested installation condition is understood.
- It describes vehicle impact performance through controlled parameters such as vehicle type, vehicle mass, impact speed, impact angle, penetration and debris distance.
- It is not a complete site-security design guide; it does not by itself resolve siting, operational workflow, traffic management, access control or maintenance strategy.
1.2 What the PAS 68 Rating Communicates
A PAS 68 rating should be read as a performance sentence, not as a marketing badge. The rating typically communicates the test method, vehicle category, vehicle mass, impact speed, impact angle, vehicle penetration and major debris distance. Consultants should review the full test report or certificate and not rely only on a shortened product description.
|
Rating element
|
Why it matters
|
|---|---|
|
Vehicle type and mass
|
A small passenger car and a heavy goods vehicle represent very different kinetic energy levels and foundation demands.
|
|
Impact speed
|
Speed has a major effect on impact energy. A higher-speed rating is not interchangeable with a lower-speed rating.
|
|
Impact angle
|
A 90-degree impact and an angled impact may produce different loading and penetration behaviour.
|
|
Penetration distance
|
This indicates how far the vehicle travelled beyond the original impact line. It directly affects required standoff distance.
|
|
Debris distance
|
This helps assess secondary risk to people, facades, equipment and public areas beyond the barrier line.
|
|
Foundation condition
|
The tested foundation depth, reinforcement and site build-up are crucial. Substitution can invalidate performance assumptions.
|
of the IEC 62305 series
LPZ 0A → 0B → 1 → 2
Type 1 → 2 → 3, coordinated
Malaysian adoption · JKR · SIRIM
Scope
What IEC 62305-4 covers
Six interconnected measures — all required together. No single measure provides adequate protection in isolation.
Assess and reduce the electromagnetic threat from all four lightning source types — direct strikes, near-structure, and conducted surges on incoming service lines.
Certified air terminals, 25mm × 3mm copper tape, heavy-duty polymer earth chambers, bonding conductors, and test points — all traceable to the IEC 62561 series with full material certifications.
Full installation by trained technicians to MS IEC 62305 / JKR specifications. Works are documented throughout with photographic evidence and inspection hold points for consultant or authority review.
Continuity testing, earth resistance measurement, and full commissioning report per IEC 62305-3. Test certificates are issued in a format accepted for JKR, BOMBA, and consultant authority submission.
Scheduled post-installation inspections and maintenance to ensure ongoing compliance throughout the system lifecycle. Annual or biennial service programmes available per IEC 62305-3 inspection intervals.
As-built drawings, material traceability records, test certificates, and compliance documentation suitable for JKR, BOMBA, local authority, and international consultant review.