IC-AUT24-PG32+33_Layout 1 04/09/2024 10:56 Page 32
BUILDING & FACILITIES MANAGEMENT LPS 1175 ISSUE 8:
SETTING THE STANDARD FOR PERIMETER PROTECTION
Kevin Wells, business development director at CLD Physical Security Systems (CLD) discusses the evolution of LPS 1175 and the value of certification when it comes to selecting physical perimeter security solutions.
specifiers, installers and facilities managers with a benchmark for quality and assurance. In 1997, only a handful of products were certified to LPS 1175. Today this number has reached over 750, illustrating the greater demand for solutions that prioritise security resistance . This certification ensures that security-rated fencing products undergo rigorous testing against real-world attack scenarios. As a result of this, 95 per cent of products tested to LPS 1175 fail due to the stringent requirements set out by the Loss Prevention Certification Board (LPCB). With this in mind, what benefits can be gained by choosing solutions with this certification and why is Issue 8 so important for the perimeter security industry?
S
LPS 1175 EXPLAINED The LPS 1175 Loss Prevention Standard, developed by the LPCB, provides a benchmark for protection against forced entry through the use of intruder-resistant and security-rated fencing. In 2010, LPS 1175 Issue 7 was introduced, offering a performance classification to rate security products, determined through rigorous testing using various toolkits to assess the product’s delay time. However, recognising the need to keep pace with evolving security trends and attack methods, LPCB revised the standard in
32 AUTUMN 2024 | INDUSTRIAL COMPLIANCE
ince its introduction in the mid- 1990s, LPS 1175 has had a significant impact on the physical security industry. The standard set the bar higher than ever before, driving product innovation while providing
2019, resulting in LPS 1175 Issue 8. In Issue 8, the security rating system was redefined and divided into two components. Firstly, a ‘threat level’ is represented by a letter from A to H, corresponding to the toolkit used to evaluate the product’s resistance against intruders and the number of attackers involved. Secondly, ‘delay’ is represented by a numeric value from one to 20, indicating the minimum delay time provided by the product in minutes.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44
