# Safety glazing film?



## Yikes (Jul 18, 2011)

Has anyone seen or used this safety film? http://www.panoramafilm.com/Benefits/Safe

They claim that you can put it on ordinary plate glass and have it qualify as safety glazing per ANSI 97.1.

I have a private school with a classroom building being converted into a library.  The old building was originally permitted without safety glazing.  They would rather reinforce the glass with this film than remove+replace (cost and sustainability issues).

In your experience, does this film work?


----------



## mark handler (Jul 18, 2011)

I have used LLumar with good results

http://www.llumar.com/en/CommercialSafety.aspx

Suitable for a broad range of applications, LLumar offers safety films meeting numerous certifications and test standards in the United States, Europe and around the world, including:

•ANSI Z97.1 and CPSC 16 CFR 1201 Cat I and II

•General Services Administration (GSA) and United Facilities Criteria (UFC)

•ASTM Large Missile Level C and Small Missile requirements

•Underwriters Laboratory UL972 Forced Entry requirements

•Factory Mutual FM Approvals 4350 Small Missile

•EN356, level P2A


----------



## Architect1281 (Jul 18, 2011)

Well the key thing missing is any reference to the CPSC aor ansi required "We took this test and passed" statement

3M has several such films and when installed properly actually work. and meet the standard.

see that Mark H was faster - need better meds


----------



## RLGA (Jul 18, 2011)

You can find all the test reports here: http://www.panoramafilm.com/Products/Safety_Certifications.


----------



## TimNY (Jul 18, 2011)

Yes, I have had a film installed over the windows to meet the standard.

The downside is the film defeats the glazing manufacturer's warranty (in the case of thermal pane windows such as in Pella, Marvin, Anderson etc)

Something about the safety film causes heat to be retained in the glazing which ruins the suspended plastic film.. turns it yellow.

May be fine for other types of glazing, though.  It is pretty interesting stuff (thick, and the HO notices right away the "color" is different in those panes)


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Jul 18, 2011)

Does anyone know of a film that can be applied to the side exposed to the outdoor elements?  Thanks Mark H.

Whether single, double or triple pane glass; my understanding is the film is to be applied on the hazardous side and noted or identified on the film or window.


----------



## jpranch (Jul 18, 2011)

mark handler nailed it!


----------



## Mac (Jul 19, 2011)

Did I see an ICC-ES report? Please demonstrate compliance with BCNYS 2406.2 (Identification of safety glazing).


----------



## jpranch (Jul 19, 2011)

Mac, I don't think you really have to. Just hang your hat on IBC Section 104.11.


----------



## Mac (Jul 19, 2011)

NY State Codes Div. modifies & amends the ICC codes, and there is no 104.11. I do have 103.3, "Aternative materials etc" that could be applied. Thanks for the tip - I could probably use that in some instances.


----------



## Sifu (Sep 28, 2012)

I think this older thread confirmed my position but to be sure.....I recently turned down an installation of 5 large windows that are in hazardous locations. They asked about films as an alternative.  I had to turn down the 3M product a few years back when used on the exterior pane but from what I remember and what I read on the ES report for LLumar and the Legacy report for 3M I think I can accept either one.  For those who have permitted their use, who provided the special inspection?

I did warn about color variations but I guess that is a more attractive alternative than safety bars or new windows.


----------



## TimNY (Sep 28, 2012)

What I have done.. Spec sheet from the manufacturer, receipt or certification from the installer, then go look.  You can tell if the film has been installed.

I'm not sure what a special inspector would do that you couldn't do.  Maybe a local rep from the company that makes the film could be on site.  I only dealt with residential, but I could see where it might be worthwhile if this is a 50 sf storefront glazing pane or something that would have seams in the film.

Tim


----------



## Rider Rick (Sep 29, 2012)

What happens two years from now when the cleaning lady removes the old film to clear up the glass.


----------



## Sifu (Sep 29, 2012)

I was wondering about whether I needed to require a special inspector.  I can observe the install and compare to the mfr specs and I can require a certification from the installer.  They may have a provision for this already.  As far as film removal, my guess is it is not removable but even if it is the question goes back to a familiar discussion;  What an owner does after we leave isn't our responsibility.  What prevents them from installing a safety rail on Monday and removing it on Tuesday?  A guardrail?  How bout window replacements?  For that matter they could remove the windows today, finish the house without them and install them after final.  (I did actually have a guy try that once) If the ICC accepts the film as an alternative I think it probably offers the best, most permanent and safest alternative.


----------



## ICE (Sep 29, 2012)

Sifu said:
			
		

> If the ICC accepts the film as an alternative I think it probably offers the best, most permanent and safest alternative.


Does the ICC accept the film for glazing at hazardous locations?

My opinion is nothing more than my opinion and I think this stuff is crap.


----------



## RLGA (Sep 29, 2012)

ICC doesn't accept anything.  The IBC establishes minimum material and performance criteria, and safety glazing is based on the latter.  The code references 16 CFR 1201 as the standard for performance.  Neither the IBC nor 16 CFR 1201 specify materials--just the test methods that must be met to qualify as safety glazing and the locations where safety glazing is required.

If glazing with an applied film can pass the tests for Category Class I or II safety glazing, then it can be used in the respective locations indicated in the IBC.

As to removal by subsequent persons, well, just about anything required in the building code can be compromised by people after occupancy.  For example, how many times have you seen fire-rated wall construction penetrated without the installation of firestop systems?


----------



## Rider Rick (Sep 29, 2012)

What about the bug to ID safety glass?


----------



## RLGA (Sep 29, 2012)

See Exception 1, Section 2406.3 (2009 and 2012 IBC) or Exception 1, Section 2406.2 (2006 IBC).


----------



## peach (Sep 30, 2012)

the safety glazing film is not easy to remove.


----------



## peach (Sep 30, 2012)

RLGA said:
			
		

> ICC doesn't accept anything. The IBC establishes minimum material and performance criteria, and safety glazing is based on the latter. The code references 16 CFR 1201 as the standard for performance. Neither the IBC nor 16 CFR 1201 specify materials--just the test methods that must be met to qualify as safety glazing and the locations where safety glazing is required.If glazing with an applied film can pass the tests for Category Class I or II safety glazing, then it can be used in the respective locations indicated in the IBC.
> 
> As to removal by subsequent persons, well, just about anything required in the building code can be compromised by people after occupancy. For example, how many times have you seen fire-rated wall construction penetrated without the installation of firestop systems?


so very true.


----------



## Rider Rick (Sep 30, 2012)

The film is for the Hairy Home Owner or the House Wife Contractor and the Rooky Design Pro who don't understand the code or care how bad a person can be cut by plate glass.

As a building inspector when I had this film come up I had the Building Official sign off on it. This has only happen once most change out the glass.


----------



## Sifu (Sep 30, 2012)

The ESR and Legacy report contain specific labeling criteria for the filmed glass.  I guess my choice of words were poor when I said ICC accepts it.  The intent was that if a Legacy report or an ES report is issued and the criteria for that report is followed it is usually an acceptable product for the application intended.  If the film meets the test criteria why wouldn't it be acceptable?  The intent of using safety glass is to lessen the likelyhood of injury.  If the films perform the same function, why not?  I would agree it would be much easier for me if they would change the glass but they have asked about the film.  I won't turn an alternative down just because it doesn't make me feel good.  If there is building science behind it I'll consider it.  I could simply require the safety bars, which would be removed the minute I leave, then where would the safety issue stand?


----------



## twistr2002 (Oct 1, 2012)

I have yet to come across the Safety Glazing films, but I would be curious to know if the polarized sunglasses test would work with the films like it does the actual glass. They do sound like a cost friendly alternative you replacing the entire window.


----------



## Sifu (Oct 1, 2012)

I have never had much success with the polarized sunglasses test.  Not enough to be able to compare anyway.  My thinking would be that it would not work.  I imagine the film is a layer of super-strong plastic that holds the glass in place upon impact and does not alter the physical properties of the glass.


----------



## twistr2002 (Oct 1, 2012)

Thats kinda what I was thinking too. It reminds me of like a window tint film from the pictures google shows.    The polarized sunglasses test comes in handy when pulling up to a job when wearing my polarized Oakley's I can see that the tempered window is very patchy not clear at all. Other windows will appear just like normal.


----------

