Forcible Entry

Forcible Entry

FIRE FIGHTING BASICS

For years, forcible entry has been described as entering an occupancy by use of force. But how much force must be applied?

Years ago, when occupancies had one frail lock, a pane of glass to remove, or a simple tool used to “jimmy” the latch far enough out of the striker plate to push or pull open the door, forcible entry was simple.

Today, security has increased to almost epidemic proportions. Doors and windows of all types covering entrances to fire occupancies have become sophisticated nightmares for first arriving fire units. We are literally one step behind the burglars. Recently, we have recognized the need for quicker and more effective methods of gaining access to the interiors of structures with as little damage as possible. We hope to be able to define our forcible entry problem in terms of the various coverings used to block our entrance to structures, the methods of security employed, and ways that have proven successful in the manipulation of these security measures.

We may begin by generally describing the two basic, accepted methods of entry: conventional and through the lock forcible entry.

Conventional forcible entry

Conventional forcible entry is described as entry to a structure by the use of prying and striking tools coupled with force alone. The tools can be used to separate a door from its jamb; to remove a latch from its striker; to break the integrity of a locking device by a ptying or shearing force; to remove a door from its hinge side; or to remove a door in pieces. The most commonly used tools associated with conventional forcible entry are the halligan-type prying bar and the flat head axe. The axe used for this purpose should be of the heavier eight-pound class and be “married” or carried at all times with its partner, the prying tool (figure 1). Care of these tools should include:

• Grinding the striking head of the axe and halligan to free them of all burrs that may fly off and cause injuries;
• Sharpening the tools properly (not razor sharp);
• Stripping all varnish and paint, both to the handles and the metal parts of the tools. This will reduce loss of control when handling the tools wet. This practice will also indicate any defects in the handle of the axe (wood or fiberglass) before it becomes a problem in an emergency situation.

The halligan-type tool used in conjunction with the axe should not be made of a casting that will increase the possibility of it breaking while using heavy prying methods on difficult security/entry problems. The adz should be about six to eight inches long and have a slight downward curve. The fork at the other end should have a tapered, beveled shape. This end should not resemble a wedge as is the case with most of the tools on the market today.

The method of conventional forcible entry will depend on whether the door to be opened swings inward or outward.

• Inward swinging doors may be forced in two ways. The selection of the manner to be used is in direct relationship to the experience of the forcible entry team, and/or the smoke and heat conditions. The first, and most successful method is accomplished by driving the fork of the pry tool between the door and its jamb to a point where the tips of the fork are one to two inches past the inside jamb molding. The tool is first placed flat against the door with the bevel approximately six inches above or below the lock cylinder. Slight blows from the axe will push it past the door stop (figure 2). The axe man must know exactly what is to be done and his blows are under the direct control of the iron man. The tool is then pryed outward and struck again. This pry and strike action is continued until the tool is perpendicular to the door and the fork is well behind the inside door jamb (figure 3). At this time, the tool is pushed inward toward the door. There are two vectors of force operating on the lock at this time. One is the spreading force of the width of the fork and the second is the shear force on the inward, prying motion of the tool.

Removing wooden door stops is a waste of time as the tool will slip past them easily.

The exception to forcing an inward door with the bevel toward the door comes when we find a metal door with a molded metal stop. It is better to insert the halligan tool with the bevel away from the jamb and crush the door stop. Then, remove the tool and continue as described above.

The second method of forcing inward swinging doors is also successful and has its reasons for use. In this case, the adz end is placed toward the jamb, behind the door stop at the lock location. A slight tilt is placed in the angle of the blade in relation to the door jamb. The tool is then struck repeatedly with the axe until the chisel of the adz is firmly embedded into the buck or jamb of the door itself (figure 4). Pushing inward on the pry tool will exert a strong perpendicular force on the lock mechanism causing it to fail.

This method will be of great benefit when one of the team is inexperienced, or when forcing doors in heavy smoke conditions when visibility is zero or when heat is so high that we must operate from our knees as close to the floor as possible and reach upward to properly place and strike the tool.

In either of the above methods, firefighters must delay force being applied to the door in order to establish control of the door opening. The door could irretrievably fly open into the fire room, causing us to lose integrity of the public hall and requiring control of a now fast spreading fire.

At times, the forcible entry team may opt to attack the hinged side of the door. In this case, the fork (bevel to jamb) is inserted about eight inches from the bottom of the door, then in the middle, and again eight inches from the top.

In this manner, the top hinge remains to the last and maintains the door position snug against the jamb until the last moment. This keeps the door in place to control the draft of the new vent artery of the fire until we are ready for our entry and control tactics. It also prevents the rapid upward extension of heat and smoke while we are forcing the door, protecting both firefighters and exiting civilians. If we are unsuccessful on one of the hinges, the door is still in place between the rest of the occupancy and the fire.

If the top hinge is taken first and the door is allowed to fall into the occupancy, smoke, gas and fire will be released from the fire area. This will expose civilians using the interior stairs as a means of egress to these punishing effects, and will require a line to be operated over the heads of the forcible entry team.

The possibility of losing the hallway at this time is a real threat. Fire from the top of the door will also delay firefighters from ascending the interior stairs for search and examination.

• Outward swinging doors may be forced by using either the adz or forked end of the halligan tool. Again, the tool is driven between the door and its jamb slightly (six inches) above or below the lock mechanism. This time, however, the tool will be pulled toward the jamb. The end of the tool used will be dictated by the amount of room available for the swing of the prying tool. (In dead-end hallways and deeply recessed commercial openings, the adz will have to be used because the walls will prevent the prying action of the tool if the fork end is used.) Sometimes on these outward opening doors, extreme difficulty is met and the entry team may opt to attack the hinge side. In this case, the hinge pins may be removed and the door pryed out of its frame.

NOTE: The presence of static bars and double bar fox locks may negate this method.

Through the lock forcible entry

In the mid-sixties, with the fire and security problem becoming prominent throughout our nation, the fire forces realized that an easier method of forcing entry to structures must be devised. Again, we were still one step behind burglars, and in this case we began to learn from them.

We learned that almost all locking devices worked by one of two simple mechanical manipulations. To jump ahead, these are a cam action or a simple twisting of a tool shape. The thing that was in our way was the lock cylinder itself. Why not pull it out of the way to enable us to manipulate the locking device inside the door with a relatively simple method?

The first method to be employed was the use of the modified nail puller. The theory was to get behind the cylinder on the door face and by a prying motion, pull the barrel of the lock, containing the tumbler assembly and lock manipulating mechanism, out of the lock assembly. It was then (as now) our objective to simply replace the activating mechanism with a homemade device of our own. In most cases, these homemade tools were nothing more than a straight screwdriver and another with a 90° bend in the blade.

As soon as we felt confident in our new type of forcible entry procedure, the security industry replaced the brass lock face with one of “break away” construction. This removed our fulcrum point and our nail puller was becoming less and less effective.

The development of the K-tool by New York City Firefighter William McLoughlin was to answer this problem. The case-hardened steel blades in the shape of a “K” were now driven down onto the barrel of the lock and into the brass body (figures 5 and 6). No longer did we have to rely on the frangible lock face for a prying surface.

The K-tool, however, depends on the lock cylinder protruding from the face of the door. Security conscious citizens now began to install their lock tumblers flush with, or slightly depressed with the line or surface of the door. The A-tool was a natural development as a retort to this problem. A few taps of the tool drives it into the door sheathing slightly above the lock cylinder. Now, downward blows will bring the blades of this tool behind the face of the lock and into the brass barrel of the lock (figure 7).

The purpose of all these tool developments is only to remove the cylinder from our objective—the activating mechanism of the lock itself. Once out of our way, the cylinder activation mechanism can be replaced by one of our simple “key tools” and the lock device opened. This type of entry should provide us with certain advantages:

• Speed. It is faster to enter an occupancy in the same manner as the owner or tenant. We may sometimes find three and four locks on a door. Conventional entry methods alone will cause a great time delay.
• Damage reduction. Doors and their frames will not be unnecessarily destroyed beyond repair. The lock mechanism (sometimes very expensive) will remain in place on the interior of the door.
• Injury reduction. It takes considerable effort on the part of the person swinging the axe to obtain a purchase (entrance) with the halligan tool. Contact with the tool may be lost and the axe may find flesh. This equals injury which equals time. Broken glass at the entrance (especially from glass and metal doors) makes the entrance slippery and can cause cuts to hands and knees. The manipulation of heavy tools in poor visibility is lessened. Injuries usually associated with this stage
• of firefighting are practically eliminated. Remember, injuries equals time and reduction of available manpower for fire suppression.
• Ease of operation. Relatively effortless manipulation of the locking mechanism will cut down on confusion and its associated personnel problems at the entrance of the fire occupancy.
• Security. We may leave the occupancy in a more secure condition awaiting the arrival of the owner. The door is still operable and, often, once the cylinder is replaced, the lock mechanism’s integrity is restored.

The defining of these two methods of forcible entry has given way to the training concept that they are mutually exclusive. This cannot be further from the truth. There must be a natural blend of these two theories. The solution of the problem at the fire occupancy may readily indicate that one or the other method is needed; however, in most cases, a successful operation depends on a thorough understanding and competency to use both methods individually or in combination.

Size up

Now, with all this theory, the forcible entry team finds itself at the operation scene and should face the next problem—size up. As with all problems and decisions concerned with firefighting, size up, in tnis case of our forcible entry problem, is of paramount importance.

1. Location. Which door should we attack to affect entry? Normally used, exterior entrances will be our objective in most cases. However, there are exceptions to this rule as we shall see later. Is this the proper door suitable for fire control conditions? Are we on the proper “side” of the fire for:
1. Interior exposure protection for:
1. Life. We must enter the door that will allow us to place water between the known or suspected life hazard and the fire. In some cases, this may mean entry from the rear of the occupancy.
2. Property. If a choice can be made, enter the side that allows for placement of streams on the fire and at the same time protect the most property.
2. Difficulty of the problem. If it will accomplish relatively the same objective, an alternative means of entry may require considerably less force and meet with successful, speedier entry with less damage. The easiest door to force may be the rear or another location in the structure.
2. Time available for entry:
1. Life. Known or suspected life will indicate the time available to affect entry and the decisions afforded us.
2. Fire condition. The stage that the fire is in on arrival will affect our forcible entry action. If the fire is in the first or second stage, immediate entry is indicated; however, if the fire is in the third or fourth stage, the possibility of backdraft or smoke explosion will have to be planned for and reversed before horizontal openings are made (i.e., any lateral entry).
3. Swing of the door. As simple as this seems, one must know which way the door opens if he is going to be successful. We have all been told that in the size up of a door, we should look for the presence or absence of the telltale hinges (doors opening outward, toward us, have their hinges exposed). However, this is not always that easy to determine in a smoke condition. Other methods that may be used are: absence of deep door jambs and door stops, the relative flushness of the doors to the building or wall line. Through training and drilling, firefighters should be aware of the normal way doors open in different types of occupancies. Doors to life-containing areas of private and multiple dwellings usually are of the inward opening type. Doors in large, commercial occupancies and places of public assembly are usually found to open outward. This bit of information, although seemingly minor, can save precious moments.
4. Locked condition of the door.
1. Test the door to be forced—it may be open.
2. If locked, try the door again with a little more pressure this time. You may get an indication which lock, if there is more than one, is the one engaged in the door. You will also be able to “feel” the strength of the locking devices.
5. Size of the forcible entry problem:
1. Door to be attacked:
1. Is it weak or strong?
2. Number and location of the locking devices.
3. Presence of windows or panels in the door near the locking devices.
2. Door surroundings:
1. Window lights in the side panels of the door.
2. Very weak walls holding up very strong doors. It may be easier to punch through the wall and unlatch the door from inside.
6. Tools and the method of attack.
1. Forcible entry team always has at the site:
1. Irons: forcible entry prying bar (halligan type) and flat head axe.
2. Lock pulling device and key tools: K-tool, A-tool, modidoor, in non-emergency situations, such as food on the stove or a simple lockout, the shutter (guillotine) may be manipulated to slide to one side by use of a nut or dental pick or any other similar device.

• Fox police locks (two) are activated with a 5/32-inch square stem (figure 24). This differs from most rim locks whose stems are flat.

1. Fox police brace lock (figure 25) is commonly referred to as the vertical bar lock. This lock, until recently, was also called the tenement lock. With the security problem spreading, it is now found in our more rural areas. It is considered jimmy proof and is a very tough lock when attacked by conventional methods. Its strength is gained from the formation of a triangle. A high tensile strength steel bar is inserted into a socket installed in the floor and then travels on a diagonal to the locking device on the door. Its presence is indicated by two things: first, the cylinder is located higher on the door style than are most cylinders. Second, when sizing up the door, an inward push will be met with tremendous resistance and any more force used will cause the door to move upward into the top frame slightly. On this lock we have two choices: either we pull the cylinder and manipulate the lock with our key tool, or we must attack from the hinge side.
2. Fox police double-bolt lock (figure 26). Also called the double-bar lock. This lock is commonly referred to in the field as Fox lock. This lock is easily recognizable because its operating cylinder is located in the center of the door. Turning the key turns a gear between two sliding steel bars and slides them in or out of the door frame. These bars sometimes penetrate 2 ½ inches inside the door frames. The cylinder is usually protected by a metal plate. We may easily shear three of these bolts and slide the plate out of the way. The cylinder is then pulled with one of the devices at our command. The square stem is replaced by a key tool and the lock is turned twice to fully open or close.

NOTE: When there is more than one lock, how do we know that we are indeed opening the double bar lock?

If we look at the position of the bolt heads in the door that hold the guides in place, we can usually discern that one set is positioned higher than the other. Once we pull the cylinder, turning our key tool toward the lower set of bolts will unlock the device if it is locked. If there is no movement, the device may be unlocked and the door secured by other means.

Additionally, we may find that our key tool is freewheeling in this lock. In this case, the drive gear is spring loaded and a slight inward pressure of our key tool will push the gear into the teeth of the locking bars and we will then be able to manipulate the device. This point becomes even more important if we are trying to exit the occupancy in an emergency. The activation thumb knob must be pulled toward the operator to open the lock.

The tubular lock is a relatively new lock that is becoming popular with the home owner. This lock is single or double key activated. The pulling of this cylinder will reveal one of a few shapes used to activate the deadbolt. In any case, the lock mechanism may be manipulated by use of a screwdriver.

This lock offers a major problem to the searching and trapped firefighter. If, after a search of a private dwelling, we try to exit the occupancy by an unforced entrance (in this case the rear door), we are faced with the problem of literally forcing our way out of the structure. We will be unable to manipulate the double key lock from the occupancy side. If we are forced to leave our entry tools because we are removing a victim, we will be faced with an even more serious problem. In an operation in which there are ongoing search and removal procedures, all the locking devices should be removed on all means of egress.

To force the tubular lock:

NOTE: These locks have become more sophisticated as security has become a greater problem. They now have a hardened steel rod through the center of the locking bolt. The length of the bolt has been increased to the point that two full turns of the device is required to remove the bolt from the door frame and wall assembly. Hardened steel mounting bolts are used in the lock faces. These locks have been termed “unforcible” by some of our constituents. However, with extra strength and proper tool operation we feel that these locks are forcible.

The key in the knob lock will be handled in one of two ways depending on the composition of the door. The spring latch on these locks enter the striker only about 1/2-inch and on wooden doors, or metal doors with wooden jambs, you will do less damage if a conventional attack is employed and the door is simply spread from the jamb. Metal doors with metal jambs will not have this much play, and removing the door knob by striking it with the back of the axe will save the door or jamb from being crushed. After the doorknob is removed, insert your key tool into the slot, if present/or into the back of the spring latch and pull or twist toward the hinged side of the door to remove the latch from the striker (figure 30). It must be remembered that at this point you do not have a doorknob, and control of an inward swinging door may become more difficult.

In a following edition of FIRE ENGINEERING, we will address high security forcible entry problems.