REPORT NUMBER: SAT-001A_Rev.2 ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: April 7, 2015 REVISED DATE: July 21, 2015

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "REPORT NUMBER: SAT-001A_Rev.2 ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: April 7, 2015 REVISED DATE: July 21, 2015"

Hugh Webster
5 years ago
Views:

TEST REPORT REPORT NUMBER: 101950461SAT-001A_Rev.

1 TEST REPORT REPORT NUMBER: SAT-001A_Rev.2 ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: April 7, 2015 REVISED DATE: July 21, 2015 EVALUATION CENTER Shady Falls Road Elmendorf, TX Phone: (210) Fax: (210) RENDERED TO Wall and Ceiling Conference 5726 Sonoma Dr. Pleasanton, CA PRODUCT EVALUATED: Fire Rated Wall EVALUATION PROPERTY: Fire Resistance Report of Testing a Fire Rated Wall for compliance with the applicable requirements of the following criteria: ASTM E119-14, Standard Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2014 Edition (Modified per Section 4.2.1). This report is for the exclusive use of Intertek's Client and is provided pursuant to the agreement between Intertek and its Client. Intertek's responsibility and liability are limited to the terms and conditions of the agreement. Intertek assumes no liability to any party, other than to the Client in accordance with the agreement, for any loss, expense or damage occasioned by the use of this report. Only the Client is authorized to copy or distribute this report and then only in its entirety. Any use of the Intertek name or one of its marks for the sale or advertisement of the tested material, product or service must first be approved in writing by Intertek. The observations and test results in this report are relevant only to the sample tested. This report by itself does not imply that the material, product, or service is or has ever been under an Intertek certification program. 1

2 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 2 of 45 1 Table of Contents 1 Table of Contents Introduction Test Samples SAMPLE SELECTION SAMPLE AND ASSEMBLY DESCRIPTION Testing and Evaluation Methods INSTRUMENTATION TEST STANDARD Deviation from Standard Method Testing and Evaluation Results RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS Surface Deflection Analysis Conclusion... 7 APPENDIX A Assembly Drawings APPENDIX B - Test Data...13 APPENDIX C - Test Photographs..25 LIST OF CALIBRATED INSTRUMENTATION...44 REVISION SUMMARY / LAST PAGE OF REPORT.. 45

3 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 3 of 45 2 Introduction Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc. (Intertek) has conducted testing for the Wall and Ceiling Conference, on a Fire Rated Wall Assembly, to evaluate Fire Resistance. Testing was conducted in accordance with the following the standard methods: ASTM E119-14, Standard Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2014 Edition (Modified per Section in this report). This evaluation took place on March 11, The intent of this testing was to see how the rating of an approved 1-hour wall assembly might be impacted by "typical" field damage. 3 Test Samples 3.1. SAMPLE SELECTION Intertek acquired all items for this testing from locally sourced providers and constructed the wall assembly as described in Section 3.2 of this document SAMPLE AND ASSEMBLY DESCRIPTION Framing 3-5/8 deep, 25EQ (25 GA "equivalent") G90 galvanized steel studs spaced 24 o.c. between 25EQ top and bottom track. 2. Interior and Exterior Cladding One layer of 4 x 10 x 5/8 USG SheetRock Brand Firecode Core TYPE X (ASTM C 1396 compliant) gypsum board oriented vertically secured using 1-1/4 self-drilling drywall screws spaced 8 o.c around the perimeter and 12" o.c. in the field. Exposed seams were covered with joint tape, and the tape and fasteners received 2 layers of joint compound. On the exposed and unexposed surfaces, the following typical field damages were simulated: Note For simplicity of this test/report, the following eight different conditions were identified by the test sponsor as typical field damages. Nominal 1/8" vertical gap (as measured from the face of the gypsum board) at one board joint filled with joint compound Damaged drywall board corner covered with joint compound Trade Damage: Nominal 1-1/2" x 1/2" chip in gypsum board core and face paper covered with joint compound Missed fastener removed and filled with joint compound Over-driven fastener covered with joint compound Gypsum board paper face torn and filled with joint compound Drywall board edge covered with joint compound Interior paper (brown paper) scratched/torn not covered with joint compound

4 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 4 of 45 4 Testing and Evaluation Methods 4.1. INSTRUMENTATION The unexposed surface of the assembly was instrumented with a total of thirteen (13), 24 GA, Type K, fiberglass jacketed thermocouples; TCs 1-9 were evenly distributed across the face of the specimen in compliance with the test standard (however, these nine TCs were not used to determine pass/fail conditions for this test). TC #10 was installed over the vertical joint with the nominal 1/8" gap, #11 was over the missed fastener, TC #12 was near the over-driven fastener and TC #13 was located over the trade damage (see Appendix A). The output of the thermocouples and the furnace probes were monitored by a 100-channel Yokogawa, Inc., Darwin Data Acquisition Unit. The computer was programmed to scan and save data every 30 seconds. Following the test, the files were imported into MS Excel for tabular and graphical display (presented in Appendix B) TEST STANDARD 1 Testing was conducted in accordance with the applicable requirements of, and following the standard methods of ASTM E119-14, Standard Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2014 Edition (Modified per Section 4.2.1). The assembly was secured to the large scale vertical furnace and was tested to the standard time-temperature curve described in the E119 standard Deviation from Standard Method The intent of this testing is to see how the rating of an approved 1-hour wall assembly would be impacted by "typical" field damage. For this reason, an hourly rating for the wall assembly was not reported. The test standard requires a hose stream test to be performed at the end of the fire test, but none was conducted as part of this evaluation. 5 Testing and Evaluation Results 5.1. RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS The test was initiated on March 11, Ben Duterte, Darin Coats and Mike Nonn representing the Wall and Ceiling Conference were present to witness the test. The ambient temperature at the time of the test was 57 F and the humidity was 81% R.H.

5 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 5 of 45 Observations made during the test are as follows: Time (min:sec) Observation(s) 0:00 The test was initiated at 9:36 AM 2:08 Gypsum paper on exposed surface flaming 3:40 Drywall paper consumed on exposed surface 9:18 Joint compound beginning to flake and fall from wall on exposed surface 19:00 Most joint compound has fallen on exposed surface; little remains 27:00 Horizontal crack developing on exposed surface at mid-height of wall 39:00 Fastener heads scorching paper on unexposed surface of wall 45:00 Crack developing on unexposed surface of wall in drywall mud 60:00 Burners extinguished; test terminated There were no flames or gases hot enough to ignite cotton waste on the unexposed surface. No hose stream was conducted on the wall assembly Surface Deflection The deflection of the unexposed surface was measured at 3 equidistant locations, 30, 60, and 90 from left to right, across the horizontal midline, during the span of the test. The amount of that deflection is presented in the table below. Time (min) Position 1 (in) Position 2 (in) Position 3 (in) Start of Test : :00 1/2 3/4 3/4 45:00 1-1/4 1-3/4 1-3/4 58:00 1-1/4 1-1/2 1-1/2

6 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 6 of 45 Correction Factor for the Fire Endurance Test In accordance with the E119 test standard, a calculation for any correction to the indicated fire resistance period was done. The calculated correction factor was -11 seconds. The standard specifies that the fire resistance be determined to the nearest integral minute. Consequently, if the correction factor is less than 30 seconds, and the test specimen met the criteria for the full indicated fire resistance period, no correction is deemed necessary Analysis The following simulated field damage conditions were instrumented with thermocouples on the unexposed side of the wall assembly: 1/8 joint; missed fastener, over-driven fastener, trade damage (1-1/2 x ½ paper damage). At 60 minutes, the temperatures at the instrumented typical field damaged locations were as follows: Location TC # Max Temp ( F) Max Allowed ( F) 1/8" Joint Missed Fastener Over-driven Fastener Trade Damage The temperature data for the selected field damage demonstrated equal or better temperature rise than the standard nine (9) thermocouples required by ASTM E119. The highest temperature measured was on the over-driven fastener (TC#12) which normally would not be instrumented with a thermocouple per ASTM E119. Note - The intent of this test was to see how the rating of an approved 1-hour wall assembly might be impacted by selected typical field damage. The individual temperature rise criteria as listed in the table above were based on ASTM E119 requirements of 325 F above the initial temperature: 56 F or 57 F, as applicable, at the start of this test for a maximum temperature of 381 F or 382 F. The other field damage was not instrumented, and included the following: Damaged drywall board corner covered with joint compound Drywall board edge covered with joint compound Interior paper (brown paper) scratched/torn not covered with joint compound There was no evidence of reduced fire resistance due to these simulated field damage conditions. Intertek considers that this would apply to the same wall assembly, but constructed with other manufacturer's listed 5/8" Type X gypsum board (compliant with ASTM C1396).

7 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 7 of 45 6 Conclusion Intertek Testing Services NA, Inc. (Intertek) has conducted testing for the Wall and Ceiling Conference, on a Fire Rated Wall Assembly, to evaluate Fire Resistance. Testing was conducted in accordance with the following the standard methods of ASTM E119-14, Standard Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, 2014 Edition (Modified per Section in this report). This evaluation took place on March 11, The intent of this testing was to see how the rating of an approved 1-hour wall assembly might be impacted by "typical" field damage. There was no evidence of reduced fire resistance due to any of the simulated typical field damage conditions in the assembly as tested. The conclusions of this test report may not be used as part of the requirements for Intertek product certification. Authority to Mark must be issued for a product to become certified. INTERTEK TESTING SERVICES NA, INC. Tested and Reported by: Signature on File Jeffrey Patterson Project Engineer, Fire Resistance Reviewed by: Signature on File Victor M. Burgos Project Engineer, Fire Resistance

8 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 8 of 45 APPENDIX A Assembly Drawings

9 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 9 of 45

10 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 10 of 45

11 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 11 of 45

12 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 12 of 45

13 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 13 of 45 APPENDIX B Temperature Data

14 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 14 of 45

15 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 15 of 45

16 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 16 of 45

17 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 17 of 45

18 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 18 of 45

19 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 19 of 45

20 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 20 of 45

21 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 21 of 45

22 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 22 of 45

23 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 23 of 45

24 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 24 of 45

25 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 25 of 45 APPENDIX C Photographs

26 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 26 of 45

27 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 27 of 45

28 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 28 of 45

29 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 29 of 45

30 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 30 of 45

31 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 31 of 45

32 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 32 of 45

33 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 33 of 45

34 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 34 of 45

35 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 35 of 45

36 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 36 of 45

37 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 37 of 45

38 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 38 of 45

39 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 39 of 45

40 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 40 of 45

41 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 41 of 45

42 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 42 of 45

43 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 43 of 45

44 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 44 of 45 CALIBRATED INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR TESTING Description Serial No. Calibration Due Date 100-Channel Data Acquisition System 99LE004 3/19/2015 Thermo/Hygrometer /19/2015 Stop Watch /20/2016

45 Report No SAT-001A_Rev.2 Page 45 of 45 REVISION SUMMARY DATE April 7, 2015 July 1, 2015 JMFlores, P.E. MDey SUMMARY Original Issue Date 1) Updated revision number and date through report 2) Added details related to modification of the test standard throughout report (Sections 2, 4, and 6) 3) Added Section Analysis 4) Revised Section 6 Conclusion to incorporate results from Section ) Removed signature from test engineer on Section 6 6) Removed TCs 1-9 from the Graph on page 14 as they were not part of this evaluation 7) Removed Graph on page 15 as it was not part of this evaluation July 21, 2015 JMFlores, P.E. MDey 1) Revised Section 3.2 and Section descriptions of typical field damages 2) Revised Section to include maximum temperature rise criteria on typical field damages 3) Revised Section to add discussion of applicability of findings to the tested assembly but constructed using other manufacturer s listed Type X, 5/8 gypsum board. 4) Revised Section 6 to remove test results table and performance observations repeated from section 5.1.2

REPORT NUMBER: SAT-005 ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: September 14, 2012 REVISED DATE: N/A

REPORT NUMBER: SAT-005 ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: September 14, 2012 REVISED DATE: N/A TEST REPORT REPORT NUMBER: 100595243SAT-005 ORIGINAL ISSUE DATE: September 14, 2012 REVISED DATE: N/A EVALUATION CENTER 16015 Shady Falls Road Elmendorf, TX 78112 Phone: (210) 635-8100 Fax: (210) 635-8101