NBS TECHNICAL NOTE 808

Potential Systems for

Lead Hazard Elimination:

Evaluations and

Recommendations for Use
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The National Bureau of Standards 1 was established by an act of Congress March 3, 1901. The Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the Nation's science and technology

and facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts

research and provides: (1) a basis for the Nation's physical measurement system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade, and (4) technical services to promote public safety. The Bureau consists of the Institute for Basic Standards, the Institute for Materials Research, the Institute for Applied Technology,

the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, and the Office for Information Programs.

THE INSTITUTE FOR BASIC STANDARDS provides the central basis within the United

States of a complete and consistent system of physical measurement; coordinates that system

with measurement systems of other nations; and furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform physical measurements throughout the Nation's scientific community, industry,

and commerce. The Institute consists of a Center for Radiation Research, an Office of Measurement Services and the following divisions: Applied Mathematics — Electricity — Mechanics — Heat — Optical Physics — Nuclear

Sciences 2 — Applied Radiation 2 — Quantum Electronics 3 — Electromagnetics 3 — Time

and Frequency 3 — Laboratory Astrophysics 3 — Cryogenics 3. THE INSTITUTE FOR MATERIALS RESEARCH conducts materials research leading to improved methods of measurement, standards, and data on the properties of well-characterized materials needed by industry, commerce, educational institutions, and Government; provides

advisory and research services to other Government agencies; and develops, produces, and

distributes standard reference materials. The Institute consists of the Office of Standard Reference Materials and the following divisions: Analytical Chemistry — Polymers — Metallurgy — Inorganic Materials — Reactor

Radiation — Physical Chemistry.

THE INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED TECHNOLOGY provides technical services to promote

the use of available technology and to facilitate technological innovation in industry and Government; cooperates with public and private organizations leading to the development of

technological standards (including mandatory safety standards), codes and methods of test; and provides technical advice and services to Government agencies upon request. The Institute consists of a Center for Building Technology and the following divisions and offices: Engineering and Product Standards — Weights and Measures — Invention and Innovation — Product Evaluation Technology — Electronic Technology — Technical Analysis — Measurement Engineering — Structures, Materials, and Life Safety * — Building

Environment * — Technical Evaluation and Application 4 — Fire Technology.

THE INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTER SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY conducts research and provides technical services designed to aid Government agencies in improving cost effec- tiveness in the conduct of their programs through the selection, acquisition, and effective

utilization of automatic data processing equipment; and serves as the principal focus within

the executive branch for the development of Federal standards for automatic data processing

equipment, techniques, and computer languages. The Center consists of the following offices and divisions: Information Processing Standards — Computer Information — Computer Services —

Systems Development — Information Processing Technology.

THE OFFICE FOR INFORMATION PROGRAMS promotes optimum dissemination and

accessibility of scientific information generated within NBS and other agencies of the Federal Government; promotes the development of the National Standard Reference Data System and

a system of information analysis centers dealing with the broader aspects of the National Measurement System; provides appropriate services to ensure that the NBS staff has optimum

accessibility to the scientific information of the world. The Office consists of the following

organizational units: Office of Standard Reference Data — Office of Technical Information and Publications —

Library — Office of International Relations.

1 Headquarters and Laboratories at Gaithersburg, Maryland, unless otherwise noted; mailing address Washington, D.C. 20234.

a Part of the Center for Radiation Research.

3 Located at Boulder, Colorado 80302.

* Part of the Center for Building Technology.
Potential Systems for Lead Hazard Elimination:

Evaluations and Recommendations for Use

National Bureau c

2 9 1974

David Waksman

Office of Housing Technology

and

John B. Ferguson, McClure Godette, and

Thomas Reichard

Structures, Materials, and Life Safety Division

Center for Building Technology

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

Sponsored by

The Department of Housing and Urban Development

Washington, D.C. 20410

o/ v.Ml \&

-*< ^k>^ .&

***e«i of *y

«

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Frederick B. Dent, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Richard W. Roberts, Director

Issued December 1973
National Bureau of Standards Technical Note 808

Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Tech. Note 808, 192 pages (Dec. 1973) CODEN: NBTNAE

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1973

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 (Order by SD Catalog No. 03.46:808). Price $1.95 cents.
Contents

Page

SI Conversion Units viii

1. Introduction 1

2. General Discussion of Properties Evaluated 4

2.1. General Comments 4

2.2. Pre-Test Treatment to Simulate Aging 5

2.3. Critical Properties 6

2.3.1. Adhesion 6

2.3.2. Fire Hazard Evaluation 7 2.3.3. Supported Impact Resistance 10

2.3.4. Unsupported Impact Resistance 10

2.3.5. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents 11

2.3.6. Toxicity of Installed Systems 12

2.4. Functional Properties 12

2.4.1. Abrasion Resistance 12

2.4.2. Scratch Resistance 13

2.4.3. Washability 13

2.4.4. Water Vapor Permeance 13

2.4.5. Colorfastness 14

2.4.6. Maintainability 15

3. Tentative Recommended Evaluation Criteria 16

3.1. Critical Properties 16

3.1.1. Adhesion 16

3.1.2. Fire Hazard Evaluation 18

3.1.2.1. Flame Spread 18

3.1.2.2. Smoke Generated 19

3.1.2.3. Toxic Combustion Products 22

3.1.2.4. Flash Point 23

3.1.3. Supported Impact Resistance 24

3.1.4. Unsupported Impact Resistance 26

3.1.5. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents 26

3.1.6. Toxicity of Installed Systems 27

iii
Contents (continued)

Page

3.2. Functional Properties 27

3.2.1. Abrasion Resistance 27

3.2.2. Scratch Resistance 29

3.2.3. Washability 30

3.2.4. Water Vapor Permeance 31

3.2.5. Colorfastness 32

3.2.5.1. Condensed Moisture Aging 32

3.2.5.2. Water Vapor Aging 33

3.2.5.3. Ultraviolet Radiation Aging 33

4. Description of Products Evaluated 34

4.1. Paint Removal Systems 34

4.1.1. Water Wash Paint Remover 34

4.1.2. Alkaline /Solvent Paint Remover 34

4.2. Unfinished Covering Materials 34

4.2.1. Asbestos-Cement Board 34

4.2.2. Gypsum Wallboard 35

4.3. Prefinished Covering Materials and Coatings 35

4.3.1. Acrylic-Polyvinyl Chloride Sheet 35

4.3.2. Gypsum Impregnated Jute Fabric 35

4.3.3. Urethane Varnish 35

4.3.4. One Component Epoxy Paint 36

4.3.5. Vinyl Counter Top Material 36

4.3.6. Vinyl Wall Covering-Light Duty 36

4.3.7. Veneer Plaster with Bonding Agent 36

4.3.8. Vinyl Wall Covering-Medium Duty 37

4.3.9. Nylon Formulated One Component Paint 37

4.3.10. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint 37

4.3.11. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint with

Flexible Primer 37

4.3.12. High Build Textured Spray CoatingFine Texture 38

4.3.13. High Build Textured Spray CoatingMedium Texture 38

4.3.14. Two Component Epoxy Paint 38

4.3.15. Cementitious Coating-Orange Peel Texture ... 38

4.3.16. Cementitious Coating-Medium Texture 38

4.3.17. Plywood Paneling-Prefinished 38

iv
Contents (continued)

Page

4.4. Other Methods 39

4; 4.1. Propane Torch Heat Softening 39

4.4.2. Sanding 39

4.4.3. Air Abrasive Paint Removal 39

4.4.4. High Intensity Heat Lamps 39

4.4.5. Heat Blower Guns 40

4.4.6. Melamine Coated Hardboard 40

4.4.7. Decorative Vinyl Films-Self Adhering 40

5. Test Results 41

5.1. Adhesion 41

5.2. Fire Hazard Evaluation 44

5.2.1. Flame Spread 44

5.2.2. Smoke Generated 47

5.2.3. Toxic Combustion Products 50

5.2.4. Flash Point 51

5.3. Supported Impact Resistance 51

5.4. Unsupported Impact Resistance 59

5.5. Abrasion Resistance 62

5.6. Scratch Resistance 69

5.7. Washability 74

5.8. Water Vapor Permeance 80

5.9. Colorfastness 81

5.9.1. Condensed Moisture Aging 81

5.9.2. Water Vapor Aging 81

5.9.3. Ultraviolet Radiation Aging 82

6. Summary of Properties and Recommendations 83

6.1. Paint Removal Systems 83

6.1.1. Water Wash Paint Remover 84

6.1.2. Alkaline /Solvent Paint Remover 84
Contents (continued)

Page

6.2. Unfinished Covering Materials 85

6.2.1. Asbestos Cement Board 85

6.2.2. Gypsum Wallboard . . 87

6.3. Prefinished Covering Materials and Coatings 89

6.3.1. Acrylic-Polyvinyl Chloride Sheet 89

6.3.2. Gypsum Impregnated Jute Fabric 92

6.3.3. Urethane Varnish 94

6. 3. A. One Component Epoxy Paint 96

6.3.5. Vinyl Counter Top Material 98

6.3.6. Vinyl Wall Covering-Light Duty 101

6.3.7. Veneer Plaster with Bonding Agent 103

6.3.8. Vinyl Wall Covering-Medium Duty 105

6.3.9. Nylon Formulated One Component Paint 107

6.3.10. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint 109

6.3.11. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint with

Flexible Primer Ill

6.3.12. High Build Textured Spray Coating-Fine

Texture 113

6.3.13. High Build Textured Spray CoatingMedium Texture 115

6.3.14. Two Component Epoxy Paint 117

6.3.15. Cementitious Coating-Orange Peel Texture . . . 119

6.3.16. Cementitious Coating-Medium Texture 122

6.3.17. Plywood Paneling-Prefinished 124

7. References 127

Appendix A A-l

A. Test Procedures • A-l

A.l. General Comments A-l

A. 2. Adhesion (Tensile Bond) A-2

A. 3. Fire Hazard Evaluation A-7

A. 3.1. Flame Spread A-7

A. 3. 2. Smoke Generated A-ll

A. 3. 3. Toxic Combustion Products A-15

A. 3. 4. Flash Point A-16

vi
Contents (continued)

Pag

e

A. 4. Supported Impact Resistance A-17

A. 5. Unsupported Impact Resistance A-22

A. 6. Abrasion Resistance A-27

A. 7. Scratch Resistance . . . . A-32

A. 8. Washability A-37

A. 9. Water Vapor Permeance A-39

A. 10. Colorfastness A-42

A. 10.1. Condensed Moisture Aging A-42

A. 10. 2. Water Vapor Aging A-45

A. 10. 3. Ultraviolet Radiation Aging A-46

References - Appendix A A-49

vii
SI Conversion Units

The conversion factors and units contained in this report are in

accordance with the International System of Units (abbreviated SI for

Systeme International d'Unites). The SI was defined and given official

status by the 11th General Conference on Weights and Measures which met

in Paris in October 1960. For assistance in converting U.S. customary

units to SI units, see ASTM E 380, ASTM Standard Metric Practice Guide,

available from the American Society for Testing and Materials, 1916 Race

Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103. The conversion factors for the units

found in this Standard are as follows:

Length

1 in = 0.0254* meter

1 ft = 0.3048* meter

1 mil = 0.001* in

Area

1 in

2 = 6.4516* x 10"4 meter2

2 2 1 ft = 0.09290 meter

Volume

3 -5 3

1 in = 1.638 x 10 J meter

1 liter = 1.000* x 10" 3 meter3

Mass

1 grain = 6.479 x 10~5 kilogram

1 ounce-mass (avoirdupois) = 2.834 x 10 ' kilogram

1 pound-mass (avoirdupois) = 0.4535 kilogram

Pressure or Stress (Force/Area)

1 inch of mercury (60°F) = 3376 newton/meter

? 2

1 pound-force/inch (psi) = 6894 newton/meter

Exactly

viii
Energy

1 inch-pound-force (in-lbf) = 0.1130 joule

Plane Angle

1 degree (angle) = 1.745 x 10 radian

Power

1 watt = 1.000* x 10 erg/second

Temperature

°C = 5/9 (Temperature °F - 32)

Exactly

ix
Abstract

The National Bureau of Standards is providing technical support to

the Department of Housing and Urban Development which is required by

Public Law 91-695 (the Lead Paint Poisoning Prevention Act) to carry out

a research program to evaluate and make recommendations regarding technology for the removal of the lead based paint hazard from the Nation's housing,

Potential hazard elimination methods have been identified by means

of a survey of available technology. This report describes testing and

evaluation methodologies used to determine (1) the suitability for use

of a series of removal and lead barrier systems, (2) the results of this

evaluation, and (3) recommendations concerning the use of said systems.

Paint removal systems were evaluated in terms of the hazards that

they present in the course of their use. Both the flammability and the

toxicity of the solvents found in removers were considered. Covering

systems were evaluated for their suitability for use as barrier layers

over lead bearing paints in housing. The effectiveness of covering systems in protecting children from leaded paint, their fire hazard properties and functional properties which are related to their serviceability

were considered in making this evaluation. The properties of the systems

were assessed in terms of minimum acceptable performance levels and

recommendations are given for their use in a field evalution program.

Key Words: Abrasion; adhesion; colorfastness; covering materials; flash

point; flame spread; impact resistance; lead paint poisoning; materials;

performance; properties; scratch resistance; smoke generation; toxic

combustion products; toxicity; washability; water vapor permeance.

x
Potential Lead Hazard Elimination Systems:

Evaluations and Recommendations for Use

David Waksman, John B. Ferguson, McClure Godette, Thomas Reichard

1. Introduction

Public Law 91-695, the Lead Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act

of 1971, required the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

to carry out a research program to evaluate, and make recommendations

regarding, technology for the removal of the lead based paint hazard

from the Nation's housing.

The major responsibility for implementing the research activities of

its lead paint program was assigned, by HUD, to the National Bureau of

Standards (NBS) and particularly to the Bureau's Center for Building

Technology (CBT) . The Lead Paint Poisoning Project was established by

CBT to carry out the research mission under the sponsorship and general

direction of the HUD Office of Research and Technology.

For the purposes of this investigation the intent of PL 91-695 's instruction to evaluate methods for the removal of the lead paint hazard was

interpreted as referring to techniques that would eliminate the hazard

either by actual removal of the lead paint or by installation of a barrier

material that would present a reasonable degree of inaccessibility to

the lead paint remaining beneath it.

Previous NBS Reports and publications have dealt with the

nature and extent of the problem, methods for the detection of

leaded paints in housing and potential solutions to the problem caused

by the presence of leaded paints in housing [1,2,3,4]*.

* Figures in brackets indicate references given on page 127.

1
Both the presence of leaded paint and its accessibility to children

should be considered in defining a hazard. The presence of lead

bearing paint, by itself, is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition.

This publication is concerned with an evaluation of removal

and covering methods proposed to make leaded paints inaccessible to

children.

As a result of an extensive survey and communications with the

building materials industry, a wide range of systems, techniques and

materials have been identified as potential means of eliminating the

health problem caused by leaded paints. Since little technical information is available regarding the effectiveness of these methods in achieving

that objective, a testing and evaluation program was initiated in order to determine their properties and to make recommendations concerning their use.

The scope of this program included a study of the functional

properties, effectiveness, and problems involved in the use of both

removal and covering systems. Health and safety factors, including

flammability and toxicity, were also considered.

The test procedures used for evaluation are described in detail in

this report and recommendations are made concerning the applicability

of the systems investigated. A variety of products were selected for

evaluation with the intent of building up a data bank that could be used

to screen products having characteristics similar to those already

evaluated, thereby minimizing the amount of future testing required. It

is hoped that this program will establish a basis that can be used to

evaluate all interior surface covering systems.
Properties of systems that are related to their application include

ease of use and the fire hazards and toxicity associated with solvents

used in the process of carrying out the work. Properties that determine

the effectiveness of a system as a barrier to keep children from leaded

paints include impact resistance and adhesion. Properties that affect

the health and safety of the occupants of a residence include fire

hazard properties such as flame spread, smoke generation and the toxic

combustion products produced. Functional properties that affect the

serviceability of a system include abrasion resistance, scratch resistance, and washability. Minimum recommended performance levels were

set for those properties where sufficient data was available to establish

such levels.

This program was specifically designed to evaluate the problems

and hazards involved in the application of paint removal and covering

methods and the performance of coverings. No attempt was made to evaluate the structural properties of interior wall systems. When complete

interior wall systems are replaced, the requirements specified in the

"Guide Criteria for the Evaluation of Operation BREAKTHROUGH Housing

Systems" [5] and/or the HUD Minimum Property Standards [6] should be

referred to.

The products discussed in this publication are described in generic

terms, and in no case does the data reported herein constitute an endorsement of any specific product. It was intended that the systems

be representative of broad generic classes of products. Variations in
formulations and manufacturing processes may invalidate this assumption

in some cases. Since laboratory tests cannot predict all of

the problems that can be encountered when using a hazard elimination

method in actual buildings, field evaluations should be carried out in

housing before definitive recommendations are made as to the suitability

of a specific method.

2. General Discussion of Properties Evaluated

2.1. General Comments

Paint removal systems which may contain flammable or toxic solvents

were evaluated in terms of the hazard that they present when they are

used. Flash point and toxic volatile components were therefore determined. Surface covering systems (coverings, liquid coatings and adhesives) were subjected to the complete range of evaluation procedures

described below. Detailed test procedures are given in Appendix A for

those properties that are not strictly judgmental in nature.*

Problems that could be encountered in field applications of the

systems were determined and noted during the fabrication of test

specimens. Application procedures recommended by the respective

material suppliers were closely followed, and only those materials

(coverings, adhesives, etc.) that they specifically recommended were

used. Recommendations for improvements in the systems evaluated are

made in those cases where it was felt that such modifications would

improve their usefulness.

* Test procedures are given in Appendix A for items marked with a (+)

.

4
2.2. Pre-Test Treatment to Simulate Aging

Systems that appear to have very desirable properties when they

are newly installed can deteriorate when they are in use over extended

periods of time. For this reason, the properties of the proposed surface covering systems were determined after exposure to accelerated

aging conditions in addition to their measurement in the "as new" condition. Large changes in properties measured before and after aging

were considered as signs of potential system instability.

The aging conditions that could be expected in dry areas of a

residence, such as bedrooms and living rooms, were simulated by subjecting test specimens to dry heat at 160°F and approximately 4% relative humidity (rh) prior to testing. Moist aging conditions such as

those that could be expected in bathrooms and to a certain degree in

kitchens were simulated by exposing test specimens to either a water

soak at 73°F or to 95% rh at 160°F prior to testing. The specimen

conditioning procedures used prior to testing are described in detail

in the test procedures given in Appendix A. In addition to the changes

in physical properties that were measured by using the above-mentioned

test procedures, observations of visible deterioration were also

recorded.

Since very little is known about the correlations that exist between accelerated aging procedures such as those described above and

actual in-use deterioration, it was not possible to predict expected
lifetimes for the systems investigated on the basis of these procedures.

In spite of this obvious deficiency, the accelerated aging procedures

described in this report are of considerable value in determining the

relative stability of interior covering systems. Care was exercised

to ensure that the conditions used were reasonable and not excessively

severe since causing all specimens to fail would defeat the

purpose of the aging which is to determine the relative stability of

covering systems.

2.3. Critical Properties

Those properties that either are required for a covering system to

perform effectively as a barrier to leaded paints, or can affect the

health and safety of workers and the occupants of a residence are defined as critical.

2.3.1. Adhesion (+)

Covering materials can be self-adhering, as is the case with

liquid coatings (such as paints) . Sheets and films can be adhesive

applied, mechanically fastened, or a combination of the two. The

strength and durability of the attachment method are very important

properties since the effectiveness of covering systems in providing a

barrier to leaded paints is dependent on their remaining in place.

When covering systems are properly attached by means of mechanical

fasteners, attachment problems would normally not be expected. However,

when self-adhering or adhesive applied systems are installed, problems

can arise due to the inherent instability of many currently used adhesive systems (as compared to systems that are mechanically attached

to sound substrates)

.

6
Properties that should be required of an adhesive applied system

include:

a. the development of an initial bond strength high enough to

support a covering,

b. a bond strength that is high enough to resist the efforts by

children to pull off the covering, and

c. long term stability under the in-use conditions to which the

system will be subjected.

These properties were evaluated for this program by means of the

test procedures that are discussed in section A. 2. of Appendix A.

2.3.2. Fire Hazard Evaluation (+)

Many of the hazards to which workers and the occupants of residences

are exposed are related to fires.

Hazards associated with the flash point of solvents found in paint

removers, liquid coatings and adhesives are normally important only

during the short period of time when the hazard elimination work is

being carried out , since the solvents will evaporate in a relatively

short time. Problems associated with the combustion of covering

materials will remain as long as those materials remain installed.

Properties that determine the fire hazard potential of the

hazard elimination systems include the flash point of solvents, and

the flame spread, smoke and toxic product levels generated during the

combustion of covering systems.
The standard fire hazard evaluation procedures that are currently

used to evaluate surface covering systems are based on their installation on asbestos cement board (ACB) . For this reason, the values obtained by testing coverings applied on ACB should normally be used to

determine compliance with code regulations. [Values for coverings applied on plywood were also obtained in the course of this investigation

since many residences contain considerable amounts of wood-based products

(e.g. cellulose-fiber-based wallboard and plywood paneling), that can

affect the fire hazard values obtained for thin coverings.] Decisions

should be made by responsible local authorities as to whether the

original substrate materials encountered in housing units comply with

applicable code regulations and as to whether or not the newly applied

covering systems used in combination with these substrates will be

acceptable. In general, if the combustible substrate surface area

(e.g. wood trim) is low as compared to the noncombustible surface area

(e.g. plaster walls) the values obtained by testing on an ACB substrate

are more meaningful. If the combustible surface area is high (e.g. if

wood wainscoting is present) the values obtained by testing with plywood

are probably more significant.

Code requirements are usually based on the use for which an area

is intended. The requirements are frequently most stringent for exit

areas (such as hallways) and furnace areas, moderately high for kitchens,

and less demanding for areas such as bedrooms and living rooms.
The toxic combustion products generated by the materials used

in building construction are of considerable importance since many

of the deaths that occur in fires have been attributed to smoke and

toxic gases [7], Unfortunately, the exact significance, in actual fires,

of the toxic combustion product levels, as measured by means of small

scale tests, has not yet been established. These tests do not take

into account the ease with which a material burns, or thermally

decomposes. In addition, care has to be taken in interpreting the

meaning of the results of such tests since the amounts of toxic gases

produced by a building component such as a wall covering may be insignificant when they are compared to the amounts generated by furnishings and other combustible materials found in a residence. For

these reasons, small scale tests can only be used to indicate potential

problems that can occur during actual fires in housing.

One means of directly utilizing the toxic combustion product data

generated by means of small scale fire tests is provided by The BOCA

Basic Building Code [8] which states that, "Interior finish materials

that give off smoke or gases more dense or more toxic that that given

off by untreated wood or untreated paper under comparable exposure to

heat or flame shall not be permitted." Thus, a clear basis for

comparison of the toxicity of various covering systems is established

for those localities that adhere to the BOCA code; several other codes

are worded similarly. However, the fact remains that the types and

amounts of toxic combustion products generated by sources other than

coverings may be more significant than those generated by covering materials,
2.3.3. Supported Impact Resistance (+)

Normal usage of habitable space does not subject the surfaces of

a dwelling unit to severe impact forces. However, when a residence

contains a child, a covering system installed as a barrier to leaded

paints may have to withstand intentional abuse in addition to the

accidental impact and abuse that normally occurs.

The supported impact test phase of this program was designed to

measure the relative resistance of surface coverings, installed on

commonly used substrates, to onslaughts of this type.

The type of impact failure encountered is dependent on the nature

of the covering material. For example, flexible non-reinforced coverings* such as paint or plastic films, generally deform up to the point -at

which they tear. Brittle cement itious coverings crack and crumble, and

reinforced products* such as many of the vinyl wall coverings, commonly

fail by virtue of reinforcement fiber tearing.

Specimens were tested both in the "as new" condition, and after

being subjected to accelerated aging to ensure that the degree of protection afforded by a covering does not deteriorate excessively with time.

2.3.4. Unsupported Impact Resistance (+)

Coverings should be capable of maintaining their effectiveness as

a barrier layer to leaded paints even if there is subsequent localized

delamination from the surfaces to which they are adhered. In addition,

coverings used to cover voids (i.e., where they are unsupported) should

be resistant to tearing and puncture. Water leaks and similar causes of

10
deterioration that can cause localized delamination of applied protective

coverings are a common occurrence in old buildings. The resistance of

unsupported surface coverings to tearing and impact is one of the factors

that determine the ability of covering systems to protect children from

leaded paints.

An unsupported impact test procedure was devised to measure the

resistance of unbacked coverings to penetration by a falling weight.

The test was intended to simulate the puncture and tearing forces that

unsupported coverints can be subjected to in actual housing. Accelerated

aging procedures were used to simulate the deterioration in properties

due to normal use conditions.

2.3.5. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents

Many of the solvents found in paint removers, liquid coatings, and

adhesives give off toxic fumes when they evaporate. These fumes can

present a health hazard to both workers and the occupants of a residence.

In some cases, the hazards presented are so high that they preclude the

use of a material; in other cases they require that a residence be

vacated by the occupants and that proper precautions be taken by workers

while the solvent fumes are present

.

The solvents listed as components by the respective material

suppliers were compared with lists of known hazardous solvents to

determine if problems due to toxic fumes could be created when the

products are used.

11
2.3.6. Toxicity of Installed Systems

Covering materials used as protective barriers to prevent the

ingestion of leaded paints by children should be evaluated to ensure

that they themselves do not create a toxicity problem.

Because of the bio-medical aspects of toxicity, a study of the toxicity

of installed covering systems was beyond the scope of this project. When

any question about the toxicity of materials exists, animal feeding experiments by qualified medical research personnel should be conducted.

2.4. Functional Properties

Functional properties are those properties that are desired for

satisfactory serviceability of a covering system, but are not directly

related to its effectiveness as a protective barrier to leaded paints

or to the health and safety of workers and housing occupants.

2.4.1. Abrasion Resistance (+)

Covering materials should be capable of withstanding the abrasive

forces encountered in cleaning and other normal household activities.

Abrasion resistance is related to properties such as the hardness, resiliency, and cohesion of the surface. For this reason, the results of abrasion

tests can be interpreted as a relative measure of the durability of a

covering material as well as its ability to resist direct abrasive

forces. A considerable amount of judgment is required in the interpretation of abrasion test results, because of variations in the thickness,

texture, and composition of covering systems. For example, an abrasion

weight loss that is considered a failure for a thin, smooth textured

paint coating may be acceptable when thick coatings, heavy wall coverings and rough textured fabrics are used. Procedures used to evaluate

12
the abrasion resistance of several covering systems and the results of

these evaluations are discussed in subsequent sections of this report.

2.4.2. Scratch Resistance (+)

Scratch resistance is somewhat related to abrasion resistance in

that it is dependent on many of the same properties. It also is a

measure of the durability of a material as well as its ability to resist

direct gouging forces. The scratch resistance of several covering systems both before and after accelerated aging was measured in this program.

2.4.3. Washability (+)

Washability is a measure of the relative ease with which soil can

be removed from the surfaces of coverings and the effect of this

cleaning action upon the finished surface. Bathrooms, kitchens, and

hallways require a material that is easy to clean due to the soiling

problems that are present in these areas. Somewhat less stringent requirements can be set for surface coverings used in other living areas

of a residence.

Ease of soil removal, resistance to staining and resistance to

polishing were observed after attempting to remove a standard soiling

medium with the combination of a standard soap solution and either a

brush or a sponge. The effects of surface deterioration caused by

normal aging were simulated by accelerated aging procedures in the

course of this evaluation program.

2.4.4. Water Vapor Permeance (+)

The water vapor transnission of a covering system is one of

the properties that determine where it can be used effectively

13
in a residence. Coverings with a very low permeability should be used

where direct contact with water is likely (e.g., normally tiled areas

above bathtubs and in shower stalls)

.

If adequate ventilation is provided, either low permeability or

high permeability coverings can be used in other areas of a residence

where contact with water vapor is likely (e.g. bathroom areas other

than those where direct contact with water is likely) . When poor

ventilation is provided in such areas, low permeability coverings

should be used.

Porous, high permeability coverings "breathe" and permit the moisture

that builds up in the wall structure to diffuse out. Nonporous low

permeability coverings, in addition to keeping moisture out of the wall

structure, are generally much easier to clean than are porous materials.

In normally dry areas of a residence (e.g. bedrooms) permeability

is not a decisive factor and properties such as ease of application,

serviceability, cost, etc. are probably more important.

The permeability properties of several covering systems were

measured in the course of this program to determine where they could be

used.

2.4.5. Colorfastness (+)

Colorfastness can be related to both the stability of coloring pigments found in a surface finish and to the chemical stability of other

components found in the surface covering.

A condensed moisture aging procedure* was used to determine the

* See section A. 10.1 of Appendix A.

14
colorfastness of materials that are likely to have some direct contact

with water on a regular hasis. Surfaces likely to be exposed to high

humidity conditions were evaluated by means of a water vapor aging procedure, and the effects of sunlight and long term aging under dry conditions were determined by an ultraviolet light-heat aging procedure.

2.4.6. Maintainability

Factors that should be considered when evaluating the maintainability of a surface covering include its resistance to damage, the

probability that it will be exposed to forces that can cause damage,

and the ease with which minor damage can be repaired. The properties

previously discussed in section 2. are a measure of the resistance of

a material to damage. The location in which a covering is used will

determine its exposure to potentially damaging forces (e.g. exposure

to moisture normally occurs in bathrooms and kitchens, and damage caused

by impact is less likely above a certain height)

.

The ease with which minor damage can be repaired varies widely with

the type of material being considered. For example, it is very easy

for the average homeowner to repair minor indentations, deep scratches

and gouges in gypsum board with spackling compound and then repaint the

repaired area. Plastic coverings may require the use of special patching compounds to fill in damage, and may also require the use of

special paints to cover up the damaged areas. Certain plastic surfaces

are not paintable and replacement of the damaged covering is the only

possible recourse. A proper repair job may require skilled labor

when textured or patterned finishes, such as those found on many prefinished products, are damaged.

15
3. Tentative Recommended Evaluation Criteria*

3.1. Critical Properties

3.1.1. Adhesion

At the present time, not enough information is available to make

an absolute correlation between the bond strength required of a covering

applied to a substrate and the strength required to prevent a child from

removing the protective covering. The bond strengths required for

coverings applied over leaded paints can be considerably higher than

those required for normal usage since a permanent barrier to the hazard

is required.

The important factors to consider in establishing bond strength requirements for coverings applied as barriers to leaded paints are:

a. the possibility that a child may be able to remove certain

coverings by peeling or pulling,

b. the possibility that the bonding may be effective on less than

100% of the surface that is being covered, and

c. the environmental conditions to which a covering is exposed in

normal service.

A minimum tensile bond strength value of 20 psi was

established for the actions of children (item a.). A safety

factor requiring an adhesive bond strength not less than 100

times the weight of the covering was established to compensate for poor bonding (item b.), and various environmental

* Testing shall be performed as specified in Appendix A of this

publication

16
pre-test treatments were established to meet the needs of

item c. (For all of the systems considered to date, the 20

psi requirement is more severe than the safety factor of

100.)

In cases where the properties of an adhesive are obviously unsatisfactory or where an adhered system is obviously unstable when

subjected to certain aging conditions, unequivocal recommendations concerning their use can be made.

The performance criteria listed below were established on the

basis of the requirement that an in-place barrier covering system should

be capable of withstanding damage caused by active children, in addition

to supporting its own weight when it is exposed to conditions simulating

in-use aging.

17
Tentative Recommended Performance Levels*

A. If additional support is not provided during installation, the

covering system shall be capable of supporting its own weight.

B. The tensile bond strength (under the expected service conditions

in occupied dwellings) shall be considered "satisfactory" if it is not

less than 20 psi, and capable of supporting 100 times the weight of the

covering. For use in normally dry areas of a residence, the values

obtained after curing at 73°F and 50% rh and after aging at 160°F and 4%

rh should be used. In areas where frequent contact with water vapor is

likely, the values obtained after aging at 160°F and 95% rh should be

used in addition to those for dry areas. In areas where direct contact

with water is likely, the values obtained after aging in water at 73°F

should be used in addition to those for areas where contact with water

vapor is likely.

C. Covering systems that do not meet these requirements shall be

rated as "unsatisfactory" for those areas where they do not comply.

3.1.2. Fire Hazard Evaluation

3.1.2.1. Flame Spread

Code requirements are usually based on the use to which an area is

subjected. Those areas such as furnace rooms where exposure to fire is

more likely, and exit areas, where the degree of resistance to fire

determines the amount of time that the occupants of a building have to

leave a residence, usually have more strict flame spread requirements

than other areas of a residence.

*These levels assume that the covering will be installed in such a manner

that a child will not readily gain a handhold on the covering so that it can be pulled off, and that the covering is installed over a sound, clean

substrate.

16
The failure of surface covering systems to meet flame spread requirements may, in some cases, be due to the failure of a thin surface

covering to effectively protect a previously existing combustible surface rather than due to the inherent combustion properties of the surface covering.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

In the absence of applicable code regulations, the requirements of

one of the major model codes (BOCA [8], AIA [9], Southern [10], or

Uniform [11], the HUD Minimum Property Standards (MPS) [6], or the

Rehabilitation Guide for Residential Properties (HUD PG-50) [12] should

be followed. Each of these codes is explicit with regard to the allowable flame spread values for interior finish materials.

Products that comply with allowable flame spread values stated in

the HUD MPS, which are listed below in table 1, shall be considered

acceptable for the purposes of this investigation when tested in accordance with the procedures specified in ASTM E-84 [13] or the procedures

given in section A. 3.1. (Robertson [14] has demonstrated that the values

obtained by these two methods show good correlation.)

3.1.2.2. Smoke Generated

Although most codes have not yet addressed themselves to the problem of smoke generation resulting from fires in housing, several local

codes (e.g., San Francisco [15], Philadelphia [16], New York City [17],

and the State of Michigan [18] do have criteria on smoke-intensity endpoints. In addition, the HUD MPS's [6] as well as the HUD Operation

19
Table 1

Flame Spread Rating Limitations of Interior Finishes

Surface Flame

Location Within Building Spread Rating - Flame Spread

Maximum Range Classification

Enclosed Stairways and Other 0-25 Class A

Vertical Openings

Corridors or Hallways and 0-75 Class A or B

Other Exits

Within Living Unit except 0-200 Class A, B or C

for Kitchen Space

Kitchen Space Within Living 0-75 Class A or B

Unit

Public Rooms and Entrance 0-75 Class A or B

Spaces

Service Rooms, enclosing Heat 0-25 Class A

Producing or Other Mechanical

Equipment, and all Other Fire

Hazardous Areas

20
BREAKTHROUGH program [5] have incorporated smoke generation criteria.

The states of Oklahoma, South Carolina, and West Virginia incorporate

the HUD MPS's in their requirements for industrialized housing [19].

Some building codes e.g. BOCA, require that "smoke and products of

combustion produced in burning be no greater than those obtained from

untreated wood when burned under similar conditions," (as discussed by

the ASTM E-5 Subcommittee IV on Fire Tests of Materials and Construction [20]). This is an implicit smoke generation criterion. Studies

conducted at NBS on untreated wood as a part of this program have shown

that specific optical density values of 350-500 are not unusual for the

smoke generated by cellulosic materials.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. In the absence of local code regulations, surface coverings

yielding smoke specific optical densities of 350-500, when tested in

either tbe flaming or smoldering modes, as specified in section A. 3. 2.

of this publication, shall be classified as "potential problems". If

the specific optical densities are greater than 500, the material shall

be classified as "hazardous".

B. The specific optical densities obtained by testing on plywood

substrates shall be used when coverings are to be applied on combustible

surfaces. The values obtained on ACB shall be used if the coverings are

to be applied on noncombustible surfaces.

21
3.1.2.3. Toxic Combustion Products

Many codes have not yet addressed themselves to the problem of

limiting the concentrations of gaseous products of combustion.

The BOCA model code [8], which is one of the codes listing requirements

>

states that "interior finish materials that give off smoke or gases more

toxic than that given off by untreated wood or untreated paper under

comparable exposure to heat or flame shall not be permitted."

No materials shall be given the classification of "hazardous" because the significance, in actual fires, of toxic combustion product

levels, as determined by means of small scale fire tests is difficult to

ascertain. The amounts of toxic combustion products generated by even

the complete combustion of thin surface covering materials may be outweighed in an actual fire by the quantities of toxic gases generated by

the combustion of furniture and other burnable items found in a residence.

Another factor that should be considered in the analysis of test data is

the ease with which toxic combustion products are given off; either by

ignition or by thermal degradation.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

When tested as described in section A. 3. 3. of Appendix A, in either

the flaming or non-flaming modes, materials which exhibit concentrations

of CO, HC1, NO and N02

, and HCN that appear to be of a level that is

described as a potential life safety problem in the current technical

literature shall be classified as "potentially hazardous".

For the purposes of this investigation, those materials that yield

toxic combustion product levels greater than those listed by Gross et al

[2ll, which are given below, shall be classified as "potentially hazardous'

22
These levels represent a potential danger to life on short term exposure (2 to 5 minutes)

.

Hazardous Combustion Product Levels [21]

concentration in ppm

a. CO 10,000

b. HC1 1000 - 2000

c. HCN 200 - 300

d. NO + NO 200

Note: Carbon monoxide gas concentrations of 9000 ppm (in the

flaming mode) were obtained for the painted plywood standard

substrate used to simulate a combustible surface in this testing

program. These values are in reasonable agreement with those

provided by Gross et al above.

3.1.2.4. Flash Point

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. When tested in accordance with the procedures specified in

section A. 3. 4., of this publication, solvents shall be classified as

"extremely flammable" if they have a flash point below 20°F, and as

"flammable" if they have a flash point above 20°F and up to and including 80°F.

These classifications are given in the Federal Hazardous Substances

Labeling Act [22].

According to Levinson [23], "if the flash point is above 100°F, the

solvent is considered to be relatively safe using normal precautions".

23
(Normal precautions would include not using the solvent in the presence

of heat or an open flame and providing adequate ventilation, when specified by the manufacturer.)

3.1.3. Supported Impact Resistance

The 18 in-lbf impact resistance requirement recommended as a

tentative minimum performance level in this publication was based on

both the impact strength requirement specified in ASTM C 587 [26], for

veneer plaster applied on a gypsum board substrate and on unsupported

impact tests conducted on 3/8 in thick gypsum wallboard at NBS (see

section A. 5. of this report for a description of the NBS test procedure

and apparatus)

.

The ASTM specification states that when the specimen is "struck

by a polished steel ball, 1 1/2 inches in diameter weighing 7.8+0.1 oz,

dropped freely from a height of 36 in there shall be no cracking or

loss of bond beyond the impact area". Tests performed in our laboratories

(as specified in section A. 4. of Appendix A) on veneer plaster in

conjunction with a bonding agent showed that cracking and loss of bond

beyond the impact area is the type of failure that is normal for veneer

plaster. Other coverings have different failure modes. Unsupported

impact tests performed on 3/8 in thick gypsum board showed no tearing

of the paper on the bottom surface at 18 in-lbf, but tearing commonly

occurred at 20 in-lbf. Tests performed at MBS on 3/8 in thick gypsum

wallboard, supported by the die of the apparatus specified in section

A. 4. showed that tearing of the bottom paper surface did not occur

at 20 in-lbf and that it began to occur at 22 in-lbf. The gypsum

24
board was tested without being subjected to accelerated aging procedures

in all cases. The 3/8 in thick gypsum board is the minimum normally

recommended by the gypsum industry for use without support.

On the basis of this information the criteria given below were

established.

The test data obtained for covering materials applied on a gypsum

substrate should be used if the covering is to be applied on plaster or

gypsum board wall surfaces. The data for plywood substrates should be

used if wood or similar solid surfaces are to be covered.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. Coverings capable of withstanding an impact force of 18 in-lbf

without showing signs of failure, as defined by section A. A. (G) , shall

be considered "acceptable". Those materials not meeting this requirement shall be classified as "probably not acceptable", if they withstand

12 in-lbf and as "unacceptable" if they fail below that value.

B. Systems intended for use in normally dry areas shall meet the

requirements specified in A. when tested after curing for 7 days at

73°F and 50% rh and after aging for 7 days at 160°F and 4% rh.

C. Systems intended for use in moist areas where direct contact

with moisture is unlikely should meet the requirements in A. after aging

for 7 days at 160°F and 95% rh in addition to the treatments specified

in B. above.

D. Systems intended for use in areas where direct contact with

water is likely should meet the requirements in A. after soaking for 7

days in water at 73°F in addition to the treatments specified in B. and

C . above

.

25
3.1.4. Unsupported Impact Resistance

The unsupported impact resistance test described in section A. 5.

of Appendix A was designed to indicate the resistance of covering

materials to tearing and bursting when they are unsupported. A basis

for the comparison of the values obtained is being developed in the

course of actual testing. Preliminary results indicate that covering

materials can be grouped into 3 classes on the basis of their resistance

to failure.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. Coverings capable of withstanding an impact force of 18 in-lbf,

without showing signs of failure, as defined by section A. 5. (F) shall

be classified as "good". Those materials not meeting this requirement

shall be classified as "acceptable" if they withstand 2 in-lbf and as

"probably unacceptable" if they fail below this value.

Coverings intended for use in normally dry areas shall meet the

above requirements when tested after curing for 7 days at 73°F and 50%

rh and after aging for 14 days at 160°F and 4% rh.

B. Materials intended for use where moist conditions are prevalent

should meet the above requirements after aging for 14 days at 160°F

and 95% rh in addition to the treatments specified in A. above.

3.1.5. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents

Testing shall be performed as specified in Section 191.1 of Part

191, Subchapter D of the Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act [22].

Substances shall be classified as (a) "highly toxic", (b) "toxic'', (c)

"irritants", (d) "corrosive" or (e) "strong sensitizers" if they cause

the reactions listed in the respective subsections of Section 191.1.

26
Certification of the degree of toxicity should be required of the

respective material suppliers.

The average concentration of a toxic vapor which can be tolerated

during an 8 hour day with no ill effects is known as the Threshold

Limit Value (TLV) . Values for the TLV of many gases and vapors have

been established by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration

[25].

3.1.6. Toxicity of Installed Systems

Testing shall be performed as specified in Section 191.1 of Part

191, Subchapter D of the Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act [22].

Substances shall be classified as (a) "highly toxic", (b) "toxic", (c)

"irritants", (d) "corrosive" or (e) "strong sensitizers" if they cause

the reactions listed in the respective subsections of Section 191.1.

Certification of the degree of toxicity should be required of the

respective material suppliers.

3.2. Functional Properties

These criteria are inteT - ' to point out potentially undesirable

properties. The fact chat so.ne of these criteria are not met does not

necessarily mean that the systv.uS are unsatisfactory for use as protective barriers over leaded paint.

3.2.1. Abrasion Resistance

The criteria listed below are primarily intended for the evaluation

of smooth surface finishes. In the case of textured surfaces, a combination of the test data and observations of the amount of visible wear

should be used to determine whether or not a system will give satisfactory performance.

27
Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. The abrasion resistance of smooth surface finishes shall be

considered acceptable, when tested as specified in section A. 6. if:

a. the average weight loss of six specimens tested for 500

cycles does not exceed 60 milligrams.

b. none of the six specimens wears through the covering layer,

B. There shall be no appreciable damage to the wearing surface

affecting appearance or function, e.g. cutting and/or tearing of the

fibers of textile materials, or smoothing of textured surfaces.

C. Systems intended for use in normally dry areas should meet the

requirements specified in A. and B. after curing for 7 days at 73°F and

50% rh, and after aging in dry heat for 7 days at 160°F and 4% rh.

D. Systems intended for use in moist areas where direct contact

with water is not likely should meet the requirements specified in A.

and B. after aging for 7 days at 160°F and 95% rh in addition to the

treatments specified in C. above.

E. Systems intended for use in areas where direct contact with

water is likely should meet the requirements specified in A. and B.

after soaking in water at 73 °F for 7 days in addition to the treatments

specified in C. and D. Above.

Coverings meeting the above requirements shall be classified as

"acceptable" for their intended areas of use. Those that do not meet

them shall be classified as a "potential problem".

28
3.2.2. Scratch Resistance

The criteria listed below are primarily intended for the evaluation

of smooth surface finishes. In the case of textured surfaces a combination of the test data and observations made of the amount of visible

damage should be used to determine whether or not a system will give

satisfactory performance.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. The scratch resistance of coverings shall be considered acceptable when tested as specified in section A. 7. if:

a. in the case of coverings with reasonably smooth, planar

surfaces the scratch width is less than 20 mils (0.020 in),

b. in the case of textured surface finishes there are no

visible signs of appreciable damage affecting appearance or function,

and

c. in the case of finishes with protruding fibers there is

no visible damage to the fibers such as cutting or tearing.

B. Systems intended for use in normally dry areas should meet the

requirements specified in A. after curing for 7 days at 73°F and 50% rh,

and after aging in dry heat for 7 days at 160°F and 4% rh.

C. Systems intended for use in moist areas where direct contact

with water is not likely should meet the requirements specified in A.

after aging for 7 days at 160°F and 95% rh in addition to the treatments

specified in E. above.

29
D. Systems intended for use in areas where direct contact with

water is likely should meet the requirements specified in A. after

soaking in water at 73°F for 7 days in addition to the treatments

specified in B. and C. above.

Coverings meeting these requirements shall be classified as

"acceptable" for their intended areas of use. Those that do not meet

them shall be classified as a "potential problem".

3.2.3. Washability

Both ease of cleaning and the changes in appearance that occur

when a surface is cleaned were determined by means of the test procedures given in section A. 8. of this publication. The percent retention

of directional reflectance is an indicator of the cleanability

of a surface, and percent gloss retention is related to the changes

in appearance of a surface caused by wear that occurs during the

cleaning process.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels*

A. Coverings shall be classified as "good" for their intended area

of use if, with the use of either a brush or a sponge:

a. the percent gloss retention is not less than 85% nor

greater than 125% of the original gloss, and

b. the percent retention of directional reflectance is not

less than 90% and not greater than 120% of the original reflectance.

* Percentages should be rounded off to the nearest 5% when determining

compliance.

30
B. Coverings shall be classified as "acceptable" for their intended area of use if, with the use of either a brush or a sponge:

a. the percent gloss retention is not greater than 125% of

the original gloss, and

b. the percent retention of directional reflectance is not

less than 90% and not greater than 120% of the original reflectance.

C. Those coverings that do not meet the above requirements shall be

classified as "potentially unacceptable" for their intended area of use.

D. Test values obtained at 73°F and 50% rh shall be used to classify materials for use under dry conditions at normal room temperatures.

Test values obtained at 160°F and 4% rh shall be used to classify mat^ials for use where exposure to heat under dry conditions is likely.

Test values obtained at 160°F and 95% rh shall be used to classify

materials for use under moist conditions.

3.2.4. Water Vapor Permeance

For the systems evaluated to date, the differences obtained when

specimens were subjected to various aging conditions were not found to

be significant. Therefore, for these systems the effects of aging do

not appear to be significant when this property is measured.

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

A. In areas where there is direct contact with water or where there

is prolonged contact with water vapor and no direct path for the vapor

to escape, coverings shall be classified as "acceptable" if they have a

vapor permeance not greater than 0.09 perms when tested as specified in

section A. 9. of this publication. Specimens subjected to all of the

pre-test treatments shall be used.

31
B. In areas where there is prolonged contact with water vapor and

a direct path for the vapor to escape (e.g., adequate ventilation is provided) , coverings shall be classified as "acceptable" if their water

vapor permeance is either less than 0.09 perms or greater than 1.5 perms

when tested as specified in section A. 9. of this publication. Specimens

subjected to all of the pre-test treatments shall be used.

C. In normally dry areas, there are no water vapor permeance

restrictions.

D. Materials not meeting these requirements shall be classified as

"potentially unacceptable" for use in those areas where they do not comply.

3.2.5. Colorfastness*

3.2.5.1. Condensed Moisture Aging

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

Specimens shall be classified as "acceptable" if, when tested as

specified in section A. 10.1. of Appendix A, they have:

A. a yellowness index difference not greater than 0.05 (in the

case of white materials** only)

,

B. a color change-lightness index difference not greater than 2.0,

and

C. a percent gloss retention not less than 80% of the original.

Specimens not meeting these requirements shall be classified as

"potentially unacceptable" for use in moist areas.

* All percentages are to the nearest 5%.

** White materials are defined as those materials having more than

80% initial directional reflectance.

32
3.2.5.2. Water Vapor Aging

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

Specimens shall be classified as "acceptable" if, when tested as

specified in section A. 10. 2. of Appendix A, they have:

A. a yellowness index difference not greater than 0.05 (in the

case of white materials only)

.

B. a color change-lightness index difference not greater than

1.8, and

C. a percent gloss retention not less than 85% of the original.

Specimens not meeting these requirements shall be classified as

"potentially unacceptable" for use where prolonged exposure to water

vapor is likely.

3.2.5.3. Ultraviolet Radiation Aging

Tentative Recommended Performance Levels

Specimens shall be classified as "acceptable" if when tested as

specified in section A. 10. 3. they have:

A. a yellowness index difference not greater than 2.5 (in the

case of white materials only)

,

B. a color change-lightness index difference not greater than

3.0, and

C. a percent gloss retention not less than 80% of the original.

Specimens not meeting, these requirements shall be classified as

"potentially unacceptable" for use where prolonged exposure to sunlight

is likely.

33
4. Description of Products Evaluated

4.1. Paint Removal Systems

4.1.1. Water Wash Paint Remover

A paint remover containing methylene chloride and methanol. It

can be applied with a brush, and removed together with the paint that

it softens by wiping it off with a water soaked applicator.

4.1.2. Alkaline/Solvent Paint Remover

A biodegradable, thixotropic liquid that can be applied by

brush, spray or roller and is normally removed together with paint by

rinsing with a high-pressure, low-volume water spray. The product is

biodegradable and contains a chlorinated hydrocarbon solvent which has

a TLV of 500 ppm.

4.2. Unfinished Covering Materials

These materials would normally be finished with a paint coating or

a wall covering material after they are installed.

4.2.1. Asbestos-Cement Board

A 1/8 inch thick unfinished asbestos-cement sheet product complying

with the requirements of Federal Specification SS-B-755a, Type F [26]

(flexible) . This thickness of the material is intended primarily for

application over a solid backing. Application would normally be via

mechanical fasteners.

34
4.2.2. Gypsum Wallboard

A 3/8 inch thick unfinished gypsum wallboard product complying

with the requirements of Federal Specification SS-L-30c, Type III,

Grade "R, Class 1, Form a [27]. Application would normally be via

mechanical fasteners or a combination of mechanical fasteners and adhesives, as specified by the manufacturer.

4.3. Prefinished Covering Materials and Coatings

These products provide a final finish in the course of their

application, and require no further decorating.

4.3.1. Acrylic-Polyvinyl Chloride Sheet

An acrylic-polyvinyl chloride thermoplastic sheet material having

a nominal thickness of 0.028 in, together with a water-based contacttype adhesive recommended by the manufacturer for use where a Class I

Fire Hazard Classification is required. Application was in accordance

with the materials supplier's recommendations.

4.3.2. Gypsum Impregnated Jute Fabric

A wall covering system consisting of a jute fabric impregnated

with crystallized gypsum and a water-based adhesive provided by the manufacturer. Application techniques similar to those used to apply vinyl

wall coverings were used in accordance with the materials supplier's

recommendations

.

4.3.3. Urethane Varnish

A single component, flat finish, clear polyurethane varnish containing a volatile mineral spirits solvent. The coating was applied

with a brush, in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.

35
4.3.4. One Component Epoxy Paint

A system comprised of a clear glaze primer-sealer coat followed by

a pigmented semi-gloss cover coat. Both coatings were single component

water-based epoxy-acrylate formulations. Brush, roller and spray application were tried, in accordance with the materials supplier's

recommendations

.

4.3.5. Vinyl Counter Top Material

A system consisting of a 1/16 inch thick smooth textured, sheet

vinyl counter top material applied with a water-based adhesive produced

by the same manufacturer. Application was in accordance with the

manufacturer's instructions.

4.3.6. Vinyl Wall Covering-Light Duty

A fabric reinforced vinyl coated wall covering conforming to Federal

Specification CCC-W-408 [28], Type I (Light Duty) applied with a wheat

paste-type adhesive. Commonly accepted installation techniques were used,

per the manufacturer's instructions.

4.3.7. Veneer Plaster with Bonding Agent

A system consisting of a liquid bonding agent which is applied on

painted and unpainted surfaces and then covered with a thin veneer of

finish plaster. Application was in accordance with the bonding agent

manufacturer's instructions for a one coat process. The veneer plaster

can either be painted after installation, or pigmented prior to installation and used without a paint top coat. The unpainted product was tested

since it was thought to be indicative of the worst case that could be encountered. Since many of the functional properties (scratch resistance,

36
abrasion resistance, washability, etc.) are dependent on the surface

finish provided; a good quality paint cover coat can be used to improve

these properties.

4.3.8. Vinyl Wall Covering-Medium Duty

A fabric reinforced vinyl coated wall covering, with a polyvinyl

fluoride film overlay, meeting the requirements of Federal Specification

CCC-W-408 [28], Type II (Medium Duty). The covering was applied with

a heavy duty adhesive on a primed surface, using commonly accepted

methods for hanging vinyl wall coverings, as recommended by the manufacturer of the wall covering.

4.3.9. Nylon Formulated One Component Paint

A nylon formulated water emulsion paint, brush applied and cured

in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. Brush, roller, or

spray techniques can be used to apply the coating.

4.3.10. Nylon Formulated Two Component faint

A two component synthetic plastic coating containing an organic

solvent. Two coats were brush applied in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The coating can be applied with either a brush

or a roller.

4.3.11. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint

with Flexible Primer

A system consisting of a two component primer coating designed to

promote flexibility, followed by a coat of the paint described in 4.3.10.,

as recommended by the manufacturer. Brush or roller application can be

used.

37
4.3.12. High Build Textured Spray Coating-Fine Texture

A viscous latex based high build aggregate filled coating, providing

a finish comparable in texture to sand-finished plaster. Spray equipment

capable of handling viscous liquids is required for its application.

4.3.13. High Build Textured Spray Coating-Medium Texture

A medium texture high build coating similar to the product described

in 4 . 3 . 12 . above

.

4.3.14. Two Component Epoxy Paint

A two component water-based epoxy formulation. The two components

were blended and then brush applied. Brush, roller, or spray application procedures may be used.

4.3,15. Cementitious Coating-"Orange Peel" Texture

A viscous portland cement-acrylic resin mixture that can be spray

applied with a hopper gun or similar equipment designed to handle viscous

liquids.

4.3.16. Cementitious Coating-Medium Texture

A sand aggregate filled portland cement-acrylic resin composition

coating similar to the product discussed in 4.3.15.

4.3.17. Plywood Paneling-Prefinished

A lauan mahogany, 4 mm thick, plywood paneling product, having a

multiple coat catalyzed varnish finish. The paneling was installed with

a paneling adhesive recommended by the manufacturer.

38
4.4. Other Methods

These additional approaches to eliminating the hazards caused by

lead-based paints have been identified. Although they have not yet been

subjected to a detailed evaluation program by NBS they are, for the sake

of completeness, worthy of mention,

4.4.1. Propane Torch Heat Softening*

Open flame burning with a propane gas torch to blister and soften

leaded paints prior to scraping.

4.4.2. Sanding*

Removing leaded paints with abrasive impregnated paper or cloth.

Either manual or machine sanding can be used.

4.4.3. Air Abrasive Paint Removal*

Paint removal using sand blast-type equipment in combination with

a sand, glass bead, or iron shot abrasive medium. Vacuum dust collection equipment is available for use in conjunction with this approach.

4.4.4. High Intensity Heat Lamps*

A radiant heat lamp, containing a high intensity quartz-bromine

lamp bulb, that can be used to blister and soften paint so that it can

be removed with a putty knife, scraper, or wire brush.

* Cautions : (1) Sanding and air abrasive paint removal methods create

hazardous leaded dust. Adequate protection and provision for its

collection should be provided. (2) The uncontrolled use of heating

devices to soften leaded paints can cause the paints to give off lead

fumes in addition to creating a fire hazard. Care should be taken to

avoid charring the paint and adequate fire protection should be provided

(3) Electrical devices can require more current for their operation

than a house's wiring can handle.

39
4.4.5. Heat Blower Guns*

An electrically heated air blower that can be used to blister and

soften paint prior to its removal by scraping.

4.4.6. Melamine Coated Hardboard

High pressure laminates consisting of a melamine layer laminated

to a cellulosic backing. Water resistant products of this type are

available for use in areas where direct contact with water is likely,

and water resistant adhesive systems are commercially available.

4.4.7. Decorative Vinyl Films-Self Adhering

Heavy gauge pre-decorated vinyl films backed with a pressure sensitive adhesive that can be applied directly on clean, solid surfaces.

Additional adhesives and solvents are not required.

* Cautions ; (1) Sanding and air abrasive paint removal methods create

hazardous leaded dust. Adequate protection and provision for its

collection should be provided. (2) The uncontrolled use of heating

devices to soften leaded paints can cause the paints to give off lead

fumes in addition to creating a fire hazard. Care should be taken to

avoid charring the paint and adequate fire protection should be provided,

(3) Electrical devices can require more current for their operation

than a house's wiring can handle.

40
5. Test Results

5.1. Adhesion

The results of the tensile bond test used to evaluate adhesion are

given in table 2. The highest dry bond strength values were obtained

for paint-type coatings and the lowest values were obtained for the

wheat paste adhesive used in combination with the light duty vinyl wall

covering.

All covering systems, with the exception of the paints, showed considerable deterioration in their bonding properties when tested after

moisture aging. The veneer plaster and both light and medium duty vinyl

wall coverings delaminated in the course of the pre-test treatment.

Similar behavior was found for the prefinished plywood paneling and

both of the cementitious coatings. Drying the moisture aged specimens,

prior to testing, appeared to reestablish a good bond in several cases.

The vinyl counter top material delaminated when it was allowed to

dry after moisture aging. The bond strength of the adhesives used with

both the acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet material and the gypsum impregnated jute fabric appeared to drop considerably as a result of the water

treatment processes.

Initial bond strength tests were carried out on coverings adhered

to a painted ACB substrate (painted with a primer coat followed by an

enamel coat) . Abnormally low bond strength values were obtained after

moisture aging because of incompatibility between the primer used and

the ACB which resulted in deterioration of the primer and subsequent paint failure. This type of failure was not observed after dry

41
InQJ

QJ

nj *-> >-, i i *c -c 13 13 1 i rn 3

CD

Q

m

(^

H

C

•H

-om * c CO en

OC co QJ •<r rO lO rH C 4J 4-> c T3 13 ON o CXI

CO QJ cn -J" 00 oj :s < ^ H

too u

oj *

J-l Tj enO

a) QJ MO in 3 C3C <r T3 TD -o 00

d CtJ (0 ^ o 3 fe QJ C M H < o y- UO or_1

rt

d

-K to

t-j 13

m CM

m •<r CO

a) (A QJ r— <r iH t;

r>^ 4J 4-» en ID ID 1 QJ (0 CO QJ 1 O QJ 3 OJ O H 00 < r- tO

4J

X CO M 3 3

00 6< •a MO <r o^ o ^ d QJ o o

0\ 4-t >. CT^ T3 -o *a *o .-vO r-»

H 00 CO J-< in ;m <T

do

OJ

i-H < *& QJ

Q iH

X

H

X 4-1

X >-< Fn

CD

I/) o

p-

(0 o

QJ , , 3

4J

U~i TJ >

<£. TJ in *

CM \C

4-1 X 3 o o a) QJ 4J O l»H O

ec V) *-t co tH X) 13 r-^ <t

u

OJ § at QJ

O

A rn cn -Jto Pi

COu

QJ i

H £ QJ OJ

(0

OJ > QJ X < X X '—'

*-• 4-1

l+-< ^ &< d O 0J

P-. 3 X rH

Pi ^a en 13 cj (0 00d Pu

r-. * ,__, OJ

1~<

tO >

OJ

Ho

<3J o ^H

OO I-H tH in 00 cn }a 4-1 00 o GO m T3 -a- <T H CJ\ d U CO < ^o •<r

0"i CJ

O OJ

QJ Fn 4J

w >>

C

Pi

M <sj CO QJ

E-i

a QJ • X

c/} >»

H

U3

CO 4J P

25 *o

(0 t-l 13 0) o - Z

TJ

r^

dd

13 QJ

CO IH3

4-1 COe

QJ

U co

(0 l-i >-. K •K * 13 OJ CO a> o-. o> o O CT. d x

13 < *J vD r-i o in (0 E m H a\

0C i-H S a » § X CM a £ s s-s ot ! Jj QJ -C OJ c (0

r-. * *o * m cn rm

m

ON

O S

QJ3

to> 3 n

C *

(- rC (a T3 CM CM CC <t o

CO rH x r- d

j-j CO H (0

H „,

C o fr-* jd m _j a) aj 5

cc o co

H tl -R e in >> K * * v£> m i-H 3 C """^ M

U-, CO CO

m r-. CT. P^

d

CO -d o i« ID m. CM 2 1 < ^ H CM <r

fe 4J **-,-_u

cn VJ

ra

w ° y in o « r* « a) E r- QJ P- 4J o <E. ^ K i; CO _Q t. VJ U JJ O r- i-H i m CO m 0)

tU 13 00 ^H •M^ « ' r-« o u to 0>"5 OJ >

a) ,_,

1-1

H ^ o> 00 s

cemen sa

sub

curing

d

is

ir

ring

pr c 10 •H U O 3 •X K K 4J 4J O cc 00

asbesto used a s

with

n

teste

ated

X du

cH

v

.H i ' l d

QJU

4-1 CO

t;

P.

0GdH

4-1 •H3

00d

•H

01 8 O3 o3H

—3

*T3do „ U OJ c

oj 3 = 3 e

Ps x: c M l-l 13 ID T3

dH«'1- 1t a-i S OJ

C CO

H 0/

QJ 4J

jj

d

co a>

co ac H <

Ph 00

l-<

C

QJ *H

aj tj d c

QJG

QJ QJ 4J QJ 4-J CJJ 4-i VJ QJ ^2, »* cS

U E-t

m ?. " a

m

p

•H > > w

d 4J

d 4J

d qj

a > QJ P^ QJ 00

QJ

C

J-jC OJ o O CO -H

iH

O

CO -H rH CO (0 iH S

rH tO -H •H

£3 < G P O i-J

rH

X V- o CO QJ 4-1 JJ

i-H 4J

>* 3 CUd PU 3 PU 1-. 0)

(0 rH ° W Cm

U

P. *H E n > d

d

it

dd ^H 3 l-l 4-» E^ Pi

(0

a <

pk >w 1 QJ

M

X

a co

O rH co

d CO

O o c O

C o d oj

O _g £tn z O "C C E tu o cd 3 fi4 QJ U- OJ Pl, QJ -1

QJ •H -H rH ^ E fc 3 X o

i-H )-i ^x iH 3 d d o d d o d -p d O -H CO 4J P^ O CO QJ 4-J X >, CJJ >^ -H o a O P- o a x 0J

H pi

H II I* iH CL *-> QJ QJ O d 4J d T3 H S r-l e rH b 0) 4J II * ' cj X >s d ^ 5& •H CO -H QJ >-. o >> o > OH O A * * TJ | < o Cfl •") d) > S > ^J [>, a u S u ZUfr 2

42
VJ

oj XI

4-1 OJ

a)

15 (0 ^

aj t-. i I o\ X) cn so r^ cn in

to

HO

mu

•H

X)

M Cfl QJ c > CX>

ffl 10 4-1 rH

O XI *dm XJ

M TJ QJ OJ rH <r <r cn < r . H 3 A

ato

CO l-i X)

QJ 0) a) 4-1 jj S to >-, <r

at <u >-< XI Xl -3- 1 13 to H P o

i—i 00 c

•H vD

OC <

•H XI

X) QJ

QJ CO o

4-1 >. CO 4J Xl X) 1

1

cfl cfl qj <u M TJ H 3

QJ

T~\ r01 +i o U <

fr« xj x. M in QJ 00 X) CH

GO

CT-. (0 >^

QJ 1-4 3 XJ xt XJ x:tu xi < H Q 4-! 3

?^ to rH Q>

4-1

M *C0u

tn" •H

O

ft c U)& 3

0) Uu

X

q-i XI > -to -H

(0 (S> •to iw

QJGO

4J CO QJ 4J

CO X)

QJ 4-»

4-» 10 CO oo En XJ <r in

oj en xt t-. 4J ftat to

cfl *D at « CO T-i j3 QJ

t-i

C 3 *o QJ

O O4J 4J

0)Oh s: (A

f> pa QJ^ qj < x:oj x: x: , c u ^3 C H C T-I

CO &< to fj ft <T X QJ TJ

*3

m

r-.

uXi QJ

S3

00

ft <SJ ro

00 ^ _

'orp

d

nu

ccur 25 GO O X) H i—i SR cn in

»d- cn o W < vO QJ t^ QJ Pi 4-) 4-t E-t >s to QJ QJ co UQ

<S1 OJ H »i5 3 Q CO £* ,H g >> tC jh -h O CD XjQ CO CQ X)

rH7

the

ure f

(0 CO -*, 4J

>•. v£) CO o -d" r*» o> co CT- XJ j2 CO

CO in i—1

COm cm o S j-t 5 s

X)

H rH en "-^ CO -Tj QJ cc

tO 4J

p O.

Csl

m fl <"

x QJ

g .. x: -h 4-t 01 00 (0 ^XJ cfl 3 c >1 - C «H

CO a\ \0

O cm

O r—i o £ -h ^ *

x> r» ^O \Q

—• m r** in tO

H >

en i-H x: OT CO ,C r-* T-\ A U M 4-1 CO

Cfl -H XJ o

t-jx, a> x: oj

QJ OJ 4-> 4J 4-» o (0

*-> 4J 1 CD

m f>> to cfl qj c ot O 00 O cn cn —i

QJ QJ

U CO 4J X) <f <T iH in «—• O cn m 4-1 ft x: o

ft.m

o> <r -_- ^ GO 4-1 QJ C 00 X)

u

ffl OJ

C VJ c ? O 3 ^ uh Eao

(2. CO X) CO

en

H " i o> ;

peri

mens ed

du

grea t

cou > rH -3" 9P-H t4 « -H C O QJ -H P

•^ QJ 4-1 0*

J-1 ft to

X i»

J-i 3 tfl -H 4-1

O

O 3 U

h ooiu

4-1

O ^ QJ Xl

C QJ x:

x: jz 01 xi o i 1 i 1 Wu XJ n

T* c v xt 3 14-4 CO CO QJ * w xJ xl a) * *J" QJ C C 1 QJ ^-> CO y cn c th o §

00M Pn 00 /-v 3 >-, oj x>

B

Xt

C 3 <-l

C cn "3 CO 4-1 CO

aj qj QJ -H *H 4-) , ^-' •H CN OtJ U-l

C rH

u c t-l XJ ^o 4->

W 1 H *—» O QJ QJ c

c_>

H » <

Cm >W 3 -H 3 QJ 1—1

co a) at 00 P* x) to S xt

4-> to 4J

X

OH o G 01 QJ -H

X 1 X 1 U

U QJ

H CO Qj) 4J GO CJ

C

QJ GO QJ GO k4 <U CO to

C QJ QJ

H

C

H

C

a tfl rH

W 3 0)

y qj -h ft e

•HH QJ 4-1 3 QJ 3 4-1 CJ x) CO rH 4J

U CO -H

X) 4-1 XJ 4J c c o a)

O

X CO QJ ^ cfl QJ

O

rH cO iH CO

O -H •M ft •H QJ ft x: Ij 3 4-1 > 01 01 •H O *H O ft CO U H to xj jj x: ft 3 O 3 O e ^ •H QJ •H Xt T-t M O Z U 4-1 tO CQ pq o 4-t GO 4J o e •• rH ffj >» >. o >% C C C 3 O Ti TM -, II 11 II II x: co x: to X QJ cO QJ *H 5 iw

>*> QJ

QJ *

GO

M GO

U o o e uB X) 4J * 1 x,

a T3

h

a

H ft 5 ft 0)

O 01 QJ rH !>.

O

X CO 3C CO

H LJ o r

u s P-. ft Z

43
conditioning. Tests were repeated for moisture aged specimens using the

phenolic board substrate specified in the adhesion test procedure

(section A. 2.) and the problem was alleviated. Since the manufacturer

of the gypsum impregnated jute fabric did not recommend his product for

use in moist areas, this product was not retested with a phenolic

substrate.

5.2. Fire Hazard Evaluation

Test results are given in table 3 for the fire hazard properties

discussed below.

5.2.1. Flame Spread

The painted ACB which was intended to simulate a relatively noncombustible substrate (e.g., painted plaster) had a low flame spread

rating (essentially zero). The painted plywood substrate, which was

intended to simulate a worst case condition, had flame spread values of

about 300 (this is considerably above the 150 to 200 range normally obtained for unpainted plywood)

.

With the exception of prefinished plywood paneling, all of the

coverings applied on the painted ACB substrate had flame spread values

below 25 (vinyl counter top material had a value of 26, which can be

rounded off to 25) . This indicates that many thin coverings do not contribute significantly to the spread of a fire when they are applied on

noncombustible substrates.

Several coverings applied on painted plywood yielded significantly

lower flame spread values than those obtained for uncovered painted plywood. The two component nylonated coatings were the only exceptions to

44
1 ^ y~.

OJ

OJ OJ > >

to «

OJ> > OC

x t- > > ft. CO fc CO

H C^>

fe < O o < o OJ c tb [iH «) PL, tO Pu-H 4-» < M J o

ft. E fc E 2: CM

X CN

X [n J-. o X o OJ o -a c

i-i TJ cm ^: CM

C OJ

m CC cm < Os. < r-i

O

i-i *a >-t -c

CM

X c-j < CM < CM J3 (0 n *-- /\ -—

,-

— c o c c O o c o

0J X

K c-j

cc 2- CC LD

c: CO o d

2: 2 o cE g

""" * -

1-1 c XI

0J

OJD.X

0J

C

OC

C oo oc o o o c c

-d c ^ c c <

rH

""" ° oc W O c o

to c c CM 3 ecf c o - c * * o

OC z z _ E u H csj CN CM H H . o i-t 6 3 o o o o o o o co o

c_> c o oo o TM \C

H ^ o o o O gj o o o o -3- H o o 3 U X •a -J ao o c o c o o o

a.

Cm

n « c o o

c-> * o o •J' * «

vD -<r oXu o 2 zE

<u c_> o o \C o

xtX o c o o o o o O oc

T) £ o o o o o -J O

t_> o o o -T Jj

r-j

—1 n rH r-( 3 o O rH *u O 0J O X o CJ *£> o vD o CO o B £ CM w rH o O o o o a

P- to <r c < -3 O o o o 4-> c o .-H rH fc 3 O

60 s z z c

II E uX

>X o m

m

m * H * CM

O <

pE4 CO z O o o o o o z o o o O o o o o o o o CJ O CM o o o -J —1 ^

l_J o X

CO o

cm" *" '5

CO CM o -3" CM

atc

a) <z c IH

^r

<J *c £ CM rH E

ec

ai T3

XI

0J <t

u. en CO c X 0J o

10

M

O C- (0

C c QJ £ o E H C w a

0J CO c

En 01 a> D Z D- W C to u OJ p =>

P- ai

a < < 2 vC En

\C

vC v£

H rH OJ

M

X xi c COX 0J o > *J s: o

to XIoo E 0J X

CO o

OJ IM o I M

be oc CC <

P- c <z < vC o m E TM c en

c- en rH ^ M

M 0J

OJ E o 0J c X)

ft< -a

0J ** ° o

I-I 3 £ 1- rH u c QJ w o 3 p PQ < *c «j *C •+-< e j-i 0J < U ^r 0J u < c OJ X 3 c

p. 3 CO X) o

p-tou o10 (0 o X ua

-H

(J rH 0J

fcu XI c ^ > 5 oo * en < <z \£

-3 en P CO

O

H 14-

Co

rH XJ

T-\ 0J 1J

f-1 £ * O *

rH CN rH

X 3 £

CO 4-1 E C QJ -

P-I 0J XI

(0 c a (0

X

X c 3

X) ID >. 4J TD C O iH X

OJ crX # u *

X>oX

>>c

-H 4J > 0J >, 0J iH X O CO 1 0J O T3 ^ o a x

"O

x

OH cu 3 S ! O 1"

o- o

XI -H

4-1 QJ

w

O 4J * 2 h

OJ c C

CO > c c O -H o

(0 0J

CO 6C -H < Xo 3 XJ

H E

OJ l-i

P- to # (0

<: «

01> X o

to E

iH 0J O >

CO o

--. E a -h E h M X E fc 3

G. *-» >^ 3 C3O rH

rH AJ

(0 3 3

rH

CO

4-1 0J 3

0J

4J 0J c c

iH -H

fO tQ > o

OJ o 3 U

a: >

PL

W

X

XI 3 X*o 3 3 PC

C cc E3O c E p* CJ CO 3 Q

U

C > rH

P.

m

a. 4-i c X

rH

CO rN

oj to C *-" -H (0

03 OJ

Q-.

H

ai to

to OJ | P- H

OJ

C 3 a*

CO

C

t-H nj < Pu

X

0JM

u ^ c a o w

>. OJ c »-» -r* CO > s

>>X C CO

iH *H > rJ

0J iH

aj -a c c

OJ o > aa

to x;

OJ t-> O -K z. E 0J * ^ o * > X

II

0J

45
u *

OJ

(0 /- c X H

en e < M J o

r<-. p-l

uT [*- tn tn -O txj rb

CO P4J3 < < o O O 4-1 OH CI o o o u ^a •z. z £ OO < O-H LJ CM CMO

•*X> <T< Of rH r-U3 <

rHa

AAA

A yfc o o o 3 X ON ^ ^ ^ o K rH c ST. 2

aJ CM o rH CM -3- « O o « in

T3E

rHO o oo cm O O O o o

rH o oo o

<r o in o o \D j, 00

O o o *

P3 00

rH

\£> < c

JJ 4J o o * rH en 1-1 M en CO <J co

CM 3ou E c u sr o CM o * <r ,_, o o \o a a £ X •o o o o o o o o o o o oo u o -D o o CO c H CO m CM CM idm X o O o o o & Q cj c O

PX CM 3

CM OJ

uX o 5 o £

oo

H c o o rH] o

rH GO

O CO CO o

rH

CT> CO rH ^o

-a z CM en CM

mm en

m CM CMH o

-a cm

u rH oe X a o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o

<t *£> MH

O ° en ' ' -3- rH CM rH -^r u m

t) o<

v-' o o O CM O o o o o

P-4

X o <j o C 3 w o

-0 3 a. o o

en rm r^. en ,_,

O 00 ^ o oj -a

rH rH rH rH

oo z -.

C 4J (0

01

C OJ 2 ^t H JD s

CO

X

ON co * LA * CM CM OJ * sO cr to 3

0) D. 4J

u- o o O o o O o O tfl

O o O o o o \D U -H -H

u •-\ £ o •£> °^ <T en CM CM <i* U) 4= 1- U 0) • uX O o O o O K 0T3

\Q -3- 0)

O -H

C

u iw

p 3

0)

O c

•H

rH OH'rl

a. oj o E c o ai O -H J3 en *T CO O ON (J (0 >N

OE

OO en

O

u Xi

O

rH 0J X» 4-t x: o -o < U CD t-j

0) CO 3 4-1

r-l

O CO

U 2C CHE o x: ca at

at

Bx

as VC 0)

at co co Sww

CJ

PJ

P^ o 00 o>

rHH

x ,c eg 4-i 4J 4-1 3 o

rH

C

-a co co C QJ > CO

CO 3 to rH U 3 C 3 o vD 00 en at > x: 4J c TJ •D en O rH X OE

co

-3" en <r <r -J- en <r

x -o o 1

-h co x:

00 OJ rH CJ

PH

rH O. < J=

00cHe o en CO rH vD \D

00 CO 3

atc at • c E (IH

<r CO o ej\ <r -* vD (0 • rHO

W ^ • ^ en en "" <f ^r 3 OJ U-4 U 4J

4J (0 r-l

U 3

co i-i at at -a

0) 4J 3 rH o

4-1 CO

O QJ

U

X> rH (X

u CM CM ^ CM rH ,_,

MH CM oo 4-13

C

PS < Ij n) -H CO

P-. m

h rH x:

O

W (0 QJ

X i o

01

O rH -H

X: -H rH 4-1 1-4 1

\o o o p-. rH •j- -J- >S-0 r4 rH

rH en xi -a o at -a

P- CCj c CO OJ T3 rJ

at c t) >» 3 C CO O X CO H O CO • , Oj o E e 1 0) 00 n) 4J & *a oj 0J

*-i 3 ^i at E H

C co £ 5^ QJ-H rO 3

0) -HX

C 3

iH 4-» c ox a. i4-i 4j co 3 w-d rJ T3 o 4J X 4-t -H O CJ o -o TJ T3 3 a> 3 OJ a. cfl OJ fO 00 HI H TJ U C **

HW ws

w s U3O EH

O

a 3 3 0) OJ rH

O

H > u c 4J

C *JCJ)

X 1 X 1 CJ rH 4J > CO O"

£3 <ti o (0 -H rt -H CO-iH E 0) OO 0) 00 4-1 c0 -O

C CO O.

OX CJ rH nJ rH « rH td"H

HCHC c w 3 at > oj -h oj 3 <!

O rJ P>N 3 Pm 3 Pw 3PU •H 0) 3 OJ 3 •»->

C T3 4-t n) 3

PS < E g

B Cu -0 -P

O OJ

X eO OJ OJ (0 ©.rH CM4J -H 3 M W H fl) o iH P-( P-. J3 x: qj c co o o w co q O C O C oca) H O H O D. u H 3 [n 0J N QJrH 3 U 0) 3 U QJ 6 TJ -H e c C C-O » M 03 r-l o l-i 00 O C

i-t 3 e o c o C OH >-. 3 r*l 3 C_> 4-t c c C 3 O -H

>>, -H o a. o a. o a-x 43 co i-i j= ca

u c OJ ffl

C TJ rH E rH E HEflJ &0M

X 60 rl

X

O i-t E )-i

B -o g.'S

•H 01 P-i o >*O >,OrH

H p. HI -H a. ai 3 to OJO oj ai

O *

:> 3T 3 U ft

V ISUtiH Stfl

HX enH

H CUu - o a P-. P- T. 1

46
this trend. Both the thickness of the covering material and its composition appear to affect this change in flame spread.

In addition to the decrease in flame spread that was observed when

coverings were tested on a painted ACB substrate instead of on a painted

plywood substrate, differences were observed in the type of burning that

occurred during the test. Several coverings that flamed openly when

they were applied on painted plywood smoldered without open flaming when

they were tested on painted ACB. This difference in combustion properties for gypsum impregnated jute fabric applied on painted plywood and

painted ACB substrates is illustrated in figures 1 and 2 respectively.

5.2.2. Smoke Generated

As can be seen in table 3, there is no clear-cut pattern to the

smoke generation results obtained for coverings applied on the painted

plywood standard substrate.

Coverings applied on painted plywood that yielded smoke generation

values that were higher than the uncovered painted plywood in both the

flaming and nonflaming test modes included: the acrylic-polyvinyl

chloride sheet, the one component epoxy paint, the medium duty vinyl

wall covering, the two component nylon formulated paint (both with without a flexible primer) , the fine texture high build spray coating and

the prefinished plywood paneling. Lower values in both the flaming and

nonflaming test modes were obtained for the urethane varnish, the vinyl

counter top material, the light duty vinyl wall covering, the veneer

plaster, the one component nylon formulated paint, and the orange peel

47
Figure 1. Flame spread test of gypsum impregnated jute fabric on a painted

plywood substrate - Open flaming.

48
Figure 2. Flame spread test of gypsum impregnated jute fabric on a painted

ACB substrate - Charring without open flaming.

49
texture cementit ious coating. Coatings that yielded lower values in only

one of the two test modes included the gypsum impregnated jute fabric,

the medium texture high build spray coating, the two component epoxy

paint, and the medium texture cementitious coating.

Values obtained for coverings applied on painted ACB substrates

were considerably below levels that were considered to be hazardous in

every case.

5.2.3. Toxic Combustion Products

Relatively high HC1 gas concentration values (in the 1,000 to 2,000

ppm range) were obtained for the acrylic-polyvinyl chloride covering and

the vinyl counter top material, both of which are relatively thick

coverings, 0.028 in and 1/16 in, respectively. Since there is some

question about the accuracy of the colorimetric indicator tubes when

high levels of HC1 gas are present, the results obtained for the

acrylic-polyvinyl chloride material were checked by means of a selective

ion electrode technique. The presence of relatively high levels of HC1

was verified by this procedure.

The painted plywood standard substrate, by itself, gave off relatively high amounts of CO (9000 ppm in the flaming mode) . This is

typical of the level that can be expected when tests are conducted on

cellulosic materials.

With the exception of the acrylic-polyvinyl chloride material and

the vinyl counter top material, coverings applied on the ACB substrate

yielded considerably lower toxic combustion product levels than those

applied on plywood.

50
Relatively nonhazardous toxic combustion product levels were obtained for the remainder of the covering materials tested on both the

plywood and ACB substrates.

5.2.4. Flash Point

All but five liquid products had flash points above 212 °F and can be

considered relatively safe as far as flash point is concerned. The two

paint removers and the urethane varnish had flash points in the 90 to

100°F range and both two component, nylonated paints had flash points

of 140°F.

5.3. Supported Impact Resistance

The results of testing covering systems applied on both painted

gypsum wallboard and painted plywood substrates are summarized in

table 4. Specimens were tested on both a solid steel plate support

and on a die which provided a void directly beneath the impact area.

Since test values obtained after aging specimens at 160°F and

4% rh appeared to be considerably below those obtained for specimens

subjected to the other pre-test treatment conditions used, a study was

conducted of the impact properties of uncovered gypsum wallboard as a

function of the aging condition to which it is subjected.

When the product was tested over a die after dry heat aging (with

cracking of the bottom layer of paper being considered an end point)

there was some slight deterioration in its impact properties. Indentation measurements showed that the depth of the dent obtained with

specimens subjected to dry heat aging was approximately twice that

51
c

l-l

0) 60 QJ 60 00 6IE 1 uo 00 00 d d XJ 00 d d CrlM o d c d d •H •H J-lQJ OJ M CO H ^i ^: J^pfl.

QJ x> a) 00 (J Ji OJ ^ QJ o M CJ

J-.

d a) -u

C nj CO (0 OJ 3 CO CO CO QJIh 3 o > co (0 nj 1-1 fj J-I o QJ l-l u KdP- m w J-i i-> U Vj l-l 1-1 CJ CO a

<U P, CO 3 X)

Cfi tO a. CO 0) (0 QJ >> « >, >> 4-1 QJ >> >> >» ^qjx: H U-, XI rH > XJ Sn Xi ^ Xi x> X) « M X) Xi x> 2 o a) X> 3 X) 3 x> d 00 o aj a w XJ-HCU XJ -O 3 (0 co XJ XJ XJ d en 4_> o a- -u T3 QJ Q) CO V-i QJ QJ OJ QJ •H CO to xi ^H QJ X) QJ T3 O S-i t-H rH C C X) Q u a. o rH QJ rH QJ -H 00 •H •H u 3

0)

co

ai •H E QJ

CO rt CO

cO

O

•r-t CO

cfl

O

(0 co

d 1-1 QJ J-» CO CO CO co qjx: •a J-" C o u *+4 a. M-C &. CO c o 3 O & 4J 3 00 >-J X X 00 60 O 00 60 60 S d qj 00 Q> 00 0) d d a. co a. d d d d-U4J

•H T) XJ

O

H

H XI

d c •H •HX -H •H

H OO CO OJ C X> - CO J-i -H •h x: 1-1 Ij QJ a -h V-i l-l V-i j-i dd QJ t: W-J QJ U-l QJ QJ QJ QJ QJ

QJ QJ > CO -H > > XJ QJ QJ > > > > COX)

Q

O QJC JZ V.O

O 4-< o x: o x: o o d xi x: o o o Z u < OJ = 2 o o a 3 CJ 3 CJ CJ co H 4J a CJ u

U 3X> 4-i * * •X +

QJ e3 * X -K

-X * OCO ^, ^ +o * * * ^ bi * --. vD 00 oo * CO 00 C CO p. + * + X

>>

OO

O + OJ o 1 : o CO CM CO c -T o CO o 00 < pn o — w CO w 1-1 r- rH . 3 r

"*

'X c M

CO -a 4 + +

~* ^ o o o

cO (0 o CO CO o o CO o 1 X) 1 +o +o

CM

CO \£>

fc 1 K +o o *

CO CO .—1 ro 00 rX) -X * 1 J-i E3 * * * ^p c * * o & -X ^-» CO +

0) 00 ^ + * + o 4 CO

K *

.r tn

O o CO o CO •<r CO CO 00

=1 •H CO 4

CN CM * 1 00 -3 * 3 OJ < CO CO •vT ^D CO \D •*: ^D s>

u. -&

CO

cO "-1 oo

OJ oo

co X>

EC

H

d 3 <sj

c/> 0) +

CO oo

O

en

O o

CX- +o o ^ +o CO CO > d E o CO <T CO 1 1 o X> u

tl r-

>* +o + w

K + 1 * v£> ^ QJ o IX CO o CO o •K in

p. ro CO o 3

'.

X

M

-o -x d * •X -X o -X X -X

K * * o E + -X * o+ o 3 + + c c o x/D O oc oo <r o o 1 OJ w P. CO rH CO <T r- ^r m E c >^ CO 00 g 01 O 4 CM CM CO

r-i

CD <* u. CO

OJ Ij o

j-i \D o QJ XJ

Pn

QJ

M

<S. x>o ^ ^ ^p +

+'""' ^^ o

QJ o + + o CO

CJ 1 CO o o o 00 r- o a ?.

nj OJ . >. CO o 1 O rH

p. l-i cC 14-1 p- e Cu pj + + + +

t-i + + o o -J- 4J r-< \0 o o o CO 00 rH CJ O B CO oo CO

COp- e B E 3 H CO X a

rt

X * * * l-l >%

s: J- * -X -K

-X -X ^ ^ ^ ^ QJ OJ 00 3 * * + + + O CO +o

CO + H

O E o o o l-i m 3 + + CO CO CO CO CO 00 -<f 14-1 3 o o o <T \£>

CO oc

O <# P. CO CN CO +o

CO

l-l

d

>. + + o00 o >. o U -H QJ

u o o

CO o

CO ** CO

r-- P-.

H

p.

aj

C to O 3 3 m x: *h

CO XJ QJ CO QJ 4-1 QJ 4J QJ rH -h x:

chj > rl

U XI XJ 4J

QJ l-i

O 4-»

b

d

a QJ P. CO 3 O 4J

I': o± o

CO + (0 P- rH J-i 3

...j xi + + o Xi 3 P- CJ

O .-'- r o o o CO -J- vD \D o « oc x: o CO CO CO CO vD XJ d 4-> B 4-1 (0 QJ C -H «H o • >. + o

CO + O OJ QJ CO J- 3 + + o CO 00 <t d -t-1 ** 3

Cd -: o o OO CO r- l>- CO CO QJ CO CO ^r CO CJ OJ QJ

CO *H C0 3 x; 0) d 4J-i "O 4J U QJ C0

CO 4J QJ

J-I

QJ -H CO J-i CO 4J (0

V-. CJ cj

d X< o o 2 S~* I* •H W 3 <-> >, 00 60d

l-l QJ>o

CJ

rH 3

cO

Q

H § d -a H QJ > 2 8 3

S-£.

rH XJ h ^ d

qj E rt

4-j rt 3

CO ~o X CO -H QJ o a.

'u XJ XJ XJ 4-1 4-) J-i QJ 4J > o XJ >, D- oH i-i d

QJ 4-»M 3 r~»

U Xi

O •H

Hw P c CO CO

w >

tJ

d *j

d

4J

d a. 4-1O to 3

CJ

H

d c

J-I cd -H rH CO cO -H CO -H & « x: ^ Xi (0 XJ

u XJ

QJ

IS) QJ 3 <C QJ O > QJ oo d

CJ 4-> 00 rH CO rH CO -H x: 4-" 3 C

O

Q 3 E X! >, QJ 3 P- 3 Ph 3 P-l r-l 4-> -Hd CO QJ J-i pO -J

P-. >

OJ1COo i O CO

Pu1 QJ U ID

exE

h-l >QJc dop.E d3O >-H

r-l >,

CO 3 2 O

rH 60

0-!

C

l-« XJ

qjd

QJ

O

d CQ o d

fc QJd d o o p.

rH E

r>.

O

•z o o d

fe 0J d o O PL rH E

->. o 2 O o d QJ pM QJ rH d Xi 3 -H d r-l IH

CO QJ QJ • QJ X> -P E P. E -h 3 O QJ

to qj x:

P. P.

H

p.3

CO X>

X> CO E3 l-l J-J >^ o E cj 3 -H CL X»

CO o d

1—1 1-J >N QJ d -u >\x: d &o

d o -H O P- X

rH E QJ

r>l

O rH S E 1 1 1 4 SE ^ CO* * K * * 2

to

O >> o < G

>> cO O 1*4 3 O Cu > E > -J > 3 2 CJ PwB oo * * -K *

52
00 00 00 oO 00 e c c

1-( c c1-t Ji ^ M ^i ^ u a a <J co CO CO

u c 3 O

U r4

M

uu

u CJ CJ °

T3

?^ >-. >* >-. >. QJ enH

cQ D. .a J3 .n J3 J3 > z M T5 XI TJ TJ T3 01

OJ QJ 01 QJ CO I c to H J3 H 0J tH iH -H o c -o O CO CO cfl CJ 3 iw U-i IW u-i QJ u *a GO 00 00 00 oO 3 c o c c c e C rH

tA •H •H

H

1-1u 1-1

M l-i CO 01 QJ QJ 01 U-l > > > > > o o O o O u O U CJ u z E

+"" 3 o i to CO

a CX ^O P P*. 3 cj -K +

01 o < * •K o < — vO -K -K oo

"r

tr

O

tC e ^ }-t T3 +

01

G + + o

psO o O CO

CD CO Js

00 oo

•a * * +

P-, vO CO <r ¥. o

•x> >JD

K CO

ja

"7

.e c j- E

•H o 3

QJ c to v£> CO C

./- ex o O

<u •H o >. -3- cj

K 3 01 < i& O K

\D

O *d- •*

i2 jjj c H

tfl vC

tie .0 c 3

CO (£. *D

<u 00 o o +

p> c I- >> I

00 o o -H q} 00

CJ

J

-a

p- ^ w "*"*

-K -K *

01 o \C CO <x -:

K

u ex

k * * o p.

01 to

cc T3 •3 C c CO + o j=

i-i E O 3 c £ &< a. E 00 <r >, + o 3

0) "5 **} tN CN

w CN CN CO

QJ 1-1 < u1-1 H _ c

vO

In

01

X

r-l o •3 o >, O + + + co t-> o O O o CX a >> I < v£> CO CO CO e tu CO m h-I -c 5 + + + ^d- <r o o o o 3EX

vO en CN CO CO *

"^ s 00C

a) o i ^ ^, ^ ^^ o HC 3 o CO o CO o o

<£ ex CO

4J

01 CJ + •H

u- -3- o o vO o *o 3 m H H H f—1 ^ CO Co n u

QJ CHJ 00 O. c e -a H QJ C o !_, H o + 3 E E £

>x> o T3 o \D CO CO

a -d- *o c >* cu 01 oi + + IJ •a o -d- o o CO

-d" -d- p- CO

C

•HE

to H 1 QJ QJ e 00 I- -3

•a •O 3 >N

C 3 00

tu 01 •H 4J c CO u c U T) o 4J X •H 1 C

CJ

H 3 < G ^ O -J

OS <

cu >w 3 tH

D QJ ex (0 01 00 01

U ta

u

O

H CO c e X 1 u O 01 H T-i 01 00 QJ 00 CJ 1-1 o H C H C c C0 >H 3 01 01 -H QJ 3 QJ CO 4-1 C -X3 ex

T3 4-1 c O QJ 3 X CO 01 CO

r-l CO »H CO o H fX,

O QJ P-i £ •H O H O Pi 4J H to ii 3 CJ QJ 3 O QJ E •H T) -H

pq ^ pa i-i o U OSj 4J e O

C •• *

>* 3 ?s 3|U 4J

C

C

C 3 O i-l to -fc J= CO 4J x: co -mI c QJ (0 J-'S

QJ * MM X 00 M x I o -H a u E *a h a <u -h a uls en QJ C QJ QJ .-) M o X V)H I tflH h Pu u = cj 2 P-. Pw 3

53
obtained for gypsum board subjected to other aging conditions. This

indicates that the dry heat aging procedures, used for coverings applied

on gypsum wallboard were probably too severe and that lower values obtained for coverings applied on this substrate may be due to a deterioration in the properties of the substrate rather than those of the

covering. Because of this deterioration in its impact properties, the

impact resistance values obtained for coverings applied on gypsum wallboard, after aging at 160°F and 4% rh should not be used to determine

whether a covering is suitable for use. Since this type of deterioration

was not observed for any of the other substrate-pre-test treatment

combinations used, the other test values measured should not be affected

by substrate deterioration.

The organic coatings, which did not contain an aggregate (urethane

varnish, both the one component and two component epoxy paints and both

the one component and two component nylon formulated paints) exhibited

relatively low impact resistance, for all pre-test treatment conditions,

when tested on the gypsum wallboard substrate. Considerably higher

values were obtained for these coverings applied on a plywood substrate.

This is due to the fact that gypsum wallboard indents much more readily

than plywood.

Impact resistance values in the 12 to 18 in-lbf range were found

for the high-build, textured spray coatings and the cementitious coatings,

applied on gypsum wallboard, after room temperature curing. Moist-heat

54
and water-soak aging caused decreases in the impact resistances of the

high-build coatings and caused the cementitious coatings to delaminate

from the gypsum substrate. Considerably higher impact resistance values

were measured for these coatings applied on plywood substrates; however,

moist aging conditions caused the cementitious material to delaminate

from this substrate as well.

All of the factory manufactured sheet and film-type covering materials showed good impact resistance, on both test substrates, when

they were tested after room temperature curing. However, in virtually

every case studied, the adhesive bonded coverings delaminated when specimens were exposed to moist aging conditions. This is most likely due to

hydration of the adhesive bond (the adhesives that were recommended for

use with these coverings by their respective manufacturers were aqueous

emulsions)

.

Veneer plaster was not tested with a plywood substrate since its

properties do not lend themselves to woodwork applications. This system

performed quite well on a gypsum wallboard substrate, after room

temperature curing; however, its bond was destroyed by moisture aging.

Typical failure modes are illustrated in figures 3 to 8 for urethane varnish, one component nylon formulated paint, orange peel

textured cementitious material, veneer plaster, vinyl counter top

material and the medium duty vinyl wall covering, respectively.

55
I c (= o 3

i-H CO >^ ft Ot 4-J c ^ C CO • 60 -H M

4-1

M COC c •a V cu i-l <u <D CO u u c 4-J n CO 3 o c cj o

ft -H 4-1 6 cd >. a a) o ft rC CO M o ft 3

CO 01 E u

<u

u •H CO c C 3 M o i-H 01 0) •H rC ft LM T3 TO 4-1 e o CD pK CD •H c 4-J

4-1 rH •H

CO ft • E

CD ft CD 00

O

4-1 cd 4-> c O

cd •H

u

4-1 4J

n 4-J

U c 4-1 COu

03 •Hw o ai ft cd ,a CJ 4-1 e ft 3 4-1 •H ID

CO 0) x:CO T3 01 TJ 4-1 <-W CJ 4-1 >-l X 4-1 CO CO x: H n H O M 1 o 3 Xi 3 c

ft P

r-t

O •H

a

U

H

M 3 o CO x: o

en Mh 13 4J

H

01M

(JO •H

J3 XI

CO 3 CD •H CO XI a 4-J 4-1 u T3 x

cd

Mx rH > CO oo 1 O 3 a

0) X>

O •H

a

H l-l CO X 00

X! (0 4-J •

4-1 IS 4-J 00

01 00 cd c u g c H 3 3 •H cfl 1-J en M CD 3

4-1 ft

u

u CJ o > CO CO oo H CD 4J o 4-J u

CO 13 o 3

CD CD >. cd 4-J

4-> 4-1 X) ft cd C E >-i 4-J •H 0) 1-1 CD CJ CO M ft

CO ft 3 CD E

ft r-t

X CD 1

CO •H

CO

4-1 4-J

a ft) c B

T3 o H o

OJ i 4J T3 OO

u

H a) 01

a o •H 4-1 •H

u

ft i-H cd 4-1 CD ft ft u CO 4J 3 Pu 4J o 4-1 CO CO en u CO u3

oo

56
iiil^ilMMtafe^ft Birtfttfi

XI 0J_ 01 1 C

•H H 1 H

rH 01 4-J H & CO T3 CJ 3

P. & CO CJ

cd T3 P

E C E CD

1-1 3 cd •M M

CD CO 3

4J p M CD 4-J CO >> c C CO

cd w. •H 4-1 U H M CU P. T3 o CU a

CD cd X E M 4J i-i •H cu <U c o CO 4J

0) H 4J a cd ^ 3 E

cu o.,p c c

> o

cd cu n M

<*- ^1 CU o c 3 4-J h

G H n Oj

4-1 •H CO 4J

CO u CO H 14- 01 C Fn P cd

4-1 O

ex 1 01 in

*J cd ,C .o

CJ 0/ 4-1 H

CO M 4J 1 P C CO 4-1 a e H J- C H

•H X> 4J

pi CO c c

"C C rC c cc

0) -C a ri

4-1 to 4-1 4-1 M cd cd CO O X c

P. X. t-l •H CO p 4-1 CO e 0/ 3 •H C CO n

CO & ,P H cd

01M

3

0£

*7>

r

T

•mi*

X c

01 •H

4-1 CO ~ 00 E c C o H o •H

0) 4-1 n

01 X) • CO a OJ 01 o w

•H 4-J CJ OJ

0) rH CO 4-1 0£ P. u cu IH c a 4-1 J= CO

CO CO CO 4-J M rO 4-1 H 3 J2 ,-P j CO CO 00 t-l •H 3 1 CM M X O c o 01 n u •H

4J CO J=

4-1 CO O 4J vO

CO E JJ .H

0) H 00

4-J M C 4J 00 3 CO •H cd c

4-1 o 3 ^ •H

CJ •H o cfl M

CO 4J p cO 0) 3

ex •H 3 l-l H CJ E 4-1 CO CJ cO •H G p 0)

01 >^ >-. 4J (-1 x E (30X1 CJ 3

0) 0) CO 4J

4-1 CJ -a cu P CO

1-1 cu M E u

o 13 4-1 3 •H 0) p 0) C H p.

P. H H •H 0) e

3 3 cd CO X. 0) CO 4-> a. fa 4-1 4-1 m

01M

3

oo

Fn

57
- ::„.

*.

i-\ -a

co >-i & coo M e

»H ,a

p o

>^rH lH o C r-H M u

•H CO Cd > £ <u

u

4-1 QJ ^ e 4-1

4-J 3 >^M-I 3 to ,£> CO •X) >^

P. "4-4 o e cjcq •H 3 >H V-J H T3 1 ^3 a Hi c CO a) 4-> -H M-l e c

•h <r 4-1 in n) n c o p. <U •H e

4-1 CO CO a) CO CJ m C oi M •

4->

O J-J o 60 3 y-i c U T) H c tH

CJ CD -H •H

n

cfl -H CO at 3

PtrH fX4

m o e o.

•H P 1 CD cu cd .c )j 13 <U 4J 3

CU 60 4-1 4-1 4J C CO ,C cd K>H H oo M O H 4-1 3 OJ Q. 0) to O P. P > ,i3 S-i 6 3 O 3 j=: 0) en o co 4-1 4->

(11 3

60

•H1 u

cd a) 6 XI 4J U CU "4-t P cO J3 cd O O 4J 4J ,Q >*-) t-H .C .O H ,-1 60i-H

CU cd 3 1 4-> U O C C H -H 3 6 .C O 3 4J O O CO VO

P. 60

i-H >,

C 4J

>•, 60 -H Cd C ^

•h-oa « > cu cd <u

4->

w

u

14-1

p o cd

O -H« >.4J

4-1 P. ^3

O

co cd

CU CO CU P.

4-1

u

B

p 3 tH •

4-1

O rH 60

O -H CU P

cd t3 cd ,P •H

P. <U fn 4J 60 e >H CO •H i-H 1 fi Pi iH 4-1 73 P. CU CO

0) cd 4J 00 CU

4-> Cd

C .P

M i-l l-l -H O CO 4J M 4J p, iH CO CU CO p. M .O > •H 3 CU 3 O O

C/> 4J CD CJ S

cuu3

60 H

P*.

58
5.4. Unsupported Impact Resistance

The results of impact tests performed on coverings, without the

provision of a supportive substrate, are summarized in table 5.

Several materials (urethane varnish, both of the epoxy paints, the

nylon formulated paints, the high build textured spray coatings, the

cementitious coatings, veneer plaster and the light duty vinyl wall

covering) had very low impact resistance (<1 in-lbf) when tested in

this manner. When low test values were obtained for coverings aged at

room temperature and humidity, further aging under accelerated conditions

was not carried out.

Two failure points were recorded for prefinished plywood paneling,

asbestos cement board and gypsum wallboard. The first value is the

maximum force resisted before there was complete penetration through

the product. Failure was determined by a lack of resistance to penetration through the covering. This value is believed to be indicative of

the force that would be required for a child to punch through the barrier

presented by these materials. The second failure point recorded was the

force required to produce cracks in the bottom surface of the board

product. These cracks were probably caused by deflection of the boards

during the impact process, but are not believed to be indicative of the

force required for a child to punch through the barrier covering.

Several materials (gypsum wallboard, ACB, acrylic-polyvinyl chloride

sheet, medium duty vinyl wall covering, prefinished plywood paneling, and

vinyl counter top material) withstood an impact force of 18 in-lbf

59
CU cu x. l-l Vi

CO 00 3 3

[fl ^ c ^ 3 4-1 4-> <L A. TO o

Oi to a -D l-l TO TO

a) cd t -u h c 00 x: l-i U H ^ (l cu u n fl Cxj 00 O 4-1 a a + fl E > o *H t- XI CO 00 00 00 CU QJ X) o m- : e -^ - U CU • 00 00 00 00 c G fl H

o (J XI o -h « 4-1 U 00 CO c c c •H 4-1 4-1 e CU TO c H •H ^ M M 4-1 4-1 » I £ C £ H 4_( l-l M >-i CO CU cO CO -H

cu CO c c CO -H C U CO TO TO CO QJ CU • CU l-i l-l en l-l £ -H 4- TO 4J CO u TO -H <U CU CU 4-1 X) x>

4J 3 SCO i- TO CU o 4-1 T3

fl iH cu m c ^H C Ss cu 4-1 £ >, CU >* u >. ^ >.

OJ ^ x cu x X3 e >. >. X • j!i XI X) X) XI Xi g

cO cu -u h JJ u c XI X X) TO E si < a cu < a -a cu -i-i T) >N TO 13 ^ T3 X) o 4-i X xi -c CU cu JD -a 13 CU fl H

CU <U QJ cu u 00 4-1 4- iH J3 -H C cu CU H -H iH -w rH .-H c M-l • H 4J «4-t O H > •H fl •H •H H

H XI G C 14-) C C H TO 0) CO TO TO XI H O - J3 Ot •4-t C >, 4-1 TO TO TO m TJ CU 4-1 £ »4-l M-4 m

3 1 -H -H H J3 CO UH fl CU C -U T 1 4J xl 00 l-i 00 TO CO 00 U 00 00 00

•i-i co a fl co cu fl 00 CU o 00 00 DO C C U fl c c

C -H i-l i- H fl U rH fl C H CO •H O -H •H

CO U CI i-l cr. l-J -H 3 O l-i l-i Cu U M-l VJ l-l M h cu a co cu cu CU U t-t o 4-1 <U OJ CU fl CU QJ CU

fl c ,co c > TO H CO TO TO CO > XI <U > "H > > > W HJ c cu c o cu TO -H O O O O -H O <U o O o < a. n <s; cu cc C_> 4J fo T) u O CJ CJ tw H U l-l CJ CJ CJ

X>

t-i

I G "5 ~ DO s - CO

CU o^

00 3 < l3 H j-» Pn

to rt O

fx,

cu 3- o

O0c

en c^

i~> \c CO •X1 rH

QJ o CO CO CO 1 > >^ o cO u

c

cu

X!

l-l e

m

cu cu CO l-l xjo

o

cu

en

<u S CU *-"

<u 00 ^r £ 5-. O ^ [xj. 00 <

oo ft! TO X>

CU OJ <-i E 31 M

>>

<&» £ U CO a a >•> 00 ou 1 CO H iH iH e H mO

iH XI

CO S

x: 00 u

c

00 o

<

i-3 <T 2

u5 o

CO

cuexe

0) CO H

CO CO i—

1

-d- i-H rH |

x> •-I CO CO '-| v CN CN V v v § +

Pi r-»

-au ^ 00

1 00

CUc

o5o o o X c c o H ^ en OJ o ex. 3

c3 -a >, EX o l-l l-l XI XI X) H f c TO CO w H cu CU i-i QJ 4-1 QJ 4-1 l-l CJ E- a TO C > l-i c > •M C 4J C 4J fl QJ S <C O > cu 00 c ^ o CU <U o TO -H TO -H TO -H Q E3 £ XI >, (U CU 1-4 c CJ 4J 00 CJ T~\ TO t-H TO tH TO *H S:3

cu r-l SI I- CJ cu en < ^ 3 Pu 3 a. 3 CL, u

r. C.) > c .-) 4-1 L B £ CU

0-, P CU £ li o 3 •H 4J -H 00 rH 3 U 4-1 U 4-1 CO 1 QJ M J3 cu Cu O H TO 3 0-, C rt p O fl o c O C CU o a -o TO c £ CJ CO S O 3 Pn OJ u- cu tn QJ iH E •H -H e fc TO o l-i T3 E C fl fl Xi 3 H M 3 x: CJ 4-1 r-l l-l CU C *-< c o fl o C O H

CO >i o CO <u >^ cu >^ x: CU o >* -H O Cu o a. o a. x

x> a, U i—( a. 4-> cu C 4-J C 00 C CO fl *o h e h 6 H B QJ

CO >» a jc >> 3 C TO t-\ -H cu ---. •H 0) >> o >s o >. O H -; CJ < u CJ -3 ZD O Pm r- r^ > J > ^ > s Z O Z CJ ^ n li.

60
QJ 0) 01 QJ 0) M M 1-1 M 1-4 3 3 3 3 p

4-) 4-1 4-1 4-1 u u

CO CO

a

co CO MH

u

UU

nU o 4-4 <H t: QJ QJ 01 01 OJ 00 c i~l iH c E 4-1 VJ

CO 0> •H 7-1 (0 -u U V4 H M l-i C 3 X> r£3 ,Q Xi .a

QJ iH e •H >. ^ >» >> >% ^ ^ J3 -O J3 .O j^ J2 o 4-

cj

CL T) -a

01 0) 0) -aOJ T3 c .-H tH iH rH •H •H *U CO CO CO (0 CO 3 4-4 4-4 *4-« M

01 GO 00 00 oo 00 O0.JD c c c s c c C -H H H

1-4 1-1u t-( QJ QJ a) 0) OJ 0) -o > > > > > > o O o o o o o o

CJuu CJ o cj 3

X.u

£>

"7

oo s c c

-H «a w 00 < IX, 01

4-1 o 3 cC •^

0> X TJ

CO C£ Ph

to to oc >. c o tO •H -o

01>o

cj c

0) tu MC £

4-1 U-Jo> (LI pq H

-oo 4-1 o CO

CD

to S-. ,e 1 4-1 QJ 00 H J-l C S tu 00 ^-3 0/ <

P-. o O

p- OJ \C X ""

H ,_,

H r-i .-) o >. 02, v V v v v

r^j" a. to CN E >, e

T3 CO

p -d* eX

tf s

-C

COc

•rt o < m

0)

OJ i-3 4-1 ^ to 3 &4 QJ 4J en r> 4-1

>-< r~- i—l

iHHH ,_, OJ OJ

a <2J

V

V

V

v

N-' £> £

CO en

O

H

nT

C e T) -a oo + 3

rt oa

TJ

OJc

-H 1 QJ 1 § e 00 u 00 cO -u -a 3 ^ C 2 c

QJ QJ OJ -HX •H OJ

u c iJ TJ o 4J

X 4-> i T3

G 3 -H 3 01 PL CO 0) cO 00

H

W 4-1 U- -u 2 W

OHO c p:

U

H

X 1 X 1 U CJ QJ •H 0) £> < QJ 00 Ol oo 4-1 U <-i S Q » H 3 H 3 e CO T-i to 3 CO H O -J H a) 3 OJ 3 -U p: T3 O

od < T3 4J T) 4J c O QJO

X cO CO QJ &4 > i-i CO iH CO o •H p* H OJ PM ^ a. w H O •H O a. 4-1 H to en 3 CJ Q 3 CJ 01 B H 01 13 -H

CQ 1- CQ J- 4J OC 4-> €

O

C • ii ^ 3 >> 3 CJ 4-1 c c P 3 O *H

x: co 4J JC CO 4- c QJ CO OJ -H 3 »4-( 0) 13

ao s-i

x 00 )-i

X

O -H

a

u 6 -o

H ft CJ -H PL 01 3 to toC 0) tu •H l-i

O

EC

W

H

M

W E-iH P4

V = c_> S Ph Ph 3

61
without complete penetration (two of these materials, plywood paneling

and acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet were adversely affected by moisture)

.

They are probably suitable, from the standpoint of impact resistance,

for use as barriers in areas where adequate support is not provided.

The gypsum- impregnated jute fabric, which withstood about 12 in-lbf, is

probably acceptable for bridging small voids.

Typical failure modes are shown for several of the covering materials

that failed at less than 1 in-lbf (one component nylon formulated paint,

two component nylon formulated paint, medium texture cementitious

material and light duty vinyl wall covering) in figures 9 to 12, respectively. Failures that occurred for several of the better performing

materials (gypsum impregnated jute fabric, vinyl counter top material,

medium duty vinyl wall covering, and acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet)

are illustrated in figures 13 to 16 respectively.

5.5. Abrasion Resistance

Test results for abrasion resistance are tabulated in table 6.

Many of the covering systems evaluated were severely affected by moist

heat aging to the point where they could not be tested.

Abrasion weight-loss values below 60 mg (the maximum value considered

acceptable) were measured for acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet, urethane

varnish, both one and two component epoxy paints, vinyl counter top

material, medium duty vinyl wall covering, prefinished plywood, the two

component nylon formulated paints and the medium texture cementitious

coating.

62
T3 >

CM CM CM

H vD 1 *

00 *o

4-1 0) CO Q

-d-

© 1-1 •oH 1 1 CM iH

j_i 01 OO3 cO 3

oo < En O «

CO r-»

O CO Z 01 vD ^o X3 JD ^O iI 1 * SO \o

CO

--(

H

1-. 0) CO

cO 3

r-.

CO oo

co E o

<r * CO v£> CN * * *

vO

CO

CO en • 00 3 <:

CP> CT* 1 I * -u > 1 u

4J 01 -3"

H Cl

6< 3

•H

m^

60 "3 <

E"4

O

<4-l

co

0)

O

O

MH ^ m en \D ' 1 ' * >£) \£i

HO

31

oo >> > c

ai s CO

CO 00

co

B o

CO CTv E e bft

--H CO

—1

CM * * * * O iA

CO

m

u 4J >

00 0) 3 <

^J £

s: CO c

OJ <r

m ^H o r-. o in

m p^

TD > 1 0)M

Cu

4-J 0) -d" CO ON

m CN en

to

C/1 -C CO

Q o

-J oo 3

on H

oo

-9

tu

O . 2 JZ O O CO ^D ^r> m ^D o

COa)MQ

chj

CO 2 01 H

CO

ID CO 00 3 - w E o

•£> *£>

H o CM CM * a> r^ o ,, CO ^O i—i

kD <T c . 00 0) u > s «*

QJ

CO s£> -dO ON CM tn CT> o

T3 > O o r^ -d- CO o 0) 01 u • OJ 3 O 4-» X. u C 3

a) -a 6 ^

i-i 3 fc. CO -U

cO

O CO \D ^o U~l ^o & ^O | O v£>

m

M ^

r-- Z 01

H £i

0)

H

CU ta E CO CJ

01 0J .£ H

<0 1 E -o QJ -U • o CO CO l-< QJ XI o + co E P-. rH QJ C6 o

en CM _< ,_, <T r^. * r-» CO

~4"

<—l E

OC -H

C

CO

m CT^ Cu

O

00 •H M-i

4-J > i-i 1-J t-J 3 -=c 3 CO QJ o a

T3 0)

OJ 00 JD 1 0) o

4->

C

CO "H 4J

XJ

a

00C

•H

<§ 3H

C >-i o H 01 C

01 o a, E >

4-> o u l-l T3 T3

QJ 4-t CO

O T3 o C CO w H 01 QJ QJ -U

4J

C

i-( CJ i-4

H

W c > y> c > QJ 3

CJ

H > 0) oo c 1-. o 0) cu

O CO -H Cfl «H .H a] 3 C« i«o c

U. 0)

a in o

t=> < >% 01 01 1-1 c 0) o u 00

O > u

a X)

h x: 1-1 CJ CO 0) 4-) CO < >s 3 P- 00 -H

O .-J

O CO D. -H > c c tH >s fO (H 4JC co 4-i a: < P-I E ^ o 3 r-H 00 H 3 •H CO «

Cu > 1 01

M J3 01 &.

O -! CO

D Pu

C (0

Q 3 o c u ai cu

w

U T3 c E u n) 3 a U- 0)c.. 01 CJ 4J -H -H E [^ o H CO > X D CJ j-j OJ c i-l 3 c o c o ai o w

>^

O (0 QJ >% 01 >> j: QJ

O ?N -H

O Cu o a.

4-1

O

P- J~> QJ -H

C J-* c ooC CQ

C T) o * U J^ >% 3 u a to •>-• to •H -H OJ --». -H 0) >. o ^ O

<:uO »-)

n

O P- > S > -J > s > 2 z u

63
a s c -o

0* £

00

u

X

a. oi bioh •H p. 3 J « H

f. 3

a) 01 u a> a) « u iH

01

H XI

W •H

u.w

X

(A <u -t 60 u f-H C u M-l -H

CI) 3 M XI s a fe 4-1 4J

a) •n bd CI) P*N a S a u U •H »w 3 to o & -n

ai: 01

0) -n

q

01 c a» •H H

0)

U t»C -U 5 3

aj

M

(1) •H x: u.

01 1 U o U -H M « <-i & U. o -o -o u

64
<uu3

0) o c c o / C 3ou3U

COu

01p.B

O 01 o e

M-4

O o ou

0) O) 4J 4-1 M—I

4-1 CO o

CO 4-1 ex C 6 "d •H cfl ex

O) T3

4-1 01

l-l 4J o cd ex i-i CX 3 3 6

to

u c o

tD M-l

u «

CO TJ

0) >^

4-1 ^i-H T3 cfl c^cO

CO 00 4-1 c c

•H -H X. COCX

4-1 01 01

i-4H 4J XW tHX

P^ 01 X> >H

,£> 4-1 H O 1C H

•H COO cao

p.6oo

01co

T3em

>>Xo

ex • 01 /-* 13

4-1 0) C w

01 CO C .-I O 3

ex 6 6 H o o

CJ 4-1

01M3

00

•H

65
is o ; v,.

i» » * . * I A *

>•

J .1 | - e ! • ' Kt ' L| ,' f

1,5

rH 4=

OC3o

r-( 4-> ^

!>i

O X.

C .C 4J •H '>-' > 0£i M C

P*>

C -H

4J ^ri

h 3 n ca T3 3 0)

(J 4-1 ,C 0) OO M

•H 3

>H 4-1 cd O OIc

0) 01

CD 4-1

4-1 e

4-1

O

a o

cd

u

p.E H

•H CD

4-1

0) cd

4-1 u oc O (J a. «H

P,M . 3 aj co > c o P o V COu

4-1 01

cd £•H

CU 4-1 3 4J H C H CD

cd e

it CDa i uo & c

0) -H H 0) > l-i

•H

•u l s * ^ft J*1 %f >

i»

** £

cd -h

0) J3 4J

VJ 4-1

C 3 0)

01 4J u cd oo E 3 oi 3 ^4 •H O I i | W

4-1 01

U £1 # ' - oi e Cd 4-1 • r v 4-1 01 U O /-n , 1 .' 4-1 U ^2 V-l

L "%

B

s-^ 0) 3 e >. 4J •H O ^3 CO CO fe V

TJ

O

01 !-J oo cd<4-t

C

H 6 ^3 -H P. B*" u iH 4-1 K J- 1

IH 01 i cd

u

O 4-1

C

O Oi

<4-l •HO 0)

4-1 Cd

CO

C

iH 01 01

0) iH

4-1 Cd 4-1 P IS* •H 4-> 4J T3 > 1

4J

M cd -H c U 0) 1-4 cd H* * * % ' Cd 4-1 0) £

o- cdU CO e e 3W H

•H

H

O IJ

CO •H -H

V *- * •O 3 Cd iH 1-1 0> O

4-> -H

Ph cd a) O 4J

H 4J O -H 1 -H cd D. S

Jk * *

P. 4J 00 !^

o- c 3 4-1 CO 1 3 01 •H 3

co E l-l CO o f fi 01 3 cd -H 1 1 1 * C3 O U ^ 4-1 \ 1 * ' H

rH \ 0) *. Ik %* 1-4 3

66
#

«tf PO

CO 00

UC

CU CU -H

4-1 Si

U 3 3 -H O -H O CO PiI

CD>Oo

<U

•H 00 > C Xi

•H 00

4-t 00 3 O CO Ou

4-> 4->

x

03 CO 4J

CU 01

4-> x: ocC

4J ^Tl o u u

CO T3 CO • P dJ ^—~ g M 4-i 00 H CU p

4J S^iH

T3 14-1 43X

0) CO

O

Si .H

X

O «H

P. -H I P U C 3 (D -H

CO 4-> C CO vD # #

CD

Si3

00

•J' I

•JU. ^Tv- J'<^>^

%fc$>*?KX.

—«V% ,

^*H'**t'i'V V "T i ^

'"^KS

<*"*•

XI

CD

4-1 COC 00

00 c

(1) -H

Si Si

00 OJP. mi g O CU

CO

g

0)O

4-1

O

Si

4-1 O Si

CO Q) P. 4J g MH

•H CO 13 O

CD tH

4J Si

Si X> O CO P m P3 <U

10 4-J C 3

01M3

00

•H

5>> Xim co fi Si rH CU I X C -H •H MH -* -U rH C

CU +J s

cfl CUo

CD Si

SiO 3 141

<-i

C

•H vH

CO CU fc Si I X!

oo

*-n 3 S O

CUM

•H

X > 4-» S oo o c

4-1 -H

4-1 Si O CO X CU

67
1 Mc H OOrl

>>

C (-1

C -H CO •H 00 QJ £* 4-1 rH 4J T3 O CO c

P. OJ CO 1 J= U CO

•H >, c

>H >-l •H ^T5 * S-i CJ O -U 4-1 nj a; a) 4J n

M-l M—1

4J

O cfl a)

4-J rH >-. CO CO ,G

QJ -H

4->

U IH

QJ ^ !-J 4J i-l u co 1 co E c a H e *j •H 0) -*

Q) VD

"O X!

CU CO 4-J u CO U QJ O TD OJ a -h M & »-l 3 3 O H 3 X tO . i^.... %.

0)3

6C

>> 00 1 a s QJ H •H u > M3 X

S*. o 00

4J 3 3 QJ o

*un (-1 3 x e 4J 4J 3 CO •H r( oo 3 QJ c

QJ ft •H e s H

OJ CO

M-l 4-1 QJ o e

4-1

4-1 o r". CO o X

QJ

u

4-i MH u XI • 4J OJ H a a 4-1 1 •H

CO 14-1 c h a CO •H x 6 CO •H oo<r M-l 3. CM

-a •H 4-1 QJ U 4J 3

4-> QJ CtJ QJ 14 > 6 O O a) QJ P. o n O

P. 3 H 3 rH rH o

CO .H •H 4-1 C CO CO 3 3 S fe •H

0)

68
The one component nylon formulated paint yielded test values

slightly above 60 mg and the veneer plaster abraded away at such a fast

rate that the abrasive wheels were continually plugged. Although consistent test results could not be obtained, the abrasion resistance of

unpainted veneer plaster is obviously unacceptable. The deep wear

pattern obtained for this material is shown in figure 17. Wear rates

measured for the orange peel texture cementitious coating and the fine

and medium texture high build spray coatings, both of which contained a

soft, porous, vermiculite-type filler, were unacceptably high; the wear

pattern observed for the medium texture spray coating is shown in

figure 18. The hard aggregate filler used in the medium texture cementitious coating appeared to improve the abrasion resistance of the mixture

considerably. The values obtained for the gypsum impregnated jute

fabric were undesirably high, but the texture and the nature of this

material may make this type of testing procedure invalid. The same

comment is also true for the textured light duty vinyl wall covering

that was tested. The wear pattern observed for the light duty vinyl

wall covering is shown in figure 19.

5.6. Scratch Resistance

The results of scratch width measurements are given in table 7.

The texture of the gypsum impregnated jute fabric precluded scratch

width measurements on this material; however, some minor fiber tearing

was observed when the test was conducted. With the exception of the

prefinished plywood paneling and the unpainted veneer plaster, the

69
U

C PCO C OJ C -O O -H

a.x

a Hi >> O iH

0) 01 .c -a <u

OJ

4-1

C

id aj

O (0 LI

01 0) a) .o

0)

x 3 s tn

cO

01 PC o B T)

0) Ja .a M m

*4H 0) -o -J-l 0) T, e b

OJ § o cO CO

4-1

Ca

60

U

H >>

0) S bo

P. cfl H cd <u

01 ,£ •a pC

4J JJ 01 •H o 60 & 3 c C

70
•H o O 01 CQ VP>» =

J2

bO

MX

P. ci.

w en

H

a i3

d) CD r-t

U

CU P-i

71
Figure 17. Abrasion wear pattern

observed for veneer

plaster after testing.

Figure 18. Abrasion wear pattern

observed for the medium

texture high build spray

coating after testing.

V

- "

;i. . ..

V;

1 V; » ' ' '.'-'."i V

'

*\ t \ t 1>4 '*•. '.'

-, -. r

"'- '. .-..?> ' •'•'! £*

:

> ' "''. -\v.' \* isitis '('

,.

' j| ; > . v.

•.'- V>*.

>•••'{.'

• - , <i< '.; i

Figure 19. Abrasion wear pattern

observed for the light

duty vinyl wall covering

after testing.

72
CD

CO

cu X. • 4-1 -nu U CO O -o m C

CO

n -t-j a) to >n C

CD

O

CO CO X "H

CO CD •H .c 4-1 u

4-1 t-l CO O n o

CJ iH w in

QJu3 X < /#>

^WSB^^

CD

cuc

cu>uo

M-l T3

CU>u

<u

CO -QOcw

0)

COa

.c

CJ

4-1 CO

CJ o

CN

QJU3

73
other coverings tested appeared to have acceptable scratch resistance

(Note: several coverings delaminated as a result of moisture aging and

could not be tested for this reason). The type of deep, wide, scratch

obtained for veneer plaster is shown in figure 20; this can be compared

with the scratch pattern obtained for the floor tile standard, which is

shown in figure 21.

5.7. Washability

The washability properties of the coverings being evaluated are

summarized in table 8.

The acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet material was easy to clean

with a sponge and very little damage to the surface was observed during

the cleaning process with this type of applicator; cleaning with a brush

appeared somewhat less desirable. Similar behaviour was also observed for

the medium duty vinyl wall covering and several of the smooth textured

paints (the two component nylon formulated paints and the two component

epoxy paint). The appearance of a marginal latex paint surface, after

testing, is shown in figure 22. The excellent washing properties of

the medium duty vinyl wall covering, which has a fluorinated hydrocarbon

surface film designed to promote ease of cleaning, are illustrated in

figure 23.

The gypsum impregnated jute fabric, light duty vinyl wall covering,

veneer plaster and both the fine and medium texture high build spray

coatings and cementitious coatings were very difficult to clean.

Several of the textured surfaces can be cleaned most readily with a brush;

74
u s^s sD CT o> 00 o CO o o

-£) 00 oc o> 3~i CT 00 CO

H

g

>-i

u-i CO

m

•H 61

cO -r-i fa «

fa co m C

CQ .-J ^

on

CT. 3 « « *j I tl s

4J s

<r o

rH J3

— 1 l 0^

J ^H v£5

m CNl

toK o X o O

O o o u < * J * oo Oo * o * O o o o o r>s -d" o <£> en 1 to CO 00 CT CT CO CO CT w

z.H

O

a. in -a- -T ,_! <fr to o o < > c O

fa o rH

fa )-i c fa O <u < Oo PI <r r-*. o m In o •<r n »H

CJ o * * * o o * T •K

O o1 o o b -X ^ c O 5*5 00 CT 00 CO CT CO o

CT 00 ON Os r- 00 CT CT

TJ 61

<U <

CO ^ o d Q) rn

03 -J <r

V 3 I d 4-J fa O CO U "H oo <f X PT" trr o o o r-t < o o * * * o ^ o * O1 o o o uO

fa 1 £ ^ fa _c co to o to > d -h E o o CO CO H o Os o o <f

rH <r

hH to at

o>

h

h

a o o o o o o ^ o CO* o o sr

h E ^

-5

a§ o

rl o

•H [i, *U

CO CO

O CQ > d -H E 00 ro

CO

St oen \£> o CO

OSO

a.< Coo o (0 10

M

H l-i CO QJ

cu

H -H

a oo

CO o oo ooCOo

00o O CO o oo <t

i-* as 4-» E w

cO 3

~T * > 00 u 60 o

a. I c '^

CO to

O tO > C -H E <

fa

X s 3 as o o v ra id ^ o o ^ o o p-» ^ n ^ m o ^o

r-. *j a)

H -h

a

4-1 E —' o 5 o o o o 5 o CO o o <r " 3

<D "u

60 , ^D . as

_ o m 00 CO •am o r*. o »am a^

m o CO

O c O 3 o %o ON O^ ON a: ON o CT X o fa <f 2

CO

H

fa o J3 o

fa "S ^ (N eg CTi CM *D

m o in as inH

m <r o o o CO

m o mm 3 >H 3 ON -3" m \D sr CTS o CO CO 00 CO o CT p-. d

01 o m .C -H E 01 o

•£ c? J, ^ _ u-i

Q , , c» ^D o 00

H srM CO «o o rn o in

m o o en o >-. H -H c 1 CO as o> 7 "H TJ CO 0"i o> r^ 3s ON CT GH

J. £

•H o fa

JJ XI «H

M

H on CU CO

IH 13C c 4J -H

03 o fa

d

H 3CO< o

60c oo

NO

fa 3 * * s

\D

o> vO i-i 3 as CO CT. " X

v£> CT

sj- CO o j Si

X

Oo 0\ o

r-4

•h

d E -H 3 d CU o

6f o T3 CO < CO -4 -o d

>»

d to

d

-—

do

^P 00 .„ CO ^ CNl cy. __,

H

m r^. c O o <t

m o CM o rs, CO cO < (0

x

O 00 CO CO CT o o CO 00 ON CO o ON vO

u XI

a. 1—1

<U 0) CUH >1 1-4 o c

CO

CO

C £ cu

rH 0) ^i 4U U CO 3 01

rH

O

d »H O o

fa c .d »-i cy fa 1o o CO in , vD CO ^o m Q vO CN -O •4* o X. CM - m m o \£> m

4-J IH

•H U-i 00 00'—'

H

H

O

O 3

33

CO CO 00 ° ° H

00 o 5 pX

OJ CU a *o

dH >.

0) c > O o Oo d3 M H O c d O CO

9]

Efl

rH o

DOOo

a)

m CU CO o: fa oo

CU aS

r-l

CU <s oCU o

CU as -

CU

Q

c^

0}J fa

cu

(0o

C3

iH

as

rH

U-l

as

a) co IH CO IH OJ h d

CU JZ X co 4J -Hd

4U 01

CO 4J

QJ N->

N-^

QJ P 4U j= d p"h 3

4-J

1-.

H

X 60

O )-< 0) CO J= o3

0) ?

T3

g1 60c

60d

do H >s

a

i) ai

-*

d

D *H

-i fa X 4 D 00 H C

•HU

H « H O 3 U 0) a m

S>n 3 d a -u oOM X H Q. OJ C co H

OJ

U

d i d

(H CU CU *ih CJ (0

(0 o H fa a H p < P 3 O -1 fa <

a. > cH 4J > CD >n 0) to

fa1 o

>>U jC < u

d

60

CUH

u

D. -H E ^ M jO E fa 3

CO 0) a. 4-i >. 3

COd

CO o

a. wcoaEo

cs

d « O fa

faoHd3O <-4 U (0

r-4 l-i >, at d u

•H CO > S

1-. >oa

-I >>

CO 3 ^ Q ^ x: c M > Ij

UC

U 00

tf) <

r-H &0

fa

C

-H

QJ

C

QJO

C P3

CU --. > 3 >ouH 3

CO

QS

rH 3 d -o > £

T3

a> +j M C

CO -H rH CO 3 fa o d

fa ajc d o o a, H E

>YO

T3

4J

d

CO tH iH CO 3 fa o d

fa CUd c o o a. »h e > o

S3

U

CU 4-» 1-1 *j d <u

cOH E

rH cO -H 3 fa V-i E fa o d cu fa CU M d J3 C O H O P_ X

th E at >N C rH

2;

u fa

60 4J

co

d ai

CO CO fa g u s OHO iH O rH

-H rH

O

0) o

.. ><

U fr^ S

'i ii ii £ < m a

OHO c o c

IH (0 "O H H C O 3 3 CU H rH U IH

4J (0

U

01

H

H * * *

CO 3 3 00d

00 -H d h

•H 0)

4-» >

CO

O

O

QJ

E-"

75
CTi CT\ -f r^ <J\

C

u

00 r*> CT> en 00

O < 4-i DO

CO

C to c hJ

t! t; cc in ,£> u 4J oi 4-1 to <

p:

-Ju

cj < o o o -K

O o o o K O ^ o M

CJ ^ o CO

CO oCTi CO

CT.

w

ex

CD DC B*« S£ > c -3" H ON * -J 4J *j O < U DO

CO <C „ ec <3

w

O %

PS CO to OO s o <

^o sr \J3

O

M o o K . cj o o o * o e A

oo

CXI 00 r- o

-O DO

CO < &* c co * *-j 4j o V u CQ <

-oa o C 4J o m

CJ -HO

tooo o o 3 •K

m S 1-1 < o1 o o * oi o

ex > to o to CO

O )-l

C -H £ o o O M ill U M

w uD fr-S co

mm aj o vfi cj r-i <r jj H i-t a z 5 E ^ a ^ co o w -X

ex

cO 1 C ^-n •H to i-i > to O « CTi

m o

pio c o <n;

p CO (0 £ o ^

10

to \o

m com to qj o \D >

CJDO HO> 4J

H *H Oh

ctj E ^ H

a!CH

M

H DO

O

g < - X

ex

c0 1 C x-v to M > to O to C -H E

cr* -* <r o O

m S<ma ton o «*

r-- o 0)

H (0 tl CO CO

aj

h -h ex

CO E w 3

0J j:

DCC 00 I: o m x>

O

r

H

cd

1-1

C oaCTi tn o a-. CT.

m f CTi '.? * co

-H

-dC

4J

CD

QJ to

0J X, •H

O PS to

m CO vD o \D X) vO 3 CT\ r** a\ CO 0> CTi r»- rH K M

CO •H

QJ c C .C bC •H o c C <r

>H o o o r— J3

O o H ex r^. CO CT* CTi >>

O ^~v

J c

CT. c

to

H co p»> C -H o a c o ^ cO O 3

cj to QJ CC .G CN

to h-I j3

rH < 4J CO DO c o r-t en O v£> o CO '-' U S -H

ML 3

>-. C?\ •XI CTi CT* ^o CTi r- y- vO -H

V4 qj ajMOh DO ec CU O 4J o < u C cO cj

CO QJ (U Em u

u

QJ DO

O

4) in ^ CM

X c e <T\ in CI \C> CT. o o CTi 00 4-» "4-1 u o oa

en ? m CO CT. CT\

m en o J >d- *H i-l >,

C

J=Q ^H 3 c c S CM QJ ^ X o

QJ 4-t

.. s .c

qj -a to co

CJ

C CU QJ to Cl< CM X. 4J 3 <r -a- o o QJ (0 ^ tn vO CTi • t o CTi M CO -H " EC r-{ at to c qj vm QJ -H 4-1 me m-i tH •H 4J X Q -C QJ S

DO

C

u tn X -H O -H to iH Q) hJ rl X (0 o o LH O -a i 4J s S C to c M QJ QJ J-i /-^ 00

a) QJ CO o PS o CC U PS u c PS

DO 4J CU

C

CO

C CO 14-1

U -H

CO CO PS CM qj x: c co co C CJ CO 3 4-> > E 00 3 00 3 CO U U o O D >, ^ t! 1 C O l-c O CO CJ tU Ti X •H X DO H O t-H 4J M U t3 4J V c iH r-t o tn m co 3 0) ex (0 H H CO 0) CO O CO CO rC o W £ [x] O O M ^ U »\° H M H

H

W

X 1 O - QJ

U 3 O H CD DO U C T3 II II II II II 3 < H S c (0 QJ CO QJ CO X D E> QJ 3 QJ to J= 3 Q) < CQ CJ O -J •a w C o to to O H •• *

OS < T) 'H •H C0 -K 4-1 to > H O a 4-> QJ o c 4-> E QJ -K *: 4J W 3 cj aj E O -H C 3

PQ L-. o S LW

>•> QJ

O

>•> 3 U 4-1

C CO S T3 z x to 4J C 0) U «H 1-1 QJ QJ DO 1-. x O *H E C to fa O E •h a, oj ^nTM QJ I

nc en f i-i.,

76
mmmm 1 CO 4-1 CO •H x x S

CO 4J

CO -H 4-1 S & X

60 ^ 4-J •H

01 4-J )-l 4-1 Q)

M-l .H QJ

CO

x 01 4-> oox: a p c

•H o

l-i c

Q)

O c > QJ O c 6 U 01 •H E O

i-H -H QJ -H U a

CO 0) co 5 O.

C/S

A

T-i

M • ^ 1 O H C 4-> O

•H 00 CO 4-1 > C O CO •H •H O

^. 4-1 t-l -H

4-1 CO a. in 3 0) ex p. T3 4-1 co a

CO e >- QJ 3 4-1 oo x •H tH C CO XI iH 3

0) -H

a

u S Xi CO x dCM

QJ

t-l 3

60

01 Vj u o

CO 4-1 U-l CO U CJ 3 •H

CO

H

P.

4-1

a c CO •H

CO

X

P. en3 X S-J 0) m

4-J CO I i-H on rH G

CO •H c 4-1 •H 01 00 OJ M 4J

COs >s

4-1 CO •HH

M-l •H o X

(0

QJ

X

O Ifl c CO

cfl Ls ^

CO

M

QJ CD P, 4-1 D- M-l < CO

CN

CM

a)m

fl00

in

77
43 43

13 &

>J

0) JJ 4-1 4J Uh 43

<*-< <D 60

CO rH •H M CD C 4= CU •H 4-1 43 u 4-1 CO e O o c o p o

>> QJ c

CO E cu n •H 6

ftU •H

CO 0)

O

ft CU X) M ft rH to •H 1 3 • r. 4^ t>0 t-l • c u

43 •H 4JO

oo JJ CO 4-1 H CO CI CO 4= 01 •H O

4-1 -I -H

<u ft iH M s*. P. ft 3 4-> CO ft

4-> •H cfl X H <u

CU 60 43

4J 4^ (3 CO

CO

O P

Q) 4= ft J-l C CO CO 43

•H CO

P-* S cfl cd

<U

Vi3M

CO (3 43

CN

CU3

60

78
9HK"

£i *

fi<T*\

>>U

•HH

•H^

to X

Cfl mSU

QJ

4-1 • 4-4 S-i CO O

4-J

C co

01 o E •H H i—i U &

QJ ft

ft cfl w

Xi

4-1 CO m D

QJ S-4 4-J J3

V4 co

QJ

4-1 * CO 4-J re •H

i-H &

ft 60

Vj

C

QJH

QJ 4-1 1= CO QJ 01 > 4-1

QJ

(-4 3

60

•Hn

QJ

4-1 4-4 4-1

cfl >4-l CI) aj x: 60 i-l 4-1 aH QJ c

4J

C o

TO 4-J O c V (3 CI) O B

s»> •H

re c o M QJ 01

U

ft ft

O

01

H ca 4-> O CO

*rt QJ •. o H ft l-i H

•HW o H 3 4-1 ft ^i | a) ft O CO ,a 60 •H

C4J

a

H .C

•H •H ft ca * 4-1 ft 3

co CO

m

QJ QJ rQ

l-i 4-1 QJ D 60 CO

4-1 S>.

C

X 4-1 o 4=

QJ •H ft 4-1 4-1 H en •H •H & y ,0 cO p re 4-1 •H JS ,C ,C

XI CO 4-1 60

QJ 01 •H •H s 3 s n

0)M3

60 H

79
this is shown, for gypsum impregnated jute fabric and the fine and

medium texture high build spray coatings in figures 24 to 26, respectively,

The difficulty in cleaning the porous veneer plaster surface is illustrated in figure 27 ( this property would be improved considerably if

the surface was coated with a good quality paint)

.

Urethane varnish specimens show good cleanability with a sponge

after curing at room temperature; however, this property deteriorated

somewhat as a result of temperature and moisture aging. The one component epoxy paint lost a considerable amount of gloss during the cleaning

process, indicating surface abrasion; however, the coating was relatively easy to clean. Excellent washability properties were found for

the vinyl counter top material and the prefinished plywood paneling

was easy to clean, but its surface lost a considerable amount of gloss

during the cleaning process.

5.8. Water Vapor Permeance

The values for water vapor transmission given in table 8 can be

grouped into three categories. The acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet

material, the one component epoxy paint, and the vinyl counter top materials had values of less than 0.09 perms; the two component nylon

formulated paint with a flexible primer was on the borderline. Both

the light and medium duty vinyl wall coverings two component epoxy paint,

two component nylon formulated paint and urethane varnish had values between 0.09 and 1.5 perms, and the remainder of the coverings had values

above 1.5 perms; veneer plaster and gypsum impregnated jute fabric had

values considerably above 1.5 perms (about 40 perms).

80
5.9. Colorfastness*

Test results that were used to evaluate the color stability of the

covering systems considered in this investigation are given in table 8.

5.9.1. Condensed Moisture Aging

Materials that showed minimal changes as a result of this test included acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet, gypsum impregnated jute fabric,

both the one and two component epoxy paints, the vinyl counter top

material, the medium texture high build spray coating, and veneer plaster,

White coverings that yellowed excessively included the one and two

component nylon formulated paints, the fine texture high build spray

coating, and both the orange peel and medium texture cementitious

coatings. The clear urethane varnish darkened considerably during the

aging process, and other coverings that showed considerable changes

included both the light and medium duty vinyl wall coverings, and prefinished plywood paneling.

5.9.2. Water Vapor Aging

Materials that showed minimal changes when exposed to this test included the acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet, the vinyl counter top

material, both the light and medium duty vinyl wall coverings, veneer

plaster, and the two component epoxy paint.

* The values given in this section were measured on specimens that were

subjected to the aging conditions that are an inherent part of the

colorfastness test method. Changes in color that were observed when

specimens used for other tests were subjected to various pre-test

treatments are recorded under observations in section 6 of this

publication.

81
White coverings that yellowed excessively included one component

epoxy paint, the one and two component nylon formulated paints, the fine

and medium texture high build spray coatings and the orange peel and

medium texture cementitious coatings. The gypsum impregnated jute

fabric darkened considerably, as did the clear urethane varnish, and

the prefinished plywood paneling surface finish was adversely

affected.

5.9.3. Ultraviolet Radiation Aging

Materials that showed minimal changes as a result of exposure to

UV radiation included both the one and two component epoxy paints,

the vinyl counter top material, the light duty vinyl wall covering,

veneer plaster, the one and two component nylon formulated paints,

the fine and medium texture high build spray coatings and the orange

peel and medium texture cementitious coatings,

Prefinished plywood paneling, urethane varnish, acrylic-polyvinyl

chloride sheet, gypsum impregnated jute fabric and the medium duty

vinyl wall covering were adversely affected.

82
6. Summary of Properties and Recommendations

The product ratings and recommendations given in this section

are based on the evaluation criteria given in section 3. When these

criteria are in conflict with applicable local code requirements the

criteria should be superseded by the local regulations.

The recommendations for use given below do not constitute

complete approval of the systems evaluated. A further field evaluation

program under actual use conditions is necessary before such

approval is given. The testing and evaluation program documented in

this report was designed to screen out systems that appeared to

offer promise as solutions to the problem caused by lead bearing paints

in housing.

Although the systems that are discussed in this publication were

evaluated in terms of their suitability for use in interior applications, some also lend themselves to exterior use.

6.1. Paint Removal Systems

Paint removers were evaluated in terms of the hazards that are

created when they are used. Both the toxicity and the flammability of

volatile solvents were considered.

83
6.1.1. Water Wash Paint Remover

A. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents : Contains methylene chloride

and methanol and is harmful if it is ingested or if considerable quantities of its vapors are inhaled.

B. Flash Point : Is somewhat hazardous, but above the "flammable"

range

.

C. Recommendations for Field Evaluation : Recommended for use in

occupied dwellings only if (1) small areas are treated, (2) the work

area is adequately ventilated, (3) occupants are kept out of the work

area, and (4) the fumes are not exposed to open flames or very hot

objects.

The product can be used in unoccupied dwellings to treat large

surface areas if items (2) and (4) above are observed.

6.1.2. Alkaline /Solvent Paint Remover

A. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents : The product contains both a

chlorinated hydrocarbon solvent and an alkali. It is harmful if it is

ingested or if considerable quantities of its vapors are inhaled.

B. Flash Point : Is somewhat hazardous, but above the "flammable"

range

.

C. Recommendations for Field Evaluation : Recommended for use in

occupied dwellings only if (1) small areas are treated, (2) the work

area is adequately ventilated, (3) occupants are kept out of the work

84
area, and (A) the fumes are not exposed to open flames and very hot

objects.

The product can be used in unoccupied dwellings to treat large

surface areas if items (2) and (A) above are observed.

6.2. Unfinished Covering Materials

These materials are intended for use as a barrier layer over

leaded paints.

6.2.1. Asbestos Cement Board

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: Easy to install over flat surfaces with

mechanical fasteners and/or adhesives. Scoring and snapping should be

used since the product is difficult to saw and potentially hazardous

asbestos dust is caused by sawing. Holes can be punched out with dies

to avoid creating dust.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No deterioration was

observed in the product. Paint primers should be selected very carefully to avoid deterioration of the paint bond when moisture is present.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: Not evaluated since an adhesive

was not specified.

d. Maintainability: Easy to patch or replace damaged areas and

then repaint.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: Not evaluated since an adhesive was not specified.

Should be adequate if mechanically fastened in accordance with accepted

practice.

85
b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Not evaluated since an adhesive was not

specified.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use where adequate support

is provided.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Acceptable" for use over small to medium

voids. A thicker material, recommended by the manufacturer for installation over furring strips, should be used if large voids are covered.

e. Abrasion Resistance: Not evaluated since this property is a

function of the final surface finish provided.

f. Scratch Resistance: Not evaluated since this property is a

function of the final surface finish provided.

g. Washability: Not evaluated since this property is a function

of the final surface finish provided.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: Not evaluated since this property is a

function of the final surface finish provided.

i. Colorfastness: Not evaluated since this property is a function

of the final finish provided.

86
III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use to cover flat (planar) surfaces in all areas of

both occupied and vacant dwellings. Thicker materials (3/16 in to 1/4

in) should be used if large voids are to be covered. Mechanical fasteners are most desirable unless proven adhesives are supplied. Because of

the carcinogenic potential of fine asbestos dust, snapping and scoring

and punching out holes with dies should be used when possible. Workers

exposed to dust should wear respirators and a dust collection system

should be provided. Dust producing cutting operations should be conducted outside the dwelling.

6.2.2. Gypsum Wallboard

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: Easy to install over flat surfaces with

mechanical fasteners and/or adhesives. Straight cuts can be accomplished

by scoring and snapping and the product is easily cut by sawing.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: There was no visible deterioration. Some deterioration in impact resistance was observed as a

result of dry heat aging, but not enough to affect its effectiveness as

a barrier. The product has very low strength while it is wet.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: Not evaluated since a specific

adhesive was not recommended.

d. Maintainability: Easy to patch or replace damaged areas and

then repaint.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: Not evaluated since a specific adhesive was not

recommended. Should be adequate if accepted practice is followed.

87
b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas wben installed on substrates similar to tbose tested.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Not evaluated since a specific adhesive was

not recommended.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when installed over voids as well as solid substrates.

e. Abrasion Resistance: Not evaluated since this property is a

function of the final surface finish provided.

f. Scratch Resistance: Not evaluated since this property is a

function of the final surface finish provided.

g. Washability: Not evaluated since this property is a function

of the final surface finish provided.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: Not evaluated since this property is a

function of the final surface finish provided.

i. Colorfastness: Not evaluated since this property is a function

of the final finish provided.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use to cover flat (planar) wall areas of both occupied and vacant dwellings. Since the impact resistance values obtained

88
for materials applied on a gypsum wallboard substrate were much

lower than those obtained with plywood, the product would not be recommended for use as a covering in areas where wood is commonly used . In

addition, the product is not suitable for use in areas where direct

contact with water is likely. Mechanical fasteners or the combination

of such fasteners with adhesives would be the most desirable attachment

procedure.

6.3. Prefinished Covering Materials and Coatings

These materials are intended for use as a barrier layer over leaded

paints.

6.3.1. Acrylic-Polyvinyl Chloride Sheet (1)

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: Care must be exercised when positioning

the covering, since a contact-type adhesive is used; especially when

applying large sheets. No other problems are anticipated.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: Buckling and delamination

observed when subjected to moisture aging (160°F, 957 rh); see figure 28.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: No problem: the adhesive contains an aqueous solvent.

d. Maintainability: A damaged area could be cut out and replaced

with another piece of the same covering, however, the color and pattern

match may not be perfect. The covering can be painted with special

paints intended for vinyls; however, ordinary alkyd and latex paints are

not satisfactory according to the covering manufacturer.

89
Figure 28. Acrylic-polyvinyl chloride sheet test specimen after moisture

aging at 160°F and 95% rh. (Note the warping and buckling).

90
II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory" at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Acceptable" for use over

cellulosic substrates except in hazardous areas such as furnace areas.

II. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use when installed on

noncombustible substrates. "Potentially hazardous" when installed

on cellulosic substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Potentially hazardous". Tbe

toxic combustion products produced by the covering should be

weighed against those produced by furnishings and other combustible

materials found in a residence to determine their importance.

iv. Flash Point: The adhesive is relatively safe using normal

precautions.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Good" for all test conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Good" washability with a sponge.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in all interior

application.

i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable" for all use conditions except where

exposure to sunlight is likely ("potentially unacceptable" under this

condition)

.

91
III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use in normally dry areas on walls, doors, and wood

trim (when thermoformed) as suggested by the manufacturer. A solid substrate in good repair is required for adhesive attachment. Minor voids

can be bridged. The product is not recommended for use in areas where

contact with moisture is likely. Since health and safety problems are

not anticipated during installation, the product can be used in both

occupied and vacant dwellings. Because of its fire hazard properties,

the product should not be used over large areas of cellulosic materials

in hazardous areas. The use of mechanically fastened trim strips on exposed edges would improve the peel resistance of the covering system. .

6.3.2. Gypsum Impregnated Jute Fabric

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: There should be no problem when the covering is installed in a manner similar to that used with vinyl wall coverings.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: The jute fabric appeared

to discolor and darken when subjected to moisture aging.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: No problem; the adhesive contains an aqueous solvent.

d. Maintainability: A damaged area could be cut out and replaced

with another piece of covering; however the color and pattern match

would not be perfect. The surface can be coated with ordinary paints.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory" at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked at 73°F.

92
b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Acceptable" for use over

cellulosic substrates except in exit areas, kitchens and hazardous areas.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use when installed on

noncombustible substrates; on the borderline between "acceptable"

and "potentially hazardous" when installed on cellulosic substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Adhesive is "relatively safe" using normal

precautions.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: The weight loss would normally cause this

material to be classified as a "potential problem" for all test conditions; however, in view of the textured nature of this material which

tends to conceal abrasive wear, the covering is "probably acceptable".

f

.

Scratch Resistance: The scratch width could not be measured

because of the nature of the material; however, since there was only

minor fiber damage for all test conditions, the material is "probably

acceptable".

g. Washability: "Potentially unacceptable".

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in areas where

direct contact with water is unlikely and where adequate ventilation is

provided for the escape of water vapor.

93
I. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" when exposed to

moisture or sunlight on a continual basis.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation ;

Recommended for use, in normally dry areas, on walls, as suggested

by the manufacturer. A solid substrate in good repair is required for

adhesive attachment. Minor voids can be bridged. The product is not

recommended for use in areas where contact with moisture is likely.

Since health and safety problems are not anticipated during installation,

the product can be used in both occupied and vacant dwellings. Because

of its fire hazard properties the product should not be used over large

areas of cellulosic materials in exit areas, kitchens and hazardous

areas. The use of mechanically fastened trim strips on exposed edges

would improve the peel resistance of the covering system.

6.3.3. Urethane Varnish

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: This product can be applied with either

a brush or a spray gun with no difficulty. An annoying odor was given

off during application.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visiDie deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The product contains a mineral

spirits solvent. Adequate ventilation should be provided and prolonged

contact with skin and breathing of vapor or spray mist should be avoided.

The container should be closed after use. According to Levinson [23],

mineral spirits has a TLV of 500 ppm.

94
d. Maintainability: Damaged areas can be readily repaired by recoating with thfa varnish and blending in with the surrounding areas.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Not acceptable" for use

over cellulosic surfaces.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: "Relatively safe", but should not be used in

the presence of heat or an open flame and adequate ventilation

should be provided.

c. Supported Impact : "Acceptable" for use on plywood and similar

materials for all test conditions. "Not acceptable" for use on gypsum

board and similar materials for any test conditions.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for all test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Good" with a sponge at room temperature. "Potentially unacceptable" in conditions where high temperature and humidity are present.

95
h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use only in normally

dry areas.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" when exposed to

either moisture or sunlight on a continual basis.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product is possibly acceptable for use on sound woodwork. The

product will not perform effectively as a barrier if the lead bearing

paint beneath it becomes delaminated from the woodwork. Application on

exterior doors, windows and associated trim would not be recommended

since the moisture problems that commonly occur in these areas can cause

the leaded paint beneath the covering to delaminate. Because of its

fire hazard properties, the product should not be used over large areas

of cellulosic materials.

In addition, the product should not be applied in the presence of

heat or an open flame and adequate ventilation should be provided.

In summary, this product is of limited value as a solution

to the problem caused by lead bearing paints in housing.

6.3.4. One Component Epoxy Paint

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The coating could not be applied smoothly

by means of a brush or roller, although these methods are specified by

the materials supplier. Airless spray coating is probably the only

acceptable application method that can be used. The use of airless

spraying is not very desirable in occupied dwellings.

96
b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visible deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The coating is a water emulsion,

and there should be no toxicity problems.

d. Maintainability: Since brush and roller application do not

give a satisfactory finish, it is difficult to touch up small areas.

Repainting of the surface by airless spraying may be required.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. Acceptable for use over

cellulosic substrates except in exit areas, kitchens, and hazardous

areas.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use when installed on

noncombustible substrates. "Hazardous" for use when installed on

cellulosic substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: "Relatively safe" using normal precautions.

c. Supported Impact: Acceptable for use on plywood and similar

materials for all test conditions. Not acceptable for use on gypsum

board and similar materials for any test conditions.

97
d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

f. Sctatch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Acceptable" removal of soil, but noticeable

changes in the appearance of the surface as a result of washing were

measured

.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas.

i. . Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to moisture is likely. "Acceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendation for Field Evaluation :

The product is possibly acceptable for use on sound woodwork; however it will not perform effectively as a barrier if the lead bearing

paint beneath it becomes delaminated from the woodwork. Application on

exterior doors, windows and associated trim would not be recommended

since the moisture problems that commonly occur in these areas can cause

the leaded paint beneath the covering to delaminate.

In summary, this product is of limited value as a solution to

the problem caused by lead bearing paints in housing.

6.3.5. Vinyl Counter Top Material

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: No problem when the covering is applied

on walls or other surfaces- Support should be provided when it is applied

on ceilings until the adhesive cures. A contact type adhesive may be

more desirable than the adhesive recommended by the manufacturer.

98
b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: The product appeared to

yellow during aging at 160°F and 95% rh and is softened by 160° heat.

Specimens delaminated when being dried after moist heat aging (160°F,

95% rh).

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The adhesive appears to contain an aqueous solvent and is not labelled as hazardous.

d. Maintainability: A damaged area could be cut out and replaced

with another piece of the same covering; however, the color and pattern

match may not be perfect. The covering can be painted with special

paints intended for vinyls; however, ordinary alkyd and latex paints

would probably not be acceptable.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh, and at 160°F, 4% rh.

However, it was "unsatisfactory" when dried after moist conditioning

and therefore would not be satisfactory in moist environments.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. Acceptable for use over

cellulosic substrates except in exit areas, kitchens and hazardous

areas.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use when installed on

all substrates.

iii. Toxic Combusion Products: "Potentially hazardous" [It

may not pose a significant life safety problem to occupants because of

the low flame spread of this material; however, it can pose a problem

99
if there is significant room involvement in a fire.]

iv. Flash Point: "Relatively safe" using normal precautions.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in dry areas on substrates similar to those tested. "Fot acceptable" for use in moist

areas (the covering delaminated from the substrate on which it was

applied)

.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Good" for all test conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions

except moist heat aging where specimens delaminated prior to testing.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions except moist heat aging where specimens delaminated prior to testing.

g. Washability: "Godd" washability.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas,

i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable" for use where exposure to moisture

and sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use in normally dry areas on walls, doors, and wood

trim (when thermoformed) . A solid substrate in good repair is required

for adhesive attachment. Minor voids can be bridged. The product is not

recommended for use in areas where contact with moisture is likely.

Since health and safety problems are not anticipated during installation,

the product can be used in both occupied and vacant dwellings. Because

of its fire hazard properties, the product should not be used over large

areas of cellulosic materials in exit areas, kitchens and hazardous areas.

The use of mechanically fastened trim strips on exposed edges would improve

the peel resistance of the covering system.

100
6.3.6. Vinyl Wall Covering - Light Duty

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The product can be readily applied using

vinyl wall covering application techniques.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: The covering delamiriated

when subjected to moisture aging.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The adhesive contains an aqueous

solvent so there should be no toxicity problem.

d. Maintainability: A damaged area could be cut out and replaced

with another piece of the same covering, however the color and pattern

match may not be perfect. The covering can be painted with special

paints intended for vinyls; however, ordinary alkyd and latex paints are

not satisfactory for this purpose.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Unsatisfactory" for all conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Acceptable" for use over

cellulosic substrates except in exit areas, kitchens and hazardous

areas.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use when installed on

noncombustible substrates. On the borderline between "acceptable"

and "potentially hazardous" when installed on cellulosic surfaces.

101
iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point" "Relatively safe" using normal precautions.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in dry anrl moist areas

on all solid substrates. "Not acceptable" for use in areas where direct

contact with water is likely (the covering delaminated)

.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for all test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: A "potential problem" when tested after

curing at 73°F, 50% rh and aging at 160 C F, 4% rh. Specimens delaminated

during aging in moist heat (160°F, 95% rh) and soaking in water at 73°F

and therefore were considered to fail the test.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions

except soaking in water at 73°F where coverings delaminated.

g. Washability: "Potentially unacceptable."

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use only in normally

dry areas.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use where contact

with moisture and sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Not recommended for use since the wheat paste-type adhesive specified

by the manufacturer has inadequate bond strength. The light duty vinyl

wall covering might be satisfactory as a barrier covering if a stronger

bond strength adhesive was used. The use of mechanically fastened trim

strips on exposed edges would improve the peel resistance of the covering

system.

102
6.3.7. Veneer Plaster with Bonding Agent

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: No problems are anticipated when properly

trained personnel are used. The bonding agent can be applied by means

of a brush or roller. Standard plastering procedures are used to apply

the veneer plaster finish coat.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: Delamination of the plaster

veneer was observed when specimens were subjected to moisture aging.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: According to the manufacturer,

the product contains a non-toxic aqueous solvent.

d. Maintainability: Damaged areas can be readily patched and

repainted.

II. Test Results* :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory" at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

* An unpainted veneer plaster surface was used to evaluate the properties

listed below. Since properties 'e' to ' i' are a function of the surface finish, they can be improved considerably if a high quality paint

coat is applied.

103
iv. Flash Point: The bonding agent is "relatively safe" when

normal precautions are used.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in dry areas on walls.

(Since plaster is not used on woodwork, the product was not evaluated on

a plywood substrate.) "Unacceptable: for use in areas where contact with

moisture is likely.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in all

applications.

e. Abrasion Resistance: A "potential problem" unless painted.

f. Scratch Resistance: A "potential problem" unless painted.

g. Washability: "Potentially unacceptable" (easily stained and

difficult to clean) unless painted.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in dry areas and

in areas where direct contact with water is unlikely,

i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable".

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product is recommended for use on walls and ceilings in areas

where exposure to moisture is not likely. The product is not recommended

for U8e on doors, baseboards and similar items nor should it be used in

areas where exposure to moisture is likely.

A good quality paint top coat and primer should be provided on

wall areas to improve the functional properties of the surface.

The system should only be applied on a sound substrate where delamination is unlikely since it will not perform adequately as a barrier

if delamination occurs.

104
6.3.8. Vinyl Wall Covering-Medium Duty

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The product can be readily applied using

standard vinyl wall covering application techniques.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: The covering delaminated

when subjected to moisture aging.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The adhesive formulation uses

water as a solvent, so there should be no toxicity problem.

d. Maintainability: A damaged area could be cut out and replaced

with another piece of the same covering; however, the color and pattern

match may not be perfect. The covering cannot be painted.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory" at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Acceptable" for use over

cellulosic substrates except in kitchens, exit areas and hazardous

areas such as furnace rooms.

ii. Smoke Generated* "Acceptable" for use when installed on

noncombustible substrates. "Potentially hazardous" when installed

on cellulosic substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

105
iv. Flash Point: The adhesive had a flash point greater than

212°F; no problems are anticipated.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in dry areas on substrates similar to those tested. Not acceptable for use in moist areas

(the covering delaminated from the substrate on which it was applied)

.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Good" for all test conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for use in areas where exposure to moisture is not likely (the coverings came off during conditioning with moisture)

.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for use in areas where exposure to moisture is not likely (the covering delaminated during

moisture conditioning)

.

g. Washability: "Good" with a sponge; "acceptable" with a brush,

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in

areas where contact with moisture is likely.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where prolonged contact with ultraviolet radiation or moisture is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use in normally dry areas on walls, as suggested

by the manufacturer. The product should not be used to cover large

expanses of cellulosic materials in kitchens, exit areas and hazardous

areas such as furnace rooms because of its fire hazard properties;

however, it is satisfactory for use on plaster walls in these areas.

106
A solid substrate in good repair is required for adhesive attachment. The product is not recommended for use in areas where contact

with moisture is likely. Since health and safety problems are not

anticipated during installation, the product can be used in both occupied

and vacant dwellings. The use of mechanically fastened trim strips on

exposed edges would improve the peel resistance of the covering system.

6.3.9. Nylon Formulated One Component Paint

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application : An inexperienced painter would have

difficulty in applying this coating without leaving brush marks. Roller

application is somewhat more desirable.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visible deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The coating is a water-based

emulsion and there should be no toxicity problems.

d. Maintainability: It may be difficult to match the texture of

surrounding areas when small areas are repaired.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Acceptable" for use over

cellulosic substrates except in kitchens, exit areas and hazardous

areas such as furnace rooms.

107
ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use in all areas when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: The paint was a water based emulsion and had

a flash point greater than 212 °F. No problems are anticipated.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use on plywood and similar

substrates for all test conditions. "Unacceptable" for use on gypsum

board and similar materials for any test conditions.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: A "potential problem" for all test conditions. The abrasion weight loss was slightly avove the level that was

considered to be adequate.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Acceptable" with a sponge after aging at 73°F,

50% rh, but marginal after aging. Inconsistent test results were

obtained.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in areas where

contact with water vapor is likely, but not in areas where there can be

direct contact with water.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to moisture is likely. "Acceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to sunlight is likely.

108
III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product is possibly acceptable for use on sound woodwork in

normal living areas; however, it has several limitations. Its fire

hazard properties make it undesirable for use on woodwork in kitchens,

exit areas and hazardous areas such as furnace rooms. In addition, its

poor abrasion makes it somewhat undesirable for use in high wear applications, and it will not perform adequately as a barrier if the lead

bearing paint beneath it becomes delaminated. For the latter reason,

application on exterior doors, windows and associated trim would not

be recommended because of the moisture problems that commonly occur in

these areas.

In summary, this product is of limited value as a solution to the

problem caused by lead bearing paints in housing.

6.3.10. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint

I. Observations ;

a. Ease of Application: The coating was relatively easy to apply

smoothly with a brush and a roller.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visible deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: The product is labeled as a

"skin sensitizer". Prolonged contact with the skin or inhalation of

the solvent vapors should be avoided.

d. Maintainability: Should be no problem.

109
II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

Installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Not acceptable" for use

over cellulosic substrates.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use over noncombustible

substrates. A "potential problem" when used over cellulosic

substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use over

noncombustible substrates. "Potentially hazardous" when installed

on cellulosic substrates; itsi performance was marginal.

iv. Flash Point: Should be safe for use if normal precautions,

as directed on the label are followed.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use on plywood and similar

substrates after dry conditioning; marginal after exposure to moisture.

"Unacceptable" for use on gypsum board and similar materials for any

test conditions.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Good" with a sponge, marginal with a brush.

110
h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in areas where exposure to moisture is not likely. "Potentially unacceptable" for use

in moist areas.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to moisture is likely. "Acceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product is possibly acceptable for use on sound woodwork:

however, it will not perform effectively as a barrier if the lead bearing

paint beneath it becomes delaminated from the woodwork. The smoke and

toxic combustion product levels measured on a plywood substrate indicate

that a possible hazard will be created if the product is used to cover

large expanses of cellulosic materials. Application on exterior doors,

windows and associated trim would not be recommended because of the

delamination problems that can be caused by moisture in these areas.

In summary, the product is of limited value as a solution to the

problem caused by lead bearing paints in housing.

6.3.11. Nylon Formulated Two Component Paint

with Flexible Primer

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application : The coatings were relatively easy to apply

smoothly with a brush and a roller. The primer coat had to be allowed

to get tacky prior to applying the cover coat.

Ill
b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visible deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: Tbe products are labelled as

"skin sensitizers". Prolonged contact with the skin, or inhalation of

the solvent vapors should be avoided.

d. Maintainability: Should be no problem.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Not acceptable" for use

over cellulosic substrates.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use over noncombustible

substrates. A "potential problem" when used over cellulosic substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Should be safe for use if normal precautions,

as directed on the label, are followed.

c. Supported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" when installed on

plywood and similar substrates after dry curing. "Unacceptable" for use

on gypsum board and similar materials.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" after curing.

112
f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" after curing.

g. Washability: "Good" with a sponge, "acceptable" with a brush,

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to moisture is likely. "Acceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product would not be recommended since its fire hazard properties preclude its use on large areas of woodwork, and its low supported

impact resistance on gypsum board makes it undesirable for use on

substrates such as painted plaster walls.

6.3.12. High Build Textured Spray Coating-Fine Texture

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The product can only be applied by

spraying with equipment designed to handle aggregate filled, viscous,

liquids. Relatively inexpensive hopper spray guns, in combination with

a source of compressed air, can be used for small jobs.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visible deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: According to the manufacturer,

the product solvent system is primarily water-based and its use complies

with existing air pollution control regulations regarding hydrocarbon

emissions.

d. Maintainability: It would be difficult to match the texture of

surrounding areas, when small areas are patched, unless spray equipment

was used.

113
II. Test Results ;

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Not acceptable" for

use over cellulosic substrates.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable for use over noncombustible

substrates. A "potential problem" when used over cellulosic

substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: The flash point was greater than 212 °F;

should be no problem.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use when installed on

plywood and similar substrates. "Unacceptable" when installed on gypsum

board and similar substrates.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: A "potential problem" for all test

conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: Probably "acceptable"; the scratch resistance was acceptable after aging, but not before.

g. Washability: "Potentially unacceptable."

114
h. Water Vapor Permenance: "Acceptable'.' for use only in areas

where direct contact with water is not likely.

i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to moisture is likely. "Acceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product would not be recommended for use since its fire hazard

properties preclude its use on large areas of woodwork, and its low

supported impact resistance on gypsum board makes it undesireable for

use on substrates such as painted plaster walls.

6.3.13. High Build Textured Spray Coating-Medium Texture

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The product can only be applied by

spraying with equipment designed to handle aggregate filled, viscous

liquids. Relatively inexpensive hopper spray guns, in combination with

a source of compressed air, can be used for small jobs.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: No visible deterioration.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: According to the manufacturer,

the product solvent system is primarily water-based and its use complies

with existing air pollution control regulations regarding hydrocarbon

emissions.

d. Maintainability: It would be difficult to match the texture

of surrounding areas, when small areas are patched, unless spray

equipment was used.

115
II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i.' Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Not acceptable" for use

over celluiosic substrates.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use over noncombustible

substrates. A "potential problem" when used over celluiosic

substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: The flash point was greater than 212°F;

should be no problem.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use when installed on plywood, and similar substrates. "Probably not acceptable" after room

temperature curing and "unacceptable" after moisture aging, when applied

to gypsum board and similar substrates.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: A "potential problem" for all test

conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Potentially unacceptable."

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use only in areas

where direct contact with water is not likely.

116
i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable" for use in areas where exposure

to moisture and/or sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Although the product's fire hazard properties preclude its use

on large areas of woodwork, it has possible application as a

protective covering on sound, painted plaster walls in dry areas. A

solid backing is required for adequate performance. Its borderline

supported impact resistance on painted gypsum board, and the low cost

potential of this type of product make it worthy of further investigation.

Field trials in occupied housing should be used as a basis for making a

final decision as to whether or not the product is satisfactory. A good

quality paint top coat should be applied over the textured coating to

improve its abrasion resistance and washability. The coating can be

applied over a wire mesh if improved impact resistance is desired and if

application over deteriorated surfaces is desired. Application in a

vacant dwelling would be desirable since the coating is spray applied.

6.3.14. Two Component Epoxy Paint

I. Observations ;

a. Ease of Application: The product is somewhat difficult to

apply without leaving brush marks. The manufacturer recommends

smoothing out the brush marks with a water soaked nylon brush after the

paint is applied.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: Mo visible deterioration.

117
c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: Both components of the paint

formulation were dispersed in water; no problems are anticipated.

d. Maintainability: No problems are anticipated.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" for all test conditions.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use in all areas if it is

installed on a noncombustible substrate. "Not acceptable" for use

over cellulosic substrates.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" for use over noncombustible

substrates. A "potential problem" when used over cellulosic

substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use when

installed on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Both components were water emulsions and

had flash points greater than 212°F; should be no problem.

c. Supported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Good" when tested with a sponge; acceptable

with a brush.

118
h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use only in areas

where contact with moisture is not likely.

i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable" for use in areas where exposure

to moisture and/or sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product would not be recommended for use since its fire hazard

properties preclude its use on large areas of woodwork and its low

supported impact resistance on gypsum board makes it undesirable for

use on substrates such as painted plaster walls.

6.3.15. Cementitious Coating-"Orange Peel" Texture

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The coating can be spray or trowel applied,

Spray equipment capable of handling textured, viscous liquids would be

required. Some shrinkage cracking was observed during the curing

process; but the performance of the covering did not appear to be

affected.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: The coating delaminated

from the substrate that it was applied on when test specimens were

exposed to moist aging conditions.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: Water is used; no problem is

anticipated.

d. Maintainability: It may be difficult to match the texture of

surrounding areas when small areas are repaired.

119
II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory" at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" when installed on substrates

similar to those tested.

ii. Smoke Generated: "Acceptable" when installed on substrates

similar to those tested.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" when installed

on substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Should be no problem; water is used as a

solvent.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use, when installed on

plywood and similar substrates, under dry conditions; specimens delaminated during moisture aging. "Probably not acceptable" on gypsum board

after 73°F, 50% rh curing; delaminated after moisture aging.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Probably not acceptable" for any test

conditions.

e. Abrasion Resistance: A "potential problem" for all test conditions.

f. Scratch Resistance: "Acceptable" for all test conditions.

g. Washability: "Potentially unacceptable."

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use only in areas

where direct contact with water is not likely.

120
i. Colorfastness: "Potentially unacceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to moisture is likely. "Acceptable" for use in areas

where exposure to sunlight is likely.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

The product is acceptable for use as a barrier over tightly adhered

lead bearing paints on wood surfaces in all dry areas. It is also

possibly acceptable for use on painted plaster and gypsum board in dry

areas. The loss of bonding that occurs when the covering, applied over

a smooth paint surface, is exposed to moisture precludes its use in

areas where moisture problems are common, such as bathrooms and exterior

doors, windows, and associated trim. Since the covering requires a solid

supportive substrate for adequate performance, it should only be applied

on sound backings. The bond can probably be improved considerably by

scoring the painted surface, or attaching a wire mesh to it, prior to

spraying on the coating. A quality paint topcoat should be provided to

improve the poor abrasion resistance and washability of the cementitious

coating. Spray application in vacant dwellings is most desirable.

Since the covering had borderline impact resistance when it was

tested on a gypsum board substrate, it should be field evaluated under

controlled conditions in housing where children are present before final

approval is given.

121
6.3.16. Cementitious Coating-Medium Texture

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The coating can be spray or trowel applied.

Spray equipment capable of handling textured, viscous liquids would be

required.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: The coating delaminated

from the substrate that it was applied on when test specimens were exposed

to moist aging conditions.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: Water is used; no problem is

anticipated.

d. Maintainability: It may be difficult to match the texture of

surrounding areas when small areas are repaired.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked; the plywood

delaminated.

b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use, over substrates similar

to those tested, in normal living areas. "Not acceptable" for use

in kitchens, exit areas, and hazardous areas such as furnace rooms.

ii. Smoke Generated: A "potential problem" when installed on

plywood and similar substrates. "Acceptable" for use when installed on noncombustible substrates.

122
iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

areas when installed on substrates similar to those tested,

iv. Flash Point: Not tested.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use on plywood, gypsum

board, and similar substrates, except where exposure to moisture is

likely (moist heat aging caused the plywood to delaminate)

.

d. Unsupported Impact: "Acceptable" for use in all areas except

where exposure to moisture is likely (delaroination occurred under this

test condition)

.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas except

those where exposure to moisture is likely.

f. Scratch Resistance: A "potential problem" for all test

conditions.

g. Washability: "Good" cleaning with both brush and sponge applicators; however the surface finish is caused to darken considerably.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas where

direct contact with water is not likely.

i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable" colorfastness in the presence of

sunlight and/or moisture; however, the gloss of the surface finish was

significantly reduced.

123
III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use as a barrier over leaded paints on walls in

dry areas other than kitchens, exit areas, and hazardous areas such as

furnace rooms. The covering can be applied over voids. Adequate ventilation should be provided to prevent the buildup of harmful vapors from

the adhesive. Since the product delaminated when it was exposed to

moist heat aging, it is not recommended for use in wet areas.

6.3.17. Plywood Paneling-Prefinished

I. Observations :

a. Ease of Application: The product can be applied, with adhesives

and mechanical fasteners, by commonly accepted procedures.

b. Stability During Accelerated Aging: Moist aging conditions

caused the plywood layers to delaminated.

c. Toxicity of Volatile Solvents: According to Gleason, et al [29]

the recommended adhesive contains methylethylketone, toluol and naphtha,

all of which are fairly toxic. Since the adhesive is in a paste form,

the amounts of solvent that will be encountered are much less than would

be found in a liquid suspension.

d. Maintainability: It would be very difficult to repair damaged

surfaces without painting the entire paneling surface.

II. Test Results :

a. Adhesion: "Satisfactory" at 73°F, 50% rh and at 160°F, 4% rh.

"Unsatisfactory" at 160°F, 95% rh and when water soaked; the plywood

delaminated.

124
b. Fire Hazard:

i. Flame Spread: "Acceptable" for use, over usbstrates similar

to those tested, in normal living areas. "Not acceptable" for use

in kitchens, exit areas, and hazardous areas such as furnace rooms.

ii. Smoke Generated: A "potential problem" when installed on

plywood and similar substrates. "Acceptable" for use when installed

on noncombustible substrates.

iii. Toxic Combustion Products: "Acceptable" for use in all

substrates similar to those tested.

iv. Flash Point: Not tested; the recommended adhesive was not

in a liquid form.

c. Supported Impact: "Acceptable" for use on plywood, gypsum board,

and similar substrates, except where exposure to moisture is likely (moist

heat aging caused the plywood to delaminate)

.

d. Unsupported Impact : "Acceptable" for use in all areas except

where exposure to moisture is likely (delamination occurred under this

test condition)

.

e. Abrasion Resistance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas except

those where exposure to moisture is likely.

f. Scratch Resistance: A "potential problem" for all test conditions

g. Washability: "Good" cleaning with both brush and sponge applicators; however the surface finish is caused to darken considerably.

h. Water Vapor Permeance: "Acceptable" for use in all areas

where direct contact with water is not likely.

125
i. Colorfastness: "Acceptable" colorfastness in the presence of

sunlight and/or moisture; however, the gloss of the surface finish was

significantly reduced.

III. Recommendations for Field Evaluation :

Recommended for use as a barrier over leaded paints on walls in

dry areas other than kitchens, exit areas, and hazardous areas such as

furnace rooms. The covering can be applied over voids. Adequate

ventilation should be provided to prevent the buildup of harmful vapors

from the adhesive. Since the product delaminated when it was exposed

to moist heat aging, it is not recommended for use in wet areas.

The authors thank Messrs. Byung Chan Son, James F. N. Seller, Jr.,

Thomas V. Prather, Michael Glover and David J. Eichman who performed

much of the testing that was carried out in this investigation. The

work of Mr. Winthrop C. Wolfe in the areas of supported impact resistance, abrasion resistance and scratch resistance and the aid of

Mr. Thomas G. Lee in conducting the fire hazard studies are also gratefully acknowledged. Sincere thanks are also due Ms. Karen Rhoades

without whose patience and help this publication could not have been

produced

.

The financial support of the Department of Housing and Urban

Development and the materials and advice provided by industry are also

appreciated.

126
7. References

1. Gilsinn, J. F., "Estimates of the Nature and Extent of Lead Paint

Poisoning in the United States", National Bureau of Standards

Technical Note 746, December, 1972, (Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Catalog

No. 013.46:746).

2. Greifer, B., et al, "Report on Literature Review, Surveys, and

Conferences Lead Paint Poisoning Hazard Detection Methods", National

Bureau of Standards Report 10649, December, 1971, (National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151, NTIS

Accession Number PB-213351)

.

3. Clark, E. J., Waksman, D., and Hattis, D., "Identification of

Potential Building Material Sources of Lead Poisoning", National

Bureau of Standards Report 10632, November, 1971, (National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151, NTIS

Accession Number PB-213014)

.

4. Waksman, D., Skoda, L. F. , and Clark, E. J., "Hazard Elimination

Procedures for Leaded Paints in Housing", National Bureau of

Standards Technical Note 770, May, 1973, (Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DiC. 20402, SD Catalog

No. C13.46,:770).

5. Guide Criteria for the Evaluation of Operation BREAKTHROUGH Housing

Systems , Volumes I to IV, December, 1970, (National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22151, NTIS Accession

Nos. PB-212055, PB-212056, PB-212057, PB-212058)

.

6. Minimum Property Standards for Multifamily Housing , FHA No. 2600,

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, February, 1971,

(Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C. 20402).

7. "The Single Fatality Fire", Fire Journal 63, No. 1, p. 34, (1969).

8. The BOCA Basic Building Code , 5th Edition, p. 261, Building

Officials Conference of America, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, 1969.

The National Building Code , American Insurance Association, New York,

New York, 1967.

Southern Standard Building Code , Southern Building Code Congress,

Birmingham, Alabama, 1969.

11. Uniform Building Code , International Conference of Building

Officials, Pasadena, California, 1970.

127
12. Rehabilitation Guide for Residential Properties , HUD PG-50, U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development, p. 35, January, 1968,

(Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C. 20402).

13. "Standard Method of Test for Surface Burning Characteristics of

Building Materials", E 84, ASTM Book of Standards , part 14, 1972,

(American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19103)

.

14. Robertson, A. F., "Surface Flammability Measurements by the Radiant

Panel Method", Special Technical Publication No. 344 , p. 37, 1962,

(American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19103)

.

15. San Francisco Building Code , Art. 42, Sec. 4202 B, pp. 408-409,

March 10, 1969.

16. Philadelphia Building Code , Title 4, Section 4-520, May 1, 1969.

17. City of New York, Local Law No. 75, Sec. C26-504. 10(d) , p. 56,

December 6, 1968.

18. Fire Prevention Section, School Bulletin 412, Sec. 13.7, revised

July, 1962, Michigan State Police, Fire Marshal's Division,

Lansing, Michigan.

19. Myers, R. W. , "State Building Code Profile", Construction Review,

Office of Business Research and Analysis, Bureau of Domestic

Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce, March, 1972.

20. "The Control of Smoke in Building Fires - A State-of-the-Art Review",

prepared by the Task Group of Subcommittee IV of ASTM Committee

E-5 on Fire Tests of Materials and Construction, Materials Research

and Standards , pp. 16-23, 42, April, 1971.

21. Gross, D., Loftus, J. J., Lee, T. G., and Gray, V. E., "Smoke and

Gases Produced by Burning Aircraft Interior Materials", Building

Science Series 18, National Bureau of Standards, February, 1969,

(Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C. 20402).

22. "Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act", Public Law 86-613,

Definitions and Regulations, Subchapter D, Part 191, Section 191.1.

July 12, 1960.

23. Levinson, S. B., "Solvents", American Paint Journal , p. 5,

July 11, 1966.

128
24. "Standard Specification for Gypsum Veneer Plaster", C 587, ASTM

Book of Standards , pt. 9, 1968, (American Society for Testing and

Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

25. Federal Register, Volume 36, Number 157, August 13, 1971.

26. "Building Board, Asbestos-Cement: Flat and Corrugated", Federal

Specification SS-B-755a, March, 1967, (Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

27. "Lath, Sheathing, and Wallboard Gypsum',', Federal Specification

SS-L-30c, March, 1967, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

28. "Wall Covering, Vinyl Coated", Federal Specification CCC-W-408,

May, 1963, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

29. Gleason, M. N. , et. al, Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products , 3rd edition, pp. 94, 11, 144, 152, 752, Williams and Wilkins Co.,

Baltimore, Maryland, (1969).

129

Appendix A

A. Test Procedures*

A.l. General Comments

Test methods and procedures were chosen, modified or designed to

simulate the service conditions that are likely to be encountered in

actual use in housing. For example, glossy painted surfaces that could

cause adhesion problems were simulated by the use of test panels painted

with glossy alkyd paint and by phenolic board substrates. The

accelerated aging procedures described in section 2.3.1. were used to

simulate the effects of moisture attack and normal dry aging over extended periods of time.

For the purpose of this investigation, pre-test treatment is defined as the environmental treatment to which a test specimen is exposed

from the moment that a covering is applied on a substrate to the moment

that the specimen is tested. It shall consist of three separate stages,

as defined below:

Curing period or cure : The time period stated by the supplier as

required for development of the properties of the system. However, in

no case was the period less than 7 days.

* The test procedures and recommended performance levels discussed in

this publication are preliminary in nature and subject to revision as more information becomes available.

A-l
Aging : Exposure for a period of time to an environmental condition

intended to simulate the effects of long-term in-service exposure,

following the curing period.

Conditioning : The equilibration of test specimens to prescribed

conditions immediately prior to testing.

A. 2. Adhesion (Tensile Bond)

A. Objective : To determine the effectiveness and the durability

of the bond between the proposed covering systems and the surfaces that

occur in buildings.

B. Scope : The proposed systems are applied on substrates simulating the well cured paint surfaces found in existing dwellings. The

strength of the bond between the covering and the substrate is determined

after exposure to standard laboratory conditions and after exposure to

aging.

C. Test Specimens : Test specimens shall be prepared for each of

the pre-test treatments described in section C.l. A set of 5 specimens

shall be prepared for each test listed. Bond test specimens shall be

prepared by applying coverings to 1/4 inch thick phenolic board substrates meeting the requirements for Type I, Grade XX, Federal Specification L-P-509a [1_]*. The covering shall be applied to the substrate

using the procedure recommended by the supplier. The phenolic board

shall be cut into 2 in x 2 in squares prior to application of the barrier

when there is a possibility that cutting the test specimen afterwards

* Underlined numerals in brackets indicate references given on page A-49.

A-2
will disrupt the bond or covering. (Cutting up large boards after the

application of coverings is generally more convenient when large numbers

of small specimens are required.)

C.l. Pre-Test Treatment :* Specimens shall be subjected to the

4 types of pre-test treatments shown in figure A-l. The first shall be

curing at standard laboratory conditions (73+3°F, 50+5% rh) . The second

shall be for 7 days at 160+5 °F, 95+3% rh, the third shall be for 7 days

at 160+5°F, 4% rh, and the fourth shall be for 7 days in water at 73°F.

Note: Test specimens shall be cured for a minimum of 7 days prior

to initiating the aging procedures. This "cure" time, which will

vary from 7 to 28 days, should be long enough to permit bond

development

.

D. Tensile Test Procedure : The test method shall be as described

in ASTM C-297 [2_] . The rate of loading shall be adjusted so that failure

will occur in 2 to 6 min. after starting load applications.

Note: The basic feature of the ASTM X-297 test method is the

application of a tensile load through two heavy steel plates which

are bonded to opposite faces of the test specimen. The tensile

load induces failure in the weakest of the materials in the

composite specimen.

Figures A-2 and A-3 show a typical test specimen mounted in the tensile

tester used to measure bond strength.

* Initial tests were performed on specimens soaked in water at 160°F in

addition to the aging conditions shown in figure A-l. This procedure

was later discontinued since it was believed to be overly severe.

A-3
k_ u- U 4-1 u U P- P"> o >. o to o o 6^; O 6s. &< O o u n h o u en rH

M-4 ID m-i fr* iw o Hh o cw O o &-< r* oi o e< r- ai t£ 4J O m m MH vj 4J 4-1 *J- 4-> CO vim u CO 4-1 CO 4-" o to o co C fa C c co C uO CO c *x to C «^1 CO c C to ^3 4J -H a W ifl 4J H 0) o 01 oi »« o> cu cu 01 0) CD 0) 01 CD C t3 01 C T3 en^: B , *-• E fa 4-1 e pm u E fa 4-> 6 4-> B 4J QJ Pt4 rH 0) B 4-> 01 fa rH 0) H fa •H H o -H o -H CO •H (0 Bo o E •rH W go OB O >N O o c ^ u en c ^ u m c >s o cn c >> O 01 ^ CJ 01 ^ H C O E U 0) -^ H o o B

QJ <S- T3 rH a) n ai h 0) r*- <u in a) r- cu rH ai r-» at r-i HI U H 01 4-1 rH U VO O -H 01 U i-l CJ vO CJ -H & C o> o.r^ .c 0) a .c ai a. £ iu CU JZ 01 (X 0) a. a) 0> rH a oi OJ rH

co u to 4J CO U 4J 10 <SJ 4-1 4-1 CO <£,' 4J 4J W C£i 4J 4J tf> 13 4-1 CO T3 4J a C 4J CO -O 4-1 a c 4-i 3 a) <" TO CO C (0 c co CO <SJ 01 to C CO co <z> a) to m o x -H m x) «h in t/l T3 «H m CO 13 *H m to tj -h m co >h m co -h X 01 m to -h ,C 01 j: m -a >. C -o ^ C 13 ^c-o ^ CO T) H3 m >-, 4J 4-i T3 m >\ 4J 4J

ai <u 01 TO (0 0) 0) tO CO OJ 01 cO CO 0) 01 (0 ifl OJ H fe UJ rH fa 01 to -I fa ai CO ^ iH ss; g M T3 S M 13 E mt) E >,T3 * TD O o £ t* *o » -a 3 o E 3 -C E 3 X E 3 J= E 3 £ E O en E I- x: c o tn B j^ x: c

C_> 'i m -H CJ fH Pj -H O en Pj -H CJ r^ U -H cj r- Pi *H u r-- -h O r^ -H (=1 rH In to O r- >h O «h l-i CO

"

u cu u

M ool o C O 1^ O fa C cw fa •H u-t a)

4-4 o •H &C O M CO o < co co (0 V£J < c ^> C 3

en .n a) .h ^ 0) &0 0) U E cO B C

c CSJ o •H CEJ J3 O •H -H H •H X o. CJ V4 CO CJ 60 o to u « 01 CO 0) CO Pm < 41 ^ > cu ?-*6-s

to co in

t-l 01 co co m

>> co *o -a

- -a a>

)-i 01 o cd o

Q r-» -^ 3 f~- *is r*- ts»

l , i i

CO>>

CO co X

T3 M

r4-i o r-* e<

CO C4-, O

o) "4-j m

4J to o

C ^ m oi B

<n 6 3 fa

•h E o

oi cj -h cn M a) c r* 3 D--H

Cj to E5 <£L'

- k

0> 4-> CO U CO c

CO 01 01 D.H E

01 -H n o u

p« m o)DC/D

3

•ao

co

c

a)B

4-1 nJ

0)

1-1 4-1

4J

CO

CU

4->

Iai

co

•H

CO

<u

ctt

C

O

•H

CO

CU H

I <3

cuu

01 •H

A-4
I %

11

I

s

Figure A-2. Tensile bond adhesion test apparatus.

A-5
Figure A-3. Tensile bond adhesion test specimen assembly,

A-6
For these tests 2 in x 2 in x 1 in thick steel plates shall be

bonded to the substrate and to the barrier materials with a high tensile

strength adhesive. The tensile load shall be applied to the steel

plates by means of a universal joint to ensure a uniform loading.

All tests shall be made with the test specimen at a standard

laboratory temperature of 73+3°F. The moisture content of the specimen

at the time of test will vary with the pre-test treatment.

A. 3. Fire Hazard Evaluation

A. 3.1. Flame Spread

A. Objective ; To determine the surface burning characteristics of

the proposed covering systems applied on surfaces that occur in housing.

B. Scope : The proposed systems are subjected to flame spread tests

to determine a flame spread index number which reflects the rate of

flame propagation over the surface of a material.

C. Test Specimens and Pre-test Treatment : Two substrate materials,

1/4 in asbestos cement board (ACB) conforming to Federal Specification

SS-B-755a, Type U ' [3] » and 3/4 in plywood, conforming to Product Standard

1-66, Type A-D, Interior [ 4_] , shall be used. The ACB represents essentially noncombustible surfaces such as plaster or gypsum board, and the

plywood represents combustible surfaces. Each substrate shall be primed

and then coated with 2 coats of semi-gloss enamel conforming to Federal

Specification TT-E-508b [5] . Covering systems shall be applied to each

of the painted substrates in accordance with the supplier's instructions.

Three 6 in x 18 in specimens shall be prepared for each system-substrate

combination. Following curing for a minimum of 7 days at standard

laboratory conditions, two of the three specimens shall be subjected to

A-7
the following pre-test treatment procedures; aging for 24 hours at

140°F and then conditioning at 73+5 °F and 50+5% rh until the specimen

reaches equilibrium. One specimen of the three shall be subjected to

more severe treatment by grooving to promote delamination, and aging for

5 days, rather than 24 hours, at 140°F prior to conditioning. Preparation of the grooved specimen from each set of three shall be in accordance with paragraph 4.9.3. of ASTM E 162 [6] .

Note: If on the first test on a set of specimens the covering

becomes completely delaminated, mechanical fastening shall be

used to prevent the covering from falling off the substrate

during subsequent tests.

D. Test Procedures : The procedures of ASTM E 162 shall be used

with the following exceptions: (1) paragraph 4.9.2. shall not be

followed and (2) three specimens shall be substituted for the four

specified in paragraph 6.1.

The method involves employing a radiant heat source (12 by 18 inch

panel) in front of which an inclined 6 x 18 inch specimen of the material is mounted, as is shown in figures A-4 and A-5. The specimen shall

be oriented so that ignition is induced near the upper edge and the flame

front progresses downward. A factor derived from the rate of progress

of the flame front (ignition properties) and another relating to the

rate of heat liberation by the material under test shall be combined to

provide a flame spread index.

A-8
Figure A-4. Radiant panel flame spread test apparatus,

A-9
do

•Ho

•M

COo

C_>

(0d

cOP<a.

cd

4J

CO

CD 4J

CDC

a)PuG

PimI <3

CDU

00

•H

A-10
A. 3. 2. Smoke Generated

A. Objective : To measure the relative smoke levels generated by

combustion of the proposed covering systems when they are used over surfaces in housing. Smoke generated in accidental fires is generally

considered to be a major factor in the life safety of building occupants.

B. Scope : The proposed systems are evaluated for smoke generation

by measuring the maximum attenuation of a light beam passed through the

smoke aerosol generated by the test specimen within an enclosed smoke

chamber. The smoke level is "reported in terms of specific optical

density, a dimensionless attenuation coefficient which defines the maximum amount of smoke accumulated from a specimen of unit surface area in

terms of its photometric obscuration over unit path length within a

chamber of unit volume" [7J

.

C. Test Specimens and Pre-test Treatment : Two substrate materials

shall be used for each surface material tested. The substrate materials

shall be painted 1/4 in asbestos cement board (ACB) and painted 3/4 in

plywood, as specified in section A. 3.1. The ACB represents essentially

noncombustible surfaces. Six 3 in x 3 in specimens shall be prepared

for each covering material on each of the substrates. For each covering

evaluated, there shall be three tests in the flaming mode and three

tests in the nonflaming mode for each of the two substrates.

Following curing for a minimum of 7 days at standard laboratory

conditions, two of the three specimens shall be subjected to the following pre-test treatment procedures; aging for 24 hours at 140°F and then

conditioning to equilibrium at 73+5°F and 50+5% rh. The third specimen

shall be subjected to aging for 5 days at 140°F instead of 24 hours prior

to conditioning.

A-H
D. Test Procedure : The test method described by T. G. Lee [_8,9_]

shall be followed.

The basic test apparatus used is shown in figures A-6 and A-7.

Changes in- the transmitted light flux caused by the smoke generated by

2 test specimens when they are exposed to a heat flux of 2.5 W/cm * shall

be measured by means of a photometer. Tests shall be performed under

both flaming and non-flaming (smoldering) test modes. The flaming test

mode shall be induced by means of a small pilot natural gas flame applied

at the base of the specimen. This flame shall be absent in the nonflaming mode.

The specific optical density of the smoke generated, D

g

, is a

property of a specimen of a given thickness, and represents the optical

density (D) measured over unit path length (L) , within a chamber of unit

volume (V), produced from a specimen of unit surface area (A). Thus,

V

D

g = D AL

L -J

V_

AL log.

la

10 L

F

J

where F = the transmitted flux, and F = the incident flux. For the

specified test chamber, V = 18 ft. 3

, A = 0.0456 ft.

2

, and L = 3 ft. The

change in D for a specific material with time should depend only on its

thickness, its chemical and physical composition, and the conditions

to which it is exposed. The maximum measured value for F shall be used

in determining D for each specimen.

* Watts per square centimeter area,

A-12
Figure A-6. Smoke test chamber,

A-13
A - Phototube Enclosure

Chamber

Blowout Panel

Hinged Door with Window

Exhaust Vent Control

Radiometer Output Jack

Temperature Controller

CDE

F

G-H

I - Autotrans formers

J - Voltmeter (furnace)

K - Fuse Holders

L - Furnace Heater Switch

M - Gas & Air Flowmeters

N - Gas & Air Shut off Valves

- Light Intensity Controls

S - Support Frame

T - Indicating Lamps

U - Photometer Readout

V - Rods W - Glass Window

X - Exhaust Vent Light Voltage Measuring Jack Y - Inlet Vent

Temperature Controller Switch Q - Light Source Switch Z - Access Ports R Line Switch

Figure A-7. Smoke chamber assembly - Consturction details.

A-14
A. 3. 3. Toxic Combustion Products

A. Objective : To determine the concentration of potentially

hazardous gases generated in the combustion of covering materials when

exposed to a standard method of test for smoke generation.

B. Scope : The proposed surface covering systems are subjected to

smoke generation tests in both the flaming and nonflaming modes. During

the test for smoke generation (section A. 3. 2.), the gases inside the

smoke chamber are analyzed for HCN, NO and NO , HC1 and CO.

C. Test Specimens and Pre-test Treatment : The test specimens and

their preparation shall be exactly the same as for the smoke generation

tests (see section A. 3. 2.). Toxic combustion product concentration test

measurements shall be taken during the smoke generation tests.

D. Test Procedure* : Concentrations of gaseous products in parts

per million (ppm) , shall be determined by drawing samples of the gas

mixture created by the combustion of test specimens in the NBS Smoke

Density Chamber through commercial colorimetric gas detector tubes.

Results shall be reported on the basis of comparison with the manufacturer's calibrations for the length of the color stains which are obtained when fixed volumes of combustion products are drawn through the

colorimetric tubes. Colorimetric tubes that are specific for the toxic

gas whose concentration is desired shall be used. Gas concentrations of

HC1, HCN, NO + NO2, and GO, shall be simultaneously determined at the

time of peak smoke accumulation during the first smoke generation test

conducted for each material-substrate, test-mode combination. Based

* See references [8,9].

A-15
upon the results of the first gas sampling the gases that are critical

to life safety shall be determined. Critical gases shall be determined

at least three times during the second smoke generation test, unless the

length of test is so short as to preclude three repetitions. For

instance, if it is found as a result of the first test that the CO or

HC1 gas concentrations are at levels that are considered to be critical

to life safety, at least 2 indicator tubes for each gas shall be used

at one time, with this same combination repeated during the test at

approximately five minute intervals.

If the concentration of HC1 is found to be above 1000 ppm, the normal upper limit of the colorimetric tubes, a method based on a Chloride

Selective Ion Electrode [7] shall be utilized. In this procedure, the

highly soluble HC1 gas and vapor in the sample (lOOcc) is absorbed by a

water-wetted glass filter as the sample flows through it at a constant

flow rate. The wetted filter with absorbed HC1 shall be subsequently

transferred to a container, and diluted and analyzed for chloride ion

concentration by means of a standard test method using chloride ion

reference electrodes. A potentiometer shall be used to measure the EMF

between the electrodes. (The specific ion electrode should have a sensitivity limit in the order of 1 x 10 mole/liter for chloride ions in

solution and a equilibrium response time of about 1 min.) A calibration

curve shall be used to determine the relationship between EMF output

and chloride ion concentration.

A. 3. 4. Flash Point

A. Objective : To determine the relative fire hazards caused by the

vapors created when solvent-based liquid coatings, paint removers and

adhesives are used.

A-16
B. Scope : The lowest temperature required to cause solvent vapors

to ignite is determined by means of an open cup test procedure.

C. Test Method : The procedures described in ASTM D 1310 [ 10 ] for

the Tag Open Cup Tester shall be used. This procedure is specified in

the Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act [ 11 ] for the determination

of hazardous flash points.

A. 4. Supported Impact Resistance

A. Objective : To determine the resistance of supported covering

systems to impact forces such as might occur during normal use.

B. Scope : This method covers a procedure for determining the impact resistance of coverings applied on gypsum board and plywood substrates that simulate those used in service. Specimens are tested on a

falling-weight, impact apparatus after being subjected to various pretest environmental treatments intended to simulate normal in-use aging.

C. Test Specimens : These shall consist of covering materials

applied on representative substrates.

Both 3/8 in thick gypsum wallboard conforming to ASTM C 36 [ 12 ]

(any type except the insulating product) and 1/2 in thick plywood (Exterior AC grade, Species Group 1) as in Product Standard PS 1-66 [4_]

shall be used as substrates. If tapered-edge gypsum wallboard is used,

a portion 12 inches from each edge of the sheet shall be discarded.

For each substrate, 48 4 in x 4 in specimens shall be prepared and

tested, 12 for each of the 4 pre-test treatments specified in section D.

Six of the 12 specimens shall be tested over a die support and six on a

steel plate support (as described in sections E and F)

.

A-17
Before the covering material is applied, each substrate shall be

primed and then coated with a semi-gloss enamel conforming to the

requirements of Federal Specification TT-E-508b [5J . The undercoat shall be as recommended by the manufacturer of the enamel used.

The enamel surface shall be sanded lightly prior to the applxcation of

the covering material. The covering material shall be applied in accordance with instructions provided by the respective materials

supplier.

For aging with moist heat, as in D.2. below, the edges of the specimens

shall be coated with a water-resistant coating, such as a marine epoxy

paint, which will adhere to the edges and withstand the aging conditions.

D. Fre-test Treatment : All specimens shall be tested at and after

conditioning to 73+3 °F and 50+3% rh. Conditioning shall be as in D.5. belov

D.l. Curing . Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of 7 days

at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh following their preparation. Longer cure periods

shall be used when recommended by the materials supplier.

D.2. Moist heat aging . Specimens shall be cured as specified

in D.l., then placed in an environmental chamber at 160+3°F and 95%

nominal rh in the presence of liquid water for 7 days.

D.3. Dry heat aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.l., then placed in a ventilated oven at 160+3°F for

7 days.

D.4. Water soak aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.l., then soaked in water at 73°F for 7 days.

A-18
D.5. Conditioning . Specimens cured as in D.l. under ambient

conditions may be tested immediately. Specimens aged as in D.3. with

dry heat shall be further conditioned for 7 days at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh.

Specimens aged as in D.2. (moist heat) or D.4. (soaking in water) shall

be further conditioned as follows:

2 days at 73+3 °F, 50% rh,

1 day in an oven at 160+3 °F, 4% rh, and finally

4 days at 73+3°F, 50% rh.

E. Apparatus : The apparatus shall be as described in ASTM D

2794 [13], with a 2 lb cylindrical impact weight, a 0.625 in diameter

indenter with a rounded nose, and a support die having an inner diameter

of 0.640 inches, as is shown in figure A-8. A steel plate support shall

be used for some of the tests, as described in section F. The plate

shall be flat and smooth, with parallel faces, and shall be approximately 1/2 inch in thickness and 4 to 6 inches square. The scale of

the apparatus shall read in inch-pounds force (in-lbf) and its zero

setting shall be adjusted to compensate for variations in the specimen

thickness and also for alternate use of the die and the steel plate.

A-19
Figure A-8. Basic impact test apparatus with female die installed

on base.

A-20
F. Test Procedure : Impact tests shall be performed on 12 specimens,

6 using the die and 6 using the steel plate, for each covering, on each

of the 2 substrates, for each of the 4 pre-test treatments.

Center the specimen on the die or on the steel plate, which is

center on the die. Adjust the scale zero setting for the proper reading

as in section E. Raise the cylindrical weight to the height corresponding to the desired force to be applied to the specimen, and drop the

weight. If the specimen fails, as descrived in section G, test at a

lower force. If the specimen passes the test, repeat the impact at a

higher force.

Tests shall be performed at 5 positions on each specimen, one at

each corner and one in the center. The point of impact for tests at the

corners shall be approximately 1 inch from each edge. If impact at the

corner damages the specimen more than impact at the center (edge effect)

,

further tests shall be run nearer to the center of each specimen.

The approximate force causing failure shall be established from

prior experience or by performing tests on one specimen at 2, 10, 40, 60,

80 in-lbf or until the specimen fails. The failure point shall then be

determined within 2 in-lbf by means of the criteria given in G. There

shall be six tests (drops) at each impact force immediately above and

below the failure point. For example, if a specimen fails at an impact

between 60 and 62 in-lbf, six drops shall be performed at 60 and 6 drops

at 62 in-lbf. Specimens that show no evidence of failure at 80 in-lbf

(the maximum impact force obtainable with the apparatus) shall be

reported to pass 80+ in-lbf impact. In cases where the thickness of

A-21
the test specimen prevents testing at 80 in-lbf, the highest obtainable

impact force shall be used.

G. Criteria for Failure :

1. Failure of more than 1 of 6 specimens of a set at a given impact

load shall be reported as a failure for the set of 6 specimens.

2. Coverings shall be considered to fail the test if:

a. there is visible tearing in the impact area through the

covering that exposes the substrate. (This is applicable to nonreinforced coverings and should be observed without the use of

magnification.

)

b. there is any evidence of cracking or delamination outside

the area of impact. (This is applicable to all covering materials.)

c. there is any evidence of tearing through reinforcement

fibers.

Note: when reinforcement fibers are widely spaced (i.e.,

leaving an open mesh greater than 1/4" x 1/4", criteria

(a) and (b) should be used.

3. Any cracking or tearing through the bottom of the substrate

shall be considered as a substrate failure.

A. 5. Unsupported Impact Resistance

A. Objective : To determine the resistance of unsupported coverings to the tearing and puncture forces to which they can be exposed

when they are applied over voids in a surface or when they

delaminate from the solid substrates to which they vere originally

applied.

A-22
B. Scope : This method covers an impact test procedure performed

on rigidly clamped, unsupported coverings. Test specimens are exposed

to several pre-test environmental conditions to simulate the deterioration that could be expected as a result of actual in-use service.

C. Test Specimens : Unsupported films of the various covering

materials selected for evaluation shall be used as test specimens.

Factory manufactured coverings such as those of the rigid board and

flexible wall covering types shall be tested as supplied by their

respective manufacturers. Adhesives furnished for application of the

covering shall not be applied prior to testing. Free films of liquidapplied coverings shall be prepared by applying said coatings on

sheets of either photographic paper (emulsion side up) , or on polyethylene as an alternate method, using a doctor blade to control spreading rates to those recommended by the respective manufacturers. The

coatings shall be allowed to cure as specified and the films shall

then be either floated off the photographic paper in water or peeled

from the polyethylene.

Following pre-test aging, as specified below, specimens shall be

allowed to equilibrate at room conditions (73+3°F and 50% rh) prior

to testing. A minimum undamaged film area of 2 in long by 2 in wide

shall be used as a test specimen.

D. Pre-test Treatment : Sufficient quantities of the various materials shall be prepared so that specimens can be subjected to all 3

of the aging conditions listed below (approximately 2 square feet per

condition) . Aging cycle 1 shall consist of curing the test specimens

A-23
at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh for a period of at least 7 days prior to testing.

Aging cycle 2 shall consist of cycle 1 followed by aging the test specimens at 160+3 °F and approximately 4% rh (the rh of room temperature air

heated to 160°F) for 14 days and then allowing the specimens to equilibrate at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh prior to testing. Aging cycle 3 shall

consist of cycle 1 followed by aging the test specimens at 160+3°F and

95% rh for 14 days and then allowing the specimens to equilibrate at

73+3°F and 50+3% rh prior to testing.

E. Test Procedure : Each specimen shall be mounted in a clamping

fixture, figure A-9, so that an unsupported test area having a 1 in

diameter is provided. The clamped border of the specimen surrounding

the test area shall be a minimum of 1/2 in wide.

The clamping fixture, and specimen, shall be placed on the die of

the impact tester as shown on figure A-10. The basic impact tester

shall be as described in section A. 4., part E (Apparatus). A separate

specimen shall be used for each impact. Testing shall continue for

specimens treated with each of the aging conditions until the failure

point (as defined in F.) is determined to within 2 in-lbf (e.g., pass

60 in-lbf, fail 62 in-lbf).

A-24
Key:

y^ s$- Aluminum

?*

: Z?tfZ$ Rubber _ (70 Durometer Neoprene)

'/////' Test Specimen

SECTION X-VX'

Figure 4-9. Unsupported Impact Attachment

A-25
Figure A-10. Basic impact test apparatus with unsupported impact

clamping fixture installed.

A-26
F. Criteria for Failure :

1. Failure of more than 1 of 6 specimens of a set at a given impact load shall be reported as a failure for the set of 6.

2. Coverings shall be considered to fail at a given impact if:

a. there is visible tearing in the impact area through the

covering. (This is applicable to non-reinforced coverings and

should be observed without the use of magnification. )

,

b. there is any evidence of cracking or delamination outside

the area of impact. (This is applicable to all covering materials.),

c. there is any evidence of tearing through reinforcement

fibers.

Note: when reinforcement fibers are widely spaced

(i.e., leaving an open mesh greater than 1/4 in x 1/4

in) criteria (a) and (b) should be used.

A. 6. Abrasion Resistance

A. Objective : To determine the resistance of coverings to

abrasion such as might occur during normal use.

B. Scope : This method covers a procedure for determining the

abrasion resistance of surface covering materials in terms of loss in

weight after 500 cycles of abrasion, using the abraser described in

Method 6192, Federal Test Method Standard No. 141a [14]. Aging procedures are used to simulate the deterioration that could occur

during normal use.

A-27
C. Test Specimens : These shall consist of comparison standards and

covering material test specimens. All coverings shall be applied on substrate plates of 1/4 inch thick phenolic board, natural color, Type I,

Grade XX, Federal Specification L-P-509a [1] . The substrate plates shall

be cut 4 inches square. In addition, they shall have slightly rounded

corners and a 1/4 in diameter hole shall be drilled and reamed in the

center of each plate to accommodate a shaft 1/4 inch in diameter. The

plates shall have uniform, plane, and parallel surfaces and one surface

shall be sanded lightly to assure good adhesion of coatings or adhesives

to the surface.

C.l. Comparison standards . For calibration purposes, a reference organic coating shall be applied to six specimen plates. The coating shall be selected to give an average loss in weight of 50 to 60 milligrams after 500 cycles of abrasion. A suitable reference coating is two

coats (brushed or sprayed) of a synthetic resin latex paint, conforming

to Federal Specification TT-P-29g [ 15 ], allowing one day drying time between coats and at least three days drying time after the second coat before testing. Six comparison standard specimens shall be prepared and

tested and the average weight loss recorded. If the computed standard

deviation of the test results is more than 10 milligrams (standard error

more than 4) , additional specimens shall be tested until the error is

within these limits.

Note: The comparison standards are intended to provide a basis for

the comparison of measurements made on different pieces of equipment,

or by different operators. If readings on the comparison standards

are not in the 50 to 60 milligram range, the readings obtained for

A-28
test specimens of covering systems shall be multiplied by a factor of

55 divided by the reading obtained for the comparison standard.

C.2. Test specimens of covering systems . For evaluation of the

abrasion resistance of coverings, 24 specimens shall be prepared and

tested, six each for treatments D.l. to D.4. Coverings shall be applied on the substrate in accordance with the manufacturer's directions

for application to a flat surface. For specimens aged with moist heat,

as in D.2., the edges of the specimens shall be coated with a water resistant coating, such as a marine epoxy paint, which will adhere to the

edges and withstand the aging conditions.

D. Pretest Treatment : All test specimens shall be tested at and

after conditioning to 73+3°F and 50+3% rh. Conditioning shall be as in

D.5.

D.l. Curing . Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of 7 days

at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh. Longer cure periods shall be used when specified by the materials supplier.

D.2. Moist heat aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.l., then placed in an environmental chamber at

160+3°F and 95% rh, in the presence of liquid water, for 7 days.

D.3. Dry heat aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.l., then placed in a ventilated oven at 160+3°F for

7 days.

D.4. Water soak aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.l., then soaked in water at 73°F for 7 days.

D.5. Conditioning . Specimens cured under ambient conditions

as in D.l. may be tested immediately after said treatment. Specimens

A-29
aged as in D.3. with dry heat shall be further conditioned for 7 days at

73+3°F and 50+3% rh. Specimens aged as in D.2. (moist heat) or D.4.

(soaking in water) shall be further conditioned as follows:

2 days at 73+3 °F, 50% rh, then for

1 day in an oven at 160+3 °F, 4% rh, and then for

4 days at 73+3 °F, 50% rh.

E. Apparatus : The apparatus shall consist of an abraser and

accessories as is shown in figure A-ll and shall be maintained as

described in section 2. of Method 6192, with the following

modifications

:

E.l. The CS-10 abraser wheels specified in Method 6192 shall

be used. Wheels shall be used within one year of the date of manufacture.

E.2. New wheels shall be faced for 100 cycles with two

fresh S-ll abrasive discs as specified in Method 6192, 50 cycles on

each disc. Wheels shall be refaced for 50 cycles, with a fresh S-ll

abrasive disc before testing each specimen.

E.3. Wheels shall not be operated when worn to or below a

minimum diameter of 1 3/4 in. If a minimum diameter mark is not

supplied with the wheels, a mark shall be made. Wheels should be

measured with calipers as they approach the minimum diameter.

F. Test Procedure : Determine and record the initial weight of

each test specimen to the nearest milligram. Mount the pair of abrasive

A-30
60G

•H

0) s

J-l ai

co

cfl

cfl Xi •

4-1

a

•H CO

to3 CU 4J >

co >h u CO CO cO (X u

CO CO

CO CO

a) 4J PSo eO T3

•H <D en a

CO CO

J-l M-l < u I <:

(!) u

A-31
wheels on their respective flange holders, taking care not to handle

them by their abrasive surfaces. Use a load of 500 grams on each wheel.

Mount a new S-ll refacing disc on the turntable and reface the wheels

for 50 cycles, brushing the residue from the disc during the process

and using the vacuum pickup as with the test specimens. Mount the

specimen on the turntable and lower the abrading heads carefully until

the wheels rest squarely on the specimen. Place the vacuum pickup

nozzle in position and adjust it to 1/32 to 1/16 inch (approximately

1 mm) above the specimen surface. Clear the counter reading to zero,

start the vacuum pickup, and then the meter of the abraser. Abrade

each specimen for 500 cycles of the abraser. Remove the specimen and

determine and record its weight loss. Repeat the operation on each

of the five remaining specimens and average their weight losses. Test

six specimens for each covering material under each of the four pretest treatments.

A. 7. Scratch Resistance

A. Objective : To determine the resistance of covering materials

to scratches, from sharp objects, such as might occur in normal service.

B. Scope : This method covers a procedure for determining resistance to scratching and tearing of covering materials by means of a

weighted diamond tool. Aging procedures are used to simulate the

deterioration that could occur during normal use.

C. Test Specimens : These shall consist of comparison standards

and test specimens of covering materials applied on specimen plates

A-32
of 1/4 inch phenolic board, natural color, Type I, Grade XX, Federal

Specification L-P-409a [ 1] . Plates shall be cut 4 inches square. The

plates shall have uniform, plane, and parallel surfaces and one surface shall be sanded lightly to ensure good adhesion of coatings or

adhesives to the surface.

C.l. Comparison standards . For the purpose of standardizing

the diamond tool, two brands of vinyl asbestos tile which conform to Type

IV, Federal Specification SS-T-312 [ 16 ] shall be used. Two pieces of each

brand of tile, each 4 inches square, shall be used as comparison standards,

C.2. Covering system test specimens . Eight specimens shall

be prepared and tested for each covering system evaluated; two for each

of four conditionings or pretreatments as in section D. The coverings

shall be applied in accordance with the manufacturer's directions for

application to a flat surface. For pretreatment with moist heat, as

in D.2., the edges of the specimens shall be coated with a waterresistant coating, such as a marine epoxy paint, which will adhere to

the edges and withstand pretreatment conditions.

D. Pre-test Treatment : All specimens shall be tested at and

after conditioning to 73+3 °F and 50+3% rh. Conditioning shall be as

in D.5.

D.l. Curing . Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of 7

days at 73+3 °F and 50+3% rh. Longer cure periods shall be used when

specified by the materials supplier.

A-33
D.2. Moist heat aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.I., then placed in an environmental chamber at

160+3 °F and 95% rh in the presence of liquid water, for 7 days.

D.3. Dry heat aging . Specimens shall be cured under ambient

conditions as in D.I., then placed in an oven at 160+3°F, 4% rh.

D.4. Water soak aging . Specimens shall be cured under

ambient conditions as in D.I., then soaked in water at 73°F for

7 days.

D.5. Conditioning . Specimens pretreated as in D.l. under

ambient conditions may be tested immediately after pretreatment

.

Specimens pretreated as in D.3. with dry heat shall be further conditioned for 7 days at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh. Specimens pretreated as in

D.2. (moist heat) or D.4. (soaking in water) shall be further conditioned, prior to testing, as follows:

2 days at 73+3°F, 50% rh, then for

1 day in an oven at 160+3°F, 4% rh and then for

4 days at 73+3°F, 50 % rh.

E. Apparatus ; The apparatus, which is shown in figure A-12, shall

be as described in Method 7711, Federal Test Method Standard No. 501a [17]

but with a conical diamond tool, having a 90 degree included angle and a

radius at the point of 3 mils (0.003 in). The sliding weight shall be

adjusted to provide a load of 500+1 grams on the tool.

A-34
CO3

4J

tUU

COO.

P<

CO

4-1 CO

43O

4-1 COUa

c/>

CMiHI <!

CDu

too •H

A-35
Diamond tools shall be replaced when they do not meet the requirements

of Procedure F-6, which is described below.

F. Test Procedure : The test procedure shall be as in Method 7711,

with the following deviations:

1. The scratch tool shall be a conical diamond tool as in section

E above.

2. Instructions in Method 7711, paragraphs 3.1.3 and A. 2, shall

be disregarded.

3. The length of the scratch required by Method 7711, paragraph 4.3

shall be the length of the chord of the arc scribed by the scratch tool.

A. The width of the scratch for each specimen shall be measured at

three places, approximately one inch apart.

5. The scratch width shall be measured to the nearest 0.5 mil (0.005 in

6. The condition of the diamond tool shall be evaluated prior to

the tests on each covering. This evaluation is made by making one scratch

on each comparison standard and measuring the width of scratch. The

average width for the four comparison standards shall be between A and

20 mils (0.00A and 0.020 in). The standard deviation of the six measurements on each brand shall not exceed 2 mils (0.002 in). If the average

width or the standard deviation is outside these limits the tool shall

be discarded.

7. The scratch width shall not be measured on surface coverings

with uneven surfaces, such as coverings having textile or other fibers

protruding above the surface. On such finishes, results shall be judged

by visual observation of damage to the finish.

8. One scratch shall be made on each specimen and two specimens used

A-36
for each covering material. The average of six measurements, 3 on each

scratch, shall be recorded as the width of the scratch for the material.

A. 8. Washability

A. Objective : To determine the relative ease with which soil can

be removed from surface finishes and the effects of the removal action

on the finishes.

B. Scope : Coverings, applied on or bonded to, a flat uniform surface are soiled and then subjected to the cleaning action of a standard

washability procedure (referred to in section E below) . Both sponge and

brush applicators are used in conjunction with a cleaning medium to determine ease of soil removal, resistance to staining and the resistance to

abrasion and/or polishing. The basic test apparatus is shown in figure

A-13.

C. Test Specimens : Liquid coverings shall be applied to 6 x 17 x

1/4 in plate glass panels using a doctor blade to control the film thickness and to obtain a smooth surface finish. Manufactured coverings shall

be bonded to the plate glass panels following the recommendations of the

respective material suppliers.

D. Pre-Test Treatment : Specimens shall be cured, aged and conditioned as specified below prior to testing.

D.l. Curing . Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of 7 days

at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh prior to aging. Longer cure periods shall be used

when specified by the respective material suppliers.

D.2. Aging and conditioning . After being allowed to cure properly, specimens shall either be (1) tested immediately, (2) aged for 7 days

at 160+5 °F and 95+3% rh and allowed to equilibrate at 73+3 °F and 50+5% rh

A-37
o

4-> S

CO

d o

•H 13 toO r-\ CU C

cx e •H

P< 4-> CO toO CO C O

,fl -H o

03 iH d -H >>

J-l

O CO £i CO U

a,

CO T3 CO H

,C CO T3

4-1 Td tH

•H

C •H £ CO d U U3

>•> CD rH ,£ ,Q 0) 00 B & •H

<D 4-1 ,£

CO

co c CO CO cO M

0)

d

4-1 iH 4-1 CO o tt CD QJ

4-1

O 4-1 4J >> a>

4-» TJ

C

•H 0) •H • iH CO "-:-> a

•H

d cu JQ cO e

CO toO •H ^ ti e O

CO iH o a)

CO 0)n p. 13 ^> 4-1 CO

CO

tH

cud

too

•rl

A-38
prior to testing or (3) aged for 7 days at 160+5°F and 4+1% rh and

allowed to equilibrate at 73+3°F and 50+5% rh prior to testing. Three

specimens shall be aged and tested for each of the above aging conditions.

E. Washability Procedure : The basic test procedure described in

Method 6141 of Federal Test Method Standard No. 141a [18] shall be used.

A. 9. Water Vapor Permeance

A. Objective : To measure the resistance of covering systems to

the passage of moisture when a water vapor pressure gradient is established between the two surfaces of the covering.

B. Scope : Test specimens prepared by applying covering materials

onto a standard substrate are exposed to a water vapor gradient. The

amount of moisture transmitted, which is a function of the water vapor

pressure difference between the two sides of the specimen, is expressed

in terms of perms*.

C. Test Specimens : Nine test specimens for each covering system

shall be prepared by application of the covering to the unsealed portion

of nine standard HK forms**. Liquid coverings shall be applied at the

spreading rates recommended by the suppliers and by use of a doctor blade,

Sheet coverings shall be applied to the HK forms using the supplier's

recommendations for application to wall surfaces.

* A perm is defined as the water vapor transmission rate of one grain of

water vapor per square foot per inch of mercury difference in water

pressure.

** As referenced in Federal Specification TT-P-29g [15].

A- 39
After the curing period (see D.l below) a 4 inch disk shall be cut

from the center of each coated form, sealed in a permeability cup and

tested in accordance with section D. (below).

D. Test Method : The basic test method shall be as described in

ASTM E 96 [19].

D.l. Curing . Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of 7 days

at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh prior to aging. Longer cure periods shall be

used when specified by the respective material supplier.

D.2. Aging and conditioning . Following the curing period

(D.l above) specimens shall either be (1) tested immediately, (2) aged

for 7 days at 160+5°F and 95+3% rh and allowed to equilibrate at 73+3°F

and 50+5% rh prior to testing or (3) aged for 7 days at 160+5 °F and

4+1% rh and allowed to equilibrate at 73+3°F and 50+5% rh prior to

testing. Three specimens of each covering system shall be aged and tested

for each of the above aging conditions.

D.3. Summary of method . A film or sheet of the material under

test shall be sealed over the mouth of a permeability cup containing a

desiccant and the assembly placed in an atmosphere of 73+2 °F and 50+2%

relative humidity. The assembly, which is shown in figure A-14, shall

be weighed at intervals and for the period in which the gain in weight

is linear with time, the results shall be used to calculate the rate,

in perms, of water vapor movement through the membrane.

A-40
§

CD

CO

CO

CO

PUo

4J

CO

CD •P

•H

cdo

CD

(1) p

ctlI <!

cuu

•H

P*4

A-41
A. 10. Colorfastness

A. 10.1. Condensed Moisture Aging

A. Objective : To determine the color stability of covering systems when they are exposed to conditions which cause moisture condensation on the surface of the covering.

B. Scope : This method is concerned with procedures for determining

the detrimental effects of condensed moisture by measuring changes that

occur in the gloss, reflectance, and color of coverings when their surfaces are exposed to continuous condensation at 100+5 °F and 95+5% rh.

C. Test Specimens : Liquid coatings shall be applied on A x 8 x

1/4 in plate glass panels using a doctor blade to control film thickness

and to obtain a smooth finish; sheet materials shall be bonded to the

glass panels. The respective material supplier's directions for liquid

coating spreading rates and adhesive application rates shall be used.

Four specimens shall be prepared and tested for each covering system.

D. Pre-test Treatment : Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of

7 days at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh prior to testing. Longer cure periods

shall be used when specified by the respective material suppliers.

E. Test Procedure : Directional reflectance, yellowness index and

85 degree specular gloss shall be measured on properly cured test specimens before and after exposure to a humidity chamber. These measurements shall be used to calculate gloss retention, lightness index

difference and yellowness index difference (for white coverings only)

.

A-42
The 85 degree specular gloss shall be determined as specified in

Method 6103 of Federal Test Method Standard 141a [20]

.

Directional reflectance shall be measured as specified in Method

6121 of Standard 141a [ 21 ] . Yellowness index shall be measured as

specified in Method 6131 of Standard 141a [2_2]

.

After initial measurements are made on the specimens, they shall

be exposed on the humidity cabinet described in ASTM D 2247 [ 23 ], for

700 hours at 100+5 °F and 95+5% rh. After exposure on the humidity

cabinet, which is shown in figure A-15, specimens shall be allowed to

equilibrate for 7 days at 73+3°F and 50+5% rh to eliminate the effects

of entrapped moisture.

Directional reflectance, yellowness index and 85 degree specular

gloss shall then be remeasured on these specimens. Percent gloss retention, lightness index difference and yellowness index difference

shall then be calculated as specified below:

Percent gloss retention shall be calculated by dividing

the gloss measured after humidity aging by the gloss measured

immediately after curing and multiplying by 100.

Lightness index difference shall be calculated from the

directional reflectance as specified in Method 6122 of Standard

141a [24].

Yellowness index difference shall be calculated as described in Method 6131.

A-43
43a ^

0) CU

CO Ph

CO Ph

cO 3

4-1 CU

cu ^i

ti 4J •H

43 c

cflO o

>. i

4-1

O

•H -d -0

•H CU 6 o • d <o 4J ,C 4-1 CU£3 4J 13 •H

CO cu 4^

CU iH CO

4-1 iH o

CO 60 4-) >.

{3

w 4-1 •H {3 •H

toO -H T3

CO •H

CO

cu e 3

}-i <U 43 3 S

4J -H CU CO O 43

•H CU 4-1 O P.

CO H-lo

13 4-1 CU CO CO

CO CU CU

4-1

a

CU CO T3 43 cw C 4-1 }-i O -H 33 O £ CO m

iHI

cu

j-i 3

bO •H

Pn

A-44
A. 10.2. Water Vapor Aging

A. Objective: To determine the resistance of surface covering

materials to exposure to continuous heat and high humidity.

B. Scope : This method covers a procedure for determining the

changes in the appearance of surface finishes caused by exposure to

heat and high humidity aging. Minute changes in gloss, reflectance

and color are determined by measuring these properties on test specimens before and after they are exposed for 7 days at 120+2 °F and 95+5%

rh.

C. Test Specimens : Liquid coatings shall be applied on A x 8 x

1/4 in plate glass panels using a doctor blade to control film thickness and obtain a smooth finish; sheet materials shall be bonded to the

glass panels. The respective material supplier's directions for liquid

coating spreading rates and adhesive application rates shall be used.

Four specimens shall be prepared and tested for each covering system.

D. Pre-test Treatment : Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of

7 days at 73+3°F and 50+3% rh prior to testing. Longer cure periods

shall be used when specified by the respective material suppliers.

E. Test Procedure : The basic test procedure shall consist of

measuring directional reflectance, yellowness index, and 85 degree

specular gloss on properly cured test specimens before and after they

are subjected to aging in a closed cabinet for 7 days at 120+2 °F and

95+5% rh. These measurements shall be used to calculate percent gloss

retention, lightness index difference and yellowness index difference

(for white coverings only)

.

A-45
The 85 degree specular gloss shall be determined as specified in

Method 6103 of Federal Test Method Standard 141a [20 ]

.

Directional reflectance shall be measured as specified in Method

6121 of Standard 141a [21J

.

Yellowness index shall be measured as specified in Method 6131 of

Standard 141a [22].

After measurements are made on cured specimens, they shall be

exposed for 7 days in a closed cabinet at 120+2 °F and 95+5% rh. Following this exposure, specimens shall be allowed to equilibrate for 7 days

at 73+3 °F and 50+5% rh to eliminate the effects of entrapped moisture.

Directional reflectance, yellowness index and 85 degree specular

gloss shall then be remeasured on these specimens. Percent gloss retention, lightness index difference and yellowness index difference

shall then be calculated as specified below:

Percent gloss retention shall be calculated by dividing

the gloss measured after humidity aging by the gloss measured

immediately after curing and multiplying by 100.

Lightness index difference shall be calculated as specified in Method 6122 of Standard 141a [24].

Yellowness index difference shall be calculated as

described in Method 6131.

A. 10. 3. Ultraviolet Radiation Aging

A. Objective : To determine the effects of solar ultraviolet (UV)

radiation and heat aging on the surface properties of covering systems.

A-46
B. Scope : This method covers a procedure for determining the

detrimental effects of UV light and heat aging on surface finishes by

exposing test specimens to radiation from a carbon arc lamp. Changes

that occur in the gloss, reflectance and color of covering materials

are determined by measuring these properties before and after exposure

to the carbon arc.

C. Test Specimens : Liquid coatings shall be applied on 4 x 10 x

1/4 in plate glass panels using a doctor blade to control film thickness

and obtain a smooth finish; sheet materials shall be bonded to the glass

panels. The respective material supplier's directions for liquid coating

spreading rates and adhesive application rates shall be used. Four

specimens shall be prepared and tested for each covering system.

D. Pre-test Treatment : Specimens shall be cured for a minimum of

7 days at 73+3 °F and 50+3% rh prior to testing. Longer cure periods

shall be used when specified by the respective material suppliers.

E. Test Procedure : The basic test procedure shall consist of

measuring directional reflectance, yellowness index, and 85 degree

specular gloss on properly cured test specimens before and after they

are placed in a weathering machine. (The weathering machine and its

operation are described in Method 6152 of Federal Test Method Standard

141a [25]) . The measurements shall be used to calculate percent gloss

retention, lightness index difference and yellowness index difference

(for white coverings only)

.

The 85 degree specular gloss shall be determined as specified in

Method 6103 of Standard 141a [20].

A-47
Directional reflectance shall be measured as specified in Method

6121 of Standard 141a [ 21_] •

Yellowness index shall be measured as specified in Method 6131 of

Standard 141a [22]

•

After measurements are made on the cured specimens, they shall be

placed in the accelerated weathering machine. The machine shall be

operated without a water spray. Test specimens shall be exposed to a

temperature of 145+5°F and the radiation of a carbon arc for 500

hours

.

After exposure in the accelerated weathering machine, specimens

shall be allowed to equilibrate at 73+3°F and 50+5% rh.

Directional reflectance, yellowness index and 85 degree specular

gloss shall then be remeasured on these specimens. Percent gloss retention, lightness index difference and yellowness index difference

shall then be calculated as specified below:

Percent gloss retention shall be calculated by dividing

the gloss measured after humidity aging by the gloss measured

immediately after curing and multiplying by 100.

Lightness index difference shall be calculated as

specified in Method 6122 of Federal Test Method Standard

141a [24].

Yellowness index difference shall be calculated as

described in Method 6131.

A-48
References - Appendix A

JL. "Plastic Sheet, Rod and Tube, Laminated Thermosetting", Federal

Specification L-P-509a, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

2. "Standard Method of Tension Test of Flat Sandwich Constructions in

Flatwise Plane", C 297, ASTM Book of Standards , pt. 16, 1972,

(American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19103)

.

3_. "Building Board, Asbestos-Cement: Flat and Corrugated", Federal

Specification SS-B-755a, March, 1967, (Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

4. "Softwood Plywood, Construction and Industrial", Voluntary Product

Standard PS 1-66, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Catalog No. C13.20

2:15.69).

5_. "Enamel: Interior Semi-Gloss, Tints and White", Federa; Specification TT-E-508b, October, 1970, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

6_. "Standard Method of Test for Surface Flammability of Materials

Using a Radiant Heat Energy Source", E 162, ASTM Book of Standards , pt. 14, 1972, (American Society for Testing and Materials,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103)

.

7_. Gross, D. , Loftus, J. J., Lee, T. G. , and Gray, V. E., "Smoke and

Gases Produced by Burning Aircraft Interior Materials", Building

Science Series 18, National Bureau of Standards, February, 1969,

(Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C. 20402).

8_. Lee, T. G. , "Interlaboratory Evaluation of the Smoke Density Chamber

Test Method", National Bureau of Standards Technical Note 708,

Appendix II, December, 1971, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

_9. Lee, T. G. , "The Smoke Density Chamber Method for Evaluating the

Potential Smoke Generation of Building Materials", National Bureau

of Standards Technical Note 757, January, 1973, (Superintendent of

Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402),

10 . "Standard Method of Test for Flash Point of Liquids by Tag Open-Cup

Apparatus", D 1310, ASTM Book of Standards , pt. 17, 1972, (American

Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103),

A-49
11 . "Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act", Public Law 86-613,

Definitions and Regulations, Subchapter D, Part 191, Section 191.13.

July 12, 1960.

12 . "Standard Specification for Gypsum Wallboard", C 36, ASTM Book of

Standards , pt. 9, 1972, (American Society for Testing and Materials,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

13 . "Standard Method of Test for Resistance of Organic Coatings to the

Effects of Rapid Deformation (Impact)", D 2794, ASTM Book of

Standards , pt. 21, 1972, (American Society for Testing and

Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

14 . "Abrasion Resistance (Taber Abraser)", Method 6192, Federal Test

Method Standard 141a, Paint Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Materials ; Methods of Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September 1965,

(General Services Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

15 . "Paint, Latex-Base, Interior, Flat, White and Tints", Federal

Specification TT-P-29g, August, 1967 (Superintendent of Documents,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

16 . "Tile, floor; asphalt, rubber vinyl, vinyl-asbestos", Federal

Specification SS-T-312, (Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402).

17 . "Scratch Resistance", Method 7711, Federal Test Method Standard 501a,

Floor Coverings, Resilient, Nontextile: Sampling and Testing , 1966,

(General Services Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

18 . "Washability of Paints", Method 6141, Federal Test Method Standard

141a, Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Materials; Methods of

Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September, 1965, (General Services

Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

19 . "Standard Methods of Test for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials

in Sheet Form", E 96, ASTM Book of Standards , pt. 14, 1972, (American

Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

20 . "85-Degree Specular Gloss (Sheen)", Method 6103, Federal Test Method

Standard 141a, Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Materials ; Methods of Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September, 1965,

(General Services Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

21 . "45-Degree, 0-Degree Directional Reflectance", Method 6121, Federal

Test Method Standard 141a, Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related

Materials; Methods of Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September,

1965, (General Services Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

A-50
22 . "Yellowness Index", Method 6131, Federal Test Method Standard 141a,

Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Materials; Methods of Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September, 1965, (General Services

Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

22 . "Standard Method for Testing Coated Metal Specimens at 100 Per Cent

Relative Humidity", D 2247, Appendix I, ASTM Book of Standards , pt. 21, 1972, (American Society for Testing and Materials,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103).

23. "Lightness Index Difference", Method 6122, Federal Test Method

Standard 141a, Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Materials ; Methods of Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September, 1965,

(General Services Administration, Washington, D.C. 20407).

24 . "Accelerated Weathering (Enclosed Arc Apparatus)", Method 6152,

Federal Test Method Standard 141a, Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and

Related Materials; Methods of Inspection, Sampling, and Testing , September, 1965, (General Services Administration, Washington, D.C.

20407).

4 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1973—542-652/113

A-51
FORM NB5-H4A (1-71) U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. NBS TN-808

2. Gov't Accession

• No.

3. Recipient's Accession No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Potential Systems for Lead Hazard Elimination: Evaluations

and Recommendations for Use

5. Publication Date December 1973

6. Performing Organization Code

7. author(s) David Waksman, John B. Ferguson, McClure Godette,

Thomas Reichard

8. Performing Organization

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. 4608400

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

11. Contract/Grant No. LAA-H-34-71

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address Office of Policy Development and Research

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Washington, D.C. 20410

13. Type of Report & Period Covered

Final

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.)

The National Bureau of Standards is providing technical support to the Department

of Housing and Urban Development which is required by Public Law 91-695 (the Lead Paint

Poisoning Prevention Act) to carry out a research program to evaluate and make recom- mendations regarding technology for the removal of the lead based paint hazard from

the Nation's housing.

Potential hazard elimination methods have been identified by means of a survey of

available technology. This report describes testing and evaluation methodologies used

to determine (1) the suitability for use of a series of removal and lead barrier

systems, (2) the results of this evaluation, and (3) recommendations concerning the use of said systems.

Paint removal systems were evaluated in terms of the hazards that they present

in the course of their use. Both the flammability and the toxicity of the solvents

found in removers were considered. Covering systems were evaluated for their suitability for use as barrier layers over lead bearing paints in housing. The effectiveness

of covering systems in protecting children from leaded paint, their fire hazard properties and functional properties which are related to their serviceability were con- sidered in making this evaluation. The properties of the systems were assessed in terms

of minimum acceptable performance levels and recommendations are given for their use in

a field evaluation program.

17. key words (Alphabetical order, separated by semicolons) Abrasion; adhesion; coiortastness ; covering

materials; flash point; flame spread; impact resistance; lead paint poisoning; materials

performance; properties; scratch resistance; smoke generation; toxic combustion products

18. availability statement toxicity; washability; water

vapor permeance.

fxl UNLIMITED.

I I FOR OF-FICIAL DISTRIBUTION. DO NOT RELEASE

TO NTIS.

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCLASSIFIED

20. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGES

192

22. Price

51.95

USCOMM-DC 66244-P7I
NBS TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS

PERIODICALS JOURNAL OF RESEARCH reports National Bureau of Standards research and development in

physics, mathematics, and chemistry. Comprehensive

scientific papers give complete details of the work,

including laboratory data, experimental procedures,

and theoretical and mathematical analyses. Illustrated with photographs, drawings, and charts. Includes

listings of other NBS papers as issued.

Published in two sections, available separately:

• Physics and Chemistry (Section A)

Papers of interest primarily to scientists working in these fields. This section covers a broad range of physical and chemical research, with major emphasis on standards of physical measurement, fundamental

constants, and properties of matter. Issued six times

a year. Annual subscription: Domestic, $17.00; Foreign, $21.25.

• Mathematical Sciences (Section B)

Studies and compilations designed mainly for the mathematician and theoretical physicist. Topics in mathematical statistics, theory of experiment design,

numerical analysis, theoretical physics and chemistry,

logical design and programming of computers and

computer systems. Short numerical tables. Issued quarterly. Annual subscription: Domestic, $9.00; Foreign,

$11.25.

DIMENSIONS, NBS

The best single source of information concerning the Bureau's measurement, research, developmental, co- operative, and publication activities, this monthly

publication is designed for the layman and also for the industry-oriented individual whose daily work

involves intimate contact with science and technology —for engineers, chemists, physicists, research managers, product-development managers, and company

executives. Annual subscription: Domestic, $6.50; Foreign, $8.25.

NONPERIODICALS Applied Mathematics Series. Mathematical tables, manuals, and studies. Building Science Series. Research results, test methods, and performance criteria of building materials, components, systems, and structures. Handbooks. Recommended codes of engineering

and industrial practice (including safety codes) de- veloped in cooperation with interested industries, professional organizations, and regulatory bodies. Special Publications. Proceedings of NBS conferences, bibliographies, annual reports, wall charts, pamphlets, etc. Monographs. Major contributions to the technical

literature on various subjects related to the Bureau's

scientific and technical activities. National Standard Reference Data Series.

NSRDS provides quantitative data on the physical

and chemical properties of materials, compiled from

the world's literature and critically evaluated. Product Standards. Provide requirements for sizes, types, quality, and methods for testing various industrial products. , These standards are developed co- operatively with interested Government and industry groups and provide the basis for common understanding of product characteristics for both buyers and

sellers. Their use is voluntary.

Technical Notes. This series consists of communications and reports (covering both other-agency and

NBS-sponsored work) of limited or transitory interest. Federal Information Processing Standards

Publications. This series is the official publication within the Federal Government for information on

standards adopted and promulgated under the Public Law 89-306, and Bureau of the Budget Circular A-86

entitled. Standardization of Data Elements and Codes

in Data Systems.

Consumer Information Series. Practical information, based on NBS research and experience, cover- ing areas of interest to the consumer. Easily understandable language and illustrations provide useful background knowledge for shopping in today's tech- nological marketplace.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC SUBSCRIPTION SERVICES

The following current-awareness and literature-survey bibliographies are issued periodically by the Bureau

:

Cryogenic Data Center Current Awareness Service (Publications and Reports of Interest in Cryogenics).

A literature survey issued weekly. Annual subscription : Domestic, $20.00; foreign, $25.00.

Liquefied Natural Gas. A literature survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00. Superconducting Devices and Materials. A literature survey issued quarterly. Annual subscription: $20.00. Send subscription orders and remittances for the preceding bibliographic services to the U.S. Department

of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22151. Electromagnetic Metrology Current Awareness Service (Abstracts of Selected Articles on Measurement

Techniques and Standards of Electromagnetic Quantities from D-C to Millimeter-Wave Frequencies). Issued monthly. Annual subscription: $100.00 (Special rates for multi-subscriptions). Send subscription order and

remittance to the Electromagnetic Metrology Information Center, Electromagnetics Division, National Bureau

of Standards, Boulder, Colo. 80302. Order NBS publications (except Bibliographic Subscription Services) from: Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

Washington. D.C. 20234

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use, S300

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

Li.o. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE COM-215

, V.UTIO/v

;^6--\9lfc