forMormatiofr aftd-feeerd

ittirposec oftd is-frot to4)e fgfergi

pahto»ffarr, y^\ ; q

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPORT 9&j? 1

9026

DWELLING UNIT BURNOUT TESTS

in

PRATT INSTITUTE TEST BUILDING

by

D. Gross

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The National Bureau of Standards is a principal focal point in the Federal Government for assuring

maximum application of the physical and engineering sciences to the advancement of technology in industry and commerce. Its responsibilities include development and maintenance of the national standards of measurement, and the provisions of means for making measurements consistent with those

standards; determination of physical constants and properties of materials; development of methods

for testing materials, mechanisms, and structures, and making such tests as may be necessary, particularly for government agencies; cooperation in the establishment of standard practices for incorporation in codes and specifications; advisory service to government agencies on scientific and technical

problems; invention and development of devices to serve special needs of the Government; assistance

to industry, business, and consumers in the development and acceptance of commercial standards and

simplified trade practice recommendations; administration of programs in cooperation with United

States business groups and standards organizations for the development of international standards of

practice; and maintenance of a clearinghouse for the collection and dissemination of scientific, technical, and engineering information. The scope of the Bureau’s activities is suggested in the following

listing of its four Institutes and their organizational units. Institute for Basic Standards. Applied Mathematics. Electricity. Metrology. Mechanics. Heat. Atomic Physics. Physical Chemistry. Laboratory Astrophysics.* Radiation Physics. Radio Standards

Laboratory:* Radio Standards Physics; Radio Standards Engineering. Office of Standard Reference

Data. Institute for Materials Research. Analytical Chemistry. Polymers. Metallurgy. Inorganic Materials. Reactor Radiations. Cryogenics.* Materials Evaluation Laboratory. Office of Standard Refer- ence Materials.

Institute for Applied Technology. Building Research. Information Technology. Performance Test Development. Electronic Instrumentation. Textile and Apparel Technology Center. Technical Analysis.

Office of Weights and Measures. Office of Engineering Standards. Office of Invention and Innovation.

Office of. Technical Resources. Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information.**

Central Radio Propagation Laboratory.* Ionospheric Telecommunications. Tropospheric Telecommunications. Space Environment Forecasting. Aeronomy.

* Located at Boulder, Colorado 80301. ** Located at 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22171.
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPORT

NBS PROJECT

4212522 Januaty 5, 1966

4212125

DWELLING UNIT BURNOUT TESTS IN PRATT INSTITUTE

by

D. Gross

Submitted to Pratt Institute

School of Architecture

Brooklyn, New York

IMPORTANT NOTICE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANI

for use within the Government. Bef and review. For this reason, the pu whole or in part, is not authorized Bureau of Standards, Washington 2 the Report has been specifically pre

Approved for public release by the

Director of the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST)

on October 9, 2015.

<nbs£>

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL DUREAU OF STANDARDS

NBS REPORT

9026

TEST BUILDING

iccounting documents intended

jected to additional evaluation

ting of this Report, either in

ffice of the Director, National Government agency for which

is for its own use.
• •

' . ,

' '

' ,

.

r •. m

;

. 5 ,
DWELLING UNIT BURNOUT TESTS IN PRATT INSTITUTE TEST BUILDING

by

D. Gross

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract —

'a ^e

1. Introduction 1

2. Objectives 1

3. Description of Test Building 2

4. Test Plan 3

5. Test Results 5

6. Discussion 20

7. Summary 25

8. Acknowledgements 27

9. References 28
DWELLING UNIT BURNOUT TESTS IN PRATT INSTITUTE TEST BUILDING

by

D. Gross

ABSTRACT

Results are reported of three burnout tests in

an experimental test building, using a wood crib

fuel load of 6 lb/ft8 and a structural design load

of 40 lb/ft2

. Measurements were made of temperature,

radiation, smoke, gas composition, and deflection.

A discussion of the fire performance of materials

and methods of construction, and conclusions with

regard to specific fire-protective objectives are

presented

.
DWELLING UNIT BURNOUT TESTS IN PRATT INSTITUTE TEST BUILDING

by

D. Gross

1

.

Introduction

A temporary test building was erected by the Research Department of

the School of Architecture of Pratt Institute as part of its work under

a Low Income Housing Demonstration grant from the U. S. Housing and Home

Finance Agency. The purpose of the Pratt Institute study was to demonstrate (in an actual building to be erected subsequently) that significant

reductions can be achieved in the cost of high-rise housing by the use of

new materials and advanced methods of construction.

The project requires the establishment of technical standards to

be used in place of any previously-established design criteria or building

code requirements.

The purpose of the test building was to develop technical information

needed for the evaluation of the various materials and methods of construction which are being considered for use in the demonstration building . Information on the fire-protective features of the construction was to be

obtained by means of full-scale burnout tests in the test building. The

Fire Research Section, National Bureau of Standards, undertook the responsibility for the planning and conduct of the burnout tests, and this report

summarizes the results of the tests.

2

.

Ob iectives

With respect to fire protection, the primary aims of Pratt Institute

were the protection of the occupants and the prevention of fire spread to

other apartments and buildings. The protection of the building itself or

of property within it was not a primary aim.

In the test building, structural and planning features were incorporated with the aim of accomplishing the following specific objectives:

1. Confinement of fire and smoke within the dwelling unit

or other space in which the fire starts.

2. Protection of the building structure against failure

to carry load.

3. Use of minimum quantities of combustible construction

materials

.
2

To the extent possible, the burnout tests were designed to obtain

information on the degree to which these objectives could be accomplished.

Pratt Institute established additional fire resistance requirements

[1], conformance to which was outside the scope of the burnout tests. The

following tentative requirements, based on performance during a standard

fire endurance test [2], were established:

Requirement -

Component Fire Endurance [2] Noncombust ib le [3]

Structural - columns, Thermal 1/2 hr.

bearing walls, girders, Structural 1 hr

floor slabs, beams

Exterior non-bearing walls Noncombustible , if

30 ft or more from

another building

Partitions between adjacent

dwelling units;

Partitions between dwelling

units and public or service

areas

Thermal 1/2 hr

Partitions within dwelling

unit

;

Closet shelving and kitchen

cabinets

Noncombustible

Tenant storage area Thermal 1 hr

3 . Description of Test Building

The test building consisted of two two-story wings connected by a wood platform and stairs, see Fig. 1. One wing was of steel frame construction with exposed exterior columns and dry floor construction; the

other was of precast concrete, bearing wall construction., Each wing

contained three rooms per story: two rooms, each about the size of a small bedroom, and the third representing a room of an adjacent apartment. The latter room contained a half-bath and an entrance to an

outside balcony. The steel wing was approximately 12 by 34 feet in
3

outside dimensions (balcony not included) with floor area per room

ranging from 114 to 134 square feet; the concrete wing was approximately

14 by 32 feet outside with floor area per room ranging from 100 to

123 square feet. Ceiling height was 8 feet. Three types of curtain

wall construction, two types qJrpartycwalls, two types of floating floor

construction, and innovations in plumbing and heating were incorporated

in the test building. Additional details are supplied elsewhere [4],

Erection of the steel wing was done in May, the concrete wing

in June, with the entire interior finishing completed by mid-July.

Following acoustical tests of sound transmission through walls and

floors in early August, burnout tests were conducted in the steel wing

on August 24th, and in the concrete wing on September 1 and November 3,

1965.

4. Test Plan

Fig. 2 is a plan view of the test building showing the arrangement

of instrumentation for the first two burnout tests. The third test was

similarly, but less completely, instrumented. During each test, a photographic record and visual observations were made and measurements

were also made of temperature, radiation, smoke, gas composition and

deflection. However, because of staff and budgetary limitations, and

the fact that the test site was located 200 miles from the laboratory,

certain measurements were limited in scope, while others, e.g., ventilation effects, were not considered feasible.

A fire load of 6 pounds per square foot of floor area was placed

in rooms 1-6 of the steel wing and rooms 1-3 and 2-3 of the concrete

wing for the respective tests and consisted of nominal 2 by 4 in.

dry Douglas fir lumber nailed into lattice-type cribs, see Fig. 3.

The cribs were supported 16 inches above the floor and ignition was

by means of a flammable liquid (6 or 10 quarts of normal heptane)

placed in pans beneath the wood cribs. The initial window openings - 11 in. wide by 60 in. high for room 1-6, and 14 in. wide by 50 in, high

for rooms 1-3 and 2-3, were chosen to limit the maximum burning rate

and to extend the burning period, but no effort was made to prevent

glass breakage and fallout due to the effects of fire. All other doors

and windows were closed during test. No combustible material was placed

in the adjoining rooms.

For Tests 1 and 2, the three second-floor rooms (except bathroom)

were loaded to the 40 psf design load using concrete block set on end.

For Test 3, the' 20-ft long roof slab above the fire test apartment was

similarly loaded.

Photographic coverage included 16 mm color movies from several

locations, 16 mm color time-lapse movies from a fixed location and 35 mm

color transparencies.
4

Temperature measurements were made using thermocouples placed in

the test room, on or near structural elements and on "unexposed" wall

and floor surfaces of the adjacent rooms. The location of thermocouples

is shown in Figs. 4 and 5, and listed in Table 1. Except for air

thermocouples, all thermocouples were of No. 24 B&S gage chromel and

alumel wires, the welded beads of which were mechanically fastened into

pre-drilled holes in steel or concrete, or were placed under asbestos

pads on "unexposed" surfaces. Four metal-sheathefi, ceramic-insulated

No. 18 B&S gage chrome 1-alumel thermocouples with fast response times

were used to measure air temperature in the fire room in all tests.

In Test No. 3, two No. 18 B&S gage chromel and alumel wire thermocouples

mounted within porcelain insulators in steel pipes (ASTM-type) were

added for comparison purposes.

Radiometers were placed as shown in Fig. 2 with the objective of

measuring irradiance levels and permitting estimates to be made of

distances at which the spread of fire by radiation might occur through

doors, windows, and between buildings. Irradiance levels were measured

with a wide-angle disc radiometer with a mica window [5] and with a wide-angle thermopile radiometer with an Irtran window. A commercial,

narrow-angle radiation pyrometer was used to measure the blackbody

temperature of the flaming interior of the fire room.

Meters for measuring the attenuation of light due to smoke

accumulation were placed in rooms adjacent to or above the fire room,

see Fig. 2. The light source, consisting of a 30-watt lamp, and the

light detector, a type 1P39 vacuum phototube and battery, were assembled

in a single box placed on the floor. Using a mirror flush-mounted on

the ceiling, a double vertical light path was obtained, extending from

1 ft above the floor to the ceiling. This reduced errors in total smoke

measurement due to stratification effects. The optical system of the

meter was designed to exclude, as much as possible, all light not originating

from the 30-watt lamp source. As noted later, this was only partially

achieved

.

Measurements were made of toxic combustion products in rooms adjacent

to the fire room by means of direct reading colorimetric gas detecting

tubes [6]. Using a manually-operated hand pump, a sample of the gas to

be analyzed was drawn through the previously sealed detector tube where

a chemical reaction occurred and gas concentration was indicated by the

pre-calibrated length of stain. A separate tube was used to indicate

the volumetric concentration of each particular component of interest.

Measurements were made of CO, CO^, HC1 and HCN at selected locations

indicated^ in Fig. 2.
5

Measurements were made of the deflection of the floor (or roof)

above the fire room, both at the center of the room and near the

partition at the approximate mid-span of the floor system. In tests

1 and 2, invar wires were fastened to the surface of the finished

floor above and passed upwards around pulleys mounted on the unloaded,

relatively cool ceiling directly above the measuring points. The

wires were then passe d horizontally near the ceiling through a hole in

the exterior wall to pulleys mounted entirely free of the building

under test. Each wire passed downward and terminated with a weight to

maintain wire tension. An indicating marker on each wire was used to

follow deflection changes on a graduated scale mounted behind the wire.

In Test 3, a wooden boom, unsupported by the test building, was installed

in order to mount the pulleys above the measuring points. A few measurements were also made of the lateral movement of exterior wall panels.

In Test 1, the invar wire was fastened to the interior face of the lightaggregate concrete panel and passed to (and through) the opposite wall

just above the finished surface of the second floor. In Test 3, the

invar wire was fastened to the aluminum-faced, polystyrene core sandwich

panel exterior face. In Test 2, lateral movements of the north (concrete)

wall and the concrete floor slab were made using dial gages. An invar

wire was also fastened to the concrete party wall at the second floor

level to indicate longitudinal expansion of the 20-ft floor slab.

5 . Test Results

5 . 1 Test Log

The following is a log of visual test observations and measurements

as well as post-test investigation notes compiled for each test:

Time

(min)

0

5

15

16

(22-23

25

35

Test No. 1- -Room 1-6, Steel Wing, August 24, 1965

Brief Summary Observations

Test started at 11:22 a.m. Weather: Clear;

Temperature: 74 °F; RH. : 567o. Wind 7 mph,

Direction: 30° (NE)

Heavy smoke in Room 1-5.

Windows in fire room fell out, Flashover.

Part of east partition wall fell into fire.

Wallboard ceiling fell off; joists and beams exposed)

Part of west partition wall fell into fire.

Fuel supply essentially consumed.
6

Time Detailed Test Observations

(min)

1:30 Heavy smoke

2:30 - 3:30 Cracking of window glass and fallout of vinyl stripping

5:00 One sq ft section of window glass fell out; smoke

filling room 1-5 through door separations.

9:00 Heavy white smoke, Room 1-5.

10:00 Window glass bowing out at top.

13:30 Floor tile burning.

14:45 Window glass fell out; first flames out of window.

15:15 Flashover

15:45 Part of east partition wall fell into fire

16:00 Exterior door badly charred upper half; bowed in 1/2 in

16:15 Paint ignites on outside of exterior door.

16:45 Flaming from exterior wall panel above window.

17:00 Flames reach top of second floor window.

19:00 East partition wall burning; flames reach radiometer.

20:30 Clock stopped; paint burning on exterior column

20:45 Second floor window pane out.

22:00 Clock and stake on fire.

(22:00 - 23:00 Gypsum board ceiling fell)

25:00 Part of west partition wall fell into fire; heavy

smoke from second floor window.

28:00 Flames dying down.

29:00 More active flaming

30:00 Flames dying down; stucco on steel curtain wall

panel flaming; panels deforming.
7

Time Detailed Test Observations (cont'd)

(min)

33:00 No further flaming out of window.

34:00 Remainder of second floor window pane fell out.

35:00 Interior of steel curtain wall bare of gypsum

board and insulation.

39:00 - 53:00 Sections of east and west partitions fell.

Post-Test Observations

1. Steel Curtain Wall panels - Buckling and distortion to roof level.

Exterior stucco surface had ignited and burned on a portion of

panels. Poured gypsum firestop fairly effective except where

pierced by electrical conduit. A few localized areas where fire

propagated in the insulation of second-floor wall. No insulation

or 'gypsum board remained on wall of fire room after fire test.

2. Light Aggregate Concrete panels - Severe outward bowing. 1 - to

2-in. separation from floor system provided access for smoke and

fire to upper floor. No access where panel butted up against ex- terior column. Polystyrene aggregate burned out. Very little

structural strength remaining.

3. Interior Door - Passage of flame above door frame into Room 1-5.

Floor tile blistered.

4. Joists - Maximum permanent deflection approximately 6 in. on both

joists along centerline of Room 1-6. Web rods near walls badly

buckled. No apparent break in welds between joist and girder.

5. Spandrel Beam (North) - Sag (less than 1 in.), distortion and

warping

.

6. Girder (East) - No excessive distortion. Fire stop above girder

generally effective except where interrupted for structural members

and electrical conduit.

7. Exterior Column - Temporary distortion and bowing, approximately

1/2 in. over length.

8. Gypsum Board-Glass Fiber Composite Wall - Very little of the gypsum

board panels on the fire-exposed layer of the walls remained after

fire test. Holes for electrical conduit (BX conduit), radiant heaters

and thermostats permitted the passage of smoke into adjoining rooms

on the first floor. No smoke penetration through second floor partitions. Asphalt- impregnated paper flamed and produced heavy black

smoke

.
8

9. Floor - considerable burnout of asphalt tile floor.

10. Window - Upper two- thirds of aluminum window frame melted.

Test No. 2, Room 1-3, Concrete Wing, September 1, 1965

Time

(min)

0

Brief Summary Observations

Test started at 11:23 a.m. Weather: partly cloudy;

Temperature: 74 °F; RH.'h 69%, Wind 14 mph, Direction:

180-200° (S). (Newark Airport Weather Report).

7 Section of upper right glass pane (1/2 ft2

) fell out.

8 Smoke at ceiling,Room 1-4.

9 Single crib only burning.

30 Upper two- thirds of right window pane fell out.

41 Window blown out by explosive concrete spalling;

heavy black smoke; fire building up.

44 F iashover ; flames out of window.

41-70 Intermittent violent spalling.

40-80 Development and enlargement of cracks in concrete walls,

particularly at joints; water weeping from concrete walls

smoke and steam through cracks.

70 Decreased flaming; heavy smoke upstairs, Room 2-3.

Detailed Test Observations

o CO o Dark smoke, becoming light at 2 minutes.

o o Window glass cracking; heptane flames from two pans

only

.

o o

r-^ Section of upper right glass pane (1/2 ft2 area) fell

out

.

8:10 Smoke at ceiling, Room 1-4.

9:00 Single crib only burning; upper edge of glass pane

leaning out approximately 2 in.

14:00 Heavy white smoke in Room 1-4.
9

Time

(min)

20:00

26:00

29:30

31:30

35:15

41:00

44:00

47:00

41:00

58:00

60:00

67:30

72:00

73:00

75:00

86:00

88:00

Detailed Observations (cont'd)

26:00 Bulging; or aluminum sandwich panel, approximate ly

1- to 1-1/2 in. in some places.

Exterior door bowing about 1/4 in.

Increase in smoke from fire room, upper two-thirds

of right windowpane fell out.

Concrete spalled off back wall.

East wall of fire room bowed in.

Window blown out by explosive concrete spalling;

heavy black smoke; fire building up.

Flashover; flames out of window.

Gypsum board layer on east wall of fire room down.

70 Intermittent violent spalling from south and west walls

Joint crack on exterior (North) wall about 1/4 in.

reinforcing bars in west wall exposed.

Water dripping down wall, Room 1-1; separation at wall

of Room 1-2, approximately 1/4 to 1/2 in.

Insulation in east wall exposed through large opening.

Smoke heavy in Rooms 1-4 and 2-3.

Handle and upper portion of exterior door charred badly

Flames receding; water weeping down exterior (north)

wall

Joint crack on exterior (north) wall ranges in width

from 7/32 in. (base) to 7/16 in. (top of bldg.).

Smoke (steam)in Room 1-1 increasing from ceiling down.
10

Post-Test Observations

Room 1-3 --(Fire room) Severe spalling of concrete on north and

especially west walls, with many reinforcing bars exposed.

Maximum spall depth, up to 2 in. Aluminum sandwich panels

intact except for hole in inner ply at upper corner of

window; polystyrene insulation burned out; aluminum straps

distorted severely. No spalling of hollow-core concrete

floor slabs forming ceiling, but gridwork pattern of cracks

over entire ceiling with severe cracks (1/16 in.) at SW corner.

Cracks at ceiling joints, 1/6 in. to 1/8 in. Gypsum board

cover for steel angle still in place for approximately 6 ft.

East wall--outer ply of gypsum board 2/3 down, glass fiber

insulation exposed. Large crack (1-1/2 in.) between this and

aluminum sandwich panel. Door frame warped; door bowed out

slightly; wall above and around door badly blackened.

Room 1-1 --East wall--floor to ceiling separation (1/8 in.) at concrete

wall joint; separation from aluminum door frame, 1/8 in.;

widespread hairline cracks over entire surface and water

stain damage due to extensive condensation and runoff. No

damage to south, north or west walls.

Room 1-2 --No damage.

Room 1-4 --Cracks in hollow-core concrete floor slabs forming ceiling.

Fire damage along upper 3 ft. of intersection of composite

wall and alumimum sandwich panel (1-1/2 in, separation). The

composite wall caved in toward Room 1-3, maximum 5 in. Fire

penetration damage between wall and door frame limited to

upper 2 ft; door and frame reasonably undistorted. Scorch

marks on upper 8 in. of closet facing composite wall. No

apparent damage to basemold (along 4 walls) or vinyl molding

around closet. Extensive and general smoke and water sweat

marks

.

Room 2-1 --Floor to ceiling separation in East wall (party wall) joint,

and corresponding roof slab joint. Maximum separation about

5/16 in. closing up to about 3/16 in. when cool. Additional

hairline cracks at corner joints between prefabricated gypsum

board partition wall and concrete wall and roof slabs. Steam

penetration through hairline cracks.

Room 2-2 --Hairline cracks at ceiling joints; separation 1/16 in. upper

half of joint at poured concrete wall filler unit. No damage

due to fire, smoke or water (from concrete sweating).
11

Room 2-3 --North wall -- separation of floor both horizontally and

vertically approximately 3/8 in.; slight evidence of smoke

penetration under basemold; floor to ceiling crack in

gypsum board. East wall (gypsum board partition) intact.

West wall -- floor to ceiling cracks (3/16 in. max) at

wall panel joint; hairline cracks and water (concrete

sweating) damage up to 2 ft above floor. South wall

(aluminum sandwich panel) -- separation from floor approximately 1/8 in. vertically and horizontally; fire and smoke

penetration between panel and basemold at two locations

above floor, SW corner of room.

Room 2-4 --Separation of partition from roof panels, 5/16 in. max

provides clear access to Room 2-3. Maximum separation

at floor 3/16 in. vertically in SW corner; 1/8 in. norizontally NW corner. Separations of closet and of gypsum

board (east wall) from roof slabs. Cracks along all hollowcore concrete roof slab joints. No fire, smoke or water vapor

damage

.

Exterior --North side -- major floor to roof cracks (1/8 in. max after

cooling) along vertical mortar joint east of exterior door.

Slight hairline cracks at other vertical joints further

east. Foundation (concrete block) cracks at NE and NW

corners. Shear crack at floor level of poured concrete

filler unit (near exterior door) with 3/16 in. horizontal

displacement. South side -- separation (1/4 in.) of aluminum

sandwich from . concrete - wall. Cracks and separation of

concrete balcony units, both floors. East and west sides -- hairline cracks in vertical mortar joints only.

Test No. 3 Room 2-3, Concrete Wing, November 3, 1965

S r i e f ;j S umma ry

Ob s e rv a t i on s : “

Test started at 9:55 a.m. Weather: Clear; Temperature:

46 °F; RH . : 687,; Wind; 11 mph, Direction 220° (SW).

Section of window glass (1-1/2 ft2

) fell out.

Section of window glass (1/2 ft2 fell out.

Bowing of aluminum sandwich panel and aluminum window

frame

.

Drops of boiling plastic expelled.

Remainder of window glass fell out.

Concrete spalling.

Sandwich pan4l fell out; room completely involved in

flames

.

Fuel supply exhausted.

Progressive smoldering and occasional flaming in sandwich panel of east room

Time

(min)

0

3

4

10

20

28

31

33

45

45 - 150
12

Time

(min)

3:10

Detailed Test Observations

1-1/2 sq ft section of window glass fell out.

4:00 Another 1/2 sq ft section of window glass fell out;

strong flaming observed in west and center cribs.

7:00 Left aluminum sandwich panel warped at upper right

corner.

9:50 Window frame and aluminum sandwich panel bowed out at

top approximately 1 in.

10:30 Entire center portion of left aluminum sandwich panel

bowed out.

19:10 Flames bathing entire rear wall.

20:30 Smoking drops of boiling plastic expelled from top of

window frame.

24. Op Cracks developing in east (gypsum board partition)

wall; flames reach window.

28:10 Remainder of window glass fell out.

28:30 Thick flames fill upper half of room.

30:15 Aluminum window frame melting and falling out.

31 - 32 Concrete spalling.

32:50 Aluminum sandwich panel fell out; entire side open;

complete flame involvement.

33:20 Heavy spalling.

44:30 Collapse of last crib; occasional flames and smoke

from aluminum sandwish panel of east room.

47:00 Flaming in partition near door to east room

50:00 Very few flames visible in fire room.

58:00 Smoke issuing from bathroom vent to roof.

59:00 Asphalt dripping from floor ledge.

60 to 150 Slow smoldering and occasional flaming with smoke

and charring progressing in aluminum sandwich panel

of east room.
13

Post Test Observations

Room 2-3 --(Fire room) Concrete spalling on north and west wall, but

no reinforcing steel exposed; maximum depth 1-1/2 in.

Gypsum board cover over steel angle still in place although

sagging in spots. Slight asphalt dripping from roof through

ceiling slab joint. Gypsum board partition wall erect, but

practically unsupported. Opening along vertical joint of

concrete wall; several other small cracks and separations.

Separation between interior door frame and north concrete

wall

.

Room 2-4 --Blisters on interior door except for lower 4 in. Scorch

marks (from ceiling to mid-height) on wall adjacent to door.

Several holes through aluminum sandwich panel; polystyrene

core burned out except for sections above and on east side

of window frame. Maximum separation of aluminum sandwich

panel approximately 1-1/4 in. at southwest corner of room. Separations at hollow-core concrete roof panel joints not

appreciably greater than from Test No. 2.

5.2. Moisture

The relative humidity in fire rooms 1-6 (Test 1) and 1-3 (Test 2)

averaged 65% during the 7-day period prior to test.

The moisture content of the wood comprising the cribs was 10 to

12%, as measured with a prong-type electical resistance moisture meter.

Measurements were made of the relative humidity of air in cavities

within the second floor hollow-core concrete floor slabs and of the

load-bearing partition wall one week prior to Test 2 with the following

results

Hollow-core floor slab, in web between cores, 73% rh

Hollow-core floor slab, near grout joint, 82% rh

Solid partition 84% rh

Direct, moisture content measurements of the concrete by extracting cores were attempted but did not prove successful.
-14 -

5.3. Temperatures

Test No. 1 Selected temperatures recorded during Test No. 1 are shown

in Fig. 6. Air temperatures in the fire room rose steadily until

shortly after 15 minutes when flashover occurred, causing a further

sharp increase. Temperatures remained near 1000 °C (1832 °F) from

18 to 32 minutes and then dropped off. The maximum individual

temperature reading was 1167 °C (2133 °F) . The furnace time- temperature

curve prescribed in the standard laboratory fire test [2] is included

for comparison. In any comparison, however, it should be borne in

mind that the latter test prescribes slow-response thermocouples

(mounted in heavy protective iron pipes) compared to the faster

response thermocouples actually used.

Also shown in Fig. 6 are average or representative temperature

curves for the 12-in. beam, the 10-in. girder, the lower chord of the

joist, and the exterior unprotected column at a height of 8 ft above

the room floor. Temperatures on the interior structural members were

rapidly elevated from about 100 °C (212 °F) to about 800 °C (1472 °F)

when the gypsum board ceiling rapidly and completely dropped at

about 22-1/2 minutes. Temperature measurements were made on the

inner and outer flanges of the exterior column at heights of 5, 8,

11 and 14 feet above the floor of the fire room. The temperature was

highest at the 8-ft height and lowest at the 15-ft height. The outer

flange was generally, but not always, hotter than the inner flange.

A maximum temperature of 520 °C (968 °F) at 30 minutes was recorded

on the outer flange at a height of 8 ft. Temperatures in excess of

440 °C (825 °F) and extending approximately 4 ft on the outer flange,

5 ft on the inner flange and 3 ft on the web were recorded. Some

portions were exposed to this temperature for 15 minutes.

The temperature on the exterior face of the light-aggregate

concrete panel under an asbestos pad reached a maximum of 176 °F : at

90 minutes. The temperature at the center of the "unexposed" surface

of the composite party wall adjoining Room 1-5 attained a maximum of

238 °F at 105 minutes. A temperature rise of 250 degrees F was

reached on the connecting steel door at approximately 10 minutes, and

after flashover, the temperature on the back surface of the door was

practically the same as that in the fire room. The air in Room 1-5

reached a temperature of 150 °F at 26 minutes and a maximum temperature

of 235 °F at 41 minutes. The temperature at the center of the "unexposed" composite wall surface of the adjoining apartment (Room 1-8)

reached 156 °F at 2-1/2 hours and was still rising slowly. The air

temperature in the adjoining apartment reached a maximum of 108 °F

after 31 minutes. The temperature on the finished floor (under

thermocouple pads) of the room above the fire rose slowly to a maximum temperature of 170 °F at 85 minutes.
15

Test No . 2

The failure of all five cribs comprising the fire load to

ignite simultaneously prevented the rapid and uniform buildup in

temperature in the fire room. As shown in Fig. 7, the temperature

measured by the NE thermocouple, situated above the burning crib,

was considerably above the average of the three other thermocouples

until after 41 minutes when complete window dropout and intense

burning occurred. Because of the cooling effect of the southerly

wind and fire room temperatures only slightly above the melting point

of aluminum (660 °C , 1220 °F) , the aluminum sandwich panel remained

in place. The temperature on the exterior face of the aluminum

sandwich panel under an asbestos pad reached a maximum of 410 °C

(770 °F) at 55 minutes.

The temperature in the second floor slab above the fire at the

level of the lower reinforcing wires is shown by a typical curve in

Fig. 7. The maximum temperatures at six locations varied from 350 °C

to 380 °C (635 to 716 °F) and occurred at approximately 80 minutes.

At two other locations ,mpisture evaporation endotherms limited the

temperature to 100 °C (212 °F) for extended periods and the maximum

temperatures reached were 127 ° and 185 °C (260 and 365 °F)

.

A typical curve of temperature on the steel supporting angles is

also shown in Fig. 7. At these east and west wall-ceiling joints, the

migration (presumably through the hollow cores) and subsequent condensation of moisture, tended to hold the temperature at the steam point

(100 °C) for extended periods. The maximum temperatures recorded on

the steel angles ranged from 138 0 to 172 °C (280 to 341 °F) at about

100 minutes. In the grout joint along the north wall, a temperature

of about 230 °C (446 °F) was measured during the period of 70 to

140 minutes.

The temperature at the center of the "unexposed" surface of the

gypsum board partition between rooms reached a maximum of 206 °F at

120 minutes. A temperature rise of 250 degrees F was reached on

the connecting steel door at approximately 15 minutes. The air in

the adjoining Room 1-4 reached a (temperature of 150 °F at 42 minutes,

and a maximum temperature of 205 °F at 72 minutes. The temperature

of the "unexposecF1 surface of the concrete partition to the adjoining

apartment reached a maximum of 176 °F after 170 minutes. The air

temperature in the adjoining apartment did not exceed .'90 °F„ The

temperature on the finished floor (under thermocouple pads) of

Room 2-3, above the fire, rose slowly and had reached 150 °F when

measurements were discontinued after 5-1/2 hours.
16

Test No. 3.

Air temperatures measured in the fire room were intermediate to

those measured in Tests Nos. 1 and 2, and slightly below the standard

fire curve until 35 minutes. As shown in Fig. 8, room air temperature dropped rapidly when the aluminum sandwich panel wall fell out.

A comparison between the temperature recorded by a fast-response

thermocouple and an ASTM-type thermocouple is also shown. The thermocouple within the heavy steel pipe was in close proximity to a fastresponse thermocouple whose temperature was in good agreement with

the overall average. It is evident that, during a rapid buildup of

temperature, a fast-response thermocouple may indicate temperatures

one to two hundred degrees C higher than those indicated by the

ASTM E- 119-type thermocouple.

The temperature on the exterior face of the aluminum sandwich

panel rose steadily to 450 °C (842 °F) at 30 minutes and then

rapidly to a peak reading of 750 °C (1382 °F) immediately prior to

panel fallout at 33 minutes.

Due to the rapid temperature drop in the fire room after 35 minutes,

the temperature in the roof slab at the level of the lower reinforcing

wires was significantly lower than in Test 2, reaching a maximum of

225 °C (437 °F) at 75 minutes.

The temperature rise at the center of the "unexposed" surface

of the gypsum board partition came within a few degrees of the ASTM

prescribed limit for an average temperature rise for failure of

250 degrees °F (139 degrees °C) at about 75 minutes. This limit was

reached on the connecting steel door at approximately 7-1/2 minutes,

and after 38 minutes, the door provided very little resistance to

the flow of heat from the fire room. The air in the adjoining room

reached a temperature of 150 °F at 31 minutes, a temperature of

194 °F at 49 minutes and a maximum temperature of 230 °F at 101 minutes.

The temperature at the center of the "unexposed" surface of the

concrete partition to the adjoining apartment reached a maximum of

156 °F at 90 minutes. The air temperature in the adjoining apartment did not exceed 90 °F.

In Table 2, a summary is presented of appropriate values of

temperature, temperature rise and time for the three tests.
17

5.4. Radiation

Two types of radiation instruments were placed at a selected

distance from the fire room window: a wide-angle thermopile

radiometer to measure the irradiance level (often called radiation

intensity), and a narrow-angle radiation pyrometer to measure the

blackbody temperature of a portion of the flames within the room. Blackbody temperatures between 800 °C (1472 °F) and 1000 °C

(1832 °F) and averaging approximately 900 °C (1652 °F) , were

recorded in Test No. 1 during the time period 15 to 35 minutes.

This blackbody temperature corresponds to an actual (thermocouple)

temperature of approximately 1000 °C (1832 °F) during the same

interval, and indicates a flame emissivity of about 0.7. In

Test No. 3, a maximum blackbody temperature of 920 °C (1688 °F) was

recorded during the relatively brief period of peak flaming.

Blackbody temperature and irradiance level measurements during

active flaming were not obtained for Test No. 2.

To permit a comparison of irradiance levels between tests to

be made, the maximum irradiance values were divided by the configuration factor F, normally used in radiant energy calculations based

on the window openings only, in the manner suggested in reference [7].

These hypothetical window radiation intensity values, as well as those based on blackbody temperatures, are listed in Table 3.

Radiation levels at other points may be predicted by multiplying the

hypothetical window radiation intensities by the configuration factor

appropriate for the window area and point in question.

For Test No. 1, the hypotherical window radiation intensity was

approximately 23 w/cnP compared to an intensity of 10.7 w/cnP corresponding to the measured blackbody temperature. This means that

radiation from flames above and surrounding the window in Test No. 1 contributed as much as that directly from the window opening. For

Test No. 3, the hypothetical window radiation intensity was 11 w/cnP

just prior to fallout of the aluminum sandwich partition.

Also listed in the table are maximum irradiance values for

points close to the window above the fire room and at a distance of

three feet from the exterior door. The irradiance level at the

exterior door was appreciably higher in Test No. 1 due to flaming

of the surface coatings on the door and adjacent wall. The irradiance level in the room above the fire in Test No. 1 may have been

high enough (2.5 w/’cnf ) to cause ignition of drapes or other furnishings through the closed window.
18

5 . 5 Smoke

The attenuation of light due to smoke (and water vapor)

accumulation was measured in terms of percent of initial light

transmission (T) . Readings were converted to optical density per

foot, 1/L (log

^ 100/T) , where L, the optical path length was

two times the smoke meter-to-ceiling height, approximately 14 feet.

No corrections were made for possible slight drift in the phototube

circuits, for the moisture or soot deposits on the lenses and

mirrors, or for the scattering of daylight by the smoke. The results

are plotted in Figs. 9, 10, and 11.

These results represent the accumulated or total smoke concentration in the various rooms adjacent to the fire room as measured over a vertical path, and are essentially independent of

smoke stratification effects. In a typical fire situation, smoke

stratification could alter the time period prior to the onset of

impaired visibility. Decreasing values following a maximum may be

due to smoke settling or agglomeration, loss through openings, etc.,

but in the case of Tests Nos. 2 and 3, was principally due to the

condensation of the moisture vapor portion of the "smoke" aerosol.

5.6, Toxic Combustion Products

In Test No. 1, positive indications were obtained for CO and

HCN, but not for CO

2 or HCi . In Test No. 2, several measurements

for HCji also proved negative. In Test No. 3, observations were

limited to CO, CC^ and HCN and were taken only in Rooms 2-3 and 2-4.

The maximum measured gas concentrations and the corresponding times

for all tests are given in Table 4. Readings taken in the fire room

(Room 2-3) in Test No. 3, although listed for information, are

questionable because of' (a) excessive water vapor condensation in

the sampling tube, and (b) temperatures in excess of the recommended

operating range.

Because of the limited number of spot readings taken, the lack

of positive readings should not be taken as proof of the absence of

the component.

5.7. Deflection

Test No. 1.

Vertical and lateral deflection measurements are shown in Fig. 12

Rapid deflection of the floor at the center of the room followed

shortly after the ceiling dropped and all structural members became

directly exposed to fire. The maximum deflection observed was 7.4 in.

with a permanent sag of about six in. after cooling. At the mid-span

of the joists, the maximum deflection observed was 2-1/4 inches.
19

The exterior light aggregate concrete panel at the measurement

location had deflected (bowed out) Q> . 5 in. at 41 min when the wire

fastening came loose. After the test, it was noted that the panels

had bowed out a maximum of about two inches*

Test No. 2

Vertical and lateral deflection measurements are shown in

Fig. 13. The maximum deflection was 0.95 in. at the center of

the room and 0.60 in. at the center of the span, both reached at

65 minutes.

The outward movement of the concrete north wall reached a maximum of 0.064 in. at 30 min, and then slowly receded* At 85 min,

when readings were discontinued, the net movement with respect to

the original position was 0.065 in. inward.

Expansion of the 20-ft floor slab (east-west), measured by

means of an invar wire, occurred gradually and reached a maximum

of 0.44 in. at 70 minutes, A complementary measurement using dial

gages on the east and west exterior walls (total span 32 ft) gave

an overall extension of 0.49 in. maximum at 80 min with a drop-off

to 0.34 in. after nearly five hours. The maximum east-west expansion at the first floor level was 0.08 in.

Meaningful dial gage extension measurements on the exterior

aluminum sandwich panel were not possible due to frequent flexures

inward and outward, following burnout of the stabilizing polystyrene

core. Visual observation of 1-1/2 in. extensions were noted during

test

Test No. 3

Maximum deflections of the roof slab were 1.3 and 1.2 in.,

at the center of the room and at mid-span, respectively. These

occurred at 40 minutes. After 2-1/2 hours, when readings were

discontinued, the slab had already recovered about 1/2 in. of this

deflection

The aluminum sandwich panel bowed in 1/2 in. within 2 min,

and then reversed, bowing outward gradually and continuously to a reading of 2-3/4 in. at 30 minutes.
20

6 . Discussion

Because of time and monetary limitations, field burnout tests

are performed under a very restricted number of possible conditions,*

Such tests are neither standardized nor completely controllable,

and considerable variations in time -temperature exposure may be

encountered. It is clear that the area of ventilation openings

(windows, cracks, etc.), the direction and magnitude of winds, and

the type and orientation of the combustible load are of vital

importance. These results apply only to the specific test conditions established.

6.1. Fire Intensity

For comparison purposes, the average fire room air thermocouple

temperatures are plotted in Fig. 14 for all three tests. The differences may be attributed to: (a) wind and ventilation effects,

including the vagaries associated with the fallout of window glass

and the development of^other wall openings, and (b) differences in

thermal, physical and combustible properties of the room surfaces.

Comparing the two concrete wing tests, the cooling effect of

the strong southerly wind in Test No. 2 prevented simultaneous

ignition of all cribs and the pattern of fire development was

appreciably slower than that of Test No. 3. Although the wind in

Test No. 3 was also southerly and somewhat unfavorable to rapid

fire development, complete flame involvement with subsequent fallout of the aluminum- faced polystyrene core sandwich panel occurred.

In Test No. 1, wind did not appear to affect fire development

significantly. The flashover which occurred at 15 minutes is not

unusual for rapidly developing fires in rooms with suitable ventilation and a fire load of 6 psf. Flashover has been noted in previous

burnout tests, including some with mock furnishings of less than

4 psf [8]. However, the involvement of the ^asphalt- impregnated paper

and glass fiber composite wall structure may have been a contributing

factor to the severity of the fire which developed. It is estimated

that the asphalt tile floor, burnout of which was extensive, could

have provided the equivalent of 2 psf of combustible load.

It is probable that collapse of the gypsum board ceiling was a direct result of the simultaneous thermal expansion of steel supporting members and the contraction of the gypsum board due to calcination, shortly after flashover.*

There is some evidence that concrete structures, especially when

uninsulated and relatively moist (as for example, the ceiling and

party wall slabs in Rooms 1-3 and 2-3), may have a moderating effect

on the temperature built up during fires. Fore example, the additional

heat required to vaporize and raise the temperature of 1 lb. of water

*Such rapid and complete dropout of the gypsum board ceiling was

not observed during a recently performed ASTM E-119 test on a floor-ceiling assembly of similar construction.
21

to 750 °C (1382 °F) is 1700 Btu. If 10 percent of the moisture

content (assumed to be 10% by weight) in the two directly exposed

concrete members were vaporized and heated to fire temperature,

this would represent over 4 percent of the heat supplied by the

fire load. Although the temperatures in both concrete wing tests

were considerably below those in the steel wing test, no definite

conclusions on this point appear justified. The use of heat flow

transducers to measure the heat absorption of walls would be

desirable in future tests.

Fire severity is a measure of the intensity and duration of a fire, and is commonly expressed in terms of the equivalent exposure

time in the standard fire endurance test. Based upon a limited

number of burnout tests performed in:,,f ireproof structures" ^with

various combustible contents [9], an approximate relationship

between combustible load (lb per ft2 of floor area) and fire severity

(hr) was formulated [10]. On this basis, a fire severity of 1/2 hr

was related to 5 psf of (wood and paper) combustibles. The latter

reference also summarized measurements of the combustible contents

of representative types of occupancies and buildings about 1940.

From a total of 13 apartments and residences which comprised the

survey, it was found that the movable -property combustible contents of an entire apartment or residence averaged over all areas

(including basement, bathroom, bedroom, kitchen, living room, etc.)

was 3.4 psf (range 2.4 to 4.9 psf). The average values for bedrooms,

closets included, was 5.0 psf (range 2.5 to 7.3 psf), and for living

rooms 3.9 psf (range 1.4 to 6,8 psf). It was on the basis of these

considerations that the sponsor suggested and we concurred in the

selection of a fuel load corresponding to 6 lb/ft2 floor area.

The total heat released by the complete burnout of six lb/ft2

of nominal 2-by 4-in. lumber arranged in lattice -type cribs is no

greater than that from the complete burnout of six lb/ft2 of wooden

furniture arranged in a conventional manner. However, since the

rate of fire growth in a "typical" furniture fire could vary widely

depending upon its type, and upon the orientation of furniture with

respect to sources of ignition, the use of closely-stacked cribs

and simultaneous ignition was considered preferable and more readily

reproduced. This arrangement produced a fire of considerable severity.

For evaluating the fire safety of a structure by a single test demonstration, such a burnout test is not considered unreasonable or unrealistic.
22

6.2. Smoke

Measurements were made for the purpose of estimating the

extent of smoke buildup which could seriously obstruct human vision

during a building fire. From past experience with accidental fires,

and in controlled burnout tests [7, 11], decrease in visibility is

often considered to represent ' h major life hazard to occupants.

A criterion sometimes used is based on the assumption that

when the "visibility" (or visual range) of a handlamp- illuminated

sign drops to 4 feet, a room is smoke-logged to a degree that would

seriously impede the escape of occupants [12], It was inferred

that this limit was reached when the light transmitted over a 4-ft

path was reduced to 0.25% of the value in the absence of smoke, or

an optical density of 0.65 per f t Williams-Leir [13] has experimentally verified this threshold level and determined that it

corresponded to the ability to distinguish a 10-watt lamp in a smoke-filled room at a distance of 11 feet. It should be borne in

mind, however, that these values are based on detection by trained

observers who were seeking an illuminated object or lamp in a known

location. To allow for >98 percent probability of an average observer detecting a contrast in light in any (unknown) direction,

and for the complex effects of hysteria, eye irritation, etc.,

under fire conditions, a combined "field factor" and "safety

factor" of 10 may be applied to the optical density. That this is

a more practical value may perhaps be gaged by the results of tests

conducted by the Los Angeles Fire Department in 1962 [14]. In

those tests, observers in a test room without breathing apparatus

left when the smoke "became irritating with apprehension about

personal safety," and that time corresponded to an average optical

density of only 0.01 per foot as measured horizontally at a 5-ft

level. Similarly, observers with self-contained breathing apparatus

left when obscuration by smoke became untenable, and that corresponded to an average optical density of 0.04 per foot.

For a limiting optical density of 0.065 per foot, comparative

critical times are summarized in Table 5. The similarity in time

periods for the three measurement locations may be noted. As

expected, smoke penetration to the adjacent room (through openings

around the closed connecting door) became critical in 2 to 7 minutes.
23

It was determined, subsequent to completion of the tests,

that the smoke meters probably were not completely free from

the effects of smoke- scat tered daylight entering through the

windows. (This is generally minimized by proper collimation of

the light beam source and the use of appropriate apertures in

the smoke meter). Laboratory evaluation cf the meters following

the test series revealed that the smoke density test readings

were lower than they should be, approximately 10 percent low at

the limiting optical density. However, the effect upon the

times listed in Table 5 are estimated to be relatively minor.

6.3. Toxic Combustion Products

The following "tolerable limit" values, taken or inferred

from literature references, may serve as a guide in evaluating the

measured concentrations of toxic combustion products.

Gas

Tolerable for

Several Minutes

Concentration

Tolerable

30-60 min

Critical

2-3 hours MAC

3

CO 12800 ppm^ 1500 ppm^ 100 ppm

co

2

10-15% 5%, 0.5%

HCN 100-150 ppm 50 ppm 30 ppm 10 ppm

It can be seen from the measured values in Table 4, that

critical concentrations of CO, HCN and sometimes CO^ were

experienced in the room adjacent to the fire room. In Test

No. 1, where an appreciable separation between the floor and wall

panel occurred, a critical concentration of CO was measured in

the room above the fire room. No measurements in the critical

concentration ranges of these gases were obtained in the adjacent

apartment of the steel or concrete wing.

6.4. Structural Effects

There was no evidence of rupture or other sudden structural

failure of the floor and roof assemblies tested. Nevertheless,

since excessive deflection of a structural member under the combined effects of load and fire exposure is of critical importance,

a careful evaluation of deflection is necessary.

clMaximum average atmospheric concentration for 8-hr exposure without

injury to health, as adopted by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, 1962.

^Depends upon degree of physical exertion
24

Deflection limits for fire-exposed assemblies in buildings

have not as yet been established. However, vertical deflection

criteria in terms of general design features have been proposed

for defining load failure of beams, floors and roof constructions

during fire tests [15]. Based on a survey of laboratory fire

endurance tests on representative constructions (considered to

have failed to sustain the applied load during test), the re- quirement was proposed that both a maximum deflection D > L

2 /800d,

and a maximum hourly rate deflection R > L

2 /150d be exceeded as an indication of load failure.

Whereas, in a laboratory fire test, the entire span length L

is loaded and fire-exposed, in these tests only one-half the span

was exposed to fire. Taking L = 10 ft and d (the depth of the

joist) = 1 ft, load failure was arbitrarily considered to have

occurred in Test No, 1 at 26 minutes. It should be noted, however,

that the structure continued to support the 40 psf design load

without collapse throughout the test.

Bowing of the unprotected steel column adjacent to the fire

window of about 1/2 in. occurred in Test No. 1 according to visual

estimate. This bowing may have resulted from thermal expansion of

the 10- in. girder, and. was recovered on cooling. However, it

should be noted that the column was stressed to only a small fraction of its design load. Temperatures in excess of 825 °F and

extending approximately 4 feet on the outer flange, 5 feet on the

inner flange and 3 feet on the web were recorded. Some areas were

exposed to this temperature for 15 minutes. The maximum temperature

recorded was 968 °F. In light of these temperatures, it seems

appropriate that serious consideration should be given to the use

of fire-protective covering and/or maintaining greater spacing

between columns and window openings, in order to provide a margin

of increased safety for such structural elements.

Prior to test, concern was expressed regarding the possible

spalling of concrete if fire-tested while moist. Such spalling

did actually occur, and in Test No. 2, was sufficient to expose

a considerable number of reinforcing bars. It is anticipated that

with adequate curing and an approach to its equilibrium moisture

content, the tendency of concrete members to spall under fire

exposure should decrease.
25

7. Summary

The importance of full-scale burnout tests in providing

valuable supplementary fire performance data was demonstrated

in a series of three burnout tests in an experimental test

building. These burnout tests permitted study of the fire

effects on floor-wall joints, smoke penetration through doors

and openings, and other complex interactions not generally

feasible in conventional laboratory fire tests.

With regard to the specific objectives established by

Pratt Institute for fire protection, the following results

and comments were noted:

1. In both constructions, a small amount of flaming

penetrated to the room above the fire room primarily

through the development of separations between the

floor assembly and the curtain walls. Some fire and

smoke also penetrated through wall openings provided

for electrical outlets. Fire penetrated gradually

to the adjacent apartment in Test No. 1 through progressive smoldering of the composite party wall.

Direct heat transmission through either the concrete

slab floor or the joist and gypsum plank floor was

not excessive. In both constructions, an appreciable

amount of smoke resulting in an optical density of

0.065 per foot, had penetrated the adjacent apartment

and the room above after approximately 20 and 45 minutes,

respectively.
26

2. There was no evidence of rupture, ^collapse , or other

structural failure within the boundary of a floor

or roof assembly during test. However, an appreciable vertical deflection of the floor system in

Test No. 1 was recorded. In the absence of established deflection limits for fire-exposed building

assemblies, proposed criteria based on laboratory

fire endurance tests on floors and roof assemblies

were applied, and, based on the assumptions used,

"load failure" was arbitrarily considered to have

occurred in Test No. 1.

The test plan did not include design load stressing

of the unprotected exterior columns. However, in

light of the temperatures recorded on the column

adjacent to the fire window, serious consideration

should be given to the protection of a column in

such a location,

3. The contribution of heat, smoke and toxic combustion

products of the construction materials was not

quantitatively evaluated. However, it is estimated

that each floor system provided the equivalent of

2 psf of combustible load. Of the other materials

used, the asphalt-impregnated paper/glass fiber

composite party wall should be expected to supply

a significant quantity of heat (and black smoke).

Also, the prolonged burning of the foam polystyrene

core of the aluminum- faced sandwich papel permitted

slow fire propagation in Test No. 3.
27

8 . Acknowledgements

The successful completion of the burnout test program was

accomplished through the !, te.am!: efforts of many members of the

Fire Research Section. In particular, Bill Bailey, Garnett

Robinson and Mel Womble were responsible for completing the many

tasks during the instrumentation, assembly, test performance and

disassembly phases, and in spite of tight scheduling. During

the tests, data were carefully taken by Tom Lee, Joe Loftus,

Stan Rodak and Harry Shoub,

The generous help of Dr. John Rockett and Larry Orloff

representing the Factory Mutual Research Associate Program at

NBS , and of Messrs. Cliff Carlson, Mel Abrams and Sam Selvaggio,

of the Portland Cement Association, is gratefully acknowledged.

Thanks are due Les Furlow and John Watkins of the Photographic

Services Section, NBS, for their efficient and successful filming

of the fire tests despite the uncertainties associated with fire

behavior in the field.

Finally, the entire staff of the Research Department, Pratt

Institute School of Architecture, Professors John Callender and

Ed Shiffer, Mr. Bob Davison and Miss Pat Wilson, were very

generous in providing assistance, and in making our task less

arduous than it would otherwise have been.
28

9 . References

[ I] Cost Reduction Methods for High-Rise Apartments; 2-Technical

Standards. School of Architecture, Pratt Institute,

June 30, 1964.

[2[ Standard Methods of Fire Tests of Building Construction

and Materials. American Society for Testing Materials,

Designation E 119-61, 1961.

[3] Standard Types of Building Construction, National Fire

Protection Association, Designation NFPA 220, 1961.

[4] Shiffer, E. T. "Progress in Building--A Research Project

Puts New Techniques to the Test of Use" The Architectural

Forum, Vol. 123 , No. 1, pp. 80-83. July-Aug 1965.

[5] McGuire, J. H. and Wraight, H. "Radiometer for Field Use"

J. Sci. Inst. 3_7, pp. 128-130. April 1960.

[6] a. Scott Draeger Multi-gas Detector, distributed by Scott

Aviation Corporation, Lancaster, N. J.

b. MSA Colorimetric Carbon Monoxide Tester, Mine Safety

Appliances Co*, Pittsburgh, Pa.

[7] Shorter, G. W. , McGuire, J. H. , Hutcheon, N, B. and Legget,

R. F., "The St. Lawrence Burns," Quarterly of NFPA 53 , p.p. 300-316, 1960. —

[8] Bruce, H. D. , "Experimental Dwelling-Room Fires," Forest

Products Laboratory, 1959.

[9] Ingberg, S. H. "Tests of the Severity of Building Fires"

Quarterly of NFPA, _22, pp. 43-61, 1928.

[10] "Fire-Resistance Classifications of Building Constructions"

BMS 92, National Bureau of Standards, 1942.

[II] "Operation School Burning" and "Operation School Burning

No. 2" Official Reports on A Series of School Fire Tests

Conducted by the Los Angeles Fire Department , published by

the National Fire Protection Association, 1959, 1961.

[12]

Kingman, F. E. T„, Coleman, E. H* , and Rasbash, D. J. "The

Products of Combustion in Burning Buildings" Brit.

J. Appl . Chem. 3, pp. 463-468, 1953.
29

[13] Williams -Leir , G. Private Communication

[14] "The Smoke Contribution Factor in the Fire Hazard

Classification of Building Materials" Tests Conducted

by the Los Angeles Fire Department, 1962.

[15] Ryan, J. V. and Robertson, A. F. "Proposed Criteria

for Defining Load Failure of Beams, Floors, and Roof

Constructions During Fire Tests," J. of Research,

National Bureau of Standards, 63C , No. 2, pp. 121-124,

Oct-Dec. 1959.
Fig.

1.

Test

Building

Viewed

from

Southwest
Fi&. 2 /h/ST#UMENTATION ARRANGEMENT - SCHEMATIC

All booRS and windows closbj> During tfst sxcepr for

window W r/RS Room WHICH WAS RaRt/ALLV GRGN
TEST /Vo. OF LAYERS

' APPKOX.

EACH CR/Q

WE/OH r , TOTAL f£

/ /3 /37 €85

z /4 f+8 740

3 /* /48 74c

'y(=syt

Pt<7. 3 COMSTRUC'TfQA/ OF WOOD C/P/
F/G. 4 LOCAT/OA/ OF Ft-lEfe//iQCOuPLE% , T£5 7~ /
f/G. 5 LOCAT/ON OF THERMOCOUPLES , TeST «2
OOQl do 3&n±Vd3dW3±

PIG.

G

SELECTED

TEMPERATURES

,

TEST
/OOO

J. 3&n±V*3dW3±.

\

\

<\|

0,

P/G.

7

SELECTED

TEMPERATURES

,

TEST
*

\

u

")

F/G.

6

SELECTED

-TEMPERATURES

,

TEST
SMO^£

DENSITY

OD

P£F

FT

F/6 9 SMOKE DENSITY TEST I
SMOfcE DENSITY OP PER FT
/=7(S.

//

SMOKE

DENSITY

,

TEST

SMOKE Density OD PEE FT
*

o

k

Mi

$

K

v.

FJ&J2

DEFLECTIONS

>

TEST
REFLECTION

,

IN.

EXTENSION

.

IN.

FtG. A3 0€FLeCT/0/VS , TEST Z
TEMPERA

TORE

/200 *

F/G./4 COMPARISON of F/RS ROOM MEAN A/R TEMRFRATURF

MBASUPCD tU/TH FAST- pE^po/USE THE#S*oCOUPLES t / Er BE16 W Ct )LtUQ

AST*W B- //3 F'&e EXPOSUPE . JLOhP- PESPOA/SE THEPaaocCUPLES PPFSCPtQeD

TEMPERA

TORE
Table

1.

Location

of

Thermocouples

o

H

i =

(§

cocococooucowu

c z •Ho

- s/"S x

§ = o

Pc

cm cm cm cm cm co

in vo p- O f-t cm cn co co <r

<C f*

00 ON O

CN CN CN CN

0) Q) V 0)

l4_l M_| 4_t m_< <t W

U CL 4-» o o o

PQ H PQ

-co =

CM CM CN CN CN
Table

2.

Selected

Temperatures

and

Times
Table

3.

Maximum

Radiation

Levels
Table 4. Maximum Gas Concentrations Indicated by Draeger and MSA

Colorimetric Tubes.

Test No. Room Time

Concentration

CO C0

2

HCN

Min ppm % ppm

1 1-5 25,47 30

50 7500

t—

i 00 No positive readings

2-6 52 2500

54 5

2 1-1 72 70

1-4 27,69 700

62,70 8

58,63 50 ; 2-3 33 150

3 2-3 3 10,000

5-1/2 13

21 25

2-4 10 3,000

50 4

26 25
Table

5

.

Time

to

Reach

Smoke

Density

0.065

per

foot