717

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPORT

4963

SIMULATED PERFORMANCE TESTS OF

BITUMINOUS PROTECTED METALS

by

Edward R. Oglio

<NBS>

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Sinclair Weeks, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

A. V. Astin, Director THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The scope of activities of the National Bureau of Standards at its headquarters in Washington,

D. C., and its major field laboratories in Boulder, Colorado, is suggested in the following listing of

the divisions and sections engaged in technical work. In general, each section carries out spe- cialized research, development, and engineering in the field indicated by its title. A brief

description of the activities, and of the resultant reports and publications, appears on the

inside back cover of this report.

WASHINGTON, D. C.

Electricity and Electronics. Resistance and Reactance. Electron Tubes. Electrical Instruments. Magnetic Measurements. Dielectrics. Engineering Electronics. Electronic Instrumentation.

Electrochemistry.

Optics and Metrology. Photometry and Colorimetry. Optical Instruments. Photographic

Technology. Length. Engineering Metrology.

Heat and Power. Temperature Physics. Thermodynamics. Cryogenic Physics. Rheology

and Lubrication. Engine Fuels. Atomic and Radiation Physics. Spectroscopy. Radiometry. Mass Spectrometry. Solid State Physics. Electron Physics. Atomic Physics. Nuclear Physics. Radioactivity. X-rays. Betatron. Nucleonic Instrumentation. Radiological Equipment. AEC Radiation Instruments. Chemistry. Organic Coatings. Surface Chemistry. Organic Chemistry. Analytical Chemistry.

Inorganic Chemistry. Electrodeposition. Gas Chemistry. Physical Chemistry. Thermochemistry. Spectrochemistry. Pure Substances.

Mechanics. Sound. Mechanical Instruments. Fluid Mechanics. Engineering Mechanics.

Mass and Scale. Capacity, Density, and Fluid Meters. Combustion Controls.

Organic and Fibrous Materials. Rubber. Textiles. Paper. Leather. Testing and Specifications. Polymer Structure. Organic Plastics. Dental Research.

Metallurgy. Thermal Metallurgy. Chemical Metallurgy. Mechanical Metallurgy. Corrosion.

Metals Physics.

Mineral Products. Engineering Ceramics. Glass. Refractories. Enameled Metals. Concreting

Materials. Constitution and Microstructure.

Building Technology. Structural Engineering. Fire Protection. Heating and Air Conditioning. Floor, Roof, and Wall Coverings. Codes and Specifications.

Applied Mathematics. Numerical Analysis. Computation. Statistical Engineering. Mathematical Physics.

Data Processing Systems. SEAC Engineering Group. Components and Techniques. Digital

Circuitry. Digital Systems. Analogue Systems. Application Engineering.

• Office of Basic Instrumentation • Office of Weights and Measures

BOULDER, COLORADO

Cryogenic Engineering. Cryogenic Equipment. Cryogenic Processes. Properties of Materials.

Gas Liquefaction.

Radio Propagation Physics. Upper Atmosphere Research. Ionospheric Research. Regular

Propagation Services. Sun-Earth Relationships.

Radio Propagation Engineering. Data Reduction Instrumentation. Modulation Systems.

Navigation Systems. Radio Noise. Tropospheric Measurements. Tropospheric Analysis. Radio

Systems Application Engineering.

Radio Standards. Radio Frequencies. Microwave Frequencies. High Frequency Electrical

Standards. Radio Broadcast Service. High Frequency Impedance Standards. Calibration

Center. Microwave Physics. Microwave Circuit Standards.
NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS REPORT

NBS PROJECT NBS REPORT

1000-30-4801 December l4, 1956 4963

SIMULATED PERFORMANCE TESTS OF

BITUMINOUS PROTECTED METALS

by

Edward R. Oglio

Floor, Roof and Wall Coverings Section

Building Technology Division

Sponsored by

Office of the Chief of Engineers

Department of the Army

<NBS>

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

The publication, re

unless permission li

25, D. C. Such pei

cal ly prepared If t

Approved for public release by the

Director of the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST)

on October 9, 201 5.

in part, is prohibited

andards, Washington

port has been specifieport for its own use,

SIMULATED PERFORMANCE TESTS OF

BITUMINOUS PROTECTED METALS

Page

I! INTRODUCTION 1

2 0 MATERIALS 2

3 . TEST PROCEDURES 3

3.1 Salt-Spray (Fog) Tests 3

3.2 Accelerated Test for Durability 3

3o3 Low-Temperature Shatter Resistance Test 4

3.4 Flame Spread Tests 5

3.4 0 1 Tunnel Tests 5

3 o4 0 2 Horizontal Panel Tests 5

3.

5

Outdoor Exposure Tests 6

4, SUMMARY OF RESULTS 6

4 0 1 Salt-Spray (Fog) Test Results 6

4 o 2 Results of Accelerated Test for Durability 8

4„3 Results of Low-Temperature Shatter Resistance

Tests 10

4„4 Results of Flame Spread Tests 12

4 0 4 0 1 Results of Tunnel Tests 12

4.4 0 2 Results of Horizontal Panel Tests 12

4 0 5 Results of Outdoor Exposure 13

CONCLUSIONS 13

APPENDIX - TABLES OF RESULTS

Table 1 0 Salt-Spray (Fog) Tests 16

Table 2 0 Accelerated Test for Durability 17

Table 3» Low-Temperature Shatter Resistance Tests 18

Table 4a. Tunnel Test (Flame Spread) 19

Table 4b„ Horizontal Panel Test (Flame Spread) 19
-

«
SIMULATED PERFORMANCE TESTS OF

BITUMINOUS PROTECTED METALS

by

Edward R, Oglio

ABSTRACT

Simulated performance tests were made on four

bituminous protected metals representative of the product

of three manuf acturers , The tests included resistance

to salt spray, accelerated durability conditions, shatter

at low temperatures, and flame spread,. Procedures for

the tests were the same as used in an earlier series, but

also included some modifications

,

None of the materials was rated as having performed

in an outstanding manner in all of the tests, although

performances generally were either comparable to or

superior to those reported previously for the same brand.

It is questionable whether the four materials should

be compared directly with each other since one is of a distinctly different type from the other three. In three

of them, a bituminous impregnated asbestos felt is used

as part of the protective system for the steel basis

sheet, A stabilized asphalt coating is used in the other.

1. INTRODUCTION

Under letter of authorization dated 30 November 1951+? refer

ence ENGES, comparative simulated service tests of bituminous

protected metals were undertaken for the Office of the Chief of

Engineers, Department of the Army, Specimens, representative of

the product of the three manufacturers as reported in an earlier

series (N,B 0 S, Report 1808, "Tests of Bituminous Protected Metal

August 21, 1952), were subjected to laboratory tests of saltspray, accelerated durability, low- temperature shatter, and

flame spread resistance.

Although most of the tests from the previous series were

repeated, the present series differed in several respects:

(1; corrugated specimens were used in all tests; (2) the felted

type products included specimens coated with bituminous
2

surfacing compound on both the weather side and the reverse

side; (3) a low- temperature shatter resistance test at minus

30°F was added, and (4) a longer salt spray test was also used.

Besides obtaining additional information on laboratory performance it was hoped that product improvement would be reflected

by improved performance since, as stated earlier, most of the

tests used in the previous series were repeated.

2. MATERIALS

The materials in this series were submitted by the Office

of the Chief of Engineers, Department of the Army, and were

standard corrugated sheets in twelve-foot lengths. It is

understood that the sheets were obtained from the plants of

the respective producers representing the following products:

1. Plasteel, a product of the Plasteel Products Corporation, which, according to the manufacturer, consisted

of a treated steel sheet coated on both sides with

stabilized asphalt and surfaced with flake mica. The

basis steel sheet, weather-side coating, and reverseside coating were calipered at 0.026, 0 . 017 , and 0.013

in., respectively.

2. Galbestos C-2-S, a product of the H. H. Robertson

Company, which, according to the manufacturer, consisted of a steel sheet coated on both sides with a bituminous-impregnated asbestos felt using metallic

zinc as an adhesive. The felts on both the weatherside and the reverse side were surfaced with a mineralstabilized, asphaltic protective coating. Thicknesses

of the basis steel and the protective coatings were not

obtained because these components could not be separated

for measurement.

3. Galbestos C-l-S. This is also a product of the H. H.

Robertson Company and, according to the manufacturer,

differs from Galbestos C-2-S in that the reverse-side

felt is not surfaced with the stabilized asphaltic

protective coating. Thicknesses of the components were

not obtained for the reason stated in the case of Galbestos C-2-S.
- 3

-

b. Steelbestos, a product of the American Steel Band

Company, which according to the manufacturer, is

similar to Galbestos C-2-S, except that a resinous

adhesive, containing rust-inhibitive pigments, was

used to bond the felts to the steel core . The basis

steel sheet, weather-side protective system and reverseside protective system were calipered at 0 . 028 , 0 o 028 , and 0<,021 in., respectively.,

3 . TEST PROCEDURES

Test specimens were cut from the sheets by band saw, care

being exercised to avoid damaging the weather-side coating system.

Unless stated otherwise, specimens 10 X 12 in. were used.

3o 1 Salt-Spray (Fog) Tests

Two specimens of each product were exposed to salt spray

(fog) in accordance with the method described in Tentative

Method of Salt-Spray (Fog) Testing, A.S.T.M. Designations B117-MfT.

The specimens were given a special protective treatment

along all four edges. This was done by wrapping a pressuresensitive aluminum foil adhesive tape over each edge and then

coating with wax.

The specimens were placed in the test chamber with the

weather sides facing the atomizer jets. After 30 days and 60

days of continuous exposure, specimens were removed from the

cabinet, rinsed and allowed to dry one week in the laboratory

and then were examined. Changes in external appearance, as

evidenced by the appearance of blisters, cracks or rust on the

surface, were noted. Adhesion was then determined by scraping

with a putty knife. Finally, the core sheet was examined for

indications of corrosion.

3.2 Accelerated Test for Durability

Raw-cut and edge-protected specimens, prepared as described

in Section 3<>1, were exposed in a low-intensity, enclosed carbon

arc unit "Weatherometer Type HVKL-X”, manufactured by the Atlas

Electric Devices Company, Chicago, Illinois. Only one arc

lamp, centrally located, was used as a source of radiation.

The power consumption of the arc was approximately 1.8 kw.
- 4 -

The unit was operated continuously 22-1/2 hours per day.

Each daily run was started with a 9-minute spray period which

was repeated every hour. The water was introduced through

four jets and delivered a total volume of approximately 90

gallons per hour at 20 pounds line pressure. The volume of

water was such that the specimens were well washed by flowing

water during each pass under the spray unit. The water temperature at the spray unit was approximately 25°C (77° F) and

was essentially mineral and metal free (total solids less

than 0.1 grain per gallon).

All piping, valves and spray jets were of aluminum. The

temperature at the panel surfaces, measured with a black bulb

mercury thermometer, ranged from 30°C (86°F) during the

water spray to a maximum of 66°C (150°F) just prior to water

spray. Ail specimens were exposed simultaneously; their

positions being changed at fixed intervals to insure uniform

weathering and washing.

Visual inspection was made after 350 hours. After 1000

hours the specimens were again visually inspected and then

examined for loss of adhesion and corrosion of the basis

metal.

3.3 Low-Temperature Shatter Resistance Test

The specimens were conditioned for 1 hour at two test

temperatures (0°F and minus 30°F ) and then were placed on a flat, firm, wooden support, 2- X 12- X 12-in., with the

weather side uppermost. A 760-gram steel ball was then

dropped from a height of 7 ft. and allowed to strike the

surface of the specimen. The path of the ball was controlled

so that it would strike the crest of a corrugation not less

than 3 in. from any edge. After impact, the specimens were

removed from the test chamber, allowed to warm to room temperature, and examined for shattering and loosening of the

protective coating system.

Any coating that was knocked off by the impact of the

steel ball was considered as shatter. Loose coating included

shattered coating and any coating that could easily and

readily be removed from the panel by lifting with the fingers,

or with little force, by the use of a knife blade of similar

instrument
- 5 -

3.4- Flame Spread Tests

Two different tests were used. One was a "tunnel” test

designed to study flame spread within a space enclosed on all

sides except top and bottom, and the other was a "horizontal

panel" test which indicates the spread of flame on the openly

exposed under-surface of a slab or sheet of material supported

in a horizontal position,,

3.4.1 Tunnel Tests

The test specimen is placed as the cover or upper side

of a tunnel, 12 ft long by approximately *+0 in. wide and 9 in.

deep, which is inclined at a slope of 5 in. vertical to 12 in.

horizontal. The three fixed sides of the tunnel are of sheet

metal lined with asbestos millboard. The igniting flame is

applied to the under-surface of the specimen, at the lower end.

In the present tests, the specimens were so assembled as

to have one joint running the 12 ft length, and they were

placed with the surface intended for interior exposure faced

downward and in contact with the flame. The igniting flame

was applied for 35 minutes, and was produced by burning gas

with a calorific value of approximately 1100 B.T.U./cu ft,

at a rate of 3 cu ft/min for 30 minutes, and at a rate of

5 cu ft/min for 5 minutes. The length of the igniting flame,

measured with an unprotected sheet metal cover in place of

the test specimen, was about 2-1/2 feet.

3.4.2 Horizontal Panel Tests

This test is described in paragraph 4.3.3 of Federal

Specification SS-A-ll8b for Acoustical Units: Prefabricated.

The 36 inch square specimen is supported in a horizontal

position on an angle iron frame, and a gas flame, automatically

regulated to produce temperatures following a specified timetemperature curve, is applied to the center of the undersurface . In the present tests, the 20-minute exposure, which

reaches a maximum temperature of 794°C and is prescribed for

Class C and Class D materials, was used. The materials were

tested with the surface intended for interior exposure faced

downward in contact with the flame. No backing could be

applied to the specimens because of the corrugated form of

the materials.
- 6 -

3.5 Outdoor Exposure Tests

Specimens, 4 ft long and cut the full width (40 in.) of

the sheet, were placed on roof exposure racks on the roof of

the Industrial Building at the National Bureau of Standards

in Washington, D 0 C. The test racks are constructed so that

the specimens are four feet above the regular roof deck and

face south at an angle of 45° to the horizontal. No edgeprotective treatment was given to the panels so that each has

one raw-cut edge, the other three edges being left with

whatever treatment was given in the course of production.

4. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

4.1 Salt-Spray (Fog) Test Results

This test is often used to indicate the comparative

ability of coating systems to afford protection in a humid

atmosphere where corrosive agents may be present. It is

generally held that this is accomplished by revealing coating weaknesses such as cracks and pinholes, or comparatively

low inherent resistance to moisture penetration in an otherwise continuous coating. These conditions may show up as

small corrosion deposits or blisters on the surface of the

coating, or as loss of adhesion between the protective system

and the basis sheet.

Two exposure periods - 30 days and 60 days - were used

in the present series. It is anticipated that some objection

to the longer exposure will be made on the ground that 30

days (720 hours) is the maximum period specifically recommended

in the Standard Method of Salt Spray (Fog) Testing (A.S.T.M.

Designation B117-44T ) 0 However, heavy duty materials such as

these products, justify the use of the longer exposure.

Furthermore, considerably longer exposure periods - on the

order of 200 days - have already been used in evaluating

some types of protective coating (paint) systems for steel

(B.M.S 0 Report 44, "Surface Treatment of Steel Prior to Painting" )

Plasteel

During the thirty-day test, this product showed fairly

good resistance to corrosion. The appearance of several rust

spots on the coating indicated the existence of pinholes.

Examination of the basis metal showed more extensive distribution of rust, but this appeared to be entirely on the
- 7

-

surface - no areas showing any appreciable penetration of the

metal in depth, In these respects the results were comparable

to those reported in 1972 (N,B,S, Report 1808),

The most pronounced effect of the test seemed to be on

the adhesion of the coating. Loss of adhesion occurred to

such an extent that the bituminous protective coating could,

with practically no effort, be stripped in large sheets from

approximately 80 percent of the test area. In this respect,

performance was considerably poorer than in the 1952 series.

The 60-day test revealed the same type of weakness in

the product. Rust on the basis sheet was about the same,

while loss of adhesion was found to be more extensive than

in the test of shorter duration,

Galbe stos

Several small areas of zinc chloride deposits and a few

pin-point sized areas of rust were the only deteriorative

effects that were noted during the 30-day test. Again these

are indicative of pinholes in the coating with the former

indicating that the metallic adhesive was also functioning

as a protective coating. These results were entirely comparable to those reported in 1952 , Except for the development of several small blisters, the

60 -day test did not appear to be appreciably more deteriorative than the 30-day test. The blisters were between the

bituminous surface coating and the impregnated felt and were

not found to be associated with any corrosion when examined.

Adhesion of the feAt remained excellent throughout the

tests and could not be removed from the basis sheet even after

the 60-day test. For this reason no evaluation of the condition of the basis metal could be made and consequently any

corrosion beyond that exhibited on the bituminous surface

coating, that might have been present, would go undetected,

Steelbe stos

No blisters, but a few small rust spots, indicative of

pinholes, were noted on the coating surface during the 30-day

test. Adhesion of the felt, although somewhat less than at
- 8 -

the start of the test, was still rated as good. Examination

of the basis metal showed six small rusted areas, the largest

of which measured about 0.3 sq. in. In no case did the

corrosion extend to any measurable depth into the metal.

In general, the product looked good and, because of the

improved adhesion exhibited, performance was considered somewhat better than that reported in the 1952 series.

During the 60-day test, rust both on the surface coating

and on the basis metal was more extensive than that reported

for the 30-day test. Adhesion was poor over practically the

entire test surface and the felt could easily be stripped

from the specimen in relatively large sheets. Surface rust

was found over 50% of the basis metal. The effect of the

longer test period was striking, with regard to loss of

adhesion and area of the basis metal showing rust.

4.2 Results of Accelerated Test for Durability

The accelerated durability test is in essence a procedure

intended to produce rhpid deterioration of bituminous materials

under conditions simulating extreme outdoor exposure. This is

accomplished by exposing the material to cycles of ultra-violet

radiation, heat and water, the analogy to the natural agents,

sunshine, heat and rain being obvious.

Numerous studies have established that, in general, a test

of this type will produce in a relatively short time the principal types of failure (cracking, blistering, chalking, erosion, etc.) that a bitumen may exhibit during the longer course

of natural weathering. However, no factor converting durability under accelerated test to durability under natural

exposure has been established. Nevertheless, the accelerated

test is of value in comparing similar materials, since it has

been established that failure usually follows in the same

order as in outdoor exposure.

The test as employed here can be considered primarily as

an evaluative test of one component - the bituminous surfacing

compound - of the total protective system. This is especially

true of the felted products where this component is a
- 9

-

relatively thin layer. Nevertheless, this type of usage is

considered valid since weakness in one component contributes

to weakness in the protective chain. To have conducted the

test so as to evaluate the total protective system would

have required an inordinately long exposure.

Plasteel

Except for some loss of mica surfacing, this product

exhibited no external effects from the exposure. No loss of

adhesion and no corrosion of the basis metal was found. In

these respects, the results duplicated those reported in the

1952 series.

Stabilized asphalt coatings of this type are known for

their ability to withstand the erosive effects of both accelerated and outdoor weathering.

Galbestos

The C-2-S ("double coated") specimens exhibited blisters

in the bituminous surfacing on both the sealed edge and raw

(unsealed) edge specimens within 350 hours of exposure. At

the end of the 1000 hours of exposure the surfacing was hard

and brittle and chalking and hair cracks were observed, especially in the valleys Q Adhesion of the felt and basis sheet

appeared undiminished and was still rated as excellent. Except for the development of blisters on the raw (unsealed)

edge specimens these results are entirely comparable to those

reported in the 1952 series.

The results obtained with the C-l-S ("single coated")

specimens were practically the same as with the C-2-S specimens with the exception of the raw-edge specimen. In this

instance no blisters yere found during the test period.

These results are a duplication of those reported in 1952.

In general, the appearance was poor for both types of

Galbestos. As indicated above, this was primarily due to the

cracking and blistering that occurred in the bituminous surfacing compound. The almost total absence of rust (a few

pinpoints were found on one of the four specimens) indicated

that other elements of the protective system - most likely

the zinc adhesive - were functioning during the exposure.
10

Steelbestos

Chalking and embrittlement of the coating were noted

No blisters, cracks or rust spots appeared nor was any loss

in adhesion of the felt detected., In general, both specimens

looked in good condition,,

The absence of blisters, cracks and corrosion represent

a marked improvement over the results reported for this

product in the 1952 series,,

4,3 Results of Low-Temperature Shatter Resistance Tests

Bituminous materials are susceptible to temperature.

That is, they soften and are susceptible to flow at elevated

temperature and become hard and brittle and susceptible to

cracking and shattering at low temperature. In practice,

protected metal sheets can be subjected to impact and shock

during installation. This can occur in handling the sheets

while unpacking and readying them for installation or when

they are being fastened to the structure. After installation,

shock and impact can occur at the lower siding courses or from

hail or other missiles on the roofing courses. Damage to the

protective systemis not likely to be serious when the temperature is moderate. However, at low temperatures damage

can be serious.

The low- temperature shatter resistance tests were designed

to give some indication of the ability of protected metals

to resist damage from impact and shock at low temperatures.

Tests were made at 0°F for installations in temperate climates

such as in the continental United States and at minus 30°F

for installations in colder climates such as the arctic and

sub-arctic regions,

Plasteel

At 0°F, shattering (coating that was knocked off the basis

metal by the impact) occurred on the weather side (side of

direct impact) to a total of 0,2 sq, in, of the surface area.

The total area that was loosened from the basis metal measured

7o7 sq, in. While no coating shattered from the reverse side,

loosening occurred over 1,2 sq, in, of the surface.
11

At minus 30°F, shatter averaged 0.6 sq. in. on the

weather side with no shatter occurring on the reverse side.

Loosening averaged 12.6 sq. in. and 1.8 sq. in., respectively.

As expected, damage to the bituminous protective coating

was greater at the lower temperature. Also, damage to the

coating was greater at 0°F than was recorded in the 1952

series. This could easily be due to (1) corrugated specimens were used in the present series, while flat sheets were

used in 1952 and (2) the basis metal in the present series

was of lower gage ( 0.026 in.) than in the earlier series

(0.037 in. )

.

Galbestos

At 0°F , a small amount (less than 0.1 sq. in.) of the

bitiminous surface coating shattered from the felt, both

on the weather side and reverse side of the C-2-S ("double

coated") type, which was the only type of this product

tested at this temperature. Loosening of the felt occurred

over an area of 0.8 sq. in. on the weather side and 0.2

sq. in. on the reverse side.

At minus 30°F, no shattering was noted on either side

on both the C-2-S and C-l-S ("single coated") types. Loosening averaged 1.1 sq. in. on the weather side and 0.4 sq. in.

on the reverse side for the C-2-S type, and 0.9 sq. in. and

0.1 sq. in. for the C-l-S type.

In all cases, loosening of the felt, as reported here

for this product, did not involve clean disbonding from the

adhesive or basis metal. It was a type of loosening or

break within the felt since a thin layer of felt remained on

the adhesive and could not be stripped from the metallic

(zinc) adhesive', even in the areas classified as being

loosened.

In general, damage to the protective coating system,

where it did occur, can be rated as slight. This compares

to no damage reported in the 1952 series. Again this might

be due to the fact that corrugated specimens were used in the

present series.
12

Steelbe stos

No shatter occurred at either 0°F or minus 30°F„

Loosening was detected over an area of 1,2 sq. in. on the

weather side and 0,4 sq. in 0 on the reverse side at 0°F

and averaged 2.1 sq 0 in. and 0.4 sq Q in., respectively, at

minus 30°F.

Loosening in this case involved a weakening of bond

partly between the felt and adhesive and partly between the

adhesive and the basis metal.

In general, the results indicate that the protective

coating of this product has good resistance to shock and

impact at low temperatures. Damage, in the form of loss

of felt adhesion, was somewhat greater than reported in 1952.

The reasons for this are probably the same as stated under

Plasteel.'

4.4 Results of Flame Spread Tests

4„4ol Results of Tunnel Tests

In general, the materials tended to melt quickly under

contact of the flame, and to drip flaming globules onto the

floor of the tunnel, where they continued to burn. With two

of the products, however, this dripping occurred on only one

of the specimens and came only from the joint directly above

the flame.' With all of the materials, the unexposed upper

surface showed signs of softening over the full length to the

top of the specimen.

4.4 0 2 Results of Horizontal Panel Tests

Three specimens of each of the four products were tested

for compliance with Class C requirements, which stipulate

that, under the prescribed test conditions, no flame from the

specimen shall reach the angle frame at any point during or

after the flame application, all flaming shall cease within

5 minutes after the test flame is discontinued, and no glow

shall progress to the edge of the specimen at any point,

during or after the test. Class D comprises those materials

which fail to satisfy the Class C requirements.
- 13 -

4.5 Results of Outdoor Exposure

The following effects were noted when the specimens were

inspected after l4 months of exposures

Plasteel

Except for some loss of mica, no effects were observed.

Galbestos (C-l-S and C-2-S)

No changes were observed except a dulling of the surface

coating and pinholes developing on the surface coating.

Steelbe stos

A number of pin point spots of rust were noted in 5 of

the 8 valleys on the specimen, while the surface elsewhere was

dull in appearance. No other effects were noted.

5. CONCLUSIONS

In general, Plasteel and Galbestos showed about the same

performance in the salt spray and accelerated durability tests

as they did in the 1952 series. Steelbestos performed better

in the present series. In resistance to shatter at 0°F,

Galbestos and Steelbestos showed up about as well as in 1952,

while Plasteel ? s performance was significantly poorer - perhaps

for the reasons stated in Section 4.

In rating performance and making comparisons of the

products in these tests, it should be noted that the tests

are simulated performance tests, done on an accelerated scale

in which various degradative factors are exaggerated. For

example, in the salt spray tests the specimens were exposed

continuously for 30 days and 60 days in an atmosphere of

atomized 20% sodium chloride solution at 95°F. During much of

this time the specimens were covered with a film of the solution which had settled from the fog in the test chamber. Also,

it is questionable whether the products should be compared

directly with each other, since one (Plasteel) is of a type

distinctly different from the other three.
- Ik -

Nevertheless, in the absence of extensive service histories

and despite the limitations mentioned, the tests are useful in

making a general evaluation, especially of similar types. For

this reason, performance ratings, based exclusively on the

results of the tests described in this report, are given below.

Where the adjective rating is the same, the product listed

first was considered somewhat superior. Naturally, if the

service history of a product is known to be at variance with

a test result, it should not be penalized.

Salt-Spray Resistance

Galbestos C-2-S & C-l-S - Very Good

Plasteel - Good —Fair

Steelbestos - Fair

Resistance to Accelerated Durability

Plasteel

Steelbestos

Galbestos C-l-S

Galbestos C-2-S

Very Good

Very., Good

- Fairly

F air—

to blistering of bituminous surface coatingo

Low-Temperature Shatter Resistance

Galbestos C-l-S

Galbestos C-2-S

Steelbestos

Plasteel

Very Good

Very Good

Good

Poor

Flame Spread Resistance

The relative flame resistance of the four products as

indicated by the two separate test methods agrees fairly

well, although the methods differ considerably in conditions

of fire exposure. On the basis of the tests made, Galbestos

C-l-S, Plasteel, and Steelbestos would appear the most flame

resistant of the group, and quite similar, although Steelbestos showed a greater tendency to melt and drip than the

other twOo
15

APPENDIX - TABLES OF RESULTS

„
TABLE

1.

SALT-SPRAY

(FOG)

TESTS - 16' - i ft 1 ft 1 <p a i a i i SO a>

cd i—i ft ft 1 p

p o o j p CD 1 CD CD CD 1 •H o i p ft ft 1 a ft > p W o i CO ft O ft cd ft 1 3 Cp Ch o O p O CD CD CD i CO O P cd 1 co P cd co co CO E''-ft 1 1 CD P i p POO ft 1 O P P p •H

ft

O ft P i o P P ft £ ft i 1 CD

ad cd o i—

CD co -p < Si CO i •H O o o 1 ft cd ft o CD > cd

CDp £ O

O i ft ft

n

h

d co 1 ft CO ft CO Ph

d

O ft P o ft ft i CD O 0 CO 1 cd ft H cd P ft « P X! i ft ft ft CD ft p 1 >5 CD H co Ph ft CD co cd ft cd ft CD i o CO o CD ft cd o 1 r—1 o p 03 ft Cd CD ft o CD > CO i a cd ftft ft ft 1 l—1 ft Cd (D J3 CD ft ft

ft tcOft o P >5 i cd co o cd CD 1 cd 1 ft o p

O

X!

a o P Cd i co P Cdp

a ft 1 O CM ftp ft ft •H

d ft

m •H

d i—

ft i p cd cd P CD 1 •H 1 CO ft

H ft

O P -H ft 1 i CD P O -H co ft 1 ft o P *H (D d d

>* CD CO P CD

O i ft

H cd co •H

O 1 o P P oft CD

cd > cd £ no i m i—i i—i cq CO

d 1 cd co ft CD •H

O

Q

O > >> o i •H cd

p cd co cd 1 P o ft co

p CD CD CO i O ft ft CD i i—

3 cd o ft d 1 Ph-P CD -H p ft ft o

>> 0V|

—

co ft i ft COH (OH o 1 co

N ft CO ft ft

p >>

-P o' cd cd ft i •H ft ft co 1 CD CD •H

O Ph i—

X co o o 1—1 i H CD a ’H CD O cd i P ft CO >> ftft o CD •H d cd »h cd o i 1 1 >H COH CD 1 CD H i

1 X! O i1 o ft

CQ ft ft -P ft ft i cd •H co

O ft

dp ° 1 % cd ft CD CD i—1 cd

«J P o CD i 3 Ljh Ph cd

O CD 1 ft

d > d cd ft

a

-p P cd

a cd i co i—1 CD *H •H CD P 1 CO •H ft CO o o d •H

01 Ifl

p o 1—

i cd ft o ft ft

p 1 ft P O co >i.H •H cd

X o ft i—

co ft o i CD “P CD •H ft CO 1 rH

O ft

d cd co ft • O i—

-p -p CD •H cd ft i CD CD CD CD P ft o 1 P Ch f CD ft CD

O CD ft

p cd

MWW P co

p co i p

O > ft ft

d P Ph 1 co

d ft i ft cd o CO Ph-P P CD cd cd cd cd cd i ft Cd CD *H ft O O X! 1 CD co •H X! O ft p cd P ft CD ft ft £ ft pq ftft iii

EH ft CO <H Cd

O Ch CD 111

ft cd ex CD rO<$ PhCh ft cda

O 1 iii o a 111 co ft ft >5 i ft CD ft o 1 ft cd

co co P i P o o o p ft 1 CD

d o CD o

CD P • cdp i cd P Cd ft CD

O 1 p o P ft o P a > -h i •H ft P ft d 1 cd d cd

cd

p •H i co

N

p o ft ft 1 co CO o ft

ft o Ch in o i ft P -H CD ft 1 cd CO ft ft

d

ft o O o cd £ i O ft co co Ph O'!

—1 1 CD CD P CO CD •H

CD ft o a1 cd -H i ftO CD Ph CD P 1 ft P CD CD ft

O

Ph MD cd CO co

p i co P ft •H P O 1 ft Cd ft ft co Ph P CO CD cd cdco i CO o ft POO 1 co ft P 1 co d cd p CD ft- \ i ft cd cd ft ft 1 ft ft cd P d o •H > cd p i

1 i

1 i co <D ft co CD P 1 rH ® CO H •H

ft cd po<—

i P p cd

d P CD 1 i—1 ft P ft

dXd

X!

r

a

p ft cd

O i P cd ft ft CD CD ft 1 cd 1 P *H •H

W CD o cd co

a 9 ft i o ft ft ft 1 O CM o CO

a

ft ft -p

O co i ft ft

d co EH Cd 1 •H 1 ft ft co o

>> o co o ra P ft i CD i—1 co ft 1—

1 ft o CD co ft

p

cd P CD ft CD ft fta i N cd co o O 1 o N] o CD ft Q ft i—1 *H i •H a ft ft d « CD 1 cd co •H o i—| £ i co ft cd o CD O i CO CO ft O ft ft 1 P o CO CD O CD ft <i ft ft N ft ft i CO CD ft ft CD ft 1 P.-P O ft ° ft N

-p •h ft co •H

p 1 i ft P O i—1 CD rH CD 1 CO ft cd ft ft CO •H

p CO CO Cd Sh i P cd ftft ft P ft Ch 1 CD CD

d Ch txo CD CO •H O oft i—H •H i •rH ft CD cd o O co o 1 P ft •H P -H ft 1—

e ft ft bO o cd Ch O' ft i O ft ft ft d O 1 CD i—

O P H O cd d d

PH CD P ft •H ° o i ft o o co

d o 1 > cd Ph co cn cd ft •H *H

ft ft^. CD

a

a

p i 1 CD CD CO ft

H

O ft 1 ft 1 ft CD ft O a tuO-H O CD i C H ft p cd rH CO -H CD 1 co d no CD a tD o ft cdco a p ft i •H cd ft ft ^ CD cd ft ft 1 ft P •h d -ft d cr

co o CO •H o Cj

— CD i ft

pp ft ft ft *H cd 1 rH

O P.-H ft co •H CO POP •H >t> a1 a i cd O cd ft ft P 1 P Ch ft CD ft •H

ft CD CO

p co tco cd i o i—l i—CD CDd 1 COX cd ft i—l CO P co P > cd cd d 'H i > CD ft O CD ft ft o CD 1 CD co •H O O CD cd cd ® o o ft >ft- -H ft iiiii

EH CO

O ft ft EH ftO ft 1111|

ft cd CO

O

d Ch PQ > o

-P iiiii co 11111 CO

coO

ft o i—

i o 1 o co p CD i ft co 1 ft ft CD ft CD i co i 1 co i ft o ft i CD CM 1 CD H 1—

p CO i ft 1 1 ft 1 CD ft cd i ft O 1 H O CD i—

i cd 1 cd ft ft i ft 1 ft CO
TABLE 20

ACCELERATED

TEST

FOR

DURABILITY i - 17 - 11 ii 13 CO 1 i > P CO i i CD cd O 1 i ch 33 i—1 ° CO 1 i 1—1

CO CIS 1 CO i <3 b£)

O cd -p > 1 p i S3 35 P o 1 o i •H (D

CD i—1 1 CD i O

p

a

<H CIS 1 Cp i cd ClJ o CD -P 1 CD i CD 0 ps ps P CD 1 PS i Pi O CD S3 a 1 i cd SO cd o 1 o i O

33 o 1 35 i cp

® i—l P 0 p> 1 i O CD 0 rH m 1 i O > CD P o bO 1 o i ^ cd <d ch w co p 1 CO i O Cp 13

CD *H 1 CD i O P S3 o 35 p> 1 33 i i—1 P bO CD o CIS cd 1 cd i CO S3 CD o H O 1 i—l i P •H IS I—1 <h O 1 Cp i CD S3 33 p 1 i > O O CD p cd <p 1 cd i o cd 30

CDOO 1 o i p

p

-p •H 1 •H i bO CO CJ PS

<H

a

a 1 a i S3 P CD <5 O 1 i •H P PS P o I Pi *H 1 cp i p S3 O ps i O CO 1 o i cd cp cd <3 CD 1 CD 1 i p o P 1 co 33 1 CO i co CD S3 O 1 CO 13 1 co i •H CO i—| O S3 i O <u 1 o i rH P P *H 1—1 1 1—1 i rQ S3 P CO bOI 1 i •H *H CD S3 i P1 ® 1 p O i CD O P 33 •rH 1 Pi T3 0 1 33 PS i P PS 33 I bO CD PS 1 bO CD i CD cd i—1 1 •P P O 1 •H P i > s3 p cd i rH O o 1 1—1 o i CD •H S3 <p 33 i co s3 bO 111

CO S3 iii

CO

a cd ooi 111 iii obO 1 i S3 . e 1 o i •H

CO PS 1 PS i P

pH CD 1 CD i CD 33 P 1 P i P O 1 o i CO o S3 1 S3 i •H

lT\ 1 i i—1

rr)

CO 1 CO i P p 1 p i Ph o 1 o i CD

CD CD 1 CD i P

-P Cp 1 Cp i cd <H CD 1 CD i P

<q PS 1 PS i CD 1 i PS O 1 o i o

35 l1i

35 ii1 s P 111 lii co CD 1 i CD H CO 1 i CO bO cd CD 1 o i CD P CD tH 1 35 i >H

(xi co l111 iii1 111 Iiii CO i—1 1 i—1 i o

CD CD 1 CD i p co 8 CD 1 CD i co i CD P 1 P i CD C\J s CO 1 CO i 30 i CIS 1 cd i rH O i—1 1 i—l i cd PH 1 Ph i O P P l bO i 0 S3 l S3 l i 33 cd 1 -H O p i p 1 p p O S3 i 0 P O P 1 Cd SOS cd i 35 0 i—1 1 o i O 33 O 0 1 O CD p i cd p 35 p 1 p 9 i—l i P O 1 O P 0 i o • S3 i ° a cd ch i o P 0 o i cd SO i rH 35 0 0 rH 1 CD O S3 i cd P £ cd 1 P bOrH 0 i S3 O P P i cd S3 CD 0 i •H ® S3 0 0 1 -H > i p 0 30 a l p 33 CD p i S3 >> bO 1 o o P 0 i P 0 S3 S3 CO o i cd 30 i •H i—1

•H

O •H

CD i ^ P p i bOrH P -H CO > 1 O o cd p i S3 cd Cd 0 cd O l o 33 0 i o > O 0 30

30 1 rH P P i 1—1 O 33

cd i S3 e-N

O ° i S3 P S3 i P cd CO S3 p i i—1 *H 0 cd O

co 1 CD >» 0 i 1—1 >

cd 1 > CD 0 CO P i cd so •H

p S3 1 O i—1 rH cd O i a o P O o

CD 1 i—1 > S3 i co i—i o •H a 1 bOP cd i 0 0 0 0

cd 1 S3 -H > S3 bo i > P CO o

co l -H P O S3 i 0 CD o o p 1 P 30 0 •H *H i p p ® i—1 p

>> 1 CD o3 0 35 i 0 p so, o

rH 1 P P P 0 rH i P O 0 o o

CD i CO S3 33 cd i O P P P S P 1 *H cd S3 P 33 i <3 O O o

cd 1 1—1 •H cd o i bO S3 35 a 1 30 P i bO S3 bO ® •H l P P P i S3 *H 0 S3 0

X! 1 CD cd 0 O o i •H S3 P •H P o O 1 P 33 o i—l i 35 3 o 35 OH P 1 CD S3 co cd i i—1 - H 0 rH 0 cd sa 1 > co P CO p i cd bop cd Ch P

so i cd cd o O 0 i 33 0 0 33 0 0

<3 1 CO 13 S3 rH

a iii O 30

p

O P a o bO iii S3 1 CD i •H 1 P i o o P i cd i p p

CD i P i 0 0 P 1 CD i p p

CO 1 P i o o

•H 1 o i S3 S3 i—1 i a ° i 30 l bO i 0 CO i o S3 i p p

CD 1 P -H i o a P 1 p i 0 0

cd 1 P CD i Ch «h p l 33 P i 0 0

CD l bO co i p P

PS 1 *H *H i O 1 i—1 i—1 i o O s l CO 30 iiii

35 35 1 CO 1iii CO o i CD i o 0

£3 1 >H iii

35 >H iii CO i o

CO 1 CO i 0 p o 1 O i o CO p co 1 P CO i P CO 0

CO 1 1 CO 1 i 0 1 30

CD c\] 1 CD i—1 i 0 rH i—1

30 1 1 30 l i 30 l 0

rH

O 1 H

O i rHO 0

cd i cd i cd P

es i O i O CO

Steelbestos

No

Slight

blistering

Chalking

of

protective

coating

noted.

Slight

along

one

edge0

pitting

along

one

edge

where

small

blisters

have

broken0

Coating

was

hard

and

brittle.

No

loss

of

adhesion

between

felt

and

metal.

No

corrosion

noted

on

basis

metal.
TABLE 3o

LOWTEMPERATURE

SHATTER

RESISTANCE

TESTS - 18 -

CD 11 CTN | CA 1 txO 1 P CD CVl UN 00 1 Ch 1 CD TO o o o 1 o •H 1 > -H 1—1 C\J 1—

1 o

Ch

h CD CO 1 CD Cl Ph 1 CA -HI 1 O 1 1 P O oi 1 O d Of P 1 O CAI CD 1 n"~) i—1 l P CD l>- ITWO 1 CM

CD 1 P TO o o o 1 O CO -P 1 cD *H i—1 ro CM 1 1 1 13 O 1 CD CO 1 1 1 1 rH 1 P EH 1 3: 1 1—

1 2 11 EH CD 1 <5 CA 1 P CD 0 0 o 1 o

CO CD TO o 0 o 1 o P > -H 0 0 o 1 o

CO O) CD CO 1 Q£| fH Cl P 1 Eh CD PI 1 -P 1 1 -P “1 1 CD Of P 1 Pi CAI 0 1 CO 1 P 0 i—1 O nO 1 o P TO o o o 1 o cD *H i—1 o o 1 o 0 CO 1 35 111 0 11 1 CA 1 tuO 1 P 0 C\J 1 CM C 1 0 TO © 1 o •H 1 > P rH 1 o C o| 0 CO 1 CD Cl P 1 CA «HI 1 O 1 1 O °| 1 PI Oi P 1 CA| 0 1 rH 1 P 0 O- 1 CO

pH CD l P TO o 1 o o P 1 CD *H o- 1 o O O 1 0 CO 1 EH 1 1 EH 1 <tj 11 CO 0 1 EH CA 1 CO P 0 o 1 1—1 p 1 0 TO o 1 o EH > P o 1 o CTV o| 0 CO 1 p P Cl PC 1 CD -H| 1 P 1 1 P ol 1 cD oi p 1 P CAI 0 1 CO 1 P CD CVJ 1 rH 1 P P o 1 o 1 CD 'rH o 1 o 1 0 CO 1 p 1 3s 1111 p 1111 0 o 1—I 1 o P CD o 1 P CO

TO CD

p 1 0 1 o -P 0 1 0 CM p CO i—| C\J > 1 P 1 i—

p cd 1 H O

rH 1 cD PH 1 CO P

CD

C\] >

<5

C\J o H • O • o o o

cOiCOO o o o O oo ON e o o POO

J- CO

H o o o

C\J i—I C\J o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o« o o o

J-o o

C\] oo o l o I © l o 0oPCO • 0 I P

CD rH CD P I P CM > hocD O 0O

-P

CA

CD P

rH

CD rH C\J CD P

CO

Aver.

0.0

0„0
TABLE

4a.

TUNNEL

TEST

(FLAME

SPREAD)

19

ao

-p i—i -p

d CD

d i © •H o O 1 a

a

a o i a to

cd

d to 1 d

CD lr\ -pd i o cd

©

a

p ro •H 1 -p \ a

a

Q o o o a i TD HD 1 a i—i a cd co o CD d i i a

rO i—1

CD 1 ro pf oCD i—i -p i a •H X i cd a CD 1 i—1 1 0 tP 11 6 11 d 1 a cd a 1 >» CO a cd •H 1 r—1 o p X O 1 CD ryi <! c © • o cd d 1 > a p d d d d S •H o 1 o o rO ° •H CD tO •H a •H a a d 1 d d d a a a a d

•H 1 •H •H cd

a o a cd

a o 00 CO cd o 1 CD a a co 1—I i—!

ro C\J 1 vO \Q cdph

a cd cd i i—1 1 CO a a a o 1 CD co Q a 11 P g 111 a 11 0's T' S 1 >s CD CD a 1 1 i a 1—I s to 1 d cd d cd a d 1 o a o a < •H 1 a a a a co 1 d d e s a CD o o O

to 1 CD CD CD CD

d o •H s s S d 1 a > a > •H Csl P

•H 1 •HO

a o a >»

a

Q

a 1 O rd o aa

a

a 1 cd cd cd cd pj- CD o

•H

© 1 a

a > a P d 1 co a co a a a Q •H 1 d d d a a 1 i—1 *H i—1 *H cd o o 1 O O CD a

j" 1 a • r"»

a ,r~=m

a ph 1 o o CO CO CO

a 1 p

a

p

aa cd

m 1 1 cd 11 a cd a cd cd p a Cd1 1—1 1 11 i—1 1 o 1 o CO 1 a cd o 1 a CO co a 1 p o o 1—1

CO

eft 1 eft CD

aa CD CD i 1 i a CO co CD a

C\J 1 i—lcd CD CD

a i—i i 1 i S a a CO CD i—1 o 1 o CO i—i i—i

cd CD

flj 1 o cd cd i—i a

•H CO l CO

a Cs CO

a CO

H o 1 o i—i

CO CD -p 1 a CD CD -P co 1 co CD a d CD 1 CD a i—i S a 1 a CO CD 1—1 1 i—i

cd CD

cd 1 cd i—i a

cd 1 cd

a eft

I

THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Functions and Activities

The functions of the National Bureau of Standards are set forth in the Act of Congress, March

3, 1901, as amended by Congress in Public Law 619, 1950. These include the development and

maintenance of the national standards of measurement and the provision of means and methods

for making measurements consistent with these standards; the determination of physical constants and properties of materials; the development of methods and instruments for testing materials,

devices, and structures; advisory services to Government Agencies on scientific and technical

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

development of standard practices, codes, and specifications. The work includes basic and applied

research, development, engineering, instrumentation, testing, evaluation, calibration services, and

various consultation and information services. A major portion of the Bureau’s work is performed

for other Government Agencies, particularly the Department of Defense and the Atomic Energy

Commission. The scope of activities is suggested by the listing of divisions and sections on the

inside of the front cover.

Reports and Publications

The results of the Bureau’s work take the form of either actual equipment and devices or published papers and reports. Reports are issued to the sponsoring agency of a particular project or program. Published papers appear either in the Bureau’s own series of publications or in the

journals of professional and scientific societies. The Bureau itself publishes three monthly periodicals, available from the Government Printing Office: The Journal of Research, which presents

complete papers reporting technical investigations; the Technical News Bulletin, which presents

summary and preliminary reports on work in progress; and Basic Radio Propagation Predictions,

which provides data for determining the best frequencies to use for radio communications throughout

the world. There are also five series of nonperiodical publications: The Applied Mathematics

Series, Circulars, Handbooks, Building Materials and Structures Reports, and Miscellaneous

Publications.

Information on the Bureau’s publications can be found in NBS Circular 460, Publications of

the [National Bureau of Standards ($1.25) and its Supplement ($0.75), available from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.

Inquiries regarding the Bureau’s reports should be addressed to the Office of Technical Information, National Bureau of Standards, Washington 25, D. C.