Document 1QVR0QEOrVz9OnG0K0DZ2Q0gZ

July 21, 1992 Dr. Roy Gottesman The Vinyl Institute Wayne Interchange Plaza II 155 Route 46 West Wayne, NJ 07470 // Integrated Fire&Failure Technologies Incorporated Dear Roy, The publication of ASTM STP 1150, "Fire Hazard and Risk Assessment" has finally occurred. That document includes a paper which I authored - Performance of Plastic Plumbing and Electrical Products in Fire Resistive Assemblies. It includes work which I think will be of interest to you. For that reason, I have enclosed a copy of the paper for your files. I hope things are going well with your retirement. I look forward to hearing any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, President JBZ:sml 100-326.Lsl Enclosure: (1) PRO Lie.tXii.ui4 CORPORATE . 2322 Sixth Street Suite 107 Berkeley, CA 94710-2412 USA Ph: 510 548 * 3451 Px: 510 * 548 * 0290 1 -800 * 726 * 5939 CTL029119 BRANCH: 1001 SW 5th Ave. Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97204-1111 USA Ptv 503 * 220* 1652 Fx: 503 * 228 * 2058 v Joseph D.' Ziclierinan1 h ;j /Performance of Plastic Plumbing and Electrical Products in Fire Resistive Assemblies t .i V'1' REFERENCE: Zkbeiman, J. I)., `Tcrfuruianrc of Plastic Plumbing anal Electrical Products In Hn Resistive Aaimlillu," Fire /hoard anil Fire Risk Assessment, ASTAISIT 1150, Marcclo M. Ilirshclilcr, Ed.. American Society (or Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1992, pp. 66- AUSTHACT: The plastic pipe, lulic, and conduit products used in the United Stales evolved Irons transplanted European technologies over the past JO years. Though originally only used in non-fire rated construction, different versions of these products have qualified for use in a variety of fire rated assemblies and building types after appro|>rialc lire endurance lesls. End uses for ilicsc products include electrical power, signal distribution, and various plumbing aiul mechanical abdications. ITuiiibing systems slmwing acceptable |icrfnnnance in fire resistive assemblies include draiu. waste, vent, and supply piping (domestic lutl and cold water, sprinkler piping). Appiovcd electrical applications include PVC'-hased rigid non-uiclallic conduit and a llcsible |xilyvinylchloride (PVC) tubing product called electrical mm-nurtallic lulling. Tested approaches avail able to safely install plastic pipe, lube, and conduit include passive and active fire slopping systems based on iusulalions, inlumcsccnl systems, and even mechanical "cut-off" devices for thermoplastic pitting systems. Fire lest results for these products and systems, aud the tlesigns that resulted from those testing programs, arc widely available. Plastics used to manufacture these products include PVC, chlorinated I'VC, acryloniliilc-buladicuc-slyrcuc (ADS), polybutylene (Pll), and polypropylene (PP). Fire risk assessments of potential performance of these products must take into account properties of the resin-polymer systems involved, the nature of the product itself (that is, drain, waste, and vent versus supply piping versus electrical conduit or tubing), where the product is installed (for example, within a cavity wall versus |tcnclraliiig or encased in a slab), and the type of installation detailing used. Uccausc of the nuiulier of (aissible combinations for end use, analytical approaches based on (I) standard lest results, (2) field data on lite performance of the plastic pipe, lube, aud conduit products, and (}) fire resistive assemblies into which they are installed all contribute to inferences drawn iu conducting hazard assessments. Specifically, this paper reviews information available to assist iu preparing more specialized risk assessments for these products than the general studies cited above, under foreseeable, end use configurations in fire resistive assemblies. An attempt has been made to utilize ap proaches suggested for general Fire hazard assessment procedures that have been under eslendcd study within the ASTM Committee E-5 on Fire Standards over the past several years, but which have not reached the status of slandatds. Most Held performance data on |daslic pi|K come from residential ncciipuncics where these products have been used for over 21) years, and where they cmislitulc 95% of pi|tc installed. In addition, there have been numerous installations in non-combustible buildings (including high rises) here and outside the United Stales. Tins database represents a large po|nilulion for evaluating the lire risk associated witli using pluslic piping products. 'Hie icsitlenlial data are most interesting (recausc (I) numerically, they represent the largest nuiulier of insiall.ilions, (2) this occupancy type is tin: most lire prouc, based on frequency of occurrence, ami (J) these 'Presiilenl, Integrated Fire and Failure Techtuilogies, Inc., 2322 Sixth Street, Suite 107, llerkeley, CA W 710. 66 ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 67 structures arc constructed using the least sophisticated building technology. Similarly, electrical tubing and conduit products (having met standard lire endurance lest conditions) have been used widely in the lield without adverse effect since their incremental acceptance into the National Electrical Code (NEC) over llie past decade. For the above reasons, the tlucc model building codes most widely used in the United Stales (which themselves represent an ad hoc risk assessment process) have accepted these products after requiring demonstration of both acceptable fire |>crfnrniance aud availability of reasonable installation methodologies. KEY WORDS: plastic pipe, fire endurance, through-penetration, hazard assessment, fire re sistive assembly, iiiluuiescenl. The plastic pi|)c, tube, am) conduit (hereafter called plastic pipe, unless otherwise noletl) technology used in the United Stales and Canada has evolved to include many new uses following ils introduction from Europe over Ihc-past .10 to *f() years. Originally permitted only iu non-fire resistive cimsliuclinn. plaslic pipe has been detnonslraletl as acceptable lot fite resistive end uses after siihslanlial testing anti field evaluation. Risk assessment studies addicssing genetal use of plaslic pipe and plastic electrical lulling have been published. Doth were conducted as part of code adoption processes. One dealt with possible increases in fire hazards when allowable uses for unplaslictzed PVC clcclric.il raceways were expanded in the National Electrical Code (NEC) |/|. The second included an assessment of lire related hazards associated with use ol plastic plumbing pipe iu fire resislive construction. T hai slinly can he loiiud in the draft cnviionmenlul impact tcpnrl published icccnlly by SKI International us pail of the tvotk associated with the state ol California plumbing code adoption process |2|. Doth of these studies considered the combustible nature of the plaslic products and found their use appropriate in fire resistive construction if appropriale installation detailing occurred. Hazard Assessment Bases In considering fire hazard elements associated with use of plaslic pipe, it is necessary to dclcuninc whether a pioposcd use will tesiill in levels of safely which exceed, ate consrdcnl with, or are less than existing products performing Ihe same function. In addition, methods to assess safely of new or non-classical uses of those products in fire resistive construction arc also needed. Potentially undesirable consequences needing examination may include rapid fire spread and unusual smoke threats. Failure or compromise of fire resistive assemblies prior lo their design limits which lead lo unanticipated levels of damage from fire also need lo be evaluated. Considering Ibis lopic from the standpoint of Ihe draft, "Standard Guide for Ihe Devel opment of Fite llazatd Assessment Standards for Products.*' pioduccd by the AS IM E5.J5.OI Task Group on Fire Risk and Fire Risk Assessment, Ihe document instructs the analyst that "one needs lo describe the product, how it is used, and its environment |J|. Initially examining "ils environment" is key to several questions related lo both occupant safely and flic spread where uses of pluslic pipe ate concerned, ami description of Ibis environment wilt ultimately define what products are sttilahle lor use. Intuitively, it can also he seen lh.it Ihe other two ("Ihe product and how it is used") lend themselves lo evaluation by lesls that can lead lo fairly s|icci(ie but btoadly applicable results. For these teasons environment will lie consideied lust. CTL029121 6B FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT End Use Environment! for Plastic Pipe, Tube, and Conduit in Eire Heshtivc Construction { Plastic pipe, tube, and conduit arc typically installed wiiliin the envelope which forms Die jboundaries of Arc resistive spaces. Since these products are installed behind such wall and ^floor/cciling surfaces, their longevity and resistance to involvement in a growing fire situation ; substantially exceeds human lenabilily in an affected space. Additionally, because this class of products arc typically installed behind barriers, changes in prcflashovcr characteristics of the space as compared to when metallic piping components arc used will he minimal. Exceptions come in the form of minor amounts of plastic pi|*c found in plumbing traps, and so forth, whose i|uantity is minimal in comparison with total amounts of normally occurring, combustible room contents. Further, fur most plastic piping products and in the ease of PVC electrical raceways, installation occurs within assemblies whose surface mcmlnancs (usually gypsum wnlllmatd) IMisscss a minimum IS min finish rating. Thus, it will lake at least IS uiin for such materials to l>c exposed to temperatures of 325*F (I65*C) or greater, u leui|ieraiure range relied ii|>ou in judging the performance of protective membranes (as detailed in sections 46 ami 47 of ASTM Method for Fire Tests of Uuilding Construction and Materials), aiul one which is substantially lower than the ignition temperature for members of this generic class of ma terials. Because of this mode of installation, liarut to occupants of such spaces from com bustion products associated with these materials is minimized in an origiu area. Additionally, because the nature of the Arc resistive construction is intended to prevent migration of combustion products, smoke threats elsewhere will be limited. As is well known, fire resistive construction de|K-uds on barriers at selected locations to prevent fire spread. In theory, if these baniers (walls, (loor/ceilings, and so forth) function as intended, building occupauls will have adc<|uulc lime to avoid injury by exiling safely or evacuating to areas of refuge. Fire spread will also be limited. I lowevcr, since actual struc tures contain openings such as doors, duels for treating, ventdating, air conditioning, and channels for distributing all sorts of utilities and services, the concept that such barriers are monolithic in nature is generally only theoretical. In practice, most contain numerous open ings which must be protected. Thus, the environment being considered involves the envelope formed by fire resistive components with plastic pi|>c, tube, or conduit installed within them aud/or passing through them. No assumptions arc made as to changes in fuel load which these products may provide. Rather, through testing, performance of assemblies which iucludc combustible plastic ele ments arc compared with tested designs which do not contain those materials (or details needed for their installation) and evaluations arc made whether or nut plastic inclusions reduce the fire endurance rating of the original design, lire cxjiosorc conditions are piescribed iu ASTM E 119, for full assemblies, and its derivative, ASTM E 814, Method for Fire Test of Through-Pcncirution fire Stops, for testing of a |ieueiratiou detailing itself. Description of Product The ``product" in this ease is various plastic pipe, lube, and conduit materials manufactured from a variety of generic polymer resins, llicsc iucludc unplaslici/cd polyvinylchloride (PVC), chlorinated PVC (CPVC), acrylonitrilc-buladicnc-slyrcnc (ADS), polypropylene (PP), polybulylcnc (PD). Each of llicsc has its own physical properties which include melt point, melt viscosity, fuel content, ease of ignition, and so forth. Additionally, application of different manufacturing technologies has led to versions with solid or foain core in PVC and AUS drain, and waste and vent (DWV) pipe products. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMOING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 69 Products me divided in the categories below with predominating generic resin tor each use shown below. 1. Mechanical system end uses. (a) DWV Piping (mtpluslicircd PVC. AUS, PF-specializcd systems). (b) Domestic hot and cold water (DIICW) (CI'VC, I'll). (c) Condensate drains (uoplaslicizcd PVC). (d) Roof drains (uuplasficizcd PVC, ADS). (e) lire sprinkler systems (CPVC, I'll). 2. Electrical tubing and conduit (also known as raceways) end-use (uupluslicizcd PVC), (a) Electrical power distiilmiion (110 to 220 volts). (It) l.ow voltage uses. (1) Signal systems. --- (2) Electronic data processing (F.DP) distribution. Currently, I'VC is the only resin system available which provides the needed physical properties fur the electrical cud-usc area. Ilaw These Products are Used To assess hazards associated with "how" plastic pipe products are used, the (ire resistive assembly for which the hazard assessment is made must be spccilic. Typical fire resistive applications which may include plastic pipe- can be broken down by the following vaiiahles, all of which assist iu developing as exact a definition of the assembly type as |>ossiblc. I. Assembly Type A. WallsIPartiiions 1. Cavity type 2. Monolithic type 1). Floor/Cciling and Koof/Cciling Assemblies 1. Cavity type 2. Monolithic type 2. Construction Type A. Combustible systems 1. wood stud walls and partitions 2. wood joist lloor/ccihng assemblies 3. composite or mixed assemblies such as those including: (a) wood-based busses (b) wood-based "I" beams (c) concrete decks on wood framing II. Non-combustible systems 1. metal stud walls and partitions 2. protected metal deck flooi/eeilmg and roof/cciling assemblies including bar joist- tyjres 3. reinforced concrete assemblies with and without exterior metal framing, support CTL029122 70 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT Piping and raceway configurations used with these assemblies (all in one or more o( the j Through-penetrating elements Partially penetrating elements j-dlV'p}, *' Included elements r$'J Combinations of A, D, and C ` l. Given the preceding background information, a 3-dimcnsional matrix to visualize vari' ablcs in the evaluation is suggested. The three axes, (a) project fire environment, (b) product being considered, and (c) use formal in project, form in the three uxes as represented in Fig. I. Hazard Assessment Data for Plaslic Pipe, Tube, and Conduit llascd on ASTM E 119 and ASTM E 114 Testing Results from well defined standard testing of assemblies arc useful as input when con ducting hazard assessments for plastic pipe, lube, and conduit installations. The scope for this paper defines the environment (or these products as fire resistive construction of one or more hours expected fire endurance. Tlius, when S|>ccific plastic pi|>c products arc tested as part of an assembly designed for use in that environment, applicable test data results. The following sections describe and discuss such standard test results and provide references for them. End Usa Characteristics of Pipo, Tubo, or Conduit Installation FIG I --Schematic tepieseniaiion of potable combinations u[ /actors which must be evaluated when intialhnt plattie pipe. lube. ond conduit ui m /tie resistive assembly. ZICHEBMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 71 In overviewing ASTM E 119 and ASTM E 814 results for plastic pipe, derating of lire resistive assemblies and impact of penetrating element diameter vs. thickness of assembly are important. Concerning derating of assemblies (reduction in fire endurance of the assembly containing the plaslic pipe product as compared to one without that product), the concept of finish rating can be applied to compare performance of assemblies.1 In the ease of the 1- and 2-lr gypsum wallboard clad wall assemblies, direcl comparisons can be made between finish rating (lime) with and without plaslic pipe, lube, and conduit installed. Such a series of comparisons are shown in Table I and reflect no substantial variation between specimens wills pipe and/or conduit installed, and those without those products present. These results are particularly important, since early failures of fire resistive assemblies are the most critical and potentially catastrophic ones. A second element of fire endurance behavior for assemblies containing plastic pipe is the relationship between penetration diameter and assembly thickness. This was explored years ago in ad hoc testing in Europe, where different diameters of plaslic pipe were installed in concrete slabs of differing thicknesses |9|. Recently, the author conducted similar tests which were 2 li iu duration. Four diieet thiougli penetrations were evaluated in 114.3- and 165.1mm (4'/i- and 6!/i-in.) thick concrete slabs. PVC-DWV sizes tested included 38.1,50.8, 76.2, and 101.6 mm (IV:, 2, 3, and 4 in.). The pipe was installed in 6.35-mm ('A-in.) oversized holes with ceramic fiber packing as fircsloppiug. In both thicknesses of slab, the 38.1-mm (I'/r-in.) pipe performed satisfactorily (or the full 2-h test duration and the 50.8- ami 76.2mm (2- anil 3-in.) pipe installations performed satisfactorily iu the 165.1-inm (6'/>-in.) thick slab. Tlie l(ll.6-mm (4-in.) pipe failed in both thickness of slab with the generic fircsloppiug used, as did the 50.8- and 76.2-mm (2- and 3-iu.) pipe in the thinner slab. Overall, failure limes in the thin slab for Ihc 2-h lest were inversely proportional to pipe diameter and all failure limes for all pipe diameters were proportionally longer iu the thicker slab |/0|. 't ins relationship between slab thickness and pipe diameter is an expression of what could be called an "aspect ratio" as relates to plastic pipe use and allows one to generalize, not surptisiugly, that larger openings arc less desirable than smaller ones, and thinner assemblies are less desirable than thicker ones, where fire endurance is concerned. The impact of elevated atmospheric pressure on the performance of plastic pipe, tube, and conduit in fire affected rooms is of recognized importance. Of these, vented applications (as found in plumbing uses) are the most critical. Conversely, minimal air flows can be expected within electrical raceways which contain substantial ftll and are essentially closed at terminating locations in junction, switch, or outlet boxes. Additionally, electrical raceways arc used typically in substantially smaller diameters. The actual pressure gradients which exist during poslflashover fires begin will) negative values iu the range of -0.508 to -0.254 nun (-4.98 to -2.49 I'a.) of water at Hour level and increase lo zero at about one-third the height of an affected room. They continue to increase such that, near the ceiling, positive pressure in the range of +.508 to + 1.02 nun ( + 4.98 to +9.97 I'a.) of water may exist |/0). The effect of these pressure gradients on possible fire travel through assemblies which include penetrations has been debated extensively iu code forums, where pressures utilized ill lest furnaces have been at issue. In response, code agencies have stipulated that some degree of positive pressure be applied lo assemblies tested under the ASTM E 814 standard. 'A contusing situation exists in die held, in lli.il finish rating measurements for dissimilar assemblies arc taken with lliciinocuiiplcs which may lie loc.ilcd al vastly different locations, dial is, individually under die gypsum membranes for wall tests above vs. al wood joists al die top of a plenum space when rated hung ceilings arc levied. Uolli measurements, however, represent a "finish rating." CTL029123 72 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT TABLE I--Fire endurance and finixli ratings of /- and 2-6 iviif/j including t'VC 1'ijie, !1 ' lube, tuui coinbul. (W. .-. . . Included Element *[ Finish Haling, min Fiic iiiitltiiducc, ti Hcfcicncc llOIttf mmc nunc I'VC-DWV UMT section I'VC ENT section EMT section I'VC ENT section IMMItf 20.tl 1*7.5 1*7.0 1*7.5 67.11 67.(1 60.1) 60.0 66.0 t i'i i i'i t Wl im 2H 2 i'*i 2 2m 2 l-M This is a conservative assessment, however, since the most common plumbing wall pene tration of a fire resistive assembly (a pi|>c trap at a sink) is muter negative pressure riming a |Mislflushovcr fire. Nevertheless, |x>silivc pressure is justified in testing since piping also may pass through fire resistive assemblies high in a room (us at lluor |ienelralions or above a hung ccilittg). Sprinkler piping, for example, is often run overhead, as is l)IICW.J Finally, most of the lest results which follow are for plastic pi|>c products installed using common, generic fire-slopping materials to ensure fire resistive integrity which is usually the simplest and most cost effective installation solution. However, because plastic pipe, tube, and conduit do melt and burn, in some applications such as larger diameters of pi|>c or with oversized penetrations, installation details based on proprietary fire-slopping materials (such as iuluuicsccnt rubbers, proprietary fiber insulations) and mccltauicnl fitcslopping devices urc necessary to provide superior and/or cost effective protection. Test results involving such detailing (which are usually listed and sometimes labeled by lliiul parly organizations) aie included where needed to illustrate particular |H>inls. l or the most extensive listings of such products, the reader is referred to the Underwriters Laboratory, Inc., Fite Rruuunee Pint lory |V|. Stundurd Fire Truing of I'lauic Pipe Most plastic plumbing pipe is run vertically in walls and shaftways in hie resistive con structions where pipe installations arc bounded by gypsum wnllhoard. For this reason, most of the early fire test work was directed at evaluating the integrity of such generic plumbing walls with plastic pi|>c installed in various ways. Uccausc of a lack of biiselinc data for classically used steel attd copper pipe, the initial fire test study conducted included these materials as well as I'VC and ADS plastic DWV pi|ic |/J|. To dale, no other standard test results for metal plumbing products have been published, which makes the question of performance criteria for them in conducting hazard assessments somewhat ill defined. In the other early tests of plastic DWV. generic plumbing walls with commonly available fire slopping materials (such as grout and thermal insulations) were evaluated J/4-2/J. These are similar approaches to that followed in the initial series 'Interestingly, in Canada the building code calls for positive pressure testing lu lie conducted at a level which is It) limes that called for in the United Slates |/>|. The justification fur this is. in pail, based upon "slack effect" arguments. Ouc can question the requirement for such high pressure dif ferentials al lesl. based un the presence of engineered smoke control pressurization syslettts itt high use buildings constructed today. Conversely, in low rise, lire resistive buildings, the slack effect is not a laclur. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 73 al tiro National Institute for Standards and Technology's Center for Fire Research (formerly National lliireuu of Standards). I- Test results produced and the plumbing and fire slopping configurations that resulted front these tests tellccl the evolution in nmleistanding of needed installation technology that occuricd It out the initial scries through the most recent tests of one and two It nielal framed wall systems. The hitler are found in typical non-couihuslihlc buildings (j,22|. Many of the assemblies tested in these series were designed to simulate a plumbing wall undergoing a (ire exposure, on a Door between two similar lire resistive assemblies above and below the lest lloor. This testing was used to assess possible vertical fire spread where vented DWV systems are installed as well as horizontal lire spread across such assemblies. The taller is the most obvious behavior expected in a fire resistive assembly with combustible Ihrough penetrating elements. Vertical spread has not been observed in properly constructed lest assemblies due to both (a) the propensity of the DWV materials to melt ami close olf openings al protected locations within cavity walls and (blithe functioning of file slopping or normal clearance penetrations al simulated Hour lines. Consistent with the ulmvc. failure modes observed in testing DWV systems have included early hoiizonlal bum lluough in test assemblies where installations included oversizerl an nular spaces al lluough |>enclrnlinn locations and/or plumbing fillings bearing on gypsum walllxiard membranes |/.f.2.f|. With regard to ainouul of plastic pipe tested on fire peiformance, the most conservative trials have included 4.877 m (Ifi ft) of 50.H mm (2 in.) and 76.2 mm (3 in.) I'VC DWV installed together in a 13*7.7 mm (5*/; in.) deep, 2.1MK x 3.658 in (It) x 12 ft) metal frame 'plumbing wall. The installation included two through penetrations. The same plumbing configuration was successfully tested in one and two hour wall designs. 'The test assembly included six vertical wall cavities and simulated upper and lower floors, two of which included the DWV pipe. A schematic of the lesl assembly can be seen in Fig. 2 |2-/|. Ibr AUS-DWV pipe, a single plumbing cavity, in a 3.048 x 3.658 m (III x 12 ft) I h 50.8 x 152.-I mm (2 x 6 in.) wood framed lest wall with the same plumbing configuration shown above represents the ninsl jH.-sximi.Mic condition tested to dale |/!/|. lu order to assess the iinp.icl ol loam coie technology in which cocxliuxinn techniques are used to produce |ilaslic DWV |ii|>e with solid exleiior layers and a low density loam core, a lest on the penetration detail only lor the assembly described above was conducted accoided to the ASTM I; 81-1 lest standard. Test results showed no difference in performance for the foam core jrroduct as conqraicd to the solid core lest result |25|. Table 2 summarizes the lesl scries discussed above for DWV pipe in gypsum wullbonrd cl.nl I- and 2-h nielal anil wood framed assemblies. Specialized, proprietary systems for DWV through penetration of gypsum shaft walls or masonry walls by plastic pipe have been developed and tested. These include guillotinc- like systems or inlumescenl closures for 2- or 3-li assemblies lor plastic pipe diameters up lu 152.4 mm (6 in.). |27-J/|. From a standpoint of lire performance of plastic jiipe used for sprinklers or Dl 1CW applications as compared to DWV (which is hugely empty and of greater diameter), the latter poses a greater threat to fire spread. However, Til sprinkler and DIICW pipe up to 50.8 mill (2 in.) in diaruelcr have been tested in both metal and wood framed assemblies under the criteiia of the AS'IM Li 814 standard |.I2,J./|. Although these applications contain water, this was not possible for testing. Thus, test results are conservative since the presence of water will increase fire cnduiancc. Ilecausc far less |>lumhing pipe is found in file resistive llour/cciling assemblies, fewer fire endurance tests have been run with such systems. Test results available are summarized in Table 3. CTL029124 74 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT ELEVATION SECTON A-A FIG. 2--Centric gypsum board clad, meial stud trail assembly for fire testing. Specimen includes rtriical drain and ran lines (nidi simulated plumbing penetrations) as trcll as bileralplumbing junetiulions. TABLE 2--Gypsum rind 1- and 2-lt trail assemblies containing plastic WII'V. Hourly lUling 1 1 l 1 2 2 2 I'cuciruiing Miikiiiit* AIIS (solid cote) AUS (foam core) I'VC I'VC AUS (solid core) I'VC I'VC Structural System** wood frame wood frame wood frame melal fraiuc wood frame wood frame tnclal frame Testing Agency A. U.C 1) A. U.C U II II E Kclciencc 1.1. 17. i| ->5| II. 17. (9| "1 /V 'Penetrating materials arc all I'A of 2-in. (3.81 of 5.U8-cm) l)WV pipe. Vent ami drain size range from 2 to 4 in., depending on assembly and genetic pipe type. For specific sires and types, consult lief 26. `For minimum thickness of lest assembly and description of structural elements, consult lief 26. Key to agencies: A__National Institute of Standards and Technology Center for Fire Httcarih (formerly National Uureau of Standards). II--Ohio State University C--University of California, llcrkclcy D--Warnock llcrsey International. Inc., Vancouver. U.C., Canada. I---Warnock llcrsey International, Inc., Pittsburg, CA. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMDING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 75 TAIll.E 3--Examples office endurance lest results for floorleeiling assemblies. 1 lourly Ruling Penetrating Material* Structural System* Testing Agency deference 2 I'Ve concrete slab A |.U| 2 I've wood frame A 1 It, 56 min.'' Alls, I'VC concrete .slab on metal U |J6| deck with hung ceil* ing detail 1 It. 30 mitt. AUS worn! frame A |J5| ``Maximum pipe sizes--3 or -I in. (7.h or III cm) depending on specific desigu tested. *Kcy to agencies: A -- Underwriter's Laboratories II--Ohm Stale University `hi the lest of this 2-h assembly, an apparently random failure occurred in the protective hung ceiling lower membrane, leading to slightly premature tailiue. Slttndttnl fire Testing of Unpliislicizcd I'VC Trothtcls for Electrical Etui Uses ASTM E 119 testing of fire resistive assemblies with unplasticizcd I'VC electrical raceway (and boxes) installed lias been conducted. Initially, Ibis test work was directed at demon strating the cipiivalcncy of the I'VC products with competing metal products. Subsequently testing look the form of more usual performance testing based on the ASTM E 119 standard itloue. Once again, scant lest results existed tor the metal products with no tests available for (ire resistive wall assemblies including rigid metallic conduit, for example. T ests of wall assemblies containing various PVC materials arc summarized in Table 4. Based upon analysis of the preceding lest results, the Conference of American Building Officials (CABO) established that I'VC raceway can be used in combustible and noncombusliblc 2-h assemblies based on 50.8 X 101.6 mm (2x4 in.) nominal framing |J7|. Three different flour/cciling designs containing I'VC electrical components have been tested successfully. One, a .Vlt design with concrete deck and metal structural system, included a plenum in which llucc different combinations of I'VC raceway and boxes svere tested. A font III, control section, included metallic raceway and boxes. The lower membrane was a liic rated, iiiniganic tile |.W|. 'This testing vetilies that I'VC boxes (see also Ilcf |.!9| for an evaluation of I'VC box impact in combustible lluoi/cciliug assemblies) and raceway can be successfully used in lloor/eeiliug assemblies without compromising (ire performance. In particular, it addresses the hazard posed when I'VC materials melt onto a lower membrane which has a critical protective function as where, in the test cited above, the lower membrane provided piolcclion for steel luembeis supporting a concrete deck. TAIll.E 4 -- I'VC electrical raceway tested in gypsum chul. fire resistive trail assemblies." I inurly Haling 2 2 PVC Material Vi-in. (12.7-mm) rigid non* metallic conduit Win. (19.05-mtu) electrical nonmetallic tubing Structural System 2 x `t in. (30.8 x If/I,(f -mm) nominal wood stud* or 3V* in. (V2.0H-iniii) 22 gauge steel studs JVn-iii. (V2.0H-mni> 23 gauge steel studs Reference w ``Doth tests run at Underwriter's Lahoialories, Inc. CTL029125 76 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT , Tlic oilier Iwo systems tested were bused on poured in place slabs of 2-li design. One was of normal weight concrete 114.3-mm (4'/j-in.) thick and contained three runs of 25.4-nun ft (1 in.l PVC electrical non-mclallic tubing (ENT) raceway |40|. Tlic other system, based on lightweight concrete, was formed on a proprietary corrugated metal pan system |4/|. Doth '/;j* of these tests were conducted on 1.829 x 2.438-ui (6 x 8-fl) specimens according to the'.'k. ASTM E 119 time leni|>craiure curve. Testing was primarily to determine ieni|ieraiure rise . above the ENT on the unexposed surface of the slab or where the non-mclallic tubing exited the uncx|H)scd face. Figures 3u und b illustrates lest specimens. Test results for the two unprotected concrete slabs addiess possible fire risks in using PVC raceway in a cast in place format. Where |Ktxsihlc derating of such assemblies is at issue, two failure modes arc potentially important. possible increases in backfacc temperature rise due lo tlic presence of PVC (electrical raceways) and possible fire spread along PVC raceway, leading from excised lo the micx|>oscd side or from internal ignition of raceway within the slab to the unex|iosed side. ' In relation to the first item, data from thermocouples placed directly above ENT runs in . these tests showed lower readings than in areas where concrete only was present, litis is a reflection of the lower thermal conductivity of the PVC raceway us compared lo the thermal conductivity of the concrete itself. Figures 4u and b illustrates this for the normal weight lUCIIMOCOUI'lC LOCAItOUS. @ on uncxposco sum/set. 000 on concuric sonrxer aoovc cm IIUNS. PtACCO ON CONCRCIC r ixaiironiAur I ROM (MINCING (III. AOOVC VlRUCAl HUN llllCRXIC SI AO niou IJ(LOW @ At (III ON SUNTACC. (m) I* AOOVC SLAU ON (III. 0 14" AOOVC SCAN ON (III. FIG. 3()__Concrete Jlab lest specimens 1.82V x l.J.IHin (6 x 8)tl; Selfsiippurtmn IH.J-nuH fV'4' in.) thick stub. 7licrinocuoples Nos. I lo V ore ASTM E IIV stuiuliiril; Nos. 10 to 12 ore /t.S / M I- 81-1. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMDING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 77 FIG. J(l>)--Concrete slab tcu ificcimvns I.H29 x 2.VJtf-w (6 x X-Ji); Lightweight concrete stub mil on /uo/niciury metul /hoi. XX.9-mm (J,/.-in.) minimum ilub ihuknexx. 7henntH'onples Nm. / to H are ASTM /. 119; buhince are ASTM L 6H thnmocou/tlcs. 14.3 mm) SLAB WITH 1"(aS.4 mm) ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING (EMT) INSTALLED A(0s. C) MCJ. 4(a)--Cooi/uoalive time tcm/icnitnre carvesJor thcrniocou/ilcx avun utictl with metallic clct tru ul rm nniyi in turn rii* >lnb\. CTL029126 78 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT .* (MO mm) SLAO WITH I* (2S. mm) ELECTRIC NONMETALLIC TUQIMQ (ENT) INSTALLED 3M| SIM SMI i*. ISIM IM a5 IMI 1 f IU< IIM m TIG. *t(b)--Comparative lime temperature curvesfn thermocouples assm iuletl with metallic (Fig. -hi) anil turn-metallic (Fig. lb) decimal raceivuys lesteil m coaciete ilnlu. slab. Similar results were also obtained wtiU llie lightweight lest slab which included the 25.4-iiiui (I-in. J LNT tMcwjy. Regarding |xissihlc lire i|iic<hI along llic )*V(' rjccw.iy, testing showed llial mi such lite spreud occurred. Rather. die material williin die slab ihuiicd gradually-and temperatures ul lucalions where LN T exiled llie lesl assemblies were lieluw failure erileria fur ASTM 1:814 (Tig. 4b). Conversely, an identical specimen, Icslcd willi east in place, thin wall electrical metallic lubing (l:MT) showed higltcr bacLfaee (cm|>eraluics above the metallic raceway during testing than in tire field of the concrete (Fig. 4a). hi addition, at exit locations on the unexposed side, temperatures also exceeded allowable levels for AS I'M Li KI4. Test assembly design was identical to that of lire normal weight slab sIhiwii in the pteceding T'ig. 3. Hack face lime temperature curves showed Iriglrcr temperatures above the LiMTas well as at millet locations oil lltc uncx|Miscd surface of llic slab |72|. llrcsc readings arc a consequence of die high thermal conductivity of llic steel tubing us compared to both the concrete and the PVC raceway. Nonstandard Sources of Hazard nud Risk Assessment Data In addition to results from standard testing, hazard and risk assessment procedures often must draw on other data to reach reasonable conclusions. Oltcn a standard lest may tun address a foreseeable consequence of the use of a product or llic intended use may dilfer fiom the standard assembly result. Thus, ciigincciing judgment, a non-standard lest, and/ or field data will lie required to provide needed answers. An inescapable fact is that so many potenliul etul-use configurations exist for pipe, lube, anil loiulitil proilucls (as with other widely used construction products) that one is prei hulalfrom testing ofull < oinhinuiions of these making some fnim of liazaid assessment a necessity. mwmwawwm ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMOING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 79 In the case of I'VC electrical raceway products, for example, portions of the hazard assessment findings in Kef l were based on non-standard lest results used in conceit with modeling results lu assess probable impact of combustion products created from lire ex posures of these products. T he findings demonstrated that no unusual hazards existed, based upon direct exposure of PVC electrical raceway to flame, as did later findings based on rodent exposures to PVC smoke bom the same products |7.l|. Likewise, potential ignition hazards posed by all clectiical raceway systems should be considered and evaluated although these aie not readily subjected to standard lesl conditions I lowever, reports are available on this topic which show that PVC raceways provide inliuisic safely factors not found in metallic raceway systems due to their inability to fault to ground I-/-/.-/.T t. It is obvious that redundant fire protection features required in many contemporary buildings impact fire risk levels there. 'This was demonstrated for PVC electrical products in a lesl conducted when sprinkler protection was added to an older, fire resistive building in a demonstration of upgrading capabilities of modern construction materials and techniques |76|. In this case, the active piolcclion provided by sprinklers based on plastic pipe prevented damage lo PVC-liNT installed within fire resistive wall assemblies to such an extent that electrical continuity was maintained after even the fire lest exposure bad been conducted. In actual situations like this lesl scenaiio. actual fire loads rarely challenge properly installed Laniers (such as single or multiple layers of walllioard) and the presence ol sprinklers further reduces hazard levels. 'The presence of these construction features should be taken into account in preparing a fire liazaid assessment of such structures. The emergence of CPVC and I'll us listed materials for fire sprinkler pipe has been reviewed |V7| and reports on (he testing lo qualify them for listing arc also available |/.V|. Those lest icsults also have implications for pipe uses in 1)11CW supply based on the same gcuciic plastics which aie qualified lot use as spimklcis. Tin example, in lest protocols tin plastic pipe sprinkler systems, the piping, chnigcd with water, is exposed lo a wood cnli heptane fire. When the test is begun and following initiation of spunkier discharge, watei How is continued through the plastic pipe which is itself exposed to the ongoing wood crib/ heptane fire. This provides adequate evidence of piping integrity and resistance lo ll.unc impingcmcul under conditions where water is picscnl and should relieve those concerned that CT'VC and 1*1) foi UIICW uses will derate file resistive assemblies ill which they aie installed. Concerning non-standard poslflaslmvcr testing of through penetration of slabs and p.ulilions by plastic DWV, two early Canadian studies showed mixed results (or tests in which attempts were made lo follow the ASTM 12 119 lime temperature curve, for small specimens These tests also piescnled different approaches to through penetration fire slopping, in cluding application of metal sleeving at through pcneliation locations lo protect pipe for periods beyond one h (79,30]. Australian reseaichers conducted tests on both unprotected f'VC pipe penetrating concrete slabs and protected situations where I'VC pipes were installed with inlumescenl fire slopping systems. Their results iciufoiccd the finding that fire stopping protection for direct, through penetrations of l*VC pipe through slabs was required to maintain fire resistance ratings. These researchers also conducted tests with metal pipes which showed high unexposed face tcm|)crnlurcs but no transmission of lire |5/-5J|. Finally, no bona tide field data documenting the existence of identified fire .hazards due lo plastic pipe, lube, or conduit as currently used is available. This includes an Australian study of tile subject |37| and searches and inquiries in the United Stales lo various incident re|Nii ling systems and databases by the author have failed lo develop field data demonstrating a luc hazard. Likewise, a scutch of held data on install.iluuis in Inc icsislivc buildings made CTL029127 60 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT under alicrnalc materials and methods sections in Hie building codes since the 1970s did not vifc**,ow a recognizable fire incidence related to plastic pi|ic use. Similar inquiries related to field performance of electrical raceways based ou l`VC raceway, whose use increased first ,b|.' with the 1987 NEC acceptance and incrementally further with the 1990 NEC, have been v negative. Discussion /(e ` The preceding section presented data which will assist in projecting exacted fire perforniancc of plastic pipe, tube, and conduit in specific situations. Generalizations which can be drawn from these data include the following below. Although the different generic materials used lor plastic pi|>c, tulic, and conduit have been tested to varying degrees in both combustible and iiun-combustible construction as semblies of widely differing lypci, such testing has not been conducted on every lyjic of included or penetrating element in every possible fire resistive assembly. The testing which has been conducted iu both standard fire endurance formats (as well as for uses in fire resistive buildings which include sprinklers based on plastic pi|>c) supports the following general ranking where lest results for a S|>ccific combination of pi|>e assembly are unavailable. CPVC > PVC > fire retardant PP > PP, PD, urn/ AUS Tire basis for this ranking can be found by comparing tabulated test results in reports such as Ref IJ and fire endurance periods presented in listing documents such as Ucf 8 where differing generic resins, used to fabricate plastic pi|ic, lube, and conduit have Ircen tested in identical installations. From a standpoint of measured fire resistance times in side by side testing, both of those references present data that sup|Mirl this ranking for products used in plumbing and electrical applications. Likewise, pnqierlies such as resistance of polymer resins to ignition (as expressed by numerical results in ASTM D 286} testing) are of importance. Finally, presence or absence of fire retardants (as in the |K>lypropylcnc materials cited) and differing melt and charring tendencies of the classes of resjns used for pipe, tube, and conduit will impact fire endurance. Model Code Acceptance Each of the three model building codes, the Uniform Duilding Code (UIIC), Standard Duilding Code (SUC), and tire National Duilding Code (NDC),4 upon which most locally adopted building codes are based, provide for the use of plastic pipe, lube, and conduit in fire resistive construcli n in their latest versions. Other socialized or regional codes (such as the NEC and the National and Standard Plumbing Codes) allow for unlimited use of plastic pipe, lube, and conduit, as specified. Likewise the ANSI S-40 committee recently developed a plumbing code allowing for use of plastic pipe in fire resistive construction and the Conference of American Duilding Officials, Doard for the Coordination of Model Codes (CADO-DCMC) issued guidelines for use of plastic pi|>c, tube, and conduit in sliufl, duct, and at through penetration locations several years ago. However, differences exist from community to community regarding adoption and amendment of these codes. Certain major TJUC. promulgated by the International Conference of Duilditig Officials (ICllO), Whittier, CA; SIIC. promulgated by the Suuiltciu lluildtug Code Congress International (SUCCI). Ilirininghaui. At.; NIIC. iMOniulgalcd by the lluildtug Officials aud Code Administrators liitctuatioiuil (UOCA). Country Club I lilts, IL. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMDING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 01 cities which promulgate their own codes, and the model plumbing code used in much of the western and midwcslein United Slates, restrict use of these products iu a vatiely ol ways. It is the author's opinion that these icslrictions are based on economic, rather than technical, grounds, inasmuch as there is a substantial, jsosilivc tccoul for these product's fire perfor mance charactciislics. Conclusion Adequate literature and test results exist to conduct hazard assessments related lo many uses of plastic pipe, lube, and conduit. In doing so, application of products must be con sidered in light of their specific function, the type of assembly in which they will be installed, aud the overall design of the structure concerned. Whenever possible, standard lest results and knowledge from field |>erformaucc should he applied lo make these assessments. References |/1 Hciijumin. I. A.. "Toxic Hazard Analysis: Electrical Non-Mclnllic Tubing." Journal uf lire 3Vi- turn, Vol. 5, Jan.-Fell. I9H7, pp. 25--4*7. |2| "Plastic Plumbing Pi|>c." including "Technical Appendices." Draft Environmental Impact Itcporl. SKI International. (Menlo Park, CA). Department of Housing and Community Development. Slate of California, Sacramento, Draft I, I9H3. and Draft It, Aug. I9K9. |J| "Standard Guide for the Development of Fire Hazard Assessment Standards for Products," ASTM Task Group E5.35 on Fire Hazard anil l ire Itisk Assessment, Committee E-5 on Fire Standards. Project X-VJ-7. (draft). 21) April 1990. |V| "Results of 3 ASTM E 119 I I lour Tests of Gypsum Wnllhoard/Slcel Stud Assemblies." (from L. I.aynmii). Lit. NOUS. Project 7f> NKI2I>H. Underwriters Laboratories. Inc., Northbrook. II.. 211 A|*id 197b. |S| "Repmt on the Fire Endurance aiul Hose Stream Tests of PVC Plastic Pijre Penetrations Through a 7'// 'Hock, l-llour Rated Gypsuntlrourd aud Steel Stud Wall." and "Fire Performance of PVC.* Pi|ie in Noit-coilihuslihic Construction." t ile Will-I9S-PSV-USKII and Wlll-495 PSV-OhJS. Warnock llcrscy International, Inc., Pittsburg. CA, Jan. I9K9. (61 "PVC aud Rigid Metallic Conduit and Metallic Outlet Duxes ill a Nonlicaring Partition Assembly." Ul. NC546-I.-2. Prujecl 73 NK7657, Underwriters Laboratories. Inc., Northbrook. IL, 21 Dec. 1973. |7| "Electrical Nonmclallic Tubing (ENMT). Electrical Metallic Tubing (EMT). and Metallic Outlet Duxes in a Nonlicaring Partition Assembly." UL 101326-4. Prujecl KU NK1I747, Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Northbrook, It., 17 Sep. I9HU. |8| fire Ueuumtce Directory JWO. Underwriters l.alwralorics. Inc., Northbrook. II.. 1990. |V| Danielsson. C.. Linder. I'.. Lundiu. O.. and Picnell. P. A.. "Fire Tests with Plastic Tolies Carried Out at the Research Station in Sludsvik. Spring 1963." Kt|>orl IK: 1966. National Swedish Institute for Duilding Research. Sludsvik. Jan. 1963. |/0| Ziehcrniaii. J. IL. Unpublished lest data. IFF Technical Services. Inc.. Derkelcy. CA. I9K8. |//| Fang. J. I)., "Static Pressures Produced by Riuim Fires." NIISIItHO-l'JSJ. Center for Fire Research. National Institute of Standards and Technology (formerly National bureau of Stanilards). Gaith ersburg. MD. I9K4. |/2| Choi. K. K.. "File Slo| for Plastic Pi|ie." fire Tetluiology. Vol. 23, No. 4. Nov. I9K7. pp. 267- 279. |/J| Parker. W. J., Paaho, M.. Scott. J. 7\. Gross. D.. and Denjainin. I. A.. "Fire Endurance of Gy|isuui Hoard Walls and Chases Containing Plastic and Metallic Drain. Waste and Vent Plumbing Systems," National llureaii of Standards Duilding Science Series 72. U.S. Department of Com merce. Sept. 1975. |/V| lllcl/ackcr. K. W. aud Dole. J. G.. "Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and a Foe and I lose Slieuin Test on Duplicate Non-load Hearing Plumbing Wall Assemblies.'' Kc|mui 5hl5. Ohio Stale Univcisuy. Iluilding Research l.alniralory. College of Engineering. Jan. 1974. |/J| lllclzackcr. R. W. and Hole. J. G.. "Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and Foe and I lose Stream Test on Dii|ihcalc Load Hearing Polyvinylchloride Plumbing Wall Assemblies." Report 551,1. Ohio Slate University. Iltuldiiig Kcscarih Lalnuaiory. College of Engineering. May 1974. CTL029128 82 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT 116\ Ulclzackcr, R. W. and llirlc, J. G., "Standard ASTM Fire Endiiriince Test and Fire and llose Stream Test un Duplicate Nun-loud Hearing Polyvinylchloride (I'VC) I'liiinliiiig Wall Asscmtilics," 1Report RN, Ohio Slate University, Uuilding Research Lalroraiury. College o( Engineering. April ,, 1973. |/7| lllcliacker. R. W. "Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and Fire and Hose Slreuin Test on Duplicate l.ond-liearing Acryloniliile-llutadienc-Slyicnc I'linuliiug Wall AucuiIiIks." Ue|ioil 5SMI, Ohio Slate University. Uuilding Research Lalroralury, College ol nngineering. 1974. |M| nicliackcr, R. W. "Standard AST*M Fire Endurance Test and Fire and llitsc Slicaiu Test on Duplicate Non-I.oad Hearing Acryhuiilrilc-Uuladtcnc-Slyrcnc (/MIS) ITiiinliing Wall Assenitilies." Report 5SMI, Ohio Stale University. Iluildang Research I jdmralory. College of Engineering, 1973. |/9| Draentcl. R. 0. and Williamson. R. U.. "Fire Tests ol Six Inch Wood Stud One-hour ITrc-raled Walls with Elastic DWV ITutnbing Systems." Service to Industry RepotI 76-7. University ol Calilornia, Berkeley. Depanincnl ol Qvil Engineering. Structural Research l.ali. Nov. 1976. |20) Draentcl, R. II. und Williamson, R. II., "Fire Test ol a Sis Inch WimmI Sind Onc-I lour I'ne-Ratcd Wall with a Fire Retardant I'olypropylcuc DWV ITuntliing System." Service to Industry Report 7701. University ol Caldornia, Department ul Civil Engineering. Slruelutul Reseateh l.ult. Ilerkeley. 1977. |2/| Williamson. R. II.. "Fire Test ol a Six Inch Wood Stud One-lwur Fire-rated Wall with a Fitlyvinylcltloridc DWV Plumbing System. Sltuclures. Materials ami Fire Research." University ol Culiloruia. Uerkeley. De|urtntenl id Civil Engineering, Slrtniural Reseatch l ull. Fell. 1985. |22J "Report on the Fire Endurance and llose Stream Tests ol l*VC Elastic l'i|>e I'vnelralions Through an H'/r* Tltick, 2-1 lour Rated Gypsumbnard and Steel Stuil Wall," and "Fire I'crloriiiuncc ol EVC Eipe in Non-comliuslihlc Construction." Files Wl II-495-ESV-U58U and WHI-495-PSV-(ki33, Warnock llerscy International, Inc.. I'illslturg. CA, Jan. 1989. |2J| ITumhcts* anil Slcamlillers Union Utcal 467/Goldlterg Research and Development Associates Corp.. "Tlte Ellecls ol AIIS Elastic ITuntliing Runs mi a Wood Stud and Gypsum Walllxtatil Earinion Exposed to a Standard Fire Endurance Test." File WHI-495-UI56, Wurnuck llerscy International, Inc., Eillslturg. CA. H Oct. I9K2. |24| Zichcrman, J. I).. "Fire Salcty ol EVC-llascd Elastic Piping." Firt Journal, Vol. K4, No. 6, NuvJ Dec. 1990. pp. 36-42. |23| "Standard Fire Endurance Test Program To Evaluate and Compare llie Fire Resistance ol Two Types ol AIIS Plastic Pi|te When They Penetrate a Fire-Resistive Wall," IFT Technical Services, Inc.. Report 5213, Cutpiillam, U.C.. Canada, Warnock llerscy Ptolcuionul Services. Ltd., I'ills lturg. CA, 16 Jan. 19X7. |26| Elastic I'tpe and Fittings Association iPPI-A). Tlnslie /'t/te in Fite Keutlire Cimiotirlinii. T he Design and Installation Manual lor Plastic Pi|te in Fue Resistive Consliuclioii, EI'FA, Glen Ellyn. II.. 1985. |27| "Eire Test Investigation ofTTirough-Ecnelraliou Fircsiup Systems in Gy|isum WalllMianl/SlccI Stud Wall Assemblies," Ul. K97UU, Project 85 NKI7IKI. 3M Company, Underwriters l.alHiiuloiics. Inc.. Northbrook. IL. 18 Sept. 1985. |28) "Report on Through-Penetration Fire Slop Devices," UL K 11)11)0-1.2. Project 8J NK19794. Orion Industries. Inc., Kansas City. KS, Underwriters laboratories, Inc., Nonhlitook. II.. 28 Nov. 1984. |29| "Rc|wrt on Wall Opening Protectivc-Dcviccs-in Conciele or Masonry Walls Assemblies." UL H9269-I.2 and R97IXJ. Projects 81 NK4JI4aud8l NK795I. 18 Dec. 1981; Letters. "Repotl Ty|ics PSS 7902 and PSS 7904 Through-Penetration Firestop Devices in Concrete Floor Assemblies." Ul. R9269. Project 82 NK22U0.6 May I98J. and Letter l(c|Mirl R9269.31 March 1983, Umlciwiilcis Laboratories, luc.. Northbrook. IL. (J0| Meyer, G. and llrillain. W., "Taro Hour Fire Resistance and llose Stream Tests ol R & G Sloanc Fire Valve," Will Flic 495.0621 and 495.0622, Warnock llerscy International (Will), Pittsburg, CA. 1984. |J/| "Report un Through-Penetration Fire Slop Devices." UL KIOIIKIO-1,2. Project 83 NK 19794, Orion Industries. Inc., Kansas City. KS, Underwriters larlntralories. Inc.. Norlliluook, II.. 28 Nov. 1984. |J2| "ASTM E 814-83 Standard Melliod ol Fite Tests olTlirough-Penetration Fire Slops: Eolybulyleiie Pipe rcnelralioiu ol a l-llour Rated Fitc-Hcsislivc Wall Assembly." Project 0I-83U5-028, SRI. Menlo Park. CA. May 1985. |JJ| "Fire Test Evaluation on Pulybulylcnc (PI)) Plastic Piping in a Sled and Wood Studded Gypsum Hoard Partitions." Design WE 735 lor Sliell Chemical Company. Houston, TX, ITIc J.l. OK9Q6.AC (45IU). Factory Mutual Research. Norwood. MA. 13 Nov. 1984. |JV| "Re|iorl on Tlirough-Pciiclration Fire Slop Devices in Concrete Floor Assemblies." UL RIU3381.2,3. Project 83 NR4820 (or Prusd Systems, Atlanta, GA. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Northbrook, IL. 25 Nov. 1983. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 03 |.I5| /in* f Uirtvtary /W0. System 160. 167. ami 3U3. Underwriters Laboratories. Inc., North* briHik. II. JW0. pj>. 1261. 1265. ami 1382. |.?6| nicU.ickcr, K. W. ami llirlc. J G.. "Standard ASTM Tire Endurance Test on a Floor and Ceiling Assembly.** Report 553V. Ohio Stale University. IMastic I'ipc Institute. Building Research Labo* ratory. Columbus. Oil. May I'37*1. |J7| Council of Amciican Building Olhci.ils (CAIIO). 'l uc Resistive Noncomlmstihle I'.ulihon As* sciuhly Containing FlcUriciil Non-Mcl.illic Tubing ami Rigid Non-Mclalbc Conduit.*' Rcpon NCR* 290, Carlou. National Evaluation Service Committee. Country Club Hills. II.. May 1987. I-WI T:avl-Fimling Rcptut im Metallic ami Nuumctullic T'ubing. Comlmls and Hoses in the Concealed Spaee ol Floor-Ceiling ami Roof-Ceiling Assemblies tvilli Suspended Ceiling." Ul. NC 546-5. Project 78 NK27.1I9. NEMA/UL Underwriters Laboratories, luc.. Northbrook, IL, Alieniioti II. Swylnyk. March 1989. |JV| "Nmimclallic Elcelrtcal Outlet Ibises lor Use ill Floor-Ceiling Assemblies Consisting ol Wood Joists. WimhI Flooring and Gypsum Wallbnard." UL RK.126. Project Kl NK 24419. Cation. Un derwriter Laboratories, Inc.. Northbrook. II.. 22 Dee. 1981. \J0\ "Kc-|>oilof the- Pilot Seale File Endurance Test nlan Unrest ranted 6` by M' by 4'/i'Thick. Remloried ('onerele Slats wilboiil an Applied Load, amt wills I* Diameter. PVC. FTcsiblc. I:N1 C'oudml Runs." File Will 49S-ESII-III65, |F*F Technical Seivtccs. Inc.. Wattiock llerscy lnternation.il. Inc.. Ptllsburg. C'A. 7 May 19*8). |4I| "Rc|MMl ol llie Pilot Seale Fite Endurance Test of I' Diameter. PVC. Flexible. LN I Comlml Runs in an Uineslruincdh` by 8' by S'/i'Tluch. Reinforced Coucreie/L'ottug.ilcd Steel Deck l-Toorf Ceiling Assembly without nit Applied Load." File Wl II-495-PSII-III69, IF I Technical Services. Inc., Warnock llerscy International, Inc.. Pittsburg, CA, 16 July 19911. |42| "Kc|Mulul the Pilot Seale Fire Endurance Test nlan Unrestrained 6' by K' by d'/t* Thick. Reinforced ('onerele Slab without an Applied Load, and wills I- Diameter. Steel. EMI Conduit Runs." File Wl II-495-PSII-III7U, IFT Technical Services. Inc.. Warnotk llerscy liileination.il, Inc.. Pittsburg. CA. 17 July 1990. |4J| PackIrani. S. C. and Crawlnrd. M. P.. "An Evalualiun nl Smoke Tnsicily and Tosic llatard ul Electrical Non-Mclallic Tubing Combustion Products," Juuriuil of Fire Siiencci. Vol. 2, Jan.-Feb. 1981. pp. 37-59. |44| Kalin. M. M., "Electrical Failure of Wires Insirlc I-inch Conduit Under Simulated Fire Condi tions." Technical Report FMKC J.L. Ol I4K4.RC. Cailon. Factory Mutual Research Corporation. Norwood. MA. Ocl. 1984. |V5| Fuller. J. F'., Hanna, W. J.. ami Kallenbacb. G. A.. "Arcing Faults in Mclallic Conduit at 120 and 2-10 v." IFTriiiiunlioin oil Imhmcy Appfuuliom, Vul, IA-2I. No. 4. Mayilunc 1985. |Vrt| Ilcnjamin/Claikc Associates, luc.. "()|icralion San Francisco: Smokc/Sprinklcr Test. Tcihim.il lU-poil," ilistitbiiled by liilcrnalional Assou.iliiul ol l ire ('bids (lAI'C). Marriol Ciupiu.ilum. San Fraiiciscn ITrc Dept., ami FT.MA/USI'A. Wasliingion. DC. April 1984. |4?| Wilging. R. ('.. "Plastic Fire Spiinkler Eipmg 1967-1987." llie Uinliloig Offmill mnl Cotie Ail- ntiniuitiior, Jnly/Aug. 1988. |48j "Kc|H>iI oil CPVC Pi|K and Fillings lor S|>rinkler Systems." Ul. E*3754. l'ro|ecl 85 NK8.17. Unilcrwrilers l.alroralorics. Inc., NoitlibrooL. IL. 17 July 1985. |49| Atwood. I'.. "Penetration ol Fire I'atltlions by Plastic Pipe," Fire Technology, Vol. 16. No I. July 1980. pp. 37-62. |50| McGuire. J. II.. "Pcnclralions of Fire Parliliims by Plastic DWV Pipe." Fire Technology. Vol. 9. No. I. Feb. 1973. p. 5. |5/| Hum, L. S. ami Marlin. K. G., "Inlmncsccnl Fire Stoppers For UI'VC Pipes Ecitciraling Concrete Slabs," Communwcallli Seicnlific and Industrial Research Orgaui/alioit. Division ol Uuilding Research. Ilighcll, Victoria, Australia, 1980. |J2| lltuwii. S. K. ami Marlin. K. G.. "Model l-Trc Resistance Tests of UPVC Etpcs Penetrating Concrete Slabs." Commonwealth Sticulilic and Industrial Research Oigamzaliun. Division ul lluilding Research. Ilighelt. Victoria. Australia. 1979. |5J| limn. L. S. and Marlin. K. G.. "Eatly Fire Hazard Assessment of UI'VC Pipe Formulations." Commonwealth Seienttlic and Inilusiiial Research Organization. Division ol Uuilding Research. Iliglrcll. Vieloria. Australia. 1981. |5V| Drown. S. K.. "Review of Aclii.il and Simulated Fires Involving Elastics and Pipes and (Tiling," Commonwealth Seienlilic and Industrial Research Organization. Division ol Uuilding Research. Ilighcll, Victoria. Auslulia. 1979. CTL029129