Document 82KDvd4YReB6mKybMxOKMjL5

July 21, 1992 ~Wayfie InterchangtfTMaza 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 JBZrsml 100-326.Lsl Enclosure: (1) PRO OeOUuU CORPORATE: 2322 Sixth Street Suite 107 Berkeley, CA 94710-2412 USA Ph: 510 * 548 * 3451 Fx: 510 548 0290 1 800 726 5939 CTL007359 BRANCH: 1001 SW 5lh Ave. Suite 1000 Portland, OR 97204-1111 USA Ph: 503 220 1652 Fx: 503 228 2058 Joseph B. Zicherman1 Performance of Plastic Plumbing and Electrical Products in Fire Resistive Assemblies REFERENCE: Zicherman, J. I)., ``Performance of Plastic Plumbing and Electrical Products In Fire Resistive Assemblies," Fire llazurtltmil Fire Kisk Assessment, ASTMSTP1150, Marcelo M. 11irsliclilcr, Ed., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, IlJ`J2. pp. 6683. AUSTRACT: llie plastic pipe. lube, and conduit products used in the United Stales evolved from transplanted European technologies over the past 30 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 appropriate fire endurance tests. End uses for these products include electrical power, signal distribution, and various plumbing and mechanical applications. Plumbing systems showing acceptable performance in fire resistive assemblies include drain, waste, vent, and supply piping (domestic hot and cold water, sprinkler piping). Appiovcd electrical applications include PVC-bascd rigid nun-metallic conduit and a flexible polyvinyl chloride (PVC) tubing product called electrical nun-metallic tubing. Tested approaches avail able to safely install plastic pipe, tube, and conduit include passive and active fire stopping systems based on insulations, intumcsccnl systems, and even mechanical ``cul-off" devices for thermoplastic piping systems. Fire lest results for these products and systems, and the designs that resulted from those testing programs, arc widely available. Flashes used to manufacture these products include PVC, chlorinated PVC, acrylonitrile-butadicnc-styrenc (A11S), polybulylcne (PD), and polypropylene (PP). Fire risk assessments of potential performance of these products must take into account properties of the rcsin-polyiner 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 penetrating or encased in a slab), and the ty|e of installation detailing used, because of the number ol jrossddc combinations for end use, analytical approaches based on (t) standard lest results, (2) field data on lire performance of (he plastic pipe, tube, and conduit products, and (3) fire resistive assemblies into which they arc installed all contribute to inferences drawn in conducting hazard assessments. Specifically, this paper reviews information available to assist in 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 ex tended study within the ASTM Committee E-5 on Fire Standards over the past several years, but which have not reached the status of standards. Most field performance data on plastic pipe come from residential occupancies where these products have been used for over 2(1 years, and where they constitute 95% of pipe installed. In addition, there have been numerous installations in nun-comliuslibic buildings (including high rises) here and outside the United Stales. This database represents a large population for evaluating the lire risk associated with using plastic piping pimhicls. The icsulcntinl d.u.i are most interesting because (I) numerically, they represent the largest number of installations, (2) this occupancy ly|>c is the most fire prone, based on frequency of occuricncc, ami (3) these 'President. Integrated Fire and Failure Technologies. Inc.. 2322 Sixth Street, Suite 107. Ilcikclcy CA 94710. 66 ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMDING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 67 structures are constructed using the least sophistieated building technology. Similarly, electrical tubing and conduit products (having met standard lire endurance lest conditions) have been used widely in the field without adverse effect since their incremental acceptance into the National Electrical Cotie (NEC) over the past decade. For the above reasons, the three model building codes most widely used in the United Slates (which themselves represent an ud hoc risk assessment pioeess) have accepted these products alter requiting demonstration of both acceptable lire peiformanee and availability of reasonable installation methodologies. KEY WORDS: plastic pipe, fire endurance, through-penetration, hazard assessment, fire re sistive assembly, intumcsccnl. The plastic pipe, lube, and conduit (hereafter called plastic pipe, unless otherwise noted) technology used in the United Stales and Canada has evolved to include many new uses following its introduction front Europe over ihe-pasl .10 to 40 years. Originally permitted only in linn-fire resistive consliuclion, plastic pipe has been demonstrated as acceptable lot file resistive end uses alter substantial testing and held evaluation. Risk assessment studies addressing general use of plastic pipe and plastic electrical tubing have been published. Both were conducted as part of code adoption processes. One dealt with possible increases in fire hazards when allowable uses for unplaslicized l'VC electnc.il raceways were expanded in the National Electrical Curie (NEC) |/|. The second included an assessment of lire related hazards associated with use ol plastic plumbing pipe in fire resistive construction. Thai study can be louiul in llic draft cnviionmcnl.il impact icpoil published recently by SRI International as pait of llic woik associated with the slate ol California plumbing code adoption pioccss [2|. Both of these studies considered the combustible nature of the plastic products and found their use appropriate in file resistive construction if appropiiale installation detailing occurred. Hazard Assessment Bases In considering fire hazard elements associated with use ol plastic pipe, it is necessary to dctcimiuc whethci a ptoposerl use will result in levels ol salety which exceed, toe consistent with, or are less Ilian existing products performing the same lunclion. In addition, methods to assess safety of new or non-classical uses of those products in fire resistive consliuclion arc also needed. I'otcntially undesirable consequences needing examination may include rapid fire spread and unusual smoke threats. Failure or compromise of fire resistive assemblies prior to then design limits which lead to unanticipated levels of damage from fire also need to be evaluated Considering this topic from the standpoint of llic draft, "Slandaid Guide lor the Devel opment of l ire I lazard /Xssessmcnl Standards for Products," pioduccd by the AS I M 1:5 35.1)1 Task Group on Fite Risk and Fire Risk Assessment, the document instructs lire analyst llr.it "one needs to describe the product, how it is used, and its enviionment" |.)|. Iniliully examining "its environment" is key lo several questions related to both occupant safely and lire spread where uses ol plastic pipe ate eonccincil. and desciipliou ol tins euvuoiiiiiciii will ultimately dcluie what products are suitable for use. Intuitively, it can also be seen dial the other (wo ("the product anti how it is used") lend themselves to evaluation by lesls lh.il can lead lo laiily specific but Inoadly applicable results, l oi llicsc reasons "cnviionincnl will be considered lust. CTL007361 68 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT End Use Environments for Pinuie Pipe, Tube, anti Conduit in Eire Resistive Construction Plastic pipe, lube, iind conduit arc typically installed within the envelope which forms the boundaries of fire resistive spaces. Since these pioducts are installed behind such wall and floor/cciling surfaces, their longevity and resistance to involvement in a growing fire situation substantially exceeds human tenability in an affected space. Additionally, because this class of products arc typically installed behind barriers, changes in predashover characteristics of the space as compared to when metallic piping components are used will be minimal. Exceptions come in the form of minor amounts of plastic pipe found in plumbing traps, and so forth, whose quantity is minimal in comparison with total amounts of normally occurring, combustible room contents. Further, for most plastic piping products and in the case of PVC electrical raceways, installation occurs within assemblies whose surface membranes (usually gypsum wallboard) possess a minimum IS min finish rating. Thus, it will take at least IS min fot such materials to be exposed to temperatures of 325'F (I6SC) or greater, a temperature range relied upon in judging the performance of protective membranes (as detailed in sections 46 ami -17 of ASTM Method for l-'irc Tests of building Construction and Materials), and one which is substantially lower than the ignition temperature for members of this generic class of ma terials. because of this mode of installation, harm to occupants of such spaces from com bustion products associated with these materials is minimized in an origin area. Additionally, because the nature of the fire resistive construction is intended to prevent migration of combustion products, smoke threats elsewhere will be limited. As is well known, fire resistive construction depends on barriers at selected locations to prevent fire spread. In theory, if these barriers (walls, lloor/eeilings, and so forth) function us intended, building occupants will have adequate time to avoid injury by exiling safely or evacuating to areas of refuge. Fire spread will also be limited. However, since actual struc tures contain openings such as doors, ducts for heating, ventilating, 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 pipe, tube, or conduit installed within them and/or passing through them. No assumptions are made as to changes in fuel load which these products may provide. Rather, through testing, performance of assemblies which include 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 not plastic inclusions reduce the fire endurance rating of the original design, l-'ire ex|iosurc conditions tire piescribed in ASTM E 119, for full assemblies, and its derivative, ASTM E 814, Method for Fire Test of Through-Penetration Fire Slops, for testing of a penetration detailing itself. Description of Product The "product" in this case is various plastic pipe, tube, and conduit materials manufactured from a variety of generic polymer resins. These include unplaslicized polyvinylchloride (PVC), chlorinated PVC (CPVC), acrylonitrilc-butadicnc-styrcnc (AbS), polypropylene (PP), polybutylcnc (I'b). Each of these 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 foam core in PVC and AbS drain, and waste and vent (DWV) pipe products. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 69 Products aie divided in (lie categoncs below with picdoiiiiiiatuig gcncnc icsin loi each use shown below. 1. Mechanical system end uses. (a) DWV Piping (unplasticized PVC, AbS, PP-specialized systems). (b) Domestic hot and cold water (DIICW) (CPVC. I'll). (c) Condensate drains (unplaslicized PVC). (d) Roof drains (unplaslicized PVC, AbS). (e) Fire sprinkler systems (CPVC, I'll). 2. Electrical tubing and conduit (also known as raceways) end-use (unplaslicized PVC). (a) Electrical power distribution (I It) to 221) volts). (h) l.ow voltage uses. (1) Signal systems. (2) Electronic data processing (F.DP) distribution. Currently, PVC is the only tesitt system available which ptovidcs the needed physical properties for the electrical end-use aica. How These Products tire Used To assess hazards associated with "how" plastic pipe pioducts are used, the hie icsistivc asscmhly for which the hazard assessment is made must be specific. Typical luc resistive applications which may include plastic pipe can be binkcn down by the following vaiiablcs, all of which assist in developing as exact a delinition ol the assembly type as possible. 1. Assembly Type A. Walls/Parlitions 1. Cavity type 2. Monolithic type b. Floor/Ceiling and Ruof/Ceiliug Assemblies 1. Cavity type 2. Monolithic type 2. Construction Type A. Combustible systems 1. wood stud walls and partitions 2. wood joist lloor/cciling assemblies 3. composite or mixed assemblies such as (hose including: (a) wood-based trusses (b) wood-based "I" beams (c) concrete decks on wood framing 11. Non-combustible systems 1. metal stud walls and partitions 2. piolectcd metal deck flooi/ceiling anti roof/ceiling assemblies including bar joisltypes 3. reinforced concrete assemblies with and without cxleiior mcl.il framing, support or protective membranes. CTL0073 62 70 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT Piping and raceway configurations used with these assemblies fall in one or more of the categories following: Tfirough-penctraling elements Partially penetrating elements Included elements Combinations of A, B, and C Given the preceding background information, a 3-dimcnsional matrix to visualize vari ables in the evaluation is suggested. The three axes, (a) project fire environment, (b) product being considered, and (c) use format in project, form in the three axes as represented in Fig. 1. Hazard Assessment Data for Plastic Pipe, Tube, and Conduit Based on ASTM E 119 and ASTM E 814 Testing Results from well defined standard testing of assemblies arc useful as input when con ducting hazard assessments for plastic pipe, tube, and conduit installations. The scope for this paper defines the environment for these products as fire resistive construction of one or more hours expected fire endurance. Thus, when specific plastic pipe 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 lest results and provide references for them. End Use Characteristics of Pipe, Tuba, or Conduit Installation FIG. I--Schematic representation of possible combinations offactors tvhiclt must be evatuatetl when installing plastic pipe, tube, and conduit in u fire resistive assembly. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PROOUCTS 71 In overviewing ASTM E I 19 and ASTM E 814 results for plastic pipe, derating of fire 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 plastic pipe product as compared to one without that product), the cunccpl of finish rating cun be applied to compare performance of assemblies.2 In the ease of the I- and 2-h gypsum wallboard clad wall assemblies, diiecl compaiisons can be made between finish rating (lime) with and without plastic pipe, lube, and conduit installed. Such a series of comparisons are shown in Table 1 and reflect no substantial variation between specimens with pipe and/or conduit installed, and those without those products present. These results are paiticularly important, since early failures of file 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 diamclcis of plastic pipe were installed in concrete slabs of differing thicknesses [9|. Recently, the author conducted similar tests which were 2 h in duration. lour direct through penetrations were evaluated in 11-1.3- and 165.1mm (4'/z- and 6'/z-in.) thick concrete slabs. I'VC-DWV sizes tested included 38.1, 50.8, 76.2, and 101.6 mm (116, 2, 3, and 4 in.). 'The pipe was installed in 6.35-mm (Win.) oversized holes with ceramic fiber packing as fircstoppmg. In both thicknesses of slab, the 38.1-nun (I'/z-in.) pipe pci formed satisfactorily for the full 2-h test duration and the 50 8- and 76.2min (2- and 3-in.) pipe installations performed satisfactorily in the I65.l-mm (6'/i-in.) thick slab. The 101.6-nun (4-in.) pipe failed in both thickness uf slab with the generic fireslopping used, as did the 50.8- and 76.2-mm (2- and 3-in.) pipe in the thinner slab. Overall, failure limes in the thin slab for the 2-h lest were inversely proportional to pipe diameter and all failure times for all pipe diameters were proportionally longer in the thicker slab |/0|. This relationship between slab thickness and pipe diameter is an expression of what could be called an "aspect ratio" as iclatcs to plastic pipe use and allows one to generalize, not surprisingly, that larger openings are less desirable than smaller ones, and thinner assemblies arc less desirable than thicker ones, where fire endurance is concerned. The impact of elevated atmospheric pressure on the pciformancc of plastic pipe, tube, and conduit in fire affected rooms is of recognized importance. Of these, vented applications (as found in plumbing uses) are (he most radical. Conversely, minimal air flows can be expected within electrical raceways which contain substantial fill anil aie 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 lires begin with negative values in the range of --0.508 to -0.254 mm ( -- 4.98 to -2.49 I'a.) of water at Hour level and increase to zero at about one-third (he height of an affected room. T hey continue to increase such (hat, near the ceiling, positive pressure in the range of l .508 to l 1.02 nun ( + 4.98 to +9.97 I'a.) of water may exist [/</). The effect of these pressure gradients on possible fire travel through assemblies which include penetrations has been debated extensively in code forums, where pressures utilized in lest furnaces have been at issue. In response, code agencies have stipulated that some degree of positive pressure be applied to assemblies tested under the AST M E 814 standaid 'A confining situation exists in the held, in that finish rating measurements for dissimilar assemblies are taken with thermocouples which may tie located at vastly different locations, dial is, individually under the gypsum membranes for wall tests above vs. al wood joists al the lop of a plenum space when rated hung ceilings arc tested. Doth measurements, however, represent a "finish rating " CTL0073 63 72 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT TABLE I --Fire endurance and finish ratings of /- and 2-h walls including l>\/C jUjn\ ndie. and cornluil. Included Element l:iuish Rating, min Eire Endurance, It Ucfcience none none none I'VC-DWV EMT section PVC ENT section EMT section I'VC ENT section none 2lt.ll 19.5 19.0 19.5 67.0 67.0 60.0 60.0 66.0 t |7| tM iM iM 2 1*1 2 K'l 2H 2 |7| 2 1*1 This is a conservative assessment, however, since the most common plumbing wall pene tration of a fire resistive assembly (a pipe trap at a sink) is muler negative pressure dining a poslflashover fire. Nevertheless, positive pressure is justified in testing since piping also may pass through fire resistive assemblies high in a room (as at floor penetrations or above a hung ceiling). Sprinkler piping, for example, is often run overhead, as is DIICW.' Finally, most of the test results which follow are for plastic pipe products installed using common, generic fircstopping 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 pipe or with oversized penetrations, installation details based on proprietary fireslopping materials (such us inlumescent rubbers, proprietary fiber insulations) and mechanical fiicstopping devices are necessary to provide superior and/or cost effective protection. Test results involving such detailing (which are usually listed and sometimes labeled by third parly organizations) aie included where needed to illustrate particular points. For the most extensive listings of such products, the reader is referred to the Umleiwiitcis Laboratory, Inc., Fire Resistance Directory |V|. Standard Fire Testing of Plastic 1`i/te Most plastic plumbing pipe is run vertically in walls and shaft ways in file resistive con structions where pipe installations arc bounded by gypsum wallboard. Fur this reason, most of the early fire test work was directed at evaluating the integrity of such generic plumbing walls with plastic pipe installed in various ways. Because of a lack of baseline data for classically used steel and copper pipe, Ibc initial fire test study conducted included these materials us well as I'VC and AIIS plastic DWV pipe |/J], To dale, no other standard lest results for metal plumbing products have been published, which makes the question of performance criteria fur them in conducting hazard assessments somewhat ill defined. In the other early tests of plastic DWV, generic plumbing walls with commonly available Fire stopping materials (such us grout and thermal insulations) were evaluated |/4-2/|. These are similar approaches to that followed in the initial series 'Interestingly, in Canada the building code calls for positive pressure testing to Ire conducted at a level which is 10 limes that called (or in the United Slates |/2|. The justification (or this is, in p.ul, based upon "slack effect" arguments. One can question the requirement for such high pressure dif ferentials at test, tiased on the presence of engineered smoke control pressurization systems in high rise buildings constructed today. Conversely, in low rise, fire resistive buildings, the slack effect is not a factor. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 73 at the National Institute for Standards and Technology's Center for Fire Research (formerly National Bureau bl Standards). Test results produced and the plumbing and lire slopping configurations that resulted from these tests reflect the evolution in tindeistanding td needed installation technology that occuricd limn the initial series through the most recent tests of one and two li metal framed wall systems. The latter arc found in typical non-combustible buildings |5,22| Matty of the assemblies tested in these series were designed to simulate a plumbing wall undergoing a fire exposure, on a lloor between two similar fire resistive assemblies above and below the test floor. This testing was used to assess possible vertical fire spread where vented DWV systems are installed as well as hoiizontal fire spread across such assemblies. The latter is the most obvious behavior expected in a lire resistive assembly with combustible through penetrating elements. Vertical spread hits not been observed in properly constructed test assemblies due to both (a) the propensity of Ibc DWV materials to melt and close olf openings at piolected locutions within cavity walls ami (b)jthe lunctioning ol Inc slopping or normal clearance penetrations at simulated Hour lines. Consistent with the above, failure modes observed in testing DWV systems have included caily hoiizontal bum llitoiigh in lest assemblies where installations included oversized an nular spaces at thmugh penetration locations and/or plumbing fillings bearing on gypsum wallboard membianes |/.f.2.f|. Willi regatd to amount of plastic pipe tested on lire performance, the most conservative trials have included -1.877 m (16 ft) of 50.8 mm (2 in ) and 76.2 mm (3 in.) I'VC DWV installed together in a 13V.7 mm (5'A in.) deep, 2.0-IK x 3.658 m (10 x 12 ft) mel.il frame plumbing wall. The installation included two through penetrations. The same plumbing configuration was successfully tested in one and two hour wall designs. The lest assembly included six vertical wall cavities and simulated upper and lower Hours, two of which included the DWV pipe. A schematic of the test assembly can be seen in Fig. 2 |27|. l;or ABS-DWV pipe, a single plumbing cavity, in a 3.0-18 x 3.658 in (10 x 12 ft) I h 50.8 x 152.-I mm (2 X 6 in.) wood flamed lest wall with the same plumbing configuration shown above icprcscnls the most pessimistic condition tested to dale |/V|. Ill oiilet to assess the impact ol loam cote Icdmology in which cocxtiusion lcclimi|iics are used to pioduce plastic DWV pipe with solid cxlciioi layeis and a low density lo.uti core, a lest on the penetration detail only lor the assembly dcscubcd above was conducted accotded to the ASTM I: 81-1 test slandaid. Test icsuIts showed no ddference in pcilnininncc for the foam core product as compaicd to the solid core lest result |25j. Table 2 summaiizcs Ibc test setics discussed above for DWV pipe in gypsum wallboaid clad I- and 2-h mel.il and wood framed assemblies. Specialized, piopriclaiy systems for DWV through penetration of gypsum shaft walls or masonry walls by plastic pipe have been developed and tested. T hese include guillotine - like systems or iiiluuicsccnl closures fot 2- or 3-h assemblies lot plastic pipe diameleis up to 152.4 mm (6 in.). |27-J/]. From a standpoint of lire performance of plastic pipe used for sprinklers or DIICW applications as compared to DWV (which is hugely empty and of gieatcr diametet), the latter poses a greater threat to fire spread. However, I'll sprinkler and DIICW pipe up to 5(1.8 mill (2 in.) in diameter have been tested m both metal and wood liamcd assemblies under the ciilciia ol the ASTM I: 81-1 slandaid | (2,.l.f|. Although these applications contain water, this was not possible lor testing. Thus, test results aie conscivalivc since the presence of water will increase fire enduiancc. Because far less plumbing pipe is found in file icsistive lloor/ceilmg assemblies, fewer fire endurance tests have been tun with such systems. Test results available are sunmiaiizcd in Table 3. CTL007364 74 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT ELEVATION SECTON A-A FIG. 2--Generic gypsum board dad, melal stud wall assembly for fire testing. Specimen indiules vertical drain and vent lines (with simulated plumbing penetrations) as well as lateral plumbing penetrations. TADLE 2--Gypsum clad I- and 2-li wall assemblies containing plastic UII'V. 1 lourly Rating Penetrating Material** Slmctural System* Testing Agency* Rclcicncc i ADS (solid core) wood frame i ADS (foam core) wood frame i I'VC i I'vc wood frame melal frame 2 ABS (solid core) wood frame 2 I'VC wood frame 2 I'VC melal frame A. I), C 17 A, 11. C E B 11 E |/.. 17, !<J\ IM |/J, 17, IV| PI \n\ |/4| |H| `Penetrating material* arc all I `/i of 2-in. (3.HI of 5.08-cm) DVVV pipe. Vent and drain size range from 2 to 4 in., depending on assembly and generic pipe type. For specific sizes and types, constdl Ref 26. `For minimum thickness of lest assembly and description of structural elements, consult Ref 26. Key to agencies: A--National Institute of Standards and Technology Center for Fire Research (formerly National Bureau of Standards). II--Ohio Stale University C--University of California, Berkeley D--Warnock llcrsey International, Inc., Vancouver, U.C., Canada. E--Warnock Kersey International, Inc., Pittsburg, CA. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 75 TABLE 3 -- Examides offire endurance lest results for jloorleeding assemblies. 1 lourly Rating Penetrating Material** SlrucUn.il System* Testing Agency* Reference 2 I'VC concrete slab 2 I'VC wood Ir.unc A IM A |LW>,<| 1 h, 56 min.* AI1S, I'VC concrete slut> on melal n |J6| deck with hung ceil* ing detail 1 h. 30 min. ABS wood liamc A MM "Maximum pipe sizes--3 or 4 in. (7.6 or III cm) depending on specific design tested. `Key to agencies: A -- Underwriter's Laboratories II--Ohio Stale University 'In the test of this 2-h assembly, an apparently random failure occurred in the protective hung ceding lower membrane, leading to slightly premature failuic. Standard fire Testing of Unpluslicizetl I'VC I'rodiicls for Electrical End Uses ASTM E 119 testing of fire resistive assemblies with unplasticized I'VC electrical raceway (and boxes) installed has been conducted. Initially, this test work was directed at demon strating the equivalency of the I'VC products with competing metal products. Subsequently testing took the form of more usual performance testing based on the AST M E 119 standard alone. Once again, scant test lesults existed I'm the metal ptoducls with no tests available for fire resistive wall assemblies including rigid metallic conduit, for example. T ests ol wall assemblies containing various I'VC 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 noncombustible 2-h assemblies based on 50.8 x 101.6 mm (2x4 in.) nominal framing [J7|. Tliicc dilfcicnt lloor/cciling designs containing I'VC clcctiical components have been tested suceesslully. One, a ft-li design with conctele deck and metal stiuctnral system, included a plenum in which three dillerent combinations of I'VC raceway and boxes were tested. A loin 111, control section, included metallic raceway and boxes. The lowei membrane was a lire ruled, inorganic tile |.M|. This testing veiilies that I'VC boxes (see also Ref |.f9| loi an evaluation ol I'VC box impact in combustible llont/cciling assemblies) and iaceway can be successfully used in fluor/ceiling assemblies without compionusing lire perfoimance. In particular, it addicsses the hazard posed when I'VC materials melt onto a lower membrane which has a critical protective function as where, in the lest cited above, the lower membrane provided protection for steel mcmbcis supporting a concrete deck. TABLE 4 -- VVC electrical raceway tested in gypsum clad, fire resistive wall assemblies " I lourly Rating PVC Material Structural System Reference 2 Win. (12.7-mm) rigid non- 2 x Tin. (50 8 x 101 6 -mm) metallic conduit nominal wood studs or 3Va in. (92 OK-miii) 22 gauge steel studs 2 Win. (19.05-mm) electrical non- 3Vli-in (92 l)8-mm) 25 gauge metallic tuhmg steel studs pi Ml "Both lesls rim at Underwriter's Laboratories, '"c CTL007 365 76 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT The oilier two systems tested were based on poured in place slabs of 2-h design. One was of normal weight concrete 114.3-mm (-I'/i-in.) thick and contained three runs of 25.4-mm (1 in.} PVC electrical non-mclallic tubing (ENT) raceway [7(2). The other system, based on lightweight concrete, was formed on a proprietary corrugated metal pan system \4l\. Both of these tests were conducted on 1.82lJ x 2.438-111 (fi x 8-ft) specimens according to theASTM E lli) time temperature curve. Testing was primarily to delcimiiie (cmpcraluic rise above the ENT on the unexposed suiface of the slab ot where the mm-mclallic lulling exiled the unexposed face. Figures 3u and b illustrates test specimens. Test results for the two unprotected concrete slabs addiess possible fire lisks in using PVC raceway in a cast in place I'oimal. Where possible derating ol such assemblies is at issue, two failure modes arc potentially important. possible increases in backfacc temperature rise due to the presence of PVC (electrical raceways) and possible fire spread along PVC raceway, leading from exposed to the unexposed side or from internal ignition of raceway within the slab to the unexposed 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 piesent. This is a reflection of the lower thermal conductivity of the PVC raceway as compared to the thermal conductivity of the concrete itself. Figures -hi and b illustrates this for the normal weight i > CONCRETE SLAB SPECIMEN IIIERMOCOUPLC L0CA1I0NS 0 on unexposed sunrxec " coiicre re sunfALC aoovc ENI RUNS PLACED ON CONCRE IE r lIORIZON1 ALLY I ROM CMERCINC ENT. ABOVE VERIICAL RUN flJIERINC SIAU rirou uriow @ At Etl! ON SURTACE (T7) r ABOVE SIAU OH ENI @ !' AUOVt SIAU ON ENI FIG. 3(a)--Concrete itub test specimens I.K2V x 2-titt-m (6 x S/t); Selfsupporting II4.boon (/'/.in.) thick stub. Thermocouples Nos. I to V tire ASl'M Is IIV siuniturit; Nos. It) to 12 tire AS / A/ If UN. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMDING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 77 t1" PIIAIIEC PVC RACEwa ENI. 1X1* ENT IN LIGHT WEICIIT CONCRETE METAL DECK 11 ir RMOCOUPI E l OCAIIONS (0 Q) ON EXPOSED sum ACL (j) AIIUV! VLR1ICAL mill ElllLRIIIC SIAU rilOM UUOW ON COHERE IE SUlirACE ABOVE CHI RUNS oh (.ouciirtE suiirACi r I lllllirOIII A11 Y I ROM EMERCinr, tin coiiduii <T?) At LHI OH SIAU SIJREaCL U (HI) r AIIOVL SIAU OH till M" AllllVI SIAU UN IHI FIG. 3(h) -- Concrete stub lest specimens I.H2V x 2 t iH-in (6 x Sjt}: Li^htieeiiilit conirete stub him on propiieuiry inehil pun, Slf.V-iitni (.TVa-ri.) intntinitm slab lliukness. 'Ibernioitiu/iles Nos I to H toe AS'TM Is IIV; bulimi c ore AS'l'hl If HN ilicimocoitples. 4.5-(114.3 mm) SLAB WITH 1" (25.4 mm) ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING (EMT) INSTALLED FIG. T(.1) - ('i'Ui{u11'Utivc time tempcrittiire i ureei Jor tlierinoi oolites iissoeiuteil with metallic i lei Iru ol riiccirti) v tcMctl in i om tele stubs. CTL007366 70 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT 4.5" (114.3 mm) SLAB WITH 1" (35.4 mm) ELECTniC NONMETALLIC TUOINQ (ENT) INSTALLED ' XII ><4< >111 1M FIG. 4(b)--Comparative lime temperature curves for thermocouples associated with metallic (hit;, la) ami mm-metallic (Fig. /!>) electrical raceways tested in conn etc slabs. slab. Similar results were also obtained will) I lie lightweight lest slab which included the 25.4-innt (I-in.) liNT raceway. Regarding possible fire sptead along the l`VC raceway, testing showed that no such liic spread occurred. Rather, the material within the slab charred gradually and temperatures at locations where 12NT exited the test assemblies were below failure criteria for ASTM E 814 (Fig. 4b). Conversely, an identical specimen, tested with cast in place, thin wall electrical metallic tubing (EMT) showed higher backfacc Icmjrcrulurcx above the metallic raceway during testing than in the field of the concrete (Fig. 4a). In addition, at exit locations on the unexposed side, temperatures also exceeded allowable levels for ASTM E H14. Test assembly design was identical to that of the noimal weight slab shown in the pieccding Fig. 3. Hack face lime temperature curves showed higher temperatures above the EMT as well as at outlet locations on the unexposed surface of the slab |42|. These leadings are a consequence of the high thermal conductivity of the sleet tubing as compared lo both (he concrete and the PVC raceway. Nonstandard Sources of Hazard and 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. Often a standard test may not address a foreseeable consequence of the use of a product or the intended use may dilfer from the standard assembly result. Thus, engineering judgment, a non-standard lest, and/ or field data will be required to provide needed answers. An inescapable fad is that so litany potential end-use configurations exist for pipe, tube, and conduit products (as with other widely used construction products) that one is precludedfront testing ofall coinbinatioin of these making some foim of hazard assessment a necessity. 2ICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMDING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 79 In lire case of PVC electrical raceway products, lor example, poilions of the li.iz.ud assessment findings in Ref / were based on non-siandard lest lesults used in conceit with modeling results to assess probable impact of combustion products created from fire ex posures of these products. The findings demonstrated that no unusual bazaids existed, based upon direct exposure of PVC electrical raceway lo flame, as did later findings based on rodent exposures lo PVC smoke from the same products ]-/.f]. Likewise, potential ignition hazards posetl by all clectiical raceway systems should he considered and evaluated although lltcse are not readily subjected lo stand,ntl lesl conditions However, reports are available on this topic which show that PVC raceways piovide iiiliinsic safety factors not found in metallic raceway systems due to their inability lo fault lo ground l77,75|. It is obvious that redundant fire piolcclion features required in many contempor.uy buildings impact fire risk levels there. This was demonstrated Ior PVC eleclnc.il products iu a test conducted when sprinkler protection was added lo an older, fire resistive building in a demonslration of upgrading capabilities of modern const i action materials and techniques |76|. In Ibis case, the active piolcclion piovided by sprinklers based on plastic pipe prevented damage lo PVC-ENT installed within (ire resistive wall assemblies lo such an extent that electrical continuity was maintained after even the fire test exposure had been conducted In actual situations like this lesl scenaiio, actual fire loads raiely challenge propcily installed bariicrs (such as single or multiple layers of wallboard) and the presence ol spnnklers luithcr reduces hazard levels. The presence ol these consliaction features should be taken into account in preparing a fire hazaid assessment of such structures. The emergence of CI'VC anil I'll as listed materials for fire sprinkler pipe has been reviewed [77| and reports on the testing to qualify them for listing are also available | /.S'| Those lest results also have implications lot pipe uses in IMICW supply based on the same generic plastics which ate qualilied lot use as sptnikleis. For example, in test ptolocols tin plastic pipe sprinkler systems, the piping, chaiged with water, is exposed lo a wood cub heptane fire. When the lesl is begun and following initiation of spunkier discharge, watci How is continued through the plastic pipe which is itself exposed to the ongoing wood cub/ heptane lire. I bis provides adequate evidence of piping iiilegiily and resistance to ll.iiuc impingement under conditions where water is pteseul and should relieve those concerned that CI'VC and I'U fot D1ICW uses will delate file icsislive assemblies iu which they are installed. Concerning non-standard poxlllnshovcr testing of through pencilation of slabs and patlitions by plastic DWV, two early Canadian studies showed mixed tcsults for tests iu which attempts were made lo follow the ASTM E 119 lime icuipcralmc curve, lor small specimens These tests also presented diflcrcnt approaches to thiougli penetration lire slopping, in cluding application of metal sleeving at through penetration locations to protect pipe loi periods beyond one h [79,301. Australian researchers conducted tests on both unprotected PVC pipe penetrating conciclc slabs and protected situations wliete PVC pipes were installed with intumcsccul hie stopping systems. Their results reinforced the finding that fire slopping protection for direct, through penetrations of PVC pipe thiougli slabs was requited to m.iiiilain lire resist.nice ratings These researchers also conducted tests with metal pipes winch showed high unexposed hue temperatures but no transmission ol lire (5/-5J|. Finally, no bona fide field data documenting the existence of identified fire hazards due lo plastic pipe, lube, or conduit as ciincnlly used is available. This includes an Auslialiun study of the subject |57) and searches and inquiries in the United Stales lo v.uions incident reporting systems and databases by the author have failed lo develop field data demonsl rat mg a lire.- h.i/.ud. Likewise, a se.ucli ol held data on installations m lue lesislivc buildings mad, CTL007 3 67 80 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT under alternate materials and methods sections in die building codes since the 1970s did not show a recognizable fire incidence related to plastic pipe use. Similai inquiries iclated to held performance of electrical raceways based on PVC raceway, whose use increased first with the J987 NEC acceptance and incrementally further witli the 1990 NEC, have been negative. Discussion The preceding section presented data which will assist in projecting expected fire per formance of plastic pipe, lube, and conduit in specific situations. Generalizations which can be drawn from these data include the following below. Although the different generic materials used for plastic pipe, tube, and conduit have been tested to varying degrees in both combustible and non-combustible construction as semblies of widely differing types, such testing has not been conducted on every type of included or penetrating element in every possible fire resistive assembly. 'Hie testing which has been conducted in both standard fire endurance formats (as well as fur uses in fire resistive buildings which include sprinklers based on plastic pipe) supports the following general ranking where test results for a specific combination of pipe assembly are unavailable. CPVC > PVC > fire retardant PP > PP, PB, aiul AUS The basis for this ranking can be found by comparing tabulated test results in reports such as Ref 13 and fire endurance periods presented in listing documents such as Ref H where differing generic resins, used to fabiicalc plastic pipe, lube, and conduit have been tested in identical installations. From a standpoint of measured fire resistance limes in side by side testing, both of those references present data that support this tanking foi products used in plumbing and electrical applications. Likewise, properties such as resistance of polymer resins to ignition (as expressed by numerical results in ASTM D 286-3 testing) are of importance. Finally, presence or absence of fire retardants (as in the polypropylene materials cited) and differing melt and charring tendencies of the classes of resins used for pipe, tube, and conduit will impact fire endurance. Model Code Acceptance Each of the three model building codes, the Uniform Building Code (UBC), Standard Building Code (SBC), and the National Building Code (NBC),4 upon which most locally adopted building codes are based, provide for the use of plastic pipe, tube, and conduit in fire resistive construction in their latest versions. Other specialized or regional codes (such as the NEC and the National and Standard Plumbing Codes) allow for unlimited use of plastic pipe, tube, 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 Building Officials, Board for the Coordination of Model Codes (CABO-BCMC) issued guidelines for use of plastic pipe, tube, and conduit in shaft, duct, and at through penetration locations several years ago. I lowcvcr, differences exist from community to community regarding adoption and amendment of these codes. Certain major 4UBC. promulgated by the International Conference of Building Officials (ICIIO), Whittier, CA; SBC. promulgated by the Southern Building Code Congress International (SDCCI). Birmingham, AL; NBC, promulgated by the Building Officials and Code Administrators hilcrnalionai (BOCA), Country Club Hills, IL. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS 01 cities which promulgate their own codes, ami the model plumbing code used in much ol die western and midsveslern United States, icMiict use of these pioducts in a v.mely ol ways It is the author's opinion that these ic.slriclions aie based on economic, ratliei than technical, grounds, inasmuch as there is a substantial, positive recotd for these product's fne perfor mance charactciistics. Conclusion Adequate literature and test results exist to conduct hazard assessments related to many uses of plastic pipe, lube, and conduit. In doing so, application of pioducts must be con sidered in light of their specific function, the type ol assembly in which they will be installed, and the overall design of the structure concerned. Whenever possible, standard lest results and knowledge from field performance should be applied to make these assessments. References |/| Benjamin, I. A., "Toxic I lazard Analysis: Eleclric.il Noil-Metallic Tolling," Journal (if l ire Sil ences. Vol. 5, Jan.-Feb. 1987. pp. 25--1`J. (2j "Plastic Plumbing Pipe." including 'Technical Appendices." Draft Environmental Impact Kcpoil. SKI International, (Menlo Paik. CA). Department of Housing and Community Development. Stale of California, Sacramento. Drall I, 1983, and Drafl II, Aug. 1989. |J| "Standard Guide for the Development of Fire 1 lazard Assessment Standards for Products." ASI M Task Group E5.35 on Fire Hazard and Fire Risk Assessment. Committee E-5 on I ire Standards, Piojcci X-95-7. (drab). 2(1 April 1990. |7| "Results of 3 AS 1 M E 119 l-l lour Tests of Gypsum Wallhuard/Slcel Slud Assemblies," (from I. I.nymnn), Ul. NC5II5, Project 7(> NKI288, Underwriters l.nhoininiics. Inc . Nonhbiook. II., 211 Apnl 1976. |.5| "Repot! on the Fire Endurance and I lose Stream Tests ol PVC Plastic Pipe Penetralious I luougli a 7'//'Thick. l-llour Rated Gyjisumhuard and Steel Slud Wall." amt "Fire Peiloim.mce of PVC Pipe in Non-combustible Construction." File Wl ll-49S-PSV-tl58tl and W1H-495-PSV-11MS, Warnock llcrsey hilcrnalionai, Inc.. Pittsburg. CA, Jan. 1989. |(5| "PVC and Rigid Metallic Conduit and Metallic Outlet Boxes in a Nonbearing Partition Assembly," Ul. NC5-I6-I.-2, Project 73 NK7657, Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., Northbrook. IL, 21 Dec. 1973. |7| "Electrical Nonmctallie Tubing (F.NMT). Electrical Metallic Tubing (EM I ), and Metallic Outlet Boxes in a Nonbearmg Paitiltou Assembly." IJL R8326-4, Project 811 NKI17-17, Unilctwiiicis Laboratories. Inc., Noilhbrook. IL, 17 Sep. 1980. |8| Fire Resistance Directory IW0, Underwriters Laboratories. Inc., Northbrook, IL. 1990 |9| Danielsson. C.. Linder, I*., I.undin. O.. and Prenell. P. A., "Fire Tests with Plasiic Tidies Carried Out at the Research Station in Sluilsvik. Spring I9(i3." Rcjrorl tK:!96(i, National Swedish Itisittuie for Building Research, Sludsvik. Jan. 1903. |Jf)| Zichcrinan, J. U.. Unpublished lest ilaia. IFF Technical Services. Inc.. Berkeley, CA. 1988 [/ /1 Fang, J. B , "Sialic Pressures Produced by Room Fires." NIISlit HO-l'Jli/.Center for I ne Research. National Institute ol Standards and 'Technology (formerly National Bureau of St.iml.mls). Gaith ersburg. MD. 1984. |/2| Choi. K. K.. "Fire Slops for Plastic Pipe." lire Teilinulogv. Vol. 23, No -I, Nov 1987. pp 287- 279. |/J| Parker. W. J.. Paabo. M.. Scott. J. T.. Gross. D.. and Benjamin. I. A.. "Fire 1 lulurancc of Gypsum Board Walls and Chases Containing Plastic and Metallic Drain. Waste and Vent Plumbing Systems," National Bureau of Standards Building Science Series 72. U S l)c|i.irimcnl of Com merce. Sept. 1975. |J-/| llleizacker. R. W. and Rule. J. G.. -Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and a I ire and I lose Stream Test on Duplicate Non-load Bearing Plumbing Wall Assemblies." Kcpoil 5815. Ohio Stale University. Building Research Laboiatory. College of Engineering. Jan. 1974 |/5| llleizacker. R. W. and Birlc. J. G.. "Standard AS'f M Fire Endurance Test and Fire and Hose Stream 'Test on Du|>ltcale l.oad Bearing Polyvinylchloride Plumbing Wall Assemblies.'' Rc|ioil 55til. Ohio Slate University. Building Research 1 ahoraiory. College ol I ngmeering. May 1974 CTL007368 82 FIRE HAZARD AND FIRE RISK ASSESSMENT \I6\ Blclzackcr, R. W. and Ilirlc, J. G.. "Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and Fire and I lose Stream Test on Duplicate Non-lnad Hearing Polyvinylchloride (PVC) I'lumliing Wall Assemblies," Report 5474, Ohio State University, Building Research Laboratory. College of Engineering, April 1973. |/7| Blctzacker, R. W. "Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and Fire and Hose Stream Test on Duplicate Load-Ucaring Acryloiiilnlc-Huindicnc-Slyicitc Pluniliiug Wall Assemblies." Report 5560. Ohio State University, Building Research Lultoralnry, College of Engineering. 1974. |/8| Dlelzackcr, R. W. "Standard ASTM Fire Endurance Test and Fire and Hose Stream Test on Duplicate Non-Load Bearing Acrylonilrilc-Buladicnc-Styrcnc (ABS) Plumbing Wall Assemblies." Report 5560, Ohio Slate University, Building Research Laboratory, College of Engineering, 1973. |/9| Draemcl, R. B. and Williamson, R. B., "Fire Tests of Six Inch Wood Stud One-hour Firc-rulcd Walls with Plastic DWV Plumbing Systems." Service to Industry Report 76-7. University of Cal ifornia, Berkeley, Department of Civil Engineering. Structural Research I .all. Nov. 1976. |20| Draemcl. R. U. and Williamson, R. II.. "Fire Test of a Six Inch Wood Stud Onc-I lout Fire-Rated Wall with a Fire Retardant Polypropylene DWV Plumbing System." Service to Industry Report 7702. University of California. Department of Civil Engineering. Structural Reseatcli Lab. Berke ley, 1977. |2/| Williamson, R. B.. "Fire Test of a Six Inch Wood Stud Onc-liour Fire-rated Wall with a Poly vinylchloride DWV Plumbing System, Structures, Materials and Fire Research." University of California. Berkeley. Department of Civil Engineering, Structural Rescaich l.ab, Feb. I9KS. |22| "Report on the Fire Endurance and I lose Stream Tests of PVC Plastic Pipe Penelialious I lirougli an 8'/j" Thick. 2-1 lour Rated Gypsumboard and Steel Stud Wall." and "Fire Performance of PVC Pipe in Non-coinbustiblc Construction." Files Wl II-495-PSV-U5WJ and Wl II-495-PSV-0635, Warnock llcrscy International, Inc., Pittsburg, CA, Jan. 1989. |2J| Plumbers' and Slcamfillcrs Union Local 467/Goldberg Research and Development Associates Corp.. "The Effects of ABS Plastic Plumbing Runs on a Wood Stud and Gypsum WalllHiard Partition Exposed to a Standard Fire Endurance Test." File WIH-495-0456, Warnock llcrscy International, Inc., Pittsburg. CA. 8 Oct. 1982. |24| Zichcrman, J. B.. "Fire Safely of PVC-llased Plastic Piping," Fire Journal, Vol. 84, No. 6, Nov./ Dec. 1990. pp. 36-42. |25) "Standard Fire Endurance Test Program To Evaluate and Compare the Fire Resistance of Two Types of ABS Plastic Pipe When They Penetrate a Fire-Resistive Wall." I IT Technical Services, Inc.. Report 5213. Cotpiillnm, B.C., Canada, Warnock llcrscy Professional Services, Ltd., Pitts burg, CA. 16 Jan. 1987. |26) Plastic Pipe and Fittings Association (PPFA), Plastic Pipe in Fire Resistive Construction. The Design and Installation Manual for Plastic Pipe in Fire Resistive Construction, PPFA. Glen Ellyn, II. 1985. |27] "lire Test Investigation ofThrough-Penetration Firestop Systems in Gypsum Wullhourd/Stec) Stud Wall Assemblies." UL R970U, Project 85 NKI7I8I. 3N1 Company, Undcrwiilcis Laboratories. Inc., Northbrook. IL. 18 Sept. 1985. |2S| "Report on Through-Penetration Fire Stop Devices," UL RIIIHKM.2. Project 83 NKI9794, Orion Industries, Inc., Kansas City. KS. Underwriters Laboratories. Inc., Northbrook, IL, 28 Nov. 1984. |29| "Report on Wall Opening Protcctivc-Dcvices-in Concrete or Masonry Walls Assemblies." UL R9269-I.2 and R97<KJ. Projects 81 NK4JI4 and 81 NK795I. 18 Dec. 1981; Letters. "Report Types PSS 7902 and PSS 7904 Through-Penetration Firestop Devices in Concrete Floor Assemblies " UL R9269. Project 82 NK221XI. 6 May 1983.and Letter Report K9269,31 March 1983, Umlei writers Laboratories, Inc.. Northbrook, IL. |.?0| Meyer, G. and Brittain, W., "Two Hour Fire Resistance and Hose Stream Tests of U & G Sloane Fire Valve." Will File 495.0621 and 495.0622, Warnock llersey International (Will), Pittsburg CA. 1984. I-?/) "Report on Through-Pcnctralion Fire Stop Devices," UL RIOIIXIO-1,2. Project 83 NK19794, Orion Industries. Inc.. Kansas City. KS. Underwriters Laboratories. Inc.. Northbrook, IL. 28 Nov. 1984. |J2| "ASTM E 814-83 Standard Method of Fire Tests of 'Ihrough-Pcnctrnlion lire Slops; Polybutylcnc Pipe Penetrations of a l-llour Rated Fire-Resistive Wall Assembly." Project (11-8305-028 SRI Menlo P.uk. CA. Muy 1985. |JJ| "Lire Test Evaluation on Polybtilylene (I'll) Plastic Piping in a Steel and Wood Studded Gypsum Board Partitions." Design Wl* 735 for Shell Chemical Company. Houston. TX. File J.l. OK9Q6.AC (4510). Factory Mutual Research, Norwood. MA, 13 Nov. 1984. |J4| "Report on Through-Penetration Fire Slop Devices in Concicle Moor Assemblies," UL R103381.2,3. Project 83 NR4820 for Proset Systems, Atlanta. GA. Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.. Northbrook. IL, 25 Nov. 1983. ZICHERMAN ON PLASTIC PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS B3 |.I5| Fire Resistance Directory lWO, System 1(41. 167. and 303, Underwriters Laboratories. Inc . Norllibrook. If. J990. pp. 1264. 1265, and 1382 |J6| Dlelzackcr. K. W. and Birle. JC.. "Standard AS TM Fire Endurance Test on a Floor and Ceiling Assembly." Report 5539. Ohio State University. Plastic Pipe Institute. Building Ueseaich Labo ratory, Columbus. Oil, May 1974. |J7| Council of Amciicun Building Officials (CABO). "Fire Resistive Noncombusliblc Partition As sembly Containing Electrical Non-Mctallic Tubing and Rigid Non-Metallic Conduit." Report NER290, Carlon. National Evaluation Scivicc Commiltec. Country Club Hills. IL. May 1987. |.(8| "Fact-Finding Report on Metallic and Noiimetallic T ubing, Conduits and Boxes in the Concealed Space of Floor-Ceiling and Roof-Ceiling Assemblies with Suspended Ceiling." UL NC 546-5. Project 78 NK273I9. NOMA/UL Underwriters Laboratories. Inc.. Northbrook, IL. Attention B Swylnyk. M;ird 1989. I.I9| "Noiimetallic Electrical Outlet Boxes for Use in Floor-Ceiling Assemblies Consisting of Wood Joists. Wootl Flooring and Gypsum Wallhoard." UL R8326. Project 81 NK 2-11IV. I ailon. Un derwriters Laboratories. Inc.. Northbrook. IL. 22 Dec. 1981. |V0| "Report of the Pilot Scale Fire Endurance Test ol an Unrestrained 6' by 8' by 4'/r" 7 hick. Reinforced Concrete Slab without an Apjsliccl Load, anil with I" Diameter. PVC?. Flexible, l-.N I ( oiuluil Runs." File Will 495-PSI1-1065. |IT Technical Set vices. Inc.. Warnock llcrscy liitcrnaiion.il. Inc., Pittsburg. CA, 7 May 19911. |4I| "Rcpoit ol the Pilot Scale File Endurance Test id I" Diameter. PVC. flexible. I.N I ( ourluit Runs in an Uuicsliaineil 6' by 8' by S'/VT hick. Remlorccd Concrcle/Corrugnlcd Steel Desk Floor/ Ceiling Assembly without an Applied Load," File Wlll-495-PSII-tH69. II I Icchnicul Services. Inc., Warnock llcrscy lntcination.il. Inc., Pillsbuig. CA. 16 July 19911. |42| "Report of the Pilot Scale Fire Endurance Test of an Unrestrained (T by 8' by 4*/_-" Thick. Reinforced Concrete Slab without an Applied Load, and with 1" Diameter, Steel. EM T Conduit Runs." File WlII-495-PSI 14117(1, IITTechnical Services. Inc., Warnock llersey Inlcinalional. Inc.. Pittsburg. CA. 17 July 1990. |4.l| Packham. S. C. and Crawford. M. P., "An Evaluation ol Smoke Toxicity and Toxic Hazard of Electrical Non-Mctallic T ubing Combustion Products." Journal of lire Sticnces, Vol. 2, Jan. I cb. 1984. pp. 37-59. |44| Kahn. M. M.. "Electrical Failure of Wires Inside Finch Conduit Under Simulated Fire Condi tions." Technical Report FMRC J.L, OII4R4.RC, Cation, Factory Mutual Research Corporalion. Norwood, MA, Ocl. 1984. j45| Fuller. J. F'., Hanna. W. J.. and Kallcnbacli. G. A., "Arcing Faults in Metallic Conduit at 120 and 240 v," IFLis Transactions on liulmtry Applitnitons, Vol, IA-21. No. 4, May/June 1985. |vrt| Bcnjamiii/Clarke Associates, Inc., "Ojicralion San Finncisco: Snioke/Sprinkler T'esl. Technical Report." distributed by liilernalional Association of l ire Chiefs (IATC), Marriol Corpoialion, San Francisco Luc Dept., and FEMA/USFA, Washington. DC. Apnl 1984. |47| Wilging. R. C.. "Plastic I'irc S|irinklci Piping 1967-1987." the lluthlmg Offuutl ami Cotie /Idinitnsltalor, July/Aug. 1988. |48] "Rc|>oit on CPVC Pi|>c and Fittings for Sprinkler Systems." UL Ex375l, Project 85 NK837, Untlerwrilers l.altoralorics. Inc., Noithbrook, IL, 17 July 1985. |-/9| Atwood. P., "Penetration of Fire Paililions by Plastic Pipe," Fire Tctlnwlogy. Vol. 16. No. I, July 198(1. pp. 37-62. |50| McGuire. J. II., "Penetrations of Fire Partitions by Plastic DWV Pipe." Fire Technology, Vol 9. No. I. Feb. 1973. p. 5. |5/| Burn. L. S. and Marlin. K. G., "Intuinescciil Fire Stoppers For IJPVC Pipes Penetrating Concrete Slabs," Coimuoiiweallli Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Division of Building Research, llighcll, Victoria. Australia, 19811. |52| Biown. S. K. and Marlin. K. G.. "Model Fire Resistance lexis of UPVC Pipes Penetrating Concrete Slabs," Commonwealth Sucutilic and Industrial Research Otgaiu/alion, Division id Building Research, llighcll, Victoria, Australia, 1979. [5J| Burn. L. S. and Marlin. K. G.. "Early Fire Hazard Assessment of UPVC Pi|tc Fnriiudnlions," Commnnwcnllh Scientific and Indusliial Research Organization, Division of Building Rescaich. llighelt, Vidoiia, Auslialia, 1981. |54| Blown, S. K.. "Review of Actual and Simulated Fires Involving Plaslics and Pi|tcs and Filling." Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Division of Building Rescaich, llighelt, Victoria, Auslialia. 1979. CTL007369