Document 99x60k1VNzakqmyaokXyrB377

UNDERWRITERS' LABORATORIES, INC. 333 WINGSTEN HflAD NORTHBROOK. ILLINOIS 60062 an independent, not-for-profit organization testingfor public safety PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT m reply, please refer to r46 68NK3598 December 6, 1963 Mr. Leonard W. Weaver Product Development Manager Bird & Son, Inc. East Walpole, Massachusetts 02032 Dear Mr. Weaver: On November 12 and 13, your Mr. Price and Mr. Blanco witnessed the conduct of Class A fire tests on 285 lb (green) and 325 lb (white) square tab strip shingles, having no cutouts, which were manufactured at your Charleston, South Carolina plant on September 12. These tests were conducted In accordance with the methods described In our Standard 790 with all test decks mounted at an incline of 5 in. to the horizontal foot. The following is a summary of the results obtained. SPREAD-CP-PLAME TESTS In the testa of duplicate decks of each shingle, flames spread to saxlmums of 7 ft and 6-1/2 ft on the 25-lb shingle and to 5-1/2 and 5-2/3 ft on the 325-lb shingle. It was also noted on the lighter shingle that there was considerable sliding of the weather side coating and some lateral spread of flame on the first five courses of each deck. These results . indicate that the 325-lb shingle complies with Class A require- ments for this test, but the 285-lb shingle.complies only with Class B requirements. FLAME EXPOSURE TESTS On the basis of the results obtained in the Spreadof-Flame-tests, duplicate decks of the 325-lb shingle were sub jected to the Class A test (fifteen 2-mln applications of the test flame) while duplicate decks of the 285-lb shingle were subjected to the Class B test (eight 2-min applications of the teat flame). Surface flaming on the 325-lb shingles did not extend beyond the fifth course, while that on the 285-lb shingles did not extend beyond the ninth course. On all four decks testej however, the surface flames extinguished themselves In the "off" period between applications of the test flame. The only action observed on the underside of these decks was light smoke and asphalt dripping at the first two cracks between deck boards. BIRD 015592 UNDERWRITERS' LABORATORIES, INC0. R46 2- - December 6, 1968 Examination of the decks after the tests revealed that, although they were stained with asphalt in a pattern similar to that of the test flame, there was no charring in evidence. These results indicated that the 325-lb shingles complied with Class A requirements in this test while the 285-lb shingles complied with Class B requirements. BURNING BRAND TESTS Three Class B brands were placed on two decks of the 285-lb. shingle and in each case the shingle protected the deck from Ignition, The brands were consumed in 11 to 14 min and subsequent action lasted an additional 4 to 6 min. A Class A brand was then placed on the second deck, which had only one "B" brand on it, for the sake of information. Al though heavy smoke and asphalt dripping occurred on the underside, no flames or glows were noted at any time on the underside. A Class A brand was then placed on each of two decks of the 325-lb shingle and each caused failure, with sustained flaming occurring at the third crack between deck boards at approximately 47 min and 35 min, respectively. At this point, Mr. Price noted that the Joints be tween shingles in adjacent courses were only 4 in. apart in stead of the 6-in. minimum specified on your application instructions. Accordingly, two additional decks were prepared, following these instructions. A Class A brand was placed on each of these two decks and again failure resulted when sus tained flaming of the deck boards occurred at approximately 25 and 35 min, respectively. On the basis of the above test results, the 325-lb shingle does not comply with Class A requirements, while the 285-lb shingle is eligible only for Listing as a Class B roof covering. This was mentioned to Mr. Price while he was here and he indicated that we wbuld be advised as to whether we should proceed with Class B listing or not. Since we are awaiting your advices in this regard, we are cancelling our anticipated completion date of December 27, 1968 and are placing Assignment 68NK3598 on an inactive status. BIRD 015593 UNDERWRITERS* LABORATORIES, INC. R46 -3- December 6, 1968 The physical characteristics of these two shingles and components are shown on the attached sheet. Very truly yours. Reviewed by: R. DONAHUE Senior Project Engineer Fire Protection Department E. K. STOEHR Associate Managing Engineer Fire Protection Department RED: elm BIRD 015594 in mCM i-< o in n CM O 00 r-i t- CM inxr i--i f~ rt rt coocao\ in r-i otn^crm in m in cm oin 4) r--1 bC C rt Si x: r--1 it VO CO CO on O w 00 inch in rH in in inno OJ rH t- vocn CM rH in o 00 CM rH rH rH rH inrH in CM a- 4 CM rH i in CM m T3 aC a in oo p CM V Vi O acr aO rot -P O n Prat V o' Pi a -p aPai o B P O B Pi CO a rH CO tOH n si 1 Cl rl p -P n o 9 rt T3 Pc O t> Pi P o BPi TJ CO Soi SnI rl rCt oV a o o*e rt B B Pi PiO 5i o an * a Pi a pn ano > c 4ritto*nSin>aO a* pX2T.cJ O rbtOB Mil) x: > n B3 rH 43 C C n to not. 15 i p n V h a i p -p Vi n a o' oon PaH XI *a3 p CPOi P3 0C0O n p nto a Sni % p tCo n ac * no pn p a Pi V3 P ao aa p ap PH c 3V Po aa <Pui i pacPi 3 Pna to 1 m tco rt r-CS P Eiw a *C'-- O *- >rCPt -.O 3 o TrrrVaJttt O "X-T 1 * tf--- IP P rcot a prct a (0 3C) prct a60orct OanC OarCt Pa si ac Ba PVi rt O xa: a n aC p Voi Pi pa aC <tt ,C0 1 rtcto Poao rrraottt VUoOi o c ja 3 aoc p cao Vu r BIRD 015595 72 BIRD 015591