Document KREZVKXXOD9dJMK2a0RvYb822
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT
R & D REPORT
DOW CHEMICAL
RESTRICTED: for us* within Th* Dow Chemical Company only.
CD
CO V
"
[
Crs or
.' N
mw
2
D
or u
|DGPARTMEHT
COMPUTATION RESEARCH - THERMAL RESEARCH
[TITLE
Specific Heat of Asbestos - 155^ Latex Sheet
j AUTHOR IS)
_
R. A. McDonald
[aUYhoA'141 ilisUTlJflf IJI-----
73 3468<TAI NUMBE
LABORATORY REPORT CODE
NCT-5517
DATE ISSUED
6-28-73
LAB. NO. PROBLEM NO.
"
AA1 , 6, 3 4 <? k,
PAGES IN FULL
REPORT
FRE VIEWER'S SIGNATURE
DESCRIPTIVE SUMMARY WITH CONCLUSIONS:
(Include reports,
in this patents
Thi* report
is:
INTERIM
MFINAL
space references to data and publications.)
and mainly:
books, and to
fxf NEW
1 REVIEW
earlier related
D. M. Blake, Designed Products TS&D, requested the specific heat measurement at 150 and l80F on a sample of an asbestoslatex sheet material supplied by Nicolet Industries, Inc. The 15# latex content was said to be Dow SD655 latex or a blend of
that and XD813I latex.
The specific heat was determined by comparison with standard reference a-Al^O^ in a differential scanning caloriometer. The
at 150 and 180F are read from a curve through the plot experimental points. See the attached Figure 1.
op
150 180
BTU/(lb. F)
.295 .304
</> --H O ro
00
jr CO
cn
A slight weight loss and a slight exothermal drift were notice^, during tlje measurement.
Ki.1 *
&JN291S73
DISTRIBUTION:
department files
RAD ADMINISTRATION CENTRAL REPORT INDEX - 5 COPIES
(566 B Id). -- Midland)
?ORM C-4JOO PRINTED p>1*73
D. M. Blake
R. R. Klimpel
r.
--- "---
_
nr
-.1
D i t tct but i on lift*
(2) if conrinucd on
offoched page*
..... ....
................ .
-2-
NCT-5517
Q
rt%
r*
16a
P8- t
UI-i.l-ASI-: (JF 'MiCIlMCAI. INFORMATION cn (Numbers I - 15, 22 - 24 for oilgnuioni ol request; 16 - 21 Cut reviewers)
CO
CO
>.
TTIitleEosf PirieJm/ssecdrTalko. Pfuhlicfo>notnpoer Releiahse rsJ//hv>i^L/l9~A/(/Er'D'^bP^i-rfa:Eh>/rTtS
Ft
f?t= --
lb. Request for release of j~|Title only Q Abstract only frq.Pult text 2. Author(9) W(// / /? A/I <X. PA -rAl t//fl A/
3. Return request to: Name W-D . f\A ~ fV\ t///? ^ Address
Plione No. G-l^/2
4. Date submitted to sponsor
l\ ^03............. .....
5. Final release decision required no later than_
$ 6*13. See page 2.
*. ia*>3
14. Please classify as one oC lollwlng: Agricultural and or Biochemical, Analytical, p Chemical Engineering antl<or Industrial Chemistry, q Instrument and/or Control, Medical and/or Pharmaceutical,
R Metallurgy and/or Mlnerology, QOrgamc, rj Physical Chemistry. Inorganic, Physics, Physical operrles, Q Polymers, g Other pROOUCT P M A R ff ( DE\jEL(fPMEA>T
i
15. I have reviewed and approved this paper and recommend its release as being in die interest of Dow. It la
Lroprlate to the intended audience and reflects the professJonaLsundards desired by this organization
'"*7 ^________ ___________________
Signature
/
/note/
Organization
Uj
16a. Received by
rlesponaibleleiltiniie manager
/De ce
for approval.
Indicate appropriate reviewers in 06b on page 2) and forward to 41a
4UU2ffiUBIdg., Midland, Mich.
V3
16c.
09RAI SJTPTJ trzxn Corporate R&Dwlll assign B-number, and send to reviewers desg*.sistep
* 17-18. See page 2. by /Q (C G\
19. Final review
(responsible line manager).
^Approved for release, note comments if made Approved fur limned release and/or only after revisions are made
<
u.
K. >
si
vl Y
describe n Not approved for release
-A Ignaturd
Q. '10. Classification: Q\, primarily research: Q B, non-research: Q C, Associated reseirch, Rocky Flats;
& QD, Analytical: Q E, Sales. Q F, General, review; QG, other.
i^4
$
Ov
21. Return to name/address in (3). If not approved, send copy ot page l to Corporate RID.
22. Final approved ^rab. 1 have complied with the conditions stated above; die originally submitted manuscript has been changed tv this final torm and will be submitted, published and/or presented in this form.
V jm
cH <
* vflti-------- - Signature
Date
23. Three copies of JMyiplered cover sheet and final manuscript to CRI tor distribution to CRI Midland. Tcsas and Wes terryV.^
24. Cover sheet copies: Responsible line manager (16a), Corporate R&O. Public Relations. College Relations.
ST0284317
This Form replaces Stock Form C-1USS0. printed R-l-67 and R3-64I.
ST0284318
SIMULATED PLANT FIRE TESTING OF
PIPE INSULATION SYSTEMS by
William J. McMillan
In industrial plants, particularly in the petro chemical industries, accidental plant fires involve burning liquid hydrocarbons, many of them lighter than v/ater. Thus, the consideration of a large flame area with rapid temperature rise and flame impinge ment directly on pipes is of paramount importance in pipe insulation systems design.
Small scale comparison tests of insulation materials may provide a rating for combustibility or fire resis tance, but they will not establish the performance of pipe insulation in a fire. Recognizing the inadequacy of point impingement flame tests and radiant heat ex posure to forecast pipe insulation behavior; the Union Carbide Corporation in the early sixties initia ted an outdoor fire resistance test to simulate plant fire conditions. This test exposed pipes and insula tion systems to approximately thirty square feet of
ST0284319
2- -
flame area having temperatures tailored to the ASTM E-119 Standard Time-Temperature Curve. The results of these tests were reported^ by Durbin H. Way and Carlos J. Hilado in 1968. During the past two years research at The Dow Chemical Company duplicated and modified the Union Carbide test procedure.
The fire resistance of pipe insulation systems is determined by suspending 20 feet of insulated 3" diameter steel pipe over a 4 x 12 foot steel fire pan containing water with burning gasoline on its surface. A schematic of the test apparatus is shown in Figure 1. Five insulated pipes may be tested simultaneously. The gasoline feed rate to the underwater sparger in the bottom of the fire pan is continuously monitored to produce a flame temperature rise which coincides with the ASTM E-119 Standard Fire Temperature Curve. After burning for one hour, the fire is allowed to burn out and the insulation inspected. The impact of water on the insulation is simulated by re-igniting the fire and after five minutes spraying the insulation with water from a fire hose until the fire is extinguished.
ST0284320
-3The pipe temperature rise is measured by a thermocouple in the pipe surface midway between the pipe ends. Although these tests were conducted within a specially designed building, the flame temperature and profile were sensitive to weather conditions and required con stant monitoring and control by adjustment of the fuel flow and draft profile. The variation in flame profile and intensity also made it necessary to measure the flame temperature immediately adjacent to each pipe. The flame temperature thermocouples are mounted within a 4" length of stainless steel pipe to modulate the thermocouple sensitivity.
Fire resistance is expressed as the time required for the insulated pipe to reach a forecast failure tem perature or as the pipe temperature after a given fire exposure time. The desired minimum fire resistance for pipe insulation for the petro-chemical industry has been arbitrarily selected as one hour for the pipe temperature to reach 1000F. However, a specific fire resistance should be selected for each installation.
ST028432I
-4- '
The variation in flame temperature from the ASTM E-119 Standard Time-Temperature Curve, from pipe to pipe and test to test, is corrected by application of a deviation factor to the temperature and or time. The deviation factor is expressed as the ratio of the area under the flame temperature curve to the area under the ASTM E-119 Standard Time-Temperature Curve. When computing the deviation correction only that portion of the TimeTemperature Curve for the time period under considera tion is used. The test is considered invalid if the flame temperature curve for the duration of the test deviates from the ASTM E-119 curve by more than ten percent.
When five pipes were insulated with one inch of a calcium silicate insulation and a ten mil stainless steel jacket; the insulation system was found to provide essentially one hour of fire resistance. Figure 2 shows the test in progress and the fire . resistance curve is shown in Figure 3. The average variation in flame temperature was 360F. The pipe temperatures varied by 92F.
ST0284322
5-
Because "white goods" normally shrink when exposed to high temperatures a double layer pipe insulation system is usually specified to provide satisfactory fire pro tection against direct flame impingement or direct radiation from the jacket, However, since ceramic and glass foam insulations expand rather than shrink when heated; a single layer of these materials will provide the required protection provided they are secured on the pipe with steel jacketing or bands.
With an external temperature rise of 2000P and a pipe temperature rise from ambient to 1000F; calculations show that the expansion of the glass foam insulation exceeds that of the pipe and cracks for direct flame impingement are not' formed. Also, in a three foot length of pipe the expansion of the pipe will not ex ceed that of ceramic foam insulation by more than 0.1". Past experience has shown the ceramic foam to fracture an average of each 6" under rapid external temperature rise; thus the potential crack due to a fire would be distributed over five- fractures and would be approxi mately 0.02" which is insignificant for direct flame impingement consideration.
ST0284323
6- The difference in fire resistance between glass foam and ceramic foam becomes more obvious with increased flame exposure time. The glass foam, because of its lower softening temperature tends to sinter and shrink at temperatures where the ceramic foam remains essentially unchanged. The fire resistance of ceramic foam pipe insulation is shown in Figure 4. Ceramic foam pipe insulation 2" thick with proper covering will provide the desired one hour of fire resistance.
From the tabulated fire resistance shown in Table I of various high and low temperature jacketing systems for two inches of ceramic foam, the fire resistance is not very sensitive to the jacketing material. The ceramic foam pipe insulation without a jacket spalled due to the rapid temperature rise and flame impingement during the first 14 minutes of the test. The loss of material reduced the fire resistance. The vinyl acrylic mastic did not readily burn and left a cementasbestos like residue which protected the ceramic foam from spalling and left it intact under the jacket residue. The asphaltic mastic burned and dripped
iz e w z o is
-7from the pipe but left a light-weight expanded residue. Some spalling occurred. The aluminum jacket had melted from the insulation within 12 minutes into the test. Banding with steel bands 12" on center instead of 6" on center allowed fragments of the foam to become dislodged from the pipe. The foam under the steel and asbestos felt jackets, although fractured, was intact after the test.
The "after fire" integrity and functionality of an insulation system is very significant when selecting an insulation system to minimize processing or production "down time" after a fire. Three inches of ceramic foam pipe insulation with an asphalt im pregnated asbestos felt jacket banded v/ith steel bands 6 inches on center did not change its fire resistance when exposed to three consecutive fire tests. The insulation was rejacketed between tests.
In a single test, a 6" diameter pipe insulation system composed of 24 ceramic foam segments approximately 1.7" v/ide bonded to an asbestos felt jacket, when banded 6"
' ST0284325
-8on center; was found to remain functional after the fire resistance test in that despite the small size of the segments, they remained firmly secured on the pipe even when the jacket,v/as scraped off.
Plastic foam insulation is not usually considered as providing fire protection. However, some fire retar dant rigid polyurethane foams by virtue of their char forming characteristics, do provide fire resistance, especially when installed with steel jacketing. Most of these rigid foams, once converted to carbon char by a high temperature, contract and rupture leaving a part of the pipe exposed to direct heat radiation or flame impingement.
One rigid polyurethane foam is unique in that when exposed to high temperature it concurrently melts, carbonizes, and intumesces thereby providing an essentially continuous carbon char insulation. Variance in the fire resistance of four commercial rigid polyurethane foam pipe insulations is shown in Figure No. 5. Each foam was 3" thick and v/as jacketed
ST028432S
-9-
with 10 mils of vinyl coated steel. The better re sistance is provided by the non shrinking type foam previously described.
The characteristic to melt, carbonize, and intumesce applies to vertical as well as horizontal surfaces. A vertical pipe insulated with 3" of rigid poly urethane foam and a steel jacket was included in one of the fire resistance tests and is shown during the test in Figure 6. The char formation did not melt and run out and provided fire resistance for longer than one hour.
Some rigid polyurethane foams continued to "punk" 20 minutes after the fire was extinguished, even when the fire was extinguished with water. The punking was usually ajacent to the pipe where a high temperature could be maintained. A punking characteristic is undesirable where there is a potential for fire re-ignition.
Five jacket materials for three inches of fire retardant rigid polyurethane foam pipe insulation
-lo
wer e tested simultaneously. The results shown in Table 2 indicate that the fire resistance of a rigid polyurethane foam pipe insulation system correlates directly with the fire resistance of the jacketing. The fire resistance as a function of the foam thick ness for a steel jacket system is shown in Figure 7.
ST0284327
Since these fire resistance tests were run with empty
pipes the fire resistance will be increased when the
pipes are filled and should be extended considerably
7'n < s
7
when the pipe contents are flowing. They should not
be confused with established ASTM test procedures
such as ASTM E-119 and ASTM E-84, nor should these
test results be considered as guaranteeing pipe
insulation performance in a fire. However, these
test results can provide the basis for the selection
of insulation materials and systems.
In summary, simulated plant fire testing of pipe insulation systems has shown that: (1) Rigid polyurethane foam insulation can provide fire resis tance. (2) The fire resistance of polyurethane foam
ST0284328
-11-
pipe insulation is a function of the jacketing 'material. (3) Single layer ceramic foam pipe insulation can provide fire resistance without flame impingement. (4} Ceramic foam pipe insulation can remain functional after a fire. The ability to forecast the insulation thickness required for fire protection becomes significant when the potential fire severity and heat insulation requirements are combined to determine the most economical thickness of insulation.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Durbin H. Way, and Carlos J. Hilado, Fire Technology 4:271-283 November 1968 and Journal of Cellular Plastics,. 221-228 June 1968.
O'
Hc
g
%n
oa>0>
--i o
ro
CD co
-PH04* CUD
jr co
tr> Gca po
CP-|. --wHU
rO--JC 3
05
w3J Kmoj wO
0J-)l O3 ' M
SCD P
-H<MD
M0-t CP
op p z0;
-GP CapD wt3r
Figure 3 Fire Resistance -of Calcium Silicate Pipe Insulation
ST0284330
ST028433I
T a b le
<
uO.
IU y
aS
zV<- cm<c CO o
CO u_
ucc ou
U..J.
CO
III
CC X
ZO
a "
Oo --
v in h m o o
lh co cd co o in
<e5 .fSt*-
3
C-
<
*oa
oo*
CO
o +3
re MVI oO
re5
Dw1m O
c `*re
o U.
o U 00 M
>reu
"9 O Z
c
'D M rfe* > 11
Co
0 3 2
o
2 v> O -0Q
< r-- r-- .<
ST0Z8U332
'Figure 5
Fire Resistance of Three Inch Thick Rigid Polyurethane Foam Pipe Insulation
ST0284-333
r- a>
h|
MU
CO
cm CO CN CM
O CinO
ST0284334
CM
<D
--i
XI a H
o a
o^ 0
a LL
> Eo
,>E
gS
.3 C
>ao.
1i .2
<J
E 3
C
^E3
<
O
S
<g
-aC
"0UU2 *oc02 Co
oa>> CO T*0fO39* O a
">c.
Sa. .ii. aCO. oo
a
ID CM
00
S
o
Figure 7
Fire Resistance as a Function of Polyurethane Foam Thickness
ST0284335
BACK CROON'D I-OK R I-Vl RWilRS
14Hie. /* J U- ci'.
'lease supply following iiiloriTuiion. Reviewers may return form lor il.ua If il is nor supplied, causing unnecessary delay.
1-5. See page 1.
6. Check one: g] Dow work covered by internal reports, nos. F P>--
0Coy
7: 7,
q Dow work nor covered by Interna) reports; Q Review, Including only previously ptic. : =
work (no new theories or insights presented).
`3
7. Check one or more; q Subject of patent disclosures, nos. by issued patents, nos.
____ ; Q Covered _;0Suo;sat cf
license and/or agreement (identity)
; 0 Not patentable or licensable; Q Publication ts a part c;'
business pianning.
8. Check one or more: Subject matter related to (identify) [--I Daw process_____________________________________ or system
____________________________ _______ _______ ; r~l Other ; j^gDow technology Q No present Dow interests.
: 0Dow service ; Eg Daw procuct
__________________ _____
9. Materia I p~| related to; |~] revision of previously released paper(s) no(s).
Date(s)
______
: Q Abstract or Title No.
previously released; f~i Not applicable.
10. If released, material will be
0 Published by Djw for distribution to
_____ _________ ___________ ____________ <;
p~| Orally presented at t/73
/eZS PR E \'Nf/<-> S/r.ifioS fi/ni '// /-ts (co ~: er er.c e,
meeting, etc.); f~]Submitted to jP('/,//) 4 tVi/Al - A;; P fi AV Pn
/ >-> (journal) for
publication, d /i S'* if a /Orc/c CCS X ~ o ot Dry yvL **-S? A #*>>
Cc`f~
h /<*> tc<*/ irf-'Cr.
'
11. Copyright and/or publishing contract/agreements with non-Dow aeepcles phave, [~) have not been made by
authors or others. /[u/rvai/\ T'C poh /ii A /
'tiy't/S J~o /j. C fiCpp
I 12. Trademarks of Dow or any other company f~~]are, figare hot used anywhere in paper (title, text, tables,
figures, references, footnotes, etc.)
I 13. Liability clause Qi^, f~| Is not required and 0 is, 0 Is no: included.
CO
H-16a, See page 1.
O
ro
oo
i. To be reviewed by
(Reviewers to be designated at Step
17. Reviewed by
Name \ R87i.n(r<vk,1*->
Recommendation Ves Provisional* No*
Signature
go
---------------zs Date art
Qu^Pro<J. Dept.
Patent Dept.
fie. Trademark 0d. Tech. Center
n<=-
n* 1 \ E*
... _
n.
-a . *
, L* /Q / /OT--
3
a
D
isr
D
n
D a
p
a
o
n .-- --"i n
D a
------- . ^13
/ C/7'. <" /
Comments or limitations 1/0'r$r. mdJ 5~rA j>~7y^n
18. Reviewers in (17) return to: f*" . 11
'*'20 Bldg. , Midland, Michigan,
crwuxi tircn roit
19-2J. Sec page i.
IlM. M* AUSUJJO
ST028U337
i
BACKGROUND I "OR REVUtWKnS
please supply following information. Reviewers nwy return form lor ilata II it is not supplied, causing unnecessary delay.
1*5. See page 1.
6. Check one: 53 Dov work covered by internal reports, nos. F P>~
^ ^^
q Dow work not covered by internal reports: J Review, including only previously published work (no new theories or Insights presented).
^
7. Check one or more: n Subject o1 patent disclosures, nos.
____: Q Covered
biy issued patents, nos.
: Subject ol
license and/or agreement (identity)
_______ ___________
: [g Not patentable or licensable; Publication is a part o:
business planning.
8. Check one or more: Subject matter related to (identify)
1 Dow process
__________________________ : Dow service
or system
; C=qTow product
' ; n Other
; (53Dow technology ~_______________________________
No present Dow interests.
9. Material f| related to: f~j revision ol previously released paper(s) no(s).;
Date(s)
;|~~l Abstract or Tide No.
previously released: Q Not applicable.
10. II released, material will be
n Published by Dow lor distribution to
_________ _____
___________ ________ _______ :
nOrally presented at / Y i /\ SOh 5 /-ZS PREVFNf*>/*>}OSIU*n /////^(conference,
meeting, etc.); j~|Submitted to TEfL /Y1 ArfUAl -P-vs s PfiEV(journal) for
publication. a/)f'*tcz/pYoeClX~c>tJtnry a j_
A +* p (ie,~stpS/cP'e/+' f"*
4 t e<*/
pfsfr.
11. Copyright and/or publishing contract/agreements with non-Dow agencies f~|have. f~l have not been made by
authors or others. yurotHA T'C puhli%bi~y Yty+iTs 7~o /\SCpi
12. Trademarks of Dow or any other company flare, ggare_noc used anywhere In paper (tide, text, tables, figures, references, footnotes, etc.) I
13. Liability clauseq is, f~| is not required and Qis, |~l Is not Included.
14-16a. See page 1.
16b. To be reviewed by 17. Reviewed by
designated at Step 16a)
Name
Recommendation Yes Provisional* No*
a. Prod. Dept. n. Patent Dept. nc. Trademark nd. Tech. Center
ne. nL n-. nh.
2. . L <4 / KTC-
n
rni
D
n
CJ
n n n nn
n /' n n
'Comments or limitations
Signature t
Date
18. Reviewers in (17) return to: Ohjtvmi wn n j! t."i*i20 Bldg., Midland, Michigan.
19-24. See page 1.
esnuu uren oou u*. M wnw*w