View or download CWCT test data - Telling

Technical Report Title:

Product weathertightness testing of a sample of a Telling Architectural Rainspan ArGeTon System

Report No:

N950-11-16372

Report number N950-11-16372 Revision 0. Status – issued to client Telling Rainspan ArGeTon System

CONTENTS 1

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................4

2

DESCRIPTION OF TEST SAMPLE.................................................................................5

3

TEST RIG GENERAL ARRANGEMENT .........................................................................7

4

TEST SEQUENCE ..........................................................................................................8

5

SUMMARY AND CLASSIFICATION OF TEST RESULTS ..............................................9

6

AIR PERMEABILITY TESTING .....................................................................................10

7

WIND RESISTANCE TESTING.....................................................................................13

8

WATERTIGHTNESS TESTING.....................................................................................19

9

IMPACT TESTING ........................................................................................................21

10

APPENDIX - DRAWINGS..........................................................................................27

Page 3 of 27


1 INTRODUCTION This report describes tests carried out at the Technology Centre at the request of Telling Architectural Limited. The test sample consisted of a sample of rainscreen cladding using ArGeTon tiles mounted on a Eurobond composite panel backing wall. The tests were carried out on 24 May 2011 and were to determine the weathertightness of the test sample. The test methods were in accordance with the CWCT Standard Test Methods for building envelopes, 2005, for: Air permeability. Wind resistance – serviceability & safety. Watertightness –dynamic pressure. Impact resistance (BS 8200). The testing was carried out in accordance with Technology Centre Method Statement C3878/MS rev 0. This test report relates only to the actual sample as tested and described herein. The results are valid only for sample(s) tested and the conditions under which the tests were conducted. Technology Centre is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025:2008 by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service as UKAS Testing Laboratory No.0057. Technology Centre is certified by BSI for: 

ISO 9001:2008 Quality Management System,



ISO 14001:2004 Environmental Management System,



BS OHSAS 18001:2007 Occupational Health and Safety Management System.

The tests were witnessed wholly or in part by: Dave Adams Huw Thomas

- Telling Architectural Limited - Eurobond Laminates Limited

Page 4 of 27


2 DESCRIPTION OF TEST SAMPLE 2.1

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT

The sample was as shown in the photo below and the drawings included as an appendix to this report. PHOTO 1000001 TEST SAMPLE ELEVATION

PHOTO 5100017 TEST SAMPLE DURING CONSTRUCTION

Page 5 of 27


2.2

CONTROLLED DISMANTLING

During the dismantling of the sample no water penetration or discrepancies from the drawings were found. PHOTO 1000084 TILE SUPPORT CLIP

PHOTO 1000087 VERTICAL SUPPORT RAIL

Page 6 of 27


3 TEST RIG GENERAL ARRANGEMENT The test sample was mounted on a rigid test rig with support steelwork designed to simulate the on-site/project conditions. The test rig comprised a well sealed chamber, fabricated from steel and plywood. A door was provided to allow access to the chamber. Representatives of Telling Architectural and Eurobond installed the sample on the test rig. See Figure 1. FIGURE 1 TEST RIG SCHEMATIC ARRANGEMENT

SEALED TEST CHAMBER TEST RIG SUPPORT STEELWORK, TO SIMULATE ON-SITE CONDITIONS WATER SPRAY GANTRY TEST SAMPLE DEFLECTION TRANSDUCER

PRESSURE TRANSDUCER

CONTROLLED AND M ETERED AIR SUPPLY GENERATING POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PRESSURES

FAN



COMPUTER CONTROLLED DATA LOGGER

SECTION THROUGH TEST RIG

Page 7 of 27


4 TEST SEQUENCE The test sequence was as follows: (1)

Air permeability

(2)

Wind resistance – serviceability on backing wall

(3)

Air permeability

(4)

Wind resistance – safety on backing wall

(5)

Wind resistance – serviceability on tiles

(6)

Wind resistance – safety on tiles

(7)

Watertightness – dynamic

(8)

Impact resistance

Page 8 of 27


5 SUMMARY AND CLASSIFICATION OF TEST RESULTS The following summarises the results of the tests carried out. Sections 6, 7, 8 and 9. 5.1

For full details refer to

SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS TABLE 1

5.2

Date

Test number

Test description

Result

24 May 2011

1

Air permeability

Pass

24 May 2011

2

Wind resistance – serviceability on backing wall

Pass

24 May 2011

3

Air permeability

Pass

24 May 2011

4

Wind resistance – safety on backing wall

Pass

24 May 2011

5

Wind resistance – serviceability on tiles

Pass

24 May 2011

6

Wind resistance – safety on tiles

Pass

24 May 2011

7

Watertightness – dynamic

Pass

24 May 2011

8

Impact resistance

Pass

CLASSIFICATION TABLE 2 Test

Standard

Classification / Declared value

Air permeability

CWCT

A4 - backing wall

Wind resistance

CWCT

±2400 pascals serviceability ±3600 pascals safety

Impact resistance

BS8200

Category B

Page 9 of 27


6 AIR PERMEABILITY TESTING 6.1 6.1.1

INSTRUMENTATION Pressure

One static pressure tapping was provided to measure the chamber pressure and was located so that the readings were unaffected by the velocity of the air supply into or out of the chamber. A pressure transducer, capable of measuring rapid changes in pressure to within 2% was used to measure the differential pressure across the sample. 6.1.2

Air Flow

A laminar flow element mounted in the air system ductwork was used with a pressure transducer to measure the air flow into the chamber. This device was capable of measuring airflow through the sample to within 2%. 6.1.3

Temperature

Platinum resistance thermometers (PRT) were used to measure air temperatures to within 1C. 6.1.4

General

Electronic instrument measurements were scanned by a computer controlled data logger, which also processed and stored the results. All measuring instruments and relevant test equipment were calibrated and traceable to national standards. 6.2

FAN

The air supply system comprised a variable speed centrifugal fan and associated ducting and control valves to create positive and negative static pressure differentials. The fan provided essentially constant air flow at the fixed pressure for the period required by the tests and was capable of pressurising at a rate of approximately 600 pascals in one second. 6.3

PROCEDURE

Three positive pressure pulses of 1200 pascals were applied to prepare the test sample. The average air permeability was determined by measuring the rate of air flow through the chamber whilst subjecting the sample to positive pressure differentials of 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 450 and 600 pascals. Each pressure increment was held for at least 10 seconds. Extraneous leakage through the test chamber and the joints between the chamber and the test sample was determined by sealing the backing wall with adhesive tape and measuring the air flow at the pressures given above. The test was then repeated with the sample unsealed; the difference between the readings being the rate of air flow through the backing wall. The test was then repeated using negative pressure differentials.

Page 10 of 27


6.4

PASS/FAIL CRITERIA

The permissible air flow rate, Qo, at peak test pressure, po, could not exceed: 1.5 m3 per hour per m2 for fixed panels. At intermediate pressures, pn, flow rates, Qn, were calculated using Qn = Qo(pn/po)2/3 The area of the backing wall was 27.2 m2. 6.5

RESULTS

TABLE 3 Measured air flow through sample (m3/hour/m2) Pressure differential

Test 1 Date: 24 May 2011

Test 3 Date: 24 May 2011

(pascals)

Infiltration

Exfiltration

Infiltration

Exfiltration

50

0.02

0.00

0.01

0.00

100

0.12

0.06

0.14

0.18

150

0.11

0.15

0.13

0.35

200

0.20

0.22

0.25

0.32

300

0.23

0.31

0.35

0.37

450

0.43

0.33

0.43

0.50

600

0.39

0.48

0.41

0.72

Temperatures

Ambient = 12°C Chamber = 15°C

The results are shown graphically in Figures 2 and 3.

Page 11 of 27

Ambient = 12°C Chamber = 15°C


FIGURE 2 Air infiltration test results

1.6 Test 1 Test 3 Permissible

1.2 1.0

3

Air flow / m /hour/m

2

1.4

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Pressure differential / pascals

FIGURE 3 Air exfiltration test results

1.6 Test 1 Test 3 Permissible

1.2 1.0

3

Air flow / m /hour/m

2

1.4

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0

100

200

300

400

Pressure differential / pascals

Page 12 of 27

500

600


7 WIND RESISTANCE TESTING 7.1 7.1.1



Deflection

Displacement transducers were used to measure the deflection of principle framing members to an accuracy of 0.1 mm. The gauges were set normal to the sample framework at midspan and as near to the supports of the members as possible and installed in such a way that the measurements were not influenced by the application of pressure or other loading to the sample. The gauges were located at the positions shown in Figure 4. 7.1.3

Temperature

Platinum resistance thermometers (PRT) were used to measure air temperatures to within 1C. 7.1.4

General


FAN

The air supply system comprised a variable speed centrifugal fan and associated ducting and control valves to create positive and negative static pressure differentials. The fan provided essentially constant air flow at the fixed pressure for the period required by the tests and was capable of pressurising at a rate of approximately 600 pascals in one second. 7.3 7.3.1

PROCEDURE Wind Resistance – serviceability

Three positive pressure differential pulses of 1200 pascals were applied to prepare the sample. The displacement transducers were then zeroed. The sample was subjected to one positive pressure differential pulse from 0 to 2400 pascals to 0. The pressure was increased in four equal increments each maintained for 15 ±5 seconds. Displacement readings were taken at each increment. Residual deformations were measured on the pressure returning to zero. Any damage or functional defects were recorded.

Page 13 of 27


The test was then repeated using a negative pressure of -2400 pascals. 7.3.2

Wind Resistance – safety

Three positive pressure differential pulses of 1200 pascals were applied to prepare the sample. The displacement transducers were then zeroed. The sample was subjected to one positive pressure differential pulse from 0 to 3600 pascals to 0. The pressure was increased as rapidly as possible but not in less than 1 second and maintained for 15 ±5 seconds. Displacement readings were taken at peak pressure. Residual deformations were measured on the pressure returning to zero. Any damage or functional defects were recorded. The test was then repeated using a negative pressure of –3600 pascals.

FIGURE 4 DEFLECTION GAUGE LOCATIONS Internal View

9

6

7

8

3

4

5 2

1 deflection gauge

Page 14 of 27


7.4

PASS/FAIL CRITERIA

7.4.1

Calculation of permissible deflection

Gauge number

Member

Span (L) (mm)

Permissible deflection (mm)

Permissible residual deformation

4

Base of panel

3800

L/300 + 5 mm = 17.6

1 mm

7

Centre of panel

3800

L/300 + 5 mm = 17.6

1 mm

7.5

RESULTS

Test 2 (serviceability on backing wall)

Date: 24 May 2011

The deflections measured during the wind resistance test, at the positions shown in Figure 4, are shown in Tables 4 and 5. Summary Table: Gauge number

Member

Pressure differential (Pa)

Measured deflection (mm)

Residual deformation (mm)

4

Base of panel

2417 -2433

4.1 -4.1

0.2 -0.3

7

Centre of panel

2417 -2433

4.5 -4.7

0.1 -0.2

No damage to the test sample was observed. Ambient temperature = 11°C Chamber temperature = 12°C Test 4 (safety on backing wall)

Date: 24 May 2011

The deflections measured during the structural safety test, at the positions shown in Figure 4, are shown in Table 6. No damage to the sample was observed. Ambient temperature = 13°C Chamber temperature = 14°C

Page 15 of 27


Note: For tests 5 and 6 the tile joints were sealed over and holes were opened into the top of the cavity between the backing and the tiles. No deflections were measured during these tests but the tiles were examined for damage. Test 5 (serviceability on tiles)

Date: 24 May 2011

No damage to the test sample was observed. Ambient temperature = 14°C Chamber temperature = 16°C Test 6 (safety on tiles)

Date: 24 May 2011

No damage to the sample was observed. Ambient temperature = 14°C Chamber temperature = 16°C TABLE 4 WIND RESISTANCE – POSITIVE SERVICEABILITY TEST RESULTS ON BACKING WALL

Position

Pressure (pascals) / Deflection (mm) 607

1202

1804

2417

Residual

1

0.1

0.1

0.3

0.4

0.0

2

1.2

2.5

3.9

5.5

0.2

3

0.5

1.0

1.4

1.9

-0.1

4

1.1

2.5

4.1

5.8

0.2

5

0.3

0.6

1.0

1.4

0.0

6

0.6

1.2

1.8

2.5

0.0

7

1.4

3.0

4.7

6.5

0.2

8

0.3

0.7

1.1

1.5

0.0

9

0.0

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.0

4*

0.7

1.7

2.9

4.1

0.2

7*

1.0

2.0

3.2

4.5

0.1

* Mid-span reading adjusted between end support readings

Page 16 of 27


TABLE 5 WIND RESISTANCE – NEGATIVE SERVICEABILITY TEST RESULTS ON BACKING WALL

Position

Pressure (pascals) / Deflection (mm) -599

-1205

-1803

-2433

Residual

1

-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

-0.5

0.0

2

-1.2

-2.5

-4.1

-5.7

-0.3

3

-0.5

-1.0

-1.5

-2.0

-0.1

4

-1.2

-2.6

-4.2

-5.8

-0.3

5

-0.3

-0.6

-1.0

-1.4

0.0

6

-0.6

-1.2

-1.9

-2.5

0.0

7

-1.5

-3.1

-4.9

-6.7

-0.2

8

-0.3

-0.7

-1.1

-1.5

-0.1

9

0.0

0.0

-0.1

-0.2

0.0

4*

-0.8

-1.8

-3.0

-4.1

-0.3

7*

-1.0

-2.1

-3.4

-4.7

-0.2


Page 17 of 27


TABLE 6 WIND RESISTANCE - SAFETY TEST RESULTS ON BACKING WALL

Position

Pressure (pascals) / Deflection (mm) 3647

Residual

-3595

Residual

1

0.9

-0.2

-0.7

-0.1

2

10.9

-0.1

-10.3

-0.9

3

4.0

-1.1

-2.3

0.2

4

11.5

-0.2

-10.8

-1.0

5

2.3

-0.6

-2.1

-0.1

6

4.9

-1.0

-3.5

0.1

7

13.6

0.2

-12.6

-1.2

8

1.3

-1.0

-1.6

0.1

9

-0.7

-0.2

-0.1

0.0

4*

8.3

0.6

-8.6

-1.1

7*

10.5

1.2

-10.1

-1.2


Page 18 of 27


8 WATERTIGHTNESS TESTING 8.1 8.1.1



Water Flow

An in-line water flow meter was used to measure water supplied to the spray gantry to within 5%. 8.1.3

Temperature

Platinum resistance thermometers (PRT) were used to measure air and water temperatures to within 1C. 8.1.4

General


FAN

A wind generator was mounted adjacent to the external face of the sample and used to create positive pressure differentials during dynamic testing. The wind generator comprised a piston type aero-engine fitted with 4 m diameter contra-rotating propellers. 8.3

WATER SPRAY

The water spray system comprised nozzles spaced on a uniform grid not more than 700 mm apart and mounted approximately 400 mm from the face of the sample. The nozzles provided a full-cone pattern with a spray angle between 90° and 120°. The spray system delivered water uniformly against the exterior surface of the sample. 8.4

PROCEDURE

Water was sprayed onto the sample using the method described above at a flow rate of at least 3.4 litres/m2/minute. The aero-engine was used to subject the sample to wind load equal to a static pressure differential of 600 pascals. These conditions were maintained for 15 minutes. Throughout the test the inside of the sample was examined for water penetration.

Page 19 of 27


8.5

PASS/FAIL CRITERIA

There shall be no water penetration to the internal face of the sample throughout testing. At the completion of the test there shall be no standing water in locations intended to remain dry. 8.6

RESULTS

Test 7

Date: 24 May 2011

No water penetration was observed throughout the test. Chamber temperature= 20°C Ambient temperature = 16°C Water temperature = 15°C

Page 20 of 27


9 IMPACT TESTING 9.1 9.1.1

IMPACTOR Soft body

The soft body impactor comprised a canvas spherical/conical bag 400 mm in diameter filled with 3 mm diameter glass spheres with a total mass of approximately 50 kg suspended from a cord at least 3 m long. 9.1.2

Hard body

The hard body impactor was a solid steel ball of 50 mm or 62.5 mm diameter and approximate mass of 0.5 kg or 1.0 kg. 9.2 9.2.1

PROCEDURE (BS 8200) Soft body

The impactor almost touched the face of the sample when at rest. It was swung in a pendular movement to hit the sample normal to its face. The test was performed at the locations shown in Figure 5. The impact energies were 120 Nm, 350 Nm and 500 Nm. 9.2.2

Hard body

The impactor almost touched the face of the sample when at rest. It was swung in a pendular movement to hit the sample normal to its face. The test was performed at the locations shown in Figure 6. The impact energies were 3 Nm, 6 Nm and 10 Nm. 9.3 9.3.1

PASS/FAIL CRITERIA At impact energies for retention of performance

There shall be no failure, significant damage to surface finish or significant indentation. 9.3.2

At impact energies for safety

The structural safety of the building shall not be put at risk, no parts shall be made liable to fall or to cause serious injury to people inside or outside the building. The soft body impactor shall not pass through the wall. Damage to the finish and permanent deformation on the far side of the wall may occur.

Page 21 of 27


9.4

RESULTS

Test 8 9.4.1

Date: 24 May 2011 Soft Body Impacts

TABLE 7 Location

Energy (Nm)

Observation

Result

1

120

No damage observed.

Pass

1

350

No damage observed.

Pass

2

120

No damage observed.

Pass

2

350

Small crack in nib.

Pass

3

120

No damage observed.

Pass

3

350

No damage observed.

Pass

4

120

No damage observed.

Pass

4

350

No damage observed.

Pass

5

120

No damage observed.

Pass

5

350

No damage observed.

Pass

6

500

No damage observed.

Pass

7

500

No damage observed.

Pass

8

500

No damage observed.

Pass

9

500

No damage observed.

Pass

10

500

No damage observed.

Pass

Ambient temperature = 15°C

Page 22 of 27


9.4.2

Hard Body Impacts TABLE 8

Location

Energy (Nm)

Observation

Result

1

3

No damage observed.

Pass

2

3

No damage observed.

Pass

3

3

No damage observed.

Pass

4

6

No damage observed.

Pass

5

6

No damage observed.

Pass

6

6

No damage observed.

Pass

7

10

Small indent & hairline crack in tile.

Pass

8

10

Small dent in tile face.

Pass

9

10

Hairline crack in tile.

Pass

Ambient temperature = 15°C

Page 23 of 27


FIGURE 5 SOFT BODY IMPACT TEST LOCATIONS External View

10 9 8 7 6 1

2

3

4 5

soft body impact location

FIGURE 6 HARD BODY IMPACT TEST LOCATIONS External View

5 8 9 3 2 1 hard body impact location

Page 24 of 27

4 6

7


PHOTO 1000074 SOFT BODY IMPACTOR

PHOTO 1000078 HARD BODY IMPACTOR

Page 25 of 27


PHOTO 1000078 LOCATION 7 AFTER HARD BODY IMPACT

Page 26 of 27


10 APPENDIX - DRAWINGS The following 5 unnumbered pages are copies of Telling Architectural Limited drawings numbered: TESTEBL 01 Rev A, TESTEBL 02 Rev A, TESTEBL 03 Rev B, TESTEBL 04 Rev B, TESTEBL 05 Rev -.

END OF REPORT

Page 27 of 27

241 139

3444

2000

4030

HORIZONTAL 200X90 RSC

VERTICAL 203X203X46 UC

STEEL FRAME SETTING OUT

2000

XXXX

ALL ELEVATIONS ARE VIEWED FROM OUTSIDE UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED.

CONTRACT NUMBER:

DO NOT SCALE !!!

Copyright TELLING Architectural Ltd.

SPECIFICATION

TILE SYSTEM:

MODULE SIZE: COLOUR:

DRAWING STATUS

A

DATE

24-03-11

COMMENTS

AMEND STRUCTURE SETTING OUT

FOR INFORMATION

REV

CONTRACT:

EUROBOND ARGETON TEST PANEL

Telling Architectural Ltd.

Unit 7, The Dell Enterprise Drive, Four Ashes Wolverhampton WV10 7DF

Tel : 01902 797700 Fax : 01902 797720

DRAWING TITLE :

STEEL STRUCTURE LAYOUT FOR TEST PANEL

A

REV

NTS

TESTEBL 01

DRAWING No.

NTS

SCALE A1 SCALE A2 SCALE A3

RAC

23-03-11

1:20

DRAWN

DATE

1000 1200 1200

2000

2105

10

4030

4020

EUROBOND PANEL SETTING OUT

10

2000

2105

XXXX


CONTRACT NUMBER:

DO NOT SCALE !!!


SPECIFICATION

TILE SYSTEM:


DRAWING STATUS

A

DATE

24-03-11

COMMENTS


FOR INFORMATION

REV

CONTRACT:




Tel : 01902 797700 Fax : 01902 797720

DRAWING TITLE :

EUROBOND PANEL SETOUT FOR TEST PANEL

RAC

A

REV

NTS

TESTEBL 02

DRAWING No.

NTS


DRAWN

23-03-11

1:20

DATE

6

3436

412

400

600

600

600

600

600

600

600

600

2000

600

400

422

16No. 1636mm long

300

16No. 1700mm long

1536

1600

4030

600

45

45

291

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

2000

400

ARGETON TOPHAT SETTING OUT

55

XXXX


CONTRACT NUMBER:

DO NOT SCALE !!!


SPECIFICATION

TILE SYSTEM:


DRAWING STATUS

A

B

DATE

24-03-11

27-04-11

COMMENTS



FOR INFORMATION

REV

CONTRACT:




Tel : 01902 797700 Fax : 01902 797720

DRAWING TITLE :

ARGETON TOPHAT SETOUT FOR TEST PANEL

RAC

B

REV

NTS

TESTEBL 03

DRAWING No.

NTS


DRAWN

23-03-11

1:20

DATE

200

1000 1200 1200

526

800

2000

1200

1200

4030

1200

ARGETON TILE SETTING OUT

1200

1200

2000

936

XXXX


CONTRACT NUMBER:

DO NOT SCALE !!!


SPECIFICATION

TILE SYSTEM:


DRAWING STATUS

A

B

DATE

24-03-11

27-04-11

COMMENTS



FOR INFORMATION

REV

CONTRACT:




Tel : 01902 797700 Fax : 01902 797720

DRAWING TITLE :

ARGETON TILE SETOUT FOR TEST PANEL

RAC

B

REV

NTS

TESTEBL 04

DRAWING No.

NTS


DRAWN

23-03-11

1:20

DATE

0.2°

73 70

27

287

203

1192

928

792

518 288

38

46 53

320No. required

3336 40No. required

400No. required

3No. required

55

300No. required

45

45

16No. 1636mm long

300

12No. required

15No. required

16No. 1700mm long

1536

1600

2No. 3000mm lengths 1No. 2255mm length with 2 No. loose butt straps

2No. 3000mm lengths 1No. 2255mm length with 2 No. loose butt straps

2No. 1700mm lengths with 1 No. loose butt strap

300x1200 module - 55No. Tiles

300x800 module 11No. Tiles


288

291

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

300

° 78

18

288


288

XXXX


CONTRACT NUMBER:

DO NOT SCALE !!!


SPECIFICATION

TILE SYSTEM:


DATE

COMMENTS

FOR INFORMATION

DRAWING STATUS

REV

CONTRACT:




Tel : 01902 797700 Fax : 01902 797720

DRAWING TITLE :

COMPONENT REQUIREMENTS FOR TEST PANEL

-

REV

NTS

TESTEBL 05

DRAWING No.

NTS


RAC

23-03-11

NTS

DRAWN

DATE

Technology Centre VINCI Construction UK Limited Stanbridge Road Leighton Buzzard Bedfordshire LU7 4QH UK 01525 859000 [email protected] www.vinciconstruction.co.uk/technologycentre