ML20092G246
| ML20092G246 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1995 |
| From: | HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092G235 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9509190195 | |
| Download: ML20092G246 (150) | |
Text
.- . _ _ = _ _
Revision 0 Page 1 of 17 TIIERMO-LAG ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR IIOUSTON LIGIIT AND POWER COMPANY SOUTII TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION REVISION 0 FOR SOUTII TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATION STATION PO BOX 289 WADSWORTH, TEXAS 77483 P_ ..PDR
Revision 0 Page 2 of 17 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Tjitle Pagg
1.0 BACKGROUND
3 2.0 OBJECTIVE 6 3.0 SCOPE 6
4.0 REFERENCES
/ INPUTS 6 5.0 DEFINITIONS 9 6.0 ASSUMPTIONS 11 7.0 METIIODOLOGY 11 8.0 RESULTS 14
9.0 CONCLUSION
S 15 APPENDIX A - Thermo-Lag Configuration Al-A132 Evaluations APPENDIX B - Summary of Results B1-B3 APPENDIX C - Upgrade Techniques Cl-C3 APPENDIX D - Record of Conversation with D1-D3 Thermo-Lag Installer FIGURES FIGURE 7-1 Application Guide Methodology 17 and Extent of Generic Applicability Ill I I' I I Il I II E I I I
- Revision 0 Page 3 of 17 1
i
1.0 BACKGROUND
.J Many US nuclear utilities have installed Thermo-Lag 330-1 (Thermo-Lag)
- manufactured by Thermal Science, Inc. (TSI) in their facilities as a fire 1 barrier / wrap material. Thermo-Lag has been used within the industry to i provide separation of redundant or fire safe shutdown systems, as well as j radiant energy shields and structural fire proofing.
j j After receiving allegations relative to potential problems with the performance
- of Thermo-Lag, the NRC convened a Special Review Team to review prior j test reports, observe plant installations, and assess material compliance to regulatory requirements. The review team's final report, dated April 1992, concluded that fire ratings and ampacity derating factors for Thermo-Lag were
- indeterminate, and that some utilities had used inadequate installation procedures. The review team concluded, however, that the overall safety i significance of the issue was low, based on evidence that the barriers would l provide some degree of protection, and that most plant areas containing such j barriers typically have low fuel loads, controlled ignition sources, and other
- fire protection and mitigation features. ,
- J NRC Bulletin 92-01 (Ref. 4.6) and Supplement 1 (Ref. 4.7) were issued following performance of utility tests that raised further questions relative to 4 material performance, and validity of previous test results. The Bulletin i declared previous tests indeterminate and required utilities to treat installed
! Thermo-Lag barriers as providing an "indetenninate" level of protection.
l Utilities invoked compensatory actions as required for inoperable fire barriers.
i Typically, this involved establishment of fire watches as an interim measure.
} NRC Generic Letter 92-08 (Ref. 4.9) identified three major areas of concern
! relative to Thermo-Lag fire barriers: 1) the fire endurance capability of l installed barriers,2) the ampacity derating of cables enclosed in Thermo-Lag
' barriers, and 3) the evaluation and application of the results of previous tests conducted to determine fire endurance ratings and ampacity derating factors of Thermo-Lag barriers.
To assess material performance and provide a basis for evaluation of installed Thermo-Lag fire barriers, an industry fire endurance test program was conducted by NUMARC (NEI). To assist in addressing generic industry 1 issues associated with the fire endurance capability of installed barrier
- configurations, the Industry Test Program
)
- Assessed current industry configurations through the use of survey data i
- Conducted tests to establish performance of various baseline and upgraded fire barrier system assemblies i _ .. _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ . _ , . - _
- Revision 0 Page 4 of 17 4
2
- Developed a guideline to assist utilities in evaluating installed barrier
- configurations Utility test programs have also been conducted,'the results of which may have j applicability to other utility installations.
1 j To expand and supplement the guidance provided in Generic Letter 86-10 i relative to the acceptance basis for future fire endurance testing, the NRC
- issued Supplement 1 to Generic letter 86-10 (Ref. 4.12) on March 25,1994.
j Since the supplement was issued following the NEI test program, it does not apply to the performance of tests which serve as the basis for the NEI
- Application Guide (Ref. 4.18). The extent to which the guidance outlined in j the supplement is intended to apply to the application of prior test results in d
unclear. However, if it is assumed to apply, the supplement does provide for j alternate test methodologies and acceptance criteria that demonstrate an i equivalent level of fire protection. In this regard, the substantial body of industry test data represented by the Application Guide can be used to establish acceptability of generic equivalencies to the test methods and acceptance
- criteria described in GL 86-10 Supplement 1. The Application Guide therefore i
provides a methodology for evaluating equivalency between certain tested and
- installed barrier configurations and is consistent with the process previously
- established by GL 86-10 (Ref. 4.14),
i l On December 15, 1992, the NRC issued Information Notice (IN) 92-82 (Ref. ,
l 4.5) informing utilities that, as a result of their testing, they had concluded that l i
Thermo-Lag is a combustible material. The NRC's concern regarding I i Thermo-Lag combustibility is attributed to the use of this material at many l l plants as a radiant energy shield in containment or within 20 foot separation ;
! areas as a means of segregating redundant safe shutdown paths. Since the i
- presence of combustibles materials in these areas is restricted by 10CFR50, j Appendix R and plant licenses, regulatory compliance could be in question.
- NUMARC (now NEI) reviewed the generic implications of the NRC findings and issued its "Thermo-Lag 330-1 Combustibility Evaluation Methodology, Plant Screening Guide" on October 12, 1993. This Guide concludes that Thermo-Lag may not necessarily be considered a combustible material for all plants arxl provides a methodology for conducting plant specific evaluations to
! assess Thermo-Lag for combustibility in the form used and under the conditions anticipated, i
- To comply with the requirements of GL 92-08 and the subsequent NRC
, 50.54(f) letters issued to request additional Thermo-Lag information, it is 3 necessary that utilities document the Thermo-Lag barrier configurations
. installed at their plants, evaluate the effectiveness of these barriers in meeting i
Revision 0 Page 5 of 17 regulatory requirements and determine the action plan for bringing their plant into compliance with NRC requirements.
I Revision 0 Page 6 of 17 Additionally, via NRC memorandum dated June 27,1994 (Ref. 4.16), the Commission directed the NRC staff not to limit consideration for exemptions which are currently permitted by regulations. Further, the Commission requested that the staff consider possible new exemptions ta Appendix R based on contemporary fire protection methodology and technology and to proceed to evaluate the feasibility of developing new guidance for rating fire barriers on the basis of representative plant fire hazards. The Commission did recognize however, that the responsibility for developing the technical basis for new exemptions would rest with the licensees. Therefore, the Commission has acknowledged that new exemptions, when technically justifiable based on specific plant barrier and hazard configurations, are a viable option for resolution of Thermo-Lag barrier issues.
2.0 OBJECTIVE The objective of this report is to take the Thermo-Lag configurations at IIouston Light and Power's (IIL&P) South Texas Project Electric Generating Station (STPEGS) and:
Evaluate the installed Thermo-Lag coverage utilizing the methodology contained in the NEI Industry Application Guide (Reference 4.18) to determine if the Thermo-Lag enclosure is bounded by testing and, if bounded, the fire rating that could be expected for that configuration.
Identify upgrades that can be installed on the existing typical details to i
either obtain a fire rating on an as installed unrated (unbounded) barrier or enhance the rating of a rated (bounded) barrier and the fire rating these upgrades will achieve..
3.0 SCOPE l The scope of this report includes all Thermo-Lag configurations at STPEGS which are still required to protect redundant safe shutdown paths as required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix R (Ref 4.17).
4.0 REFERENCES
/ INPUTS 4.1 NRC Information Notice 91-47: " Failure of Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Material to Pass Fire Endurance Test", August 6,1991.
4.2 NRC Information Notice 91-79: " Deficiencies in the Procedures for Installation Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Materials", December 6,1991.
4.3 NRC Information Notice 92-46: "Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Material Special Review Team Report Findings, Current Fire Endurance Tests,
l Revision 0 Page 7 of 17 ;
and Ampacity Calculation Errors", June 23,1992.
4.4 NRC Information Notice 92-55: " Current Fire Endurance Test Results for Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Material", July 27,1992.
4.5 NRC Information Notice 92-82: "Results of Thermo-Lag 330-1 Combustibility Testing", December 15, 1992.
4.6 NRC Bulletin 92-01: " Failure of Thermo-Lag 330 Fire Barrier System to Maintain Cabling in Wide Cable Trays and Small Conduits Free from Fire Damage", June 24, 1992.
4.7 NRC Bulletin 92-01, Supplement 1: " Failure of Thermo-Lag 330 Fire Barrier System to Perform its Specified Fire Endurance Function",
August 18, 1992.
4.8 NRC Generic letter 92-XX (Draft): "Thermo-Lag Fire Barriers",
February 11, 1992.
4.9 NRC Generic Letter 92-08: "Thermo-Lag Fire Barricrs", December 17, 1992.
4.10 NRC Inspector General Inspection Report, Case No. 91-04N:
" Adequacy of NRC Staffs Acceptance and Review of Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barrier Materials", August 12, 1992.
1 4.11 Thermal Science, Inc. (TSI) Technical Note 20684, Thermo-Lag 330 Fire Barrier System, Installation Procedures Manual, Power Generating Plant Applications, Revision V, November,1985 (STP Log No. C042-00010-3M).
4.12 Supplement 1 to NRC Generic Letter 86-10: " Fire Endurance Test Acceptance Criteria for Fire Barrier Systems Used to Separate Safe !
Shutdown Trains Within the Same Fire Area", Dated March 25,1994. l 4.13 NRC Infom1ation Notice 94-22: " Fire Endurance and Ampacity Derating Test Results for 3 IIour Rated Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barriers", Dated March 16, 1994.
4.14 NRC Generic Letter 86-10, " Implementation of Fire Protection Requirements", April 24, 1986 4.15 NRC memo from James M. Taylor to the NRC Commissioners, )
" Options for Resolving the Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Issues", dated May 12,1994.
Revision 0 Page 8 of 17 4
4.16 NRC memo from John C. Hoyle to James M. Taylor "SECY-94-127 -
Options for Resolving the Thermo-Lag Fire Barrier Issues", dated June 27, 1994.
4.17 VECTRA Calculation No. 0023-00170-CO2, Rev. O, " Appendix R Compliance Assessment" (This is currently a draft calculation.)
! 4.18 VECTRA Technical Report No. 0784-00001-TR-02, "NEI Application i Guide for Evaluation of Thermo-Lag 330 Fire Barrier Systems",
Revision 1.
4.19 Ilouston Light and Power Letter No. ST-HL-AE-4695, dated February 10,1994, " Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding Generic letter 92-08, Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barriers" 4.20 Drawing No. 7E041EL1099, Rev 8, "10 CFR 50 Appendix R:
- Raceway Wrapping Schedule, Unit 1" 4.21 Drawing No. 7E042EL1099, Rev. 4, "10 CFR 50 Appendix R:
Raceway Wrapping Schedule, Unit 2" i'
4.22 Ilouston Light and Power Calculation No. EC-5045, Rev 1, " Raceway 4
Weight Analysis" 4.23 IIouston Light and Power Calculation No. EC-5046, Rev. 4, " Power Cable Sizing Verification in Fire Wrapped Raceways"
- 4.24 Unit 1 Field Takeoff and Inspection Record for Item No. 43, Identifier l C1XE2ATSAB, dated 4/23/87 (QA installation record for cable tray C1XE2ATSAB) 4.25 Unit 1 Field Takeoff and Inspection Record for Item No.143, Identifier C1XE2ARX002, dated 4/24/87 and 9/17/87 (QA installation record for conduit C1XE2ARX002) 4.26 Unit 2 Transco Work Release & Inspection Record, T.O. Area 2XE01-P10, Item No. 4, dated 5/12/87, 5/13/87, 5/16/87, 5/17/87 and 5/31/87 (QA installation record for conduit C2XE2ARX002) 1 4.27 Unit 2 Transco Work Release & Inspection Record, T.O. Area 2XE01-P10, Item No. 5, dated 5/17/88,5/18/87 and 11/3/88 (QA installation record for cable tray C2XE2ATSAB) 4.28 VECTRA Report No. 0023-00177-RPT-001, Rev. O, " Fire Modeling
Revision 0 Page 9 of 17 Analysis of STP Auxiliary Shutdown Areas" 5.0 DEFINITIONS 5.1 Thermo-Lac Barrier Secment A portion of a Thermo-Lag barrier which can be determined to be of different construction than adjacent portions. For example, two different Thermo-Lag barrier construction techniques found along the same raceway (e.g., preshaped coverage on a horizontal conduit and V-rib panel coverage on an adjacent conduit support).
5.2 Fire Barrier Performance Parameters The parameters of the Thermo-Lag Typical Style or Detail that affect the overall performance of the fire barrier. These parameters include l material type, thickness, stiffener (V-rib) location / orientation, stress l skin location, joint type, fastener type and spacing, distance of fasteners from joints, unsupported barrier span, etc.
5.3 Commodity Parameters The parameters of the contents enclosed within the fire barrier system segment being evaluated that affect the performance of the fire barrier.
These parameters consist of size, type of material, mass and orientation.
5.4 Bounded Conficuration Installed commodity and barrier configuration whose collective performance parameters are consistent with (or "better than") those of tested configurations such that an equivalent level of fire endurance capability can be concluded.
5.5 Butt Joint l l
A type of joint between prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials in which l the mating surfaces of adjacent pieces abut as in either an end-to-end or corner configuration without beveling.
5.6 Fasteners Metallic or other components used to secure prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials in place during installation. Commonly used fasteners on conduit and cable tray enclosures include 16 to 18 Ga. stainless steel tie wire and 1/2 in, wide x 0.020 in thick stainless steel banding.
Mechanical fasteners such as anchor bolts are often used to secure
r Revision 0 Page 10 of 17 barrier materials to concrete structures.
5.7 Mitered Joint A type of joint between prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials where the mating surfaces of adjacent pieces are beveled.
5.8 Pre-Buttered Joints Joints and seams between prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials sealeil on all mating surfaces with Thermo-Lag 330-1 bulk (trowel) grade material during construction of the protective envelope around the protected commodity.
5.9 Score and Fold A technique used to install prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials whereby a cut or score is made into the material leaving the internal stress skin layer (facing the protected commodity) intact. This technique results in a " seam" to facilitate forming the Thermo-Lag around a protected commodity, thus avoiding joints between individual pieces. This also includes " grooving" which is cutting a "V"-shaped notch into the material to facilitate forming the Thermo-Lag around a )
protected commodity leaving the internal stress skin layer intact.
5.10 Structural Ribs ("V"-ribs)
Contoured "V"-shaped ribs formed into prefabricated Thermo-Lag panels during manufacture for the purpose of providing structural support across the width of the panel.
5.11 Stress Skin A pretreated open weave carbon steel mesh used to provide a mechanical base for application of Thermo-Lag 330-1 bulk grade material during manufacture of prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials.
Stress skin is also used as a mechanism to externally reinforce joints and seams between the prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials. Stress skin is also used as a mechanism to externally reinforce joints and seams between the prefabricated Thermo-Lag materials forming protective envelopes.
5.12 Total Enclosed Mass As used herein, this term refers to the total mass of contents per unit
i s
1 e i Revision 0 Page 11 of 17 length (or volume) contained within a protective envelope. For l
example, the total enclosed mass for an installed cable tray barrier can be expressed as the mass (Ib.) of the cable tray plus that of the cabling it contains per linear foot.
i 5.13 Inaccessible Parameters j
1 Parameters which can only be verified or measured through a j destructive examination of the Thermo-Lag barrier (e.g., internal tray
- banding, panel thickness, V-ribs, internal stress skin).
4 5.14 Unsuonorted Soan The dimensions of a protective envelope configuration for which
- Thermo-Lag panels comprising the enclosure are primarily self- )
] supporting. As such, panels installed along the distance are not i substantially supported by the protected commodity itself or other j support mechanisms such as unistrut type frame segments. Examples of unsupported barrier spans include Thermo-Lag panels installed l across the top and bottom surfaces of horizontal cable trays or those f projecting from wall surfaces without internal support or methods of f joint reinforcement. )
l l 6.0 ASSUMPTIONS i
l 6.1 This report assumes that the Thermo-Lag being evaluated in this report j is installed in accordance with information obtained from the installer i
and documented in Appendix D of this report, the information contained in the installation manual (Ref. 4.11) and the information i contained in the QA records (Ref 4.24 through 4.27).
I l 6.2 This report evaluates the Thermo-Lag identified as still being required
) in the VECTRA draft Calculation No. 0023-00170-CO2 (Ref. 4.17).
I i 7.0 METHODOLOGY j
7.1 Evaluating Effectiveness of Thermo-Lag Barriers l
The Thenno-Lag fire barrier systems installed at HL & P's STPEGS will be evaluated utilizing the methodology contained in the NUMARC l (NEI) Industry Application Guide (Ref. 4.18). This process is
] consistent with the guidance provided in Generic Ixtter 86-10 (Ref.
] 4.12), but has been expanded due to the unique performance characteristics of Thermo-Lag. Figure 7-1 depicts the evaluation
]; process for determining whether Thermo-Lag barriers can be i
i I
Revision 0 Page 12 of 17 reasonably bounded by those tested and the extent that the Application Guide applies relative to resolving overall Thermo-Lag fire endurance capability issue.
Step 1: Determine The Configurations To Be Evaluated And The Performance Parameters For These Configurations a) Obtain the total population of Thermo-Lag barrier configurations to be evaluated from the VECTRA Calculation No. 0023-00170-CO2 (Ref. 4.17).
b) Separate each Fire Barrier System (FBS) into individual barrier segments on a per plant basis for evaluation purposes Individual FBS segments are constituted by one or more of the following distinguishing characteristics: 1) change in barrier construction technique; 2) significant change in protected commodity or contents; 3) change in type of barrier material; or 4) change in orientation of the protected commodity or the barrier which necessitates a change in barrier construction technique.
The Application Guide tabulates FBS segments previously tested, including applicable interface points between individual barrier segments. FBS segments being evaluated will be grouped into typical details to the greatest extent practicable, c) List the FBS segments to be evaluated on the " Installed To Tested Fire Barrier Evaluation Forms" provided in Appendix F of the NEI Industry Application Guide.
- Additionally, to assist in identifying specific segments being evaluated, reference the applicable Commodity Number or Numbers from the input data that are being evaluated.
, d) Determine the as-built commodity and barrier performance parameters for each configuration that are needed to complete the evaluation forms. The information for these parameters is obtained from the walkdown of the Thermo-Lag enclosures, a record of conversation with a Thermo-Lag installer (See Appendix D), the QA installation records for the Thermo-Lag (Ref. 2.24 through 4.27) and the Thermo-t
'l Revision 0 Page 13 of 17 Lag Installation Manual (Ref. 4.11)
}
Step 2: Determine Tests and Parameters To Be Applied For
! Evaluation Of Segments i
- a) For each segment, review the NEI Industry Application i Guide to identify tests of similar barrier segments and commodities to be utilized for comparative purposes in i the evaluation. In selection of tested segments and assemblies to be used to evaluate the installed barrier
- configurations, consideration should be given to
, methods of barrier constniction, specific commodities
- tested and test results. It should be noted that several tests, or portions thereof, may be applicable to a single r installed FBS segment.
! b) Using Appendix C, " Tested Parameters" of the NEI j Industry Application Guide, identify the applicable commodity and barrier performance parameters for
~
i cach tested segment. In some instances, it may be
) necessary to review the respective test report excerpts contained in Appendices H through K of the NEI
) Industry Application Guide to obtain detailed information for the applicable performance parameters I associated with tested configurations.
c) For each segment, enter the selected fire test designations and performance parameter data for the tested configurations on the evaluation forms.
. Step 3: Evaluate Installed And Tested Commodity And Barrier i Performance Parameters
- a) For each segment, compare the performance parameters between installed and tested configuration.
i i b) Using Table 5-1, " Performance Parameter Bounding Criteria" in the NEI Industry Application Guide, j' determine whether the pertinent performance parameters associated with each installed FBS segment are bounded by test. Appendix D of the NEI Industry Application Guide contains the technical bases used to !
develop the bounding criteria to establish whether installed configurations can be reasonably bounded.
4
Revision 0 Page 14 of 17 c) If all segments comprising a Fire Barrier System (FBS) are bounded, then that entire system is bounded.
Therefore, as a minimum, a level of fire resistance capability equivalent to that of " worst" performing segment can be concluded for the installed FBS.
Document the evaluation results for the entire FBS using the forms provided in Appendix F of the NEI Industry Application Guide and consider further actions as appropriate, d) If the aggregate of performance parameters associated with each segment comprising the FBS are not bounded by tested configurations, then further evaluation is required to determine if equivalency to tested configurations can be established. In performing such evaluations, the significance and extent that performance parameters associated with the installed configuration differ from those of tested configurations should be considered. Table 5-1 and Appendix D of the NEI Industry Application Guide provide guidance which may assist in distinguishing parameter variations that mh/ be significant in terms of affecting fire endurance capability, from those that testing has demonstrated would not be anticipated to significantly !
affect barrier performance. Additionally, the guidance provided in Section 3.2.2, " Deviations From Tested Configurations" of Enclosure 2, " Appendix R Questions and Answers", to GL-86-10 (Ref. 4.14) will l be considered in the determination of whether equivalency to tested configurations can be reasonably established. Upon completion of these evaluations as required, document the results for the applicable FBS using the appropriate evaluation forms.
8.0 RESULTS 8.1 Thermo-Lag Configuration Fire Barrier Evaluation Results Summary The safe shutdown re-evaluation at STPEGS (Ref. 4.17) has resulted in a dramatic reduction in the amount of Thermo-Lag required to protect !
safe shutdown paths. The only Thermo-Lag remaining that is required to protect safe shutdown paths is located in the Auxiliary Shutdown area (Fire Area 7) in both Unit 1 and Unit 2. It involves 37 linear feet of 24" wide cable tray and 47 linear feet of 4" conduit. The coverage for the cable tray is V-ribbed panels installed directly against the tray
3 Revision 0 Page 15 of 17 and the coverage on the conduit is preshaped half rounds installed directly against the conduit. Each raceway also has a metal, rectangular box where the cables go through the floor penetration.
This box is covered with V-ribbed panels installed directly against the box. The remaining Thermo-Lag is 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> material and it is installed ;
in an area currently requiring a 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> rating.
The Thermo-Lag coverage has been evaluated in accordance with the NUMARC (NEI) Industry Application Guide. The detailed evaluations for each raceway segment are included in Appendix A of this report.
Appendix B provides a summary of results and Appendix C provides a detailed description of the upgrades discussed in the evaluations and Appendix D contains the record of conversation with the Thermo-Lag installer.
The results of the evaluations indicate the following i
i
- The Thermo42g configurations are bound by testing except for i the Thermo-Lag / structural interfaces. Upgrading these
! interfaces in accordance with the upgrades utilized in TUEC 1
- Test 11-4 will result in all of the configurations having a fire
! rating of at least 60 minutes. i l
- It is questionable if a fire rating greater than 60 minutes can be i i obtained due to the lack of testing for more than 60 minutes for structural interfaces even though the conduits, cable trays and
! junction boxes can obtain a rating greater than 60 minutes.
l
9.0 CONCLUSION
i
! In their correspondence describing options for resolving Thermo-Lag fire l barrier issues (Ref. 4.15 and 4.16), the NRC staff has indicated compliance j with existing regulatory requirements with exemptions granted (where j technically justified) will be the primary focus of ongoing activities In general, the NRC staff's current perception is that 1-hour rated barrier
! configurations can be reasonably obtained by either evaluation of installed
, configurations or implementing upgrades. However, the perception is that 3-
- hour rated barrier configurations cannot reasonably be obtained by upgrade
- based on previous testing with additional Thermo-Lag materials.
There are essentially seven (7) options for addressing Thermo-Lag barrier configurations which do not currently comply with regulatory requirements:
) 1. Upgrade existing barriers to achieve compliance. However, without l further testing, this option is only viable for 1-hour configurations. !
l l
Revision 0 Page .16 of 17 Although, it should be noted that TVA and Thermal Sciences, Inc. are currently pursuing a joint test program which will evaluate the performance of some 3-hour upgrade configurations using advanced Thermo-Lag materials.
- 2. Re-evaluate components protected by Thermo-Lag barriers to determine if they are truly required to achieve safe shutdown objectives. Such.
analyses have demonstrated considerable success in reducing the population of required barriers and are considered a cost effective measure. This option has already been completed.
- 3. Relocate / reroute safe shutdown components where feasible.
- 4. Qualify 3-hour barriers as 1-hour barriers by evaluation and/or test.
This option would also generally require provision of both automatic fire detection and suppression system capability in the area. .
Inadvertent actuation and flooding concerns would have to be addressed. The area currently has area wide detection.
- 5. Replace Thermo-Lag barriers with other qualified barrier materials. As with option 1, without further qualification testing of 3-hour configurations and materials this option has limited applicability.
However, replacement of 3-hour barriers may become a future option should further testing succeed in qualifying alternate cost effective materials.
- 6. Request limited plant-specific exemptions. This approach could include a performance based approach in conjunction with other methods, such
- as probabilistic techniques, etc. This is a viable option based on the l results of the fire modeling analysis (Ref. 4.28), the area wide
( detection provided and the level of protection afforded by the Thermo-j Lag coverage especially if the existing enclosures are upgraded to j provide a 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> fire rated barrier. I J
l 7. An approach ernploymg various combinations of the above options.
l This option maximizes the ability to tailor the action on a specific i barrier basis. This approach typically draws on a comprehensive l cost / benefit analysis of each barrier configuration to select the
- appropriate method for resolution.
Revision 0 Page 17 of 17 FIGURE 7-1 APPLICATION GUIDE METIIODOLOGY AND EXTENT OF GENERIC APPLICABILITY ,
, s.paret. in.ieii.4 ras into ,
e g,pgeot *Evolueteable* Segmente Step 1 ,1 Extent of Gwa. .
, Applicabiltry 1f .
identtfy Applicable Performance
, Parameters of installed Configuradone ,
If '
i .
. Review Appendices A & B To e Further Actions Detem*ie Teete To Se Step 2 8 (As Required)
Utilized in The Evaluation
- Exermtion/ Deviation
. i Jr e e Upgrade
[ Identify Applicable Performance [
- Further Testing Perarnsters of Tested Configuradone Step 3 *
- Using Appendix C And Appendices ste V.ie Mess / Procedures H-K (As Necessaryl e e
, ,
- Other Modifications i e Evaluate Performance Parametere Using 8 d
' Bound 6ng Crtterie (Table 51) And '
l Appendix 0 To Determine if insteiled l
, Configuratione Are Sounded W Teste ,
If i i I J
. Docwnent Using Appendix F ,
j i
i e .
Ennutta II '---- . i
. 1 Ag installed l
4
**"** YE5
'., Parametwo O Sounded 9y Document Sounded '
. Tested i d
., Confleuredone ,'
5%Acmoe And '
d . . . . . .e Extent Of ;y NO Olffering Parameters Equivalency To Tested Config- YES uration Established By Evoluerlon 1
GL 8410 Encl. 2
- Dededone From ,
Tested Connguratione* NO
gO 8I?4?8F
~ - $E8 o N g9x > ynPett J , i 1
3 F
O 1 D E E G R I
A U P
Q E
R T N S
E O I
T T Y A B U D L E A D V N E 4-B U R A O E I I
S S B H E N T E T A R T R M O
I 2 O U E T E N F H A X C I E S U C N )R T L O "0- E S A T '0 H E V I 2 T I E R N R O
( C E U 1 L E E R I F T7 E, H J E I C0 T T
I E Z G I '
T R O D N 7I N
/
R J
M N A
E D O0D R EL 2 E T A B I P NI E S 0 Y SO G Y A Z.U 1
E A T -
R T
I X/ B P S E
S 2 I D E AX E T R D F O E N T RA EU R E Y I A
u M HA C U S B R R
e M I O D A 3-UE E O H- D 2 n C OIR L E E
D B
2-E D SFE 3 T N D T E A U E 2 U T S O T C - X L O A T T E A A B R S E
n T T V T O A E 2 R R D R S E I
E I
T P N U T G N A
/
M O O N A :
T E I
T H- E P S S T A 1 M E E S E C N Y C G E S N I
S O S E L R R Y M :
E E S I T E M T F E
R I D G T E L R R S T U A O N Y S S T
_ B M I T S Y E S A
/
G M A R S R E N A O R E R N T L- C D I
R E I O E
_ /
R L .
O R E R I T B S E R A R A A K 1 M I I U B A U C R R R E B A F- E R Q L I L
H A E R E A P M E B R I
R V P E R T F I R
U F E A G
I 5.
F 1 2
3 4 6 7
(
FIGURE F-1.1 INSTAT I Fn TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 2 OE 31 g.
- t. -
- 1. THERMOw LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDEPmFIER- CIXE2ATSAB 8 Y
N-
- 2. 8 BOUNDED BY BARRIERRATING -"
1EST AS INSTAH FD WITH UPGRADE s' NODE COMMODITYTYPE (Y/N) (MIN) (MIN) EVALPAGES {:
8 N O 60 4-10 o 1 BOX CONFIGURATION 1-2 ' CABM*IRAY Y 60 86 11-17 .
2 CABMTRAY RADIALBEND Y 60 86 18-24 2-3 CAB 2 TRAY Y 60 86 11-17 3 CABETRAYRADIAL BEND Y 60 86 18-24 3-4 CABETRAY Y 60 86 11-17 4 CABMTRAY RADIALBEND Y 60 86 18-24 4-5 CABM TRAY Y 60 0
86 60 11-17 25-31 kg
-5 CABM1 RAY /WAI1 INTERFACE N i
. i T
b e,
C w
j
FIGURE F-2 INSTAI LED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE3 OF 31 g 0
b._
- 1. DIERMO-LAG BARRIER SYS'EM/ PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER CIXE2ATSAB .
?
H
- 2. M
. SKETCH OF INSTALLED CONFIGURATION ,
N s.
e.
S 4-5 o goos s , Cl%ELAT5ABl o
a NooE4 5-4 te o De.3 g.3 j E.
o
- s. ,
g / e4enst :
1 - 2.
, gtaooss g
- g4 ope 1 4-5 n~s 3-1 p/ m..... ,,,,,
~
/-
Icixc u o
- 2 I
... s/ ,
a u
h ti
!' l
.t i ;jl i ,f!
[ !
- g" gCyN8" gs$"
y4ghh i ?
>u 2 > -
1 N. N N 3
. S0 O I S SON S N S F I l S1 T E L SI 0 DO 0 DO O M. T AT1 ZI L
._ sH AAA A1 NN.N 1 NN.N 4 HO EW N MTU I
SW N MTA U 1
A U On0
_. E A N. TmO NL EA TG NU OnO BFTID U BF11D G J NDN EL L UF uVE N N DI AE A A E E OI D R R D ORl EI D RD N I V UI R VA DJ AE UIR OMUA I
P N O I V
E EMNEE EN E O E EA LU E EA LU m FuUP F OOE TD A NE E FUF F
OE ANED E1 STTS AQ E 2 TT AQ S S A
I DcBDMASE 1
- E DBDMASE TI ENER VE SE E - E TI NERVB
. 6 E
L 4 4- 4-B S 4- 4- 3-3- 3- 3- - 3-AT 2 T1 2 T1 2 T1 2 T1 S1 2 T1 S1 CS S1 S1 S1 T T E T EE T EE T S EE S EE S EE NT S S P E TM E TM E TM E 1M CE E TM CE A T CE T CE T CE 1 EH T
DEH EH I EH I EI 1 I ENUC 1
E UC E N
_ M N 'S I 1S B
A -
E 20 N
O S
T A
2 E
L B
A MY 1
S
-. I X ) C OA S
T I C M RR A O F T U
L M
AD R
R A A N A C V R U S R C NL I I E E P CEE F T I
F NA PS DV I R R
.- K 1 1 OV OE I E A SS E E N CE RV S PW RE V I
E D I DE RI D O*E R 4 S I C L
1L J I
R I Y
E D
m I AS I E L D2D M A 06 0
2 A
T R T DE U C 15 N -
A f O N m R O "6 RE D N I
R == O F T D D I DD S
_ B O S I Y N AK C DE M T C BE 2 Z I
R M RA A AB U 1 E M D AR 4TM L E LI
- 8 O R
I O
C u E
I CT "3 2SE A I
E "63 3 H _
T: _
F u N _
_ D t E l
M E
_ r F G
_ T T E S
s O R M Y E P E A T M /
T S M R T
O ET Y
S R E
- T SY R A T L B
D SR E N I A
_ I R U C
F E R E D I
R A N '4 I
R B O 2 I
A A E R
M C )
1 B D (
. T O H M N S
. S A E A T N L U I L
I M B A
A Y U r A C
M C T
S A D F T R N /
N R
E UP N
I T O a l O
.- H P E C L 7 Z
_ T A L
- E 5 I R
B 4 E 1 O
A A )
2 T 4 H
I 2 3 C ( S 3 Y N T
I 3 L S O E I A T I F- CS D T E
M E
Y T
P E Z
I S
I R
E T
A N
E T N8 N LM O
3 A T N
A E
C A I
_ OM M M T R O -
G RR O O T
__ I F EA .
PP C _
0023-00177-TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A6 of A132
!' llll llll llll llll
=
9i,WI i,=
, i iWI i,Wl i
i,WI i
8 l o
^
lg t l83 8
g 8 l* l 808 3
- d
!l tla I5ll !
l i: l s
i l i
a
, l!sll" llI
!sl sh si
!dl8 l!
ilslil !!
8 l
- ! a
! ! l i l l 1 I ! i e i t i 3
l g i h i g : g a
- ~ m b E l f lE !! lI!l ll
INSTAI J FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 6 OF 31 FIGURE F-5 CIXE2AT3AB ta PERFORMANCE I THERMO4AO BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENT1HER.
G NODEI u 2 APPIJCABM HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT:
M D
3C INSTAMR)Cm6MRADON 4C TESMCONROURATXMS) SC APPUCABW 6C EVALUAIMDU 8" BARRIER EVALUATED TEST 3 REF.NO. .
PRE-BITTIERED BUITX)DRS WmiPRE- PRE-BtJrIERED BtJIT XHNTS Wmi NElTEST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS g BtTTIERED *PICIURE FRAME" BUTIED10 SOME SOORE AND FOID INSTAllpn. NO 5.
THE RACEWAY COVERAGE AND BOLTED EVALUATION &
D JOINTTYPE(3) 10THE CONCRETE PRE-BUTIERED BUIT JODGS WITH I TUECTEST REQUIRED SCORE AND FOLD ON BOITOM. PRE- SCHEME 11-4 BLTIERED "PICIURE FRAME" BlJrIED TO THE RACEWAY COVERAGE AND BOLTED TO THE CONGEIE.
s1/4" NE11EST 2-3 SAME.NO s 1/4" EVAllJA110N 1UECTEST RBQUIRED. >
JOINT GAP SCHEME 11-4 g S
9.
x l
6" IED - 45" X 12" X 13" NE11EST 2-3 1EST3 BOUND l 36" X 18" X 10" 3" LBD = 18" X 8* X 8* INSTAIIRD NO TUECTEST EVALUATION UNSUPPORM 36" X 20" X 12" SGEME Il-4 REQUIRED.
BAiuuEn SPANS i
INSTAIJ FD AGAINST LBD NEI TEST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS INSTALLED AGAINST METAL BOX INSTAIIFn NO INTERNAL NONE TUEC *IEST EVALUATION SUPPORT SCHEME 11-4 REQUIRED. u MECHANISMS y
G R.
D i
i..__. _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___________________ _ __ _ _ _ __ _.
.j l l[; !1 < - i!
l L 8U g dAWhw.N2gso PES 9x > .
?$( y* 2 > C u 1 _
_ 3 F S N _
O DO 0 7
W. N NN N 1 1 N .
E MO A N.
O .
U OD 0 A
U 0 .
G l l F OID T B211D L O1D 1 -
E NAE
_ A l E NA E R DtlAL A AR V .UIR P .UI UD -
MAQ S S VB E .
MAQ AVE E E 3- AVE TINER O SER SE SER E
_ M 4-3-
4- 3- 4- 3 4 A 3 3- T1 T1 T1 -
Tl C TS T
. 2 2 2 2 S 1 T S1 T S1 T SI E S EE EE EE EE NT P E 1M S
E TM S
E TM S
E TM
ENUC DEH I DEI ENUO 1
E EI UG I
E EH UC
_ NATS NA1S N TS N TS B 2 A
3 1
N A
2 O
I E
X )
S T I C
A U
L MAD R E A
. UT A V A ML U E Y R NA K T OV N CE H E I
D I M M R I Y
E D
M S U U R T O D M I M A I D N M N X I A A X
- B O B M A E E M M N M "2 O
. R I
O C O
/
1 "2
1 2 N T
F D N D E E M
M I
U
. E E F G M.S .
T T E S
I NT
_ S O M
E R P E I
MIO N
_ T W T S OJ O ETS Y S
M I NM T Y R A R DO E R D S R
I R U AF H
R E U
R A SN T
. I. U B RE I
A T
I A
B E
R I
G F S E 2 A 1 TU NI l
p I
B L
A M U
SQ NE A T S I h C S D M R -
R U N I
.G E P I N X SN H P A A EI E T A B M R C I
A N
- O I 2 D
- 2
/
1 2
1 AP VS N 3
6 M S E R O R RD E R F- C N
S E F3 T A E
I N U R P CN E R MAM NE TG NE Y I
E R T p NO SE U O f t
I RR B I D
E F EA PP
FIGURE F-7 INSTAU FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION -
PAGE 8 OF 31 o o
PERFORMANCE I THERMMAG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODmf IDENI1FIER. CIXE2ATSAB U PARAMETERS g 2 APP 1JCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODEI h 4
?
BARRIER 3E INSME CONNURADON 4E ME CONNURAWS) SE AmJCABM 6E EVALUA110W 8 EVALUATED TEST 3 REF. NO. P NO REINFORCEMENT AT JOINTS OR AT NONE NEI1EST 2-3 THEINSTAu m IS p STRUCIUREINIERFAG. THE"PICIURE NOTBOUNDED BY 5.
FRAME"IS BtTITED TOTHE BOX JOINTS REINFOR D WTIH S11tESS TUECTEST THETESTED s' COVERAGEWTIHNOSTRESSSKIN AND SKIN, TROWEL GRADE AND STAPES SCHEME Il-4 CONFIGURATIONS. o JOINT TROWEL GRADE REINFORCEMENT. WAllINTERFACE REINFORCED WITH REINFORCEMENT PICTURE FRAME, STRESS SKIN, MECHANISMS TROWEL GRADE AND STAPLES.
SUPPORTS ARE CDMPLETELY COVERED SUPPORT MEMBERS WERE NEI TEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS d INIERvENING SiEzLiS COVERED is - PRoIEcrED FOR FUU.ENGTH AND INSTAnm NO 3 INTERVENING SIEEL MEMBERS WERE EVALUATION R X
STRUCTURAL PROTECIED IOR AN 1 " DISTANG/ REQUIRED.
SUPPORTAND INTERVENING COVERED OUT 9" 1UEC1EST STEEL SGEME I1-4 PROTECDON CONCREIE ON ONE SIDE. EXPOSED ON AliSIDES NEIitST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS INSTALIED. NO CONCRETE ON ONE SIDE, TUEC TEST EVALUATION SCHEME 11-4 REQUIRED IDCATION
@ m ENCIDSURE y a
e, t
n
i 2 0023-00177-TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A10 of A132 4 ;;;
E E
! ! ll 4
i l g i!g!
I $
in,
$ll!
ili l 28 n
1l 6
3 Es p
, n S
,1
!! a i l 11 111
- i -
mmmmimnm lilli .
i lg 3 g nl, ............ 1. !Biq.l.
!!!!!!I!!Ill
!.q.i.
11 llj!
B l 5 I5 l l m s 1 <8 l!I a :s!8 s l a g !
- i s !!! i i l a! I liinth!h iiiis il l 1 l
i
=
B i lE l'jigmiiiiimi!,ilit!
ly'I !illi.liliisi sue uuom ua p Eli, n
i, g l s g I
- le d e *l li i r,
I l il5ln -
1
! ., 8 5 E s ill l
. !! lm -
g 2
. l l..
. 2
' E - : a ; #
0023 00177-TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page At1 of A132
)i lllili!
i i il ll i, I Illel i
l .
il
'I :l
- i jl l !i ai i
s i lIllllg!
. ,ii llli ,,
! s g i lg- 1h ;
! i l i i i_jllls.gl' l
! ! !lh "E l l
! ! l s lilil il !!3ls'! l!
ll!lilll a
i i i s tj I i !!lll "I l! l ! lillllll!i l
l i s i .e il!jjillil!
i ll 4 le g ls i l r.li 1piilillisi !li lllE 'l if!!'
! i l 1 1 22 iili< i l
l ! . 1 1
>o3EE >
g uhayN.$" g5Ea * - ohyg2tt i
O 1
3 N F I S S SE1 - S N DO DO DEE D O O . NN.N NS .N N N 1
DO N N N.N U U U U .O 1 O E A N.
L I
F OT DI
. OmO B
I T OmO B lD l OmO B
I T
I A B
i I
A G J NA E A DI AUIE DI D l U EALU I E o1 R A A R lUI R
V P E A
aT mS N I
Uy AL A
V E
TT SS E N VE TI ER AQ 1T S S A EN TI EV OmTN TT S S A EN 1I EV 6
EI 0 0 0 1
0 1
0 1
B S 1 1
2
_ AT C S 2T 2 2 2 T
E T T S S S s S WT E E t E E 1
l T I a T A '
l I 1 I
E E E E E N N N N N M
N B O
I A )
S S T T L
A A A
U L
2 E
X I
W AD R N
U C I
T C RE r R A UT A i T F E V
R U G Y / V _
E A E L I E R A A R I D R
R l
I N
E 5-NVR E T S
T E
4 7
2 N
A L
I D Y -
R I Y
4, m A B
A M 1
=
A T
R R C U Y N A
I r
D M,
3-m I
"
- N I
A O Z
B O W 4
M R I M 2, B X U 1 R -
E M 2- A "4 L
- 4 O _
R I
O C
1 T
- A 4
C 2 A 2 H F u N E
D t l
M E r F G E
T T S S O R M E P T /
M E
S N
O E Y T S M T S Y R A R
N E U
. n S R
I R W R L F
~
E R H T A I
A H T 1 R B N I R E O G N A A R C I
A O B Z T G m m R Y I R
S A U I
S A O n
N I M B A
A Y R T T H _
( T A F J _
M C S R
I _
R U N M R A _
- E P I T B 1 C1
. 1 1 P A W A L 7 1
- T B C m 9 0 R .
t E A
A "4 1 i
0 V C 2 I 2 2 : _
3 _
Y D E
N _
T 3 /S 0
- E I L A 3D 1 _
D 1
F CS 1 _
I NR E E I
R NC A E AE O P Z E EN T Y I T
N LE N R MT E M T S T A E U RO I
O I
EA O T F PP C
0033-00177-TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A paSe A13 of Al32 <
! l'ill lill lill lill I, h h h h
, e e s a z 5 lo l "
i i
=
a B1 5 8 l ;a! i 1
- s. 9 8
$f I l 8
d d B
g i * , lla 8 11 l a l l g r g -
!! !! l si i I I !
e a r a
a l
l "
g 5
. _ , t 8 l l
!E !! lI!l ll l
- e
gRRs>r oaygzy b" T{'5 o
. =$ > Z 2 ::
1 3
F I S S S S O N DO DO DO DO O . NN NN NN N NN.N T O U .N .N 3 I U U .O U OnO 1
E A N.
U F BPT I
OnO BpT ID OmT B
I D
O BmOTID G LE DI AU J AER D I AE R DI AUIE R A AR Dt UI EA UI I T I V EA L EALU EA LU ITS LU P E I T S S A TTS AQ S S AQ 1TS AQ S
C E TI EVN EN TI ER VE EN TI ER VE EN I
VE I ER 6
2 B
0 1
0 1
0 1
'0 1
3 - - - -
PT S S S P E E E E A 1
[
T T T l
1 l t E E E E C N N N N S
N O
I B
A )
S T S T N
(
. A A 2 O S Y
U E X
I T
AD N I
A L I RE I R
A C. UT O J T V R E
GU RL T A T S
E I F NA I
J l
N I
K I
D E E A R I 4, T R D i
S E R m M, E T E T
A D 3 T I J R B O 2,
- l l O P
E M 2- A P
"4
/ P M R 1 "4 U R
I O
C 1
T
- C 4
P s 2 S F u N E
u t l
c M h E G
- T T E S
- S O R M .
E P E Y T W. T S
N A R
E O O T Y
S I
T T T S Y R A R
S I
E L
E D S R
I R
U G
NI B
A R E I
R A R OJ C J R B N T I R E O T I S A
A R C J N T OB l I I
F D B A _
S E I D G -
A l A
N M B L l A
E R -
I C A T E D -
M C S I E N
R J 1 T T E P I
U R _
H P B- O _
T A -
4 P E /
- P R 1 4 U I 2 C3 P < 2 S 5
) D S K S E L M A TRI E (
E P TR S F- CS E P A RES NR N R ON I
Y O OI N E AE R T I P R A PR P EPl PA R MT R E R T M UA S I Ui U N O SB NS C O
FAM A I O J N E
M G RR B J U I
EA -
F PP -
0023 00177 TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page AIS of A132 h z i $ $ ! $
8 !!a als 3 g!g dllill ill is ill j, h2 h h h
, e a e a z
- 9 I
m i ,s d
j l
,! I 4
i l g ? .
~
s s .
I s e la 3 l-s e
1- l sli s
lh l
. _ , i e il i i
,i i la ll lil l li
! ! ' ', i I i ;i gy@GyiYk - E6io >gg9h oac, so > 5 ,>CJ S
~ 1 3
F S S
- O M.
TO I
N DO N
5 U N
- 1 AN U O N ODN.O 0
- E L F. ODn I TD O11
- G A
AE NAE VR /Um BHA D I UIR E NA
/U P E ELU EA LU EL mao AVB TT S S AQ MA AV E SER E TI NERVB SE
- 6 E 0 0 M 0 1 1 1 S - - -
. 2 2 MSTE 2 T T S
T S
MT P
S E E E A T T I
T I
I E E E E N N N S
E.R N RO P U
- O I
B A )
I CD T S S UE A
T A RR T E
- U 2
E X
M T SV O
S A C. UT A "I E V R E ML U DEL D I
E I NA EE RT S
E N V A I E D
5- OG N R I 4, M CNI O R Y 4-SN
.- T 3, E TE D A I D 3- RV E S
- E M 2-O PT*.
U X R SI N 1 '8
. 1 O : E N E I C T 4
- F D N u E E E.T
. f M RU
_ E I
f F G E
UO I
D E
s T O
R S
M X' I
E T M P
/
E R T E R
T N
- T Y R A R T S S E D R I
R U DA .
R EW S E R M R I A E I - R B N E L D T R A E O VE I S
A B R C
) OE C1 L T O I
F a S L
- S A E l E A N M I
B l
A RG" N I ( A AN8 I 1 O M C SNT D R
E U P
M TES RvA E H P S
- T A E N
ORE PEI O P
P T X O UN AT I 2 E N SI E 3
T 7 E R NS EM LDG ANN N O N R E
F- CS NR E T MIS RAI NLD O U E AE I
R T EN OCA NTEEC C RVE B D
ANW R MT R E R OR H JOC U ORT T C U O A F E RPPETS O R
O K
FAM L
G N M TUN P RR B I E
SSI I
F EA PP R
t I
FIGURE F-8 INSTAT.IFD TO Tb:s itu FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 16 OF 31 o B
Y ;
- 1. 111ERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- CIXE2ATSAB 8 a
Y H :
W '
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5 8 ,
Po I
S.
t*.
E-1 THROUGH E-2 o
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): :3 o
j
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
EI ENr1narnMASB:
CIXE2ATBAB l .24*CABt2 TRAY = 3.870lDFT
= 1.628ID FT
( .M 882 AWO-600V 17-M882 AWO 600V = 3.763 LDFT g I 22.Mst2 AWO.400V = 3.126 tDFT .o I. M 84AWO.2KV = 0.00SIDFT(NOTE I) Q l .M 86 AWO.2KV = 4000LDFT(NOTEI) 9 2.M812 AWO.600V = 0.24SIDFT x i j 4-IM 882 AWO-400V = 2.796ID FT y l 2.M el4 AWO.2KV = 8.674tDFT ;
12-I FR.816 AWU.600V = 8000lDFT(NUTE R) 3.t QQ,#16 AWO-400V = 0.000IDFT(NGIE1) ;
2-3 FR.856 AWO.de0V = 0.000IDFT(NGIEl)
I. M 82AWO-2KV = 0.000IDFTOlGIE n ;
TUTAL = 20.8F7 IDFT 7 NGIES; ,
t TIE WEIGIITE FOR THESE CABIES WERE NOT READILY AVAIIABt2. SINCE THE Epcs narn MASS EVAlllADON WITil MIEEE CAM 2 WEMETIS WEL BE No i 1.
DIFFERENTTHAN WITHOUT THE WE30lfT3.THE CABI2 WE3OlfT3 ARE NOT Dn myn l i
- 2. TIE CABI2 WE30H13 WERE TAKEN FROM cal 4UI.ATION EC . 3843. REY. 8.* RACEWAY WEIOlfT ANALYSIS". TIE PARTICIAAR CARE 2300NTAmED M EAcit l RACEWAY WAB OSTAB4ED FROM CAIKULATION EC- 30% REV. 4.*FOWER CAME EEZINO VERIRCA110N W FIRE WBAFFED RACEWAYE. ,
E-2 . BANDE WEREUBEDON TIE INSTA11ED CABt2 TRAY AND FASTENER SPACING WAS MAINTAINED AT 82*0R 1258. THERE WAS HOWEVER NO REqtAarurntT FOR BAND TO J0DIT SPACING SO THAT DOdEN330N VARES. THE ACTUAL DISTAtHD CONFIGURATION IR WITIGN 4" 0F THE 300er CN THE BGrTOM PANEL FOR Tim senarmalTAL SECDON WHICH WOIAD BE THE CRITICAL JOINT. nHS COUFt2D WITH THE FACT THATTHESE ARE 2 HOUR PANEla WieCH DID NOTTEND 10 DISTURT IN THETEST. g REsuLTi m ne :FACoo 0F THE nANDs To mo<T oREAm THAN 2- memo msnmanCANT AND THE n=rAanD mEma n0UNDED aT na mrED. io uAncrAnf .
- i CONSERVATIBM IN THIS EVAIAIATION CREDIT IS BEING TAKEN FOR ONLY A 6e MINUTE BAmaera RA1980 INSTEAD OF THE e6 MINUMB OSTADED Bf NEITEST 2-3 >
U '
2, U
INSTAT J FD TO TESTED FIRE BARIUER EVALUATION PAGE 17 OF 31 FIGURE F-8 h
I. THERMO-IAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- CIXE2ATSAB u A
lc b
P
- 2. APPLICABE FIRE BkRRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): I-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5 y ,
5'
- s o
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1111 ROUGH E-2 i
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
y SEGMENTEVALUATION:
2 1HE INSTALHD CONFIGURATION IS BOUNDED BY NEI TEST 2-10. IN ORDERTO MAINTAIN 1HE CONSERVA11SM OF THIS EVALUA110N, CREDTT &
E IS NOT TAKEN FOR1HE FULL 36 MINUIE RATING OBTAINED IN NEI TEST 2-10. BUT TT IS REASONAB210 EXPECT 1 HAT 1HE INSTAI I > FD CONFIGURATION CAN PROVIDE AT LEAST A 60 MINUTE RA111Xi WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH1HE MAXIMUM RATING 1 HAT CAN BE OBTAINED ICRTHE WALL INIERFACE WITH UPGRADE.
IT WOUID BE Potta F 10 MAINTAIN CONSERVA11SM AND OBTAIN A HIGHER RATING BY INSTAILING ADDI110NAL BANDMG TO COMPLY WITH MAXIMUM TESTED BAND 'IO XMNT SPACING.1HIS WOUID RESULT IN AN 86 MINUIE RA11NG. ALSO,1HE EXISTING COVERAGE COUIE BE UPGRADED PER NEI TEST l-4 'IO OBTAIN A 3 HOUR RATING POR THE CAB 211tAY, BUT THE UPGRADES REQUIRED ARE VERY ELABORA1E AND THE ENI1RE'lltAY RUN CXXHD NOT OBTAIN A RA11NG HIGHERTHAN TIS " WEAKEST LINK",1HE STRUCIURAL INTERFACE. ,
1ESIS 2-10 EXHIBTIED STRUCIURAL INIEGRTTY FOI1DWING THE HOSE SI1 TEAM TEST. !
7
'a E
.C s ,
r t' i l
! *i I !( -
iI:!l : l' ! ! .,[ :l oSwh ayN b".g5EoO >m 3 E R' > o Eh o >C" 1
3 F S S SE1 -
- O M. DO DO DEE NN N NN N NS N 8
1 MO N O 5
U U U .N O E OD.O OD.O OD O ODD MFN. OTID I
BETA ED
_ I G NAE BETID BET NAE A MER IUR DL UR DU ate EA DWA EA U .UIR P ELU EA TTS LU TTS UU ELU L
._ E MAQ S AQ S AQLU IT A SS MAQ
- AVE E AVE A
6 SER E TI NERVE TINERVB E TINEV SER E
L 0 0 0 0 0 B 1 1
1 1 1 AS T 2 2 2 2 2
- C S T T T T T E S NT P
S E
S E
S E
S E E A T T T T T 1 I I I I E E E E E M N N N N N N
- B O
I A )
3 S
- T 1 A
A 2 L A
U L
E X
I M
AD N D C I
C RE T E T A A B T R V
R L Y F E E E I MU NA L A A R V
F OV D I
R D R I T
N CE A T 1
4 N R 7 A m E D Y E 2 L R I 4 M A B
A M 1
A R Y I 3 S R C U Y
= T N
A r0 2 S
H T
- N A O B 0 E E
4 I M R Z E M D O B X U T I R
M A
- L O R
I O
C N
A C 4
2 A "4 2 H T
F D N E E D T C
M b E G T T E
S S O R M E P E T M /
T S M O ES I Y
S M T Y R A L A
E R D D S R
I R N C I
R R E T l
E I
R A M N
B R E
R B L t
E O A V A A t C I B E D D T G F D 2 A Y N S A E R A A N L L B
U R L I O A
A T
Y T T A M C S A F T R u N R E N E r I T B R 1 O H r A L Z T A E C E 7
9 I R
B E 0 A "4 T 0 O I
2 3 A C 2 S 2 H Y n 3 T F t N F-E CS I
D L
A sn ii I
O I
T NR E I t S r
E AE O P R S A R MT Y E MN N EM A T N
U R E M T T A
OA L E I
F EA T PP C
. . _ - - - - . - - . ~ . - . = . . . . - . .
0023 00177.TR.002. Revision 0 Appendix A Page A20 of Al32 8
i l l' ill lill lih lih
! i gi N N N N
, e e a e g ^
I E
l l S g o
$ l s
$ l
. t
- 9 l
- : l 6 4
- i 4
ia i a i
i g i 11 1 e e g 8
nl la 1i i-
- r! i i i E s a l l h
. _ . s_ l l
i ,
l-.lI l!I ! ., '
>ESo.. > .ou o. A o8y .
i?O*
- Rg.
I ' s5: a > C a.
1 3
F S S S S _
U DO DO O DO DO NN N 0 M K .NNN NN N NN.N U T O U .O U U 0 ODI.O 2 .
A N. ODI E U F Om11D B OmO B ID T BET IA D
- G A
L E A R DMA D I AER DI2 AUIR E
DLUI E R
6 BETp TT S SA EN TI EV L
TTS AQ S
EN TI ER VE S S EN TI ERV3 AQ TT S S AQ EN 1IERVE E 0 0 0
- L 0 1 1 B
A T3 -
1 1 2
2 2
CS 2T T T T UE PT S S S S P E E E E 1 T T
. A T 1 I I I
E E E E C N N N N S
N
- O I
B A ) S S
- T 3 1
T N
A A M Y
- U L
2 E
X M
AD D X A R
I RE E A C UT A R T
T V
R U E S ML E
E l NA TI NI K D I N
E E D A I
D 4 E R I E R D _
R Y 3 S E E _
I r 2 E I T
A D S T I R
U O
- B O M
E D B "4
- P P
E M O N
E R
/
1 "4 U R
I O
C T C P s 2 S F N u w t E
M t Fx G E
i T S ,
s O R M Y
- E P E A
- T M /
T S M S R Y I O ETS S U N T
E
- T Y R A R
I O L E B
- D SR I R
U J D A
. F E I R
A N E R
C T
H RRA B E
N O E T
S N
A R C I T BO.
I 1
F D M A _
- S E D G _
/ E M A N M B A E
R D I C A T E M C S E
- R E
U N I
T I
T R
P U _
H P B O _
- T A - "4 P P
E /
1
- U C R 4 S
I 2 3 P < 2
) S 5
E R S
(
E P MR LA TRI M
S
. F- C N E I
P Y
A G RE S OI N N ON -
E A R T rR rR PA RrA EPI R MR R T uA S TU NS C I
U O A N I
O N Sa I E M _
G I
F R B J w _
E .
F P
FIGURE F-6 INSTAI J En TO TESTED FIRE BARRIhK EVALUATION PAGE21OF31 8
PERFORMANCE I THERMCMAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROJECTED COMMODIIY IDENTWIER: CIXEZAT5AB PARAMETERS 8 2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODES 2,3,4 j ,
m mSTAu2DCGGIRJRAME O MEDCONMURAMS) 2 APRJCAIRE O EMUAUMt g BARRIER EVALUATED TES13 REF.NO. '
u 1/2" BAPSS 1/2" BANDS NEITEST2-10 SAMEINO p a
EVALUATION c ,
REQUDtED. E o
FASTENER
- o 12" MAXIMUM 12" MAXIMUM NEITEST 2-10 SAMEINO '
EVALUA110N REQUntED FASTENER SPACING E
2 e-x VARIES. INSTALLERS HAD NO MINIMUM 2* MAXIMUM NEITEST2-10 SEE EVALUAllON E-2 SPACING REQUIREMENFFROM JODUS.
FASTENER DISTANCEFROM JOIN 13 NONE NONE NElTEST2-10 SAME/NO EVALUATION ,
REQUIRED '
FASTENER 2 EDGE GUARDS 'a b
RJ v r 4J
, - ,tI i! [ il
&3EE>
ooU g d4lch" g5" goo J g h 9. > C 82 1 O 3 I N N F S
_ O 0 1 . DO 1O N N A N /0N 2 z
._ 2 U m x N.0 0 E L F. 1D 1 mS1 1D O1D 1 G AE AE L oUA bt t N ate A VR ELU UD UD /Un uT ELU sS LU P E
_ MAQ AQ MAQ AVE VE AVE E
_ E L 0 0 0 B 1 i 1 AET 2 2
2 C S UE T S
r S
T S
PT E
_ P E A T t
n i
T I
_ E E E E N N N
_ S
_. aR N RM u
O I
B A )
r cD S uE T 3 T
(
N R A A 2 O rER U sV I
, E T L X AD O I
R E .
_. A C. UA T mC .
S E
. V t B
O U I D D E
I F
FL NA EM R 1 S
_ E N D
v I A
I E D E oG N R I 4, T cN O R Y 3, S S E A
T E rD D
_ B I
D O
M 2
S E
D 1
E aV oR r
E S
O E O N r . P R M 0 N E O
N uMF SDI X
E I 0 T 4 F D N u E T
E M aT R U
. E CE G uO
. 1 T E T S
i a
O R M cE u
tR P E
_ T M T S N O
nEV S
O ETS Y I O S T T Y R A R moS S E D R U U
U G oA F
E U
I A
I F EW R
S E
I U B N E D
. I A
I A E R
O C vE O
I S
B oH
_ T I F D L S G E S L E E A L RG A N L L B
L A N I O M
A C
T S
A W r. t O
R E U N nNEST D E
nVA I
. F H F E ORE S T A rEL O
_. N r P I 2 E O
N uRT SDA X
E 3
T 7 E NS EM LDG ANN H0 N E
R F- Cs MS RAINLI l O U NR EN I
UTEEC DF S E AE CA TRVE E AOw R Mr U ROm G
I Fa Ra E4 N
B MROC N
I E
R H
F E M
C U
P C
wNCE F Pr
wu.coi77.ra.co2. a.visico o aggeoaix 4 g,s,x24ocsi32 8
! S s W l=
lli,
! l i
llll I
',l is l
l l l I 2
il lii Illlll l:
e mimumillilIll i ni p i, i l t !!a!!i!i!!!!i.
, , ............. i g3 i
s 9
i 1
!=
i Jjis- l i
l* i il8l
- 2 i e d- l I1 -
i i..iin;.
- e lN a iiii l1: l
$!!iil!$;;i :$ -l 1 B S
!ill uam i a
g j. g* zue=ililiiI; n l! Il
=
o l3 $
g#li ai1 1i 0
i, i
l a
i 8
e i
il!
im 1 Illi s - - .
0023-00177 TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A25 of A132 i i llI
. 5 E
!.llll ll1 8 isll 5
- !l8 1 i
- ..i,l l
- , i i l .
s' i i
- s llllallli a
l
- i: 8 e i I e 2
,I!l!ls: l=
is l i B
iz iii!'i
! l is llipi i c
- l l l
! l a j e e ill.i, l- . .
8 ! gl 3 l s i i 1
! is i i i i l.lll.1l.
li !li
PAGE 25 OF 31 o FIGURE F-3 INSTAI .T En TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION O I. THERMOLAG BARRIER SYSTEM 1ROTECTED COMMODFIY IDENTIFIER. CIXE2ATSAB U PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS g 2 APPuCra2 HRE BARiuER SYSTEM SEGMENT. NODE 5 Y
H INSME CONHGURATKE 4A TESTED CONHGURATMMS) 5A APPUCABE M EVALUADOW ?
COMMODITY 3A EVALUATED TESTS REF.NO. g CONDUTT/ WALL DGERFAG NElTEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION .'4 CABm1RAYINTERFAG WITH A M E-1.
STRUCTURE.
TYPE CABLES AIR DROPPING FROM CABM TUECTEST $.
1 RAYS 11) EMBEDDED WALL SIEEVES SCHEME 11-4 3/4",2" & 3" CONDUITS NE1 TEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION o 24" E-l.
24 AIR DROPPING CABLES AT 1UEC1EST SIZE EMBEDDED WAllSIEEVES SCHEME II-4 ALUMINUM NE1 TEST 2-2 1EST BOUNDS STEEL D6TArisn. NO EIECIRICAL CARI FR 1TJEC1EST EVALUAT10N i MATERIAL SCHEME 11-4 REQUIRED i
2 1 &-
x N/A ATINIERFAG NEI1EST 2-2 THISIS AN y N/A ATINTERFAG AND EVALUATION OF TUECTEST THEINIERFAG SWEME 11-4 BETWEEN CABE TRAY COVERAGE TOTALDrt en g Wall. THERMAL MASSISNOT A CONSIDERADON IN
'IMIS EVALUATION VER11CAUHORIZONTAL NE1 TEST 2-2 TESTBOUNDS HORIZONTAL /VER11 CAL AND INSTALLED. NO ORIENTATION TUECTEST EVALUA110N SCHEME 11-4 REQuGtED h
e C i 44
. - . . - . - - ~ - . _ . - _ . . _ - . ~ . - _ . . ~ - - . . . . . . .
0023 00177-TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A27 of A132
- m
! !'lill lill lik lill
- pi ir i
! , iWeI iWI i rl W irl in
- 8 l
j, 1i F
i i l o! a ! I a
l ,
li l 6? ! ,
ia l l 1
- ll1 ll ii ll l i s a t
! 8 I i l l l l <
- i i lal li l i i4 s i E h
l m - . e $ l l l ll. l 15 ll lill II
- j !!Il il ll 8tg. .
gu.;3'gaO 0h .o $$G . a.>Ce
- 2 1
3 T .
F W O 1 O N E MO SYEN N N N 7 I O
A N. D BE0 2 O O .
E S1 ID I G WFE ED 1E 1
OT NA E OTAED N
O DD N AER A AR 1D D A U /UI R /UI R /UI P V E AN E T L ELU ELU ELU TS USA MAQ MAQ AVB MAQ AVB N B1E OEV AVE SER SER E I SER E 4- 4- 4 B 4 ATS 2- 2- 2- 2- -
2 T1 2 T1 2 Tl 2 T1 CS SI S1 SI T S1 JE T EE T EE T S EE S EE 1 S S P
P T E TM E 1M E 1M E 1M CE A CE T CE T CE 1 T
E N
UC TS l
ENUC NATS ENUO NA1S ENUC NATS K
B A
N S T
O I
A 2 )
E EGE E S MAT T X M ARE A I C A R Et U M R FVO AD F E L
A WT E E RE R ON CO G A
G A
AE R R E R NA CR I C W1 I
1 1 E E T
R m OV P C I E CE " N PG0 DA1 N NI DO I R m E L R RD l I
LC Y M O F O E0E1 l A
L A
R TX M T T1 L W W A 5
&D UIDO B XE E D EE RT BT EBL "4 T
A T
A O
E S N OL CO EI DI RUN A 1
/ A A
/
R I
M C T. C SB PBAW s
/
N N
_ F N E E u I C M E G 1 H E S
s O R M E
T W ETS M "EGE O m Y M MAT ARE T SY SR E A
R RE FVG n R S I R W E ON G R E R R RCO G A A J R R
A B N UY C I
AE F F I
A E O R R A B R C C I
P WH T E E sa "G0 T
T S
G H I N N N u W D A1 E
I I l
B R RD l I
m C A w s E0E1 l A
l A
R J 1 m T1 L W W F P P
IDO U T T D A BIEBL "4 A A ERUN TDI A
/
1 A
/
A
/
1 2 c
' PBAW s N N
)
5 E R S E( P NRE F- Cs NR E P A G
R O
E I
Y U A R T I P G
R Mn U RO I
M R
A B
T N
O J
N NR 3B M
I A
TN P
U S
l{, I ,fl ' l1llllI l lIIl1
- ;,I ; * ' ;! i
- i >!i; tl};! ,i I !! i ooUg Y
@".p$$:o . - 3 > 8w> y
- a '
he 2,>Cu 1
3 N
_ F N N f
O 0 0 O M. I T
1 T
1 T N 8
2 HO A A A O A N. U U U I D
_ E UF LA L L OTA E G A A A MR E
V V E
V E
MUI ELU R
P E MAQ
_ E E 1 E 1-E1 E -
AVE E E -
2 1 4- 4- 4-B 4 2- 2 2- - 2- Tl A 13 2 T1 2 T1 S1 2 T1 S1 2
r SI CS S 1 T T EE E T S EE S EE S EE S TM mT E 1M E TM E TM W CE l
ENUC I
I ENUC ENUC ENUC NATS
_ NATS NATS NATS m
_ B A
N 5 T "2 O
I A
2 )
1 W
E S
_ T X M E G
A I C M M D U T AD T S U E
_- L A
V E
R E
R I
RET L WAU RL NA O
B R
O M
I X
A M
D N
S I
A f
_ E E N D JG I D R I M A MA
_ R Y l
S u
EI A
O 5
E E
R S
3 FM E B
_ E M
M D
O N
C N
O 1
L O
"2 E
" H R N O
R O C B 1T N I
F C T. e
. D N E E u T M W
_. h T
C E
T O
G E
S E
G S R M D
_ E P E "2 E T W T S m 1
D O ETS Y S n W N
_ T Y R A R S M A E
n S R
I R T L
U M S R
J I
E U
U I
A R
B E
A m O
O B
R I
X A
M I
N I
O A B R C O J T G I
F H A M S A E e C N D O N
I 4
O L
B A
t rA A E C
RG FA M C S E" A L R U T P O E P m E S H P R 3 *2 M E T A C 1 - R N
. N L E O
_ O O
- H N I
2 m C B 1 1 u S
_ 6 F-E CS R
E R
E NE R
R E NR I I N E! f E U
_ AE MT R E P TY EC T A E T CO SNO TQ R R E R ST A
_ G I RR B m E F EA PP l ;'.l ; ,
FIGURE F-7 INSTAU FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 29 OF 31 o o
PERFORMANCE I. THERMO4AG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMOOFIY IDENIVER. CIXE2A13AB U$
PARAMETERS 6 2 APPUCASE HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT. NODE 5 3 0
3E INSTAUED CONHGURATION 4E SE APPUCABW 6E EVALUA110Nf
-B N TESTEDCONHGURADOH(3)
EVALUATED TES13 REF.NO. 8 NONE ,
GROOVE AND RXD METHOD IS USED NEITEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION I' AT XMNTS WHERE1HERM(M.AG E-2 {3 FLARES OUTONIOTHE CONCRETE. 5.
E' l JODfT *PICIURE FRAME *IS11ED INIO TUECTEST "
REINFORCEMENT RACEWAY COVERAGE UT1IJZING A SCHEME 114 MECHANISMS STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE UPGRADE.
INTERVENING SIEEL IS COVERED 1B* NONE NE11EST 2-2 TES1ED BOUNDS AND INSTAllID. NO d 1UEC1EST EVALUAllON 3 STRUCTURAL SCHEME I14 REQUIRED S.
SUPPORTAND x DffERVENING >
STEEL
, PROIECDON AT A CONCRE1E Wall AT A(X)NCRETE CERlNG NEllEST2-2 SAME/NO EVALUATION AT A CONCRETE Wall 1UECTEST RBQUUtED.
SCHEME I14 IDCATION OF ENCIDSURE y
'n b
O b.
C 9J
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____m __
y _.a-, n _s. - _ , .. sum. .>a.aa&,-..wasa.--m ,a .
-e. aen,., aan x. ,, ._,s .._.,a au_ xa,. _ ,.. _ _ . ,_. _s,e.- s,,,a_,._ ..,a,_a,a, O O g 8 !
il,l ol,'
a
'a $$\'lh, I
$ : g!
e I l
1 0 e =lall l B l llI,I 0 I E
[
i l l llE'Il 8
l, l,lli I 1 3
- e e al l e
l I- a ip I!8 i !
! 1 "I""II"l l l\ \
l l1%El'I" l
I .-. ,_ - , .-.. -_ - .
l FIGURE F-8 INSTALIED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 31 OF 31 o S
Y
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- C1XE2AT3AB $
l G
?
i h
- 2. APPLICABIE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 5 7
E'.
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): E-1 THROUGH E-2 g o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENTEVALUATION:
AS INSTALLED.1HERE IS NO BOUNDING 1EST AND THEREFORE NO FIRE RATING FOR1HE STRUCIURE INIERFACE. THE PRINCIPAL .
ATTRIBIIIE MISSING FROM 1ME INSTAllID CONFIGURATION IS S11tESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE SUPPORT BETWEEN THE "PICIURE -$
FRAME
- AND CABLE 1 RAY COVERAGE PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STRUCTURAL PROIECIlON ATTHE INIERFAG AREA. 3 a
E AN UPGRADE OF THE INSTAI 2 Pn CONFIGURA110NS BY TYING ~ DIE"PICIURE FRAME" COVERAGE INIO THE RACEWAY COVERAGE WITH >
STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE PERTUEC TEST SCHEME 11-4 WIll. PROVIDE REASONABLE ASSURANCE 1 HAT 1HE INSTALL 2D WRI. BE BOUNDED BY THAT TEST AND PROVIDE A RATED DURA 110N OF 60 MINUIES.
1ES1ED RACEWAYS EXHIBITED ACCEPTABIE STRUCIURAL INTEGRTIY IN THE AREA OF 1HE THERM (MAG (XXI.ARS FOllDWING THE HOSE SIREAMTEST.
?
Si d
44 h
?:
l INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE I 0F 31 g FIGURE F-1 ti
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIElt CIXE2ARX002 8'
- i F
N k
- 2. BARRIER /COMMODIT.Y LOCATION DATA- SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT UNIT ONE FIRE ARENZONE 07/Z071 I l ELEC. AUX BUILDING, EL 20*-0" d:
2 o
- 3. REQUIRED RATING: 1-HOUR X 3-HOUR OTHER RES
- 4. FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENTS EVALUATED: SEE PAGE 2 "a
- 5. FIRE BARRr2R SYSTEM SEE PAGE 2 y EVALUATION RESULTS: BOUNDED BY TEST NOT BOUNDED BYTEST RATED BARRIER SYSTEM FURTHEREVALUATION REQUIRED (OTHER)
- 6. APPLICABLETEST
REFERENCES:
NEI TEST 2-2,2-3 AND l-7 AND TUEC TEST 11-4 o
- 7. REMARKS N/A B,
e k
?:
~ - . - - - . _ _ . - . . - .. . -
FIGURE F-1.! INSTALI FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE20F 31 o ,
o u '
- l. THERMO-IAG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER.- ClXE2ARX002 $
c Y
-4 i 2.
?
8w BOUNDED BY BARRIER RATING .
TEST AS INSTAIIFn WITHUPGRADE y NODE COMMODITYTYPE (Y/N) (MIN) (MIN) EVALPAGES g. ,
- g. ,
BOXCONFIGURATION N 0 60 4-10 o 1 ~
1-2 CONDUlT Y 91 112 11-17 2 CONDUIT RADIALBEND Y 102 129 18-24 2-3 CONDUIT Y 91 112 11-17 CONDUIT Y 91 112 11-17 3-4 4 CONDUIT RADIAL BEND Y 102 129 18-24 CONDUIT Y 91 112 11-17 4-5 5 CONDUIT RADIAL BEND Y 102 129 18-24 d '
5-6 CONDUIT Y 91 112 11 17 3 6 CONDUIT /WALLINTERFACE N O 60 25-31 ,$.
BOX AT NODE 3 IS EVALUATED IN THE EVALUATION OF CABLE TRAY ClXE2ATSAB (NODE 1)
E E.
t ti
l FIGURE F-2 INSTAI.I Fn TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 3 0F 31 g ,
ti
- 1. DIERMO. LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- CIXE2ARX002 8
3 h
- 2. g '
SKETCH OFINSTAIIFn CONFIGURATION .u 8 9 s.
e.
s 4 o >
o
- C.8%El4T SA 8l ,
a NODE 4 om z ., is
' N *tA L 9.
NooEG ,
S-L > i I~
gt40085 4-s n...,
' / 1-3 noost Mope 1 i
~, / ,. x Ic:xcunooz l 3m C
u f
i , ,' ;
' i' ,[ ! ift t tt i ! i oSy 2uwa: i= ".gSE:
8 ygg9x y yg a>-
1 N N 3
F L S0N ALL S0N S N N S S1O S10 D 0 DO 0
4 N. L I
W MTA A1I AT mI SW A11 A1 N 0
1 1
1 NN N E RO N M,N TAU U 1 A U OD0 G N TG OI OD.A U .
A N. T BF11D G J N OENU EL N N A EL BE UD L A UN E EI DIRt uA DJ LE A D I A E I
P ARR I
D AR V UIR WN DNRRA I I
_ V E E NEEOV E RD EN N EOV E TD E EAVI TTE U E EA LU F
UP TD E FUP E S S Q E 2 .
1T S S AQ F
OE F OE A A N E - DBDMASE 1I EN NE 1 EN VE NROE l
I - E -
BDMASE I
A D SE TI ER
. 6 4- 4- 4- 4- 4-M 1 1 3-1 1 3-1 1
1 1 3-l I
B 3-AS CS T 3-2 T S
2 T S
2 T S
2 T S
2 T S
UE T E T E T E T S E T S E S S S T T PT T E T E T E E P E C l C T C 1 C T C A T E l E I E l E I E
_. E U I
E J E U E U E U A N 1 1 N T N T N 1 N 1 5
_ M 201
_ N 2 B A M O 0 0 ) C OS I
T A X
R S RY FA A 2 M t
._ U U M T
O R S 1 1
AD FS L C E E E L
_ A WTA GV Bm. A V EL I GU NE I ABS S C
_ E F I HL NA PE P
CAE CV E 1
1 R
I N CE RL DI S P A C BB V I
E A D O R 2SE
- 4 LL 1 I
. D R L 06 2 A
F I M RW I 1 D D A 0 T R YT S AO ~M C 75 RED D E
.
- u
== N A O I I E S T 6 I R S O B O E D I A CiEK C T DD B Z E
R M
M O
D O
N S
D E
A 3
4TM 2SE Aa NC I
A E
E BB LI 63 L
8 8
I R
O H
. I C T M F o N
> t E M
l t E Fx G E
_ t s T O
R S
M R
_ E P E O T M /
T S
DL O ET Y S
M I
F X
T SY R A R
O T O E B n R S I R
J M D N E E R m E O
_ I A N T
I R R B N H T
E O U C A A C O B R N T H D M U S G I J A M U X
_. N I
4 O
B A O B
"2 1
L A
A T T M C S N N X S N
t U U P
I O
- 4 B
L O H P H 2 L 6 Z I
T A C X E 0 R N E T
6 1 O A U *6 H I 2 3 J 3 S 1 Y D E N 3
E T
I L I S SD 0 1
F- C S A T NR D E E I
R I
NC S S 1
A E AE O P Y Z E ENE A I
T N
R MT N LM I
T U RFA OM E M T S A
M OA E
I R
O
_. I F EA O T PP C
. - _ _ _ _ . . ._ _. _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ ___ ._ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . . . _ ___ _ . ._ _. . m _... . _ _ _ _ _ _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _
FIGURE F-4 INSTAI .I Fn TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 5 0F 31 o o '
PERFORMANCE I THERM (MAG BARRIER SYSlTMPROHCTED COMMODITY IDENI1FER: CIXE2ARX002 U PARAMETERS o 2
2 APP!JCABE HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT: NODEI y BARRIER 3B INSMIED CONERJRADON 4B HSNONRGNWS) SB AIW CABE 68 EMAIAM REF.NO.
h EVALUATED TEST 3 3J THERMObLAG 330-1 V-RIB PANELS THERMO LAG 330-1 V-PmRFn PANELS NE! TEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS *R INSTAI J Fn. NO 2.
THERMOLAG 330-1 V-RIBBED PANELS TUECTEST 11-4 EVALUATION 2-MATNAL ON SIDES AND TOP. FLAT PANEL ON REQUIRED. O N BOTTOM AND AT "PICIURE FRAME" AT WALL t
, 1.2710.2r 1.0" +0.2r - 0*. NE! TEST 2-3 TEST BOUNDS INSTALLED. NO 627 i0.12r TUECTEST Il-4 EVALUA110N MATERIAL d y
TIDCKNESS S. ;
x E2 SIDE. ORIENI'ATION VARIES. INTERNAL AND ORIENIED NEI TEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS HORIZONTAL INSTAIIFn. NO S11FFENER EVALUA110N (V-RIB) INIERNAIJORIENTED TRAY TO Wall 1UEC1EST 11-4 REQUIRED.
IDCADON/ ON TOP PANEL AND VER11 CAL ON
'I1ON SIDE PANELS .
k INSIDE AND OUTSIDE BO1E INSIDE AND OUTSIDE NEITEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS INSTALLED. NO INSIDE ONLY TUECTEST 11-4 EVALUA110N STRESS SKIN REQUIRED 2 LOCADON g h
2 t
7:
_ . _ _ _ ._ . _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _. _ .. __ _ ._..._ ._. ._ _ _ . . _ . _ - . _ _ . . . . . . . . _-. _. _m . . . _.
2 FIGURE F-5 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 6 0F 31 o o
PERFORMANCE I THERMO4AO BARRIER SYS1D4IPROTECTED COMMODITY IDENITIER: CIXE2ARX002 O PARAMETERS 6 o
2 APPLJCABIE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT: NODEI
- d. i 3C mSw2EDCONMURAHM 4C HSHD CONMURAMS) E API M ABLE 6C EVALUAH MI h BARRIER EVALUATED TESTS RI!F. NO. p PRE-BLTTIERED BLTITJOINTS. BLTITSTO PRE-BLTITERED BLTIT JOINIS WITH NElTEST 2-3 INSTALLED IS ;u OONCRETE PWOR. SOME SCORE & POLD. BOUNDED BY NEl "s, TEST 2-3 BLTTIS !c.
mms) PRE-BLTTIERED BLTIT AND SCORE AND 1UEC TEST 11-4 NOT BOUNDED BY O FOW JOINIS. "PICIURE FRAME" 0 TUECTEST It-4 BOLTED TO CONCRETE AND BLTTIED 10 RACEWAY COVERAGE.
s 1/4" GAP s 1/4" GAP NEITEST 2-3 SAME.NO EVALUATION TUECTEST 11-4 REQUIRED.
1 E
S e-x 36" X 24" X 12" 6" 1RD = 45" X 12" X 13" NEI TEST 2-3 TESHD BOUNDS 3" WD = 18" X 8* X 8" INSTAIIFn NO EVALUA110N UNSUPPORED 36" x 20" x 12" TUEC TEST 11-4 RBQUIRED.
BARRIER SPANS INSTAIIFn AGAINSTJUNCI1ON BOX INSTAL 1 Fn AGAINSTWD NEl'IEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS INSTALLED NO .
NONE. TUEC TEST Il-4 EVALUA110N REQUIRED.
SUPPORT $*
MECIIANISMS b
2 b
m tJ g
, ii ;> :; t 3' * ,i>!
- ! I " [, ,
t-8" zy5W @M. :o2s.3 o >oIip
- o{ De 2.> io 1 _
3 _
F N
f 0 0
7 M. N N 1
1 A N E HO A N.
O . O U 0 1D G UF OIT D OTD I
L OT E
__ A P
LE AR NAE 1 R N AER A V N1AR V / 1I /UI E
/1I1U E
EI ELU hAQ U E MAQ E .
4- 4 4- 4-E 1 1 1 1 1
R 3- 1 3-1 3-1 3-A S T 2 T 2 T 2 T 2 T _
CS T S S S S _
T E T E T E _
. J 1
PT E S E S S S T _
P E 1 E T E 1 E C C C T DC T _
. A T DE T
I ENU NAT I
ENU NAT ENM NA1 ENU NAT 2 _
. N 1 0
O I X 0
)
S T R A
A 2 S
- U L I E
X M AD N D
A C RE T B A A L
- V L I
E MU E E F1 I FL NA E _
1 D S M M R I H E U U R ( Y S N M
. T H I M
. A D I E
I A
T X
A I
X B O D S M A E N
. E MM O N "2 "2 M O
- R I
O C T. O
/
1 1 *2 N F D N
- u E E M T
C M U h E G M
- T T E S X S I
s O R M AC
- E P E D T /
T MO M S W O J O E Y T S H S NM
. T S Y R A R D DR O E N n S R
I R A AF HT R E R M B 1
I R A F N L SN R B O E RE 1
A A E R C E EM B T lE T
S G I
F D E S l R AI A E l S T U N M I B
S M SQ I (
M A
C uS E.
E U
M NE I
R R J m D I G
E 1
P A X SN I P T A EI E T A S M I C N
" R A O VSP A
2 2 I 2 m "1 1
1 N M S D
- F- CS E E NE NN EFS EA E NR N EI NU
. I E
T CN I
AE R E TYP EC E T G R MT R ST T S A S NO I
- R E AS P AAJ AG U O MA A A F F F T S FD G MR B I D
E I
F FA PP
- l ;l ii , lt IiIllIlfflI!l i ll lll!
f , , ' i
! l
_ g y8zy .k E);g o >@@&h oa u ? O k t r:
_ 1 O 3 I Y N F N I E B S S 0 S DO D 0
1 .
.. 1O IS NI D-4 YT Eli NN N
.N U .N 8
E AN D BUD U G U L F. J D B, N U ST On0 BP11D OnID BFT O .
A AE l E3 DO2 T E JAE R DI AE UIR P VR l AN B DI EA UI LU EA I
LU E T C TT T US T E S TTS AQ S S S VE AQ E N B1NT I
OE O U EN 1I ER VE E TI N ER 6
_ 4- 4- 4-
. E I 1 1 1 B 1 3-1 3-1 A S 23- T 2 T 2 T C ST S S T S UE T E T E S E PT S S T T P E T E E A 1 C T C T C 1 E I E I E E U E V E U
. E N T N I
" N T S
S S SH E
. N EIITN I DR NE E O
2 0 RIPWK S A WC E
D I
0 X ) TA SN T R S
( S TD SES HRA I
_- N A A 2 O H T NORDRELP I
G BS ET E N
_ U E X D I E N MID O L I AD RE WAFT A RIE N EI NSTS C
A U A T E I, Mr O V DDE R G D W UL t E
E FlE I FW I
NA EA R",N C RE E SUEN RFEA S
E I
E R GCM EA K N OV E D R B ORTR I
CE O S "9 I C
E E D FL AA FR D MFGI O T S L N R
I D
I E T
NE EWE I RFA R E DIN D U
O L O C
A R Y S G M ENE
_. A T
I D
1 E
E T
ROT S
E R
N O
T S
N B O D E T L
,l 1 W I
OERE I E N I PUI EO A I
M P V
_ E M O
N O N NNlAICO I I O E
P G
_ R O : E N OKJSWPR " 1 URNR SPI P C O A I C T 4 F N w E LL u I M AE
_ h Fr G NE RT T T E S E S E D
_ S O R M TG I E P E NN S T M /
T S N O
I I EN 1
N O ETS Y S D R E O
._ T R A AV R R Y R
_ n S E I U SE O _
R R TI D _
_ R E R GI RN 1 J
I R A B
F N OI P
F _
I R E O PE E _
A T A B R C D
UR SU E T O I
F E G
_ S A E XS DIr. N N 1 I B
M O I O
A BCD O I A T C M C S N ERNE R J I
N O T S
E H
P P
I 1E I
E V N T A E CH 1 O I
A N N C G O U0 S I 2 E J N J1I A
. T 7 E K NS EM LDG ANN NO N R E
F- C S m T MI S RAINLI 1 O U
_ E NR AE F N CA I
EN UTEEC I
C RVE E D
A WC S
R MT R E R OR H U PE ORT T C RP T S O wNE U JOC OM FA A F E TUN R P
G I
RR B N I
' ii I{ : ' j'l t' I ! ,i (- ! <
_ 8uNhN 'K1e.8o 35F>
- 1 ~ % 2'-
1 E N B HT O R
_. 3 F EE NO 3-I S
N TT E
E OA 0 I Z 2 TI S
_ y D E L S EE T
S MH ENER NS E E I EO E AOEN Lt i T DTR G BH T 3HRA A FAE A 1 E OI H A 2WAP CN P
TE S L EA RN N H "4 3N T M TOINIOI S D UC AO LI D E.S N E A QD T RI UT E SMJEO MG CA GIILNI T FHN R E IC !
DUC V TI RFI 6 NWEA I NP A R RTEG AR E CSARU ALP UG 1N I 1N ED PE EV I
T PE SN OH POI 6" OGI I G Y TA T F N
DJ A*5 TN B fP D E O I NT R I D OJDE H A UE 4 OV E S".SZ I E T RC ED OS T N E I I "3 H O H S D
_ AITC T YE L N U
TEUINT S NWEN D L AA B O DHB,H TE 2 N T T 0 OYDA ET N
AC B AN NE BOIOHE GI TL 0 R T I X A OBRDUA I TE O N RD TT T CE H
GW OEEK R R EM,ES S F lRJB Y N A VME TA I
E W',
O T
I T Tl I L D
O ?
F OOTM CCI I I NAD E T S ET D SE I
X Y4 4.-
T EDE O U DR AV MNNSEN A EI RS O TU I I 1
C D XMO WE I O
_ U IOMH DBO3 TTTT FFFF T F
TT FF EC R.
T S U DMMB I
QN G T L .
/I I /
RRRR 2
/ //
BR A46 E E A NR 5 A R I WYCH lIII 1 1I R0 T R BID OD E LFT ",5- C V 0006 O TH N TE 6 66
. I XNO I 2279 0 00 1
.C E
U NI AISl E F OOS W 7 3 2.2 6 66 VE l I
B EED T RWBD E ,GOT A XO.
9001 l 1 1 T ENO Y K N NIYR PE
==
l 1 1
== VR RI E0I NT N OT TE = B S E E 5T D 1
D D BTV B 0A 4
N W0SDI 1ISNE R I C N DNON 5I U A OFM ETT R Y 1 URECO R ED 3- H 1
A T E J1 Cf S 1 ESTD 2"6 EETAN RC
" 2 I B I D
El NC A T ATL O N D 1 E
L A
L A S WNEN A
_ E O O XI D HU T J T T 0
1M E T EO NDT AI R M N "4 TEOD O O TO I R E OPD N A I
F M : 2 4A B,El
.R T T 1A R U F E
N I
I NPSC 1
)
S 3- X1 Y IA Sl fDE F T1OLERST u O (
" 1 6 TENT O S.E NIN C T E 3 S l
AN D SREA I PIG t AESDON CIA EXT o N H .JI B L O R SN
_ E N 1 MT L
_ M t M
G U O ECXTE OT1 I OB " RBN UI OE E i c EU BL1B RO E 3
O AO HB T G O GTN N V FS H "2 I
S B S 3O E E R NA RNI EDO A O 1 T
O T S H TR E L VV0 0 EW Y T NEET R ID T O E 006 KY A01 PT E VE C CE M T 00 -
AA D
R E 1 OA NI N UTA 66 G
T F T B D D1M EA OR OSE E W P - - - /
R
/
T E CFR JUP T GGW B R E E NR U CLD A Me S E EIE&I DBE D I U WWA AA6 L
6 EC A D N A I
TI GM.I S
N H Y I T D 0 U NFEE O I S SMllRW N16 6 #,
1 6
WR HY. O 3
B A NRD S OAO C I
_ A s ELA P" 1 1 RA T E6 I
T Y R #R 1 H AW CA B MC S SDL SMI E )
AR SV3 C O C#, P C,6 X G EE S S I P UINAE " /d S D A I E ERN G 1 I N R R R
( . MT EH D H
4241
- - - - =
E W MC A lE WIN U CI I
E O OC TH TD CU 1 422 2 E EDR LA GAPI A L I
R A NR ON 0 0 L l
D TA NTS EAP R B N. O TOBU S X BN E S I E F I ST .O S R AAP I
N C AINID S AFS T
)
S TERRB UDBB1 M A IE 2
0 2 ENA HO R E I
S RTH HE RO I D
( 2 A D AAR mRXA G F L TCW I J A E.
N N RRW D C
T E .T EO O O VN EAPP D m2EAA NS SIDT L- L B
I I F O EETSD T
T T EXMMR t
yX S RNNN O A A A 1 OOO-1 I
2" . AFVJCB AIO OA 8 C 1BCC6 C
< M I U U E 1 1 2 F- R L L L
_. E E P A A R H P V. V I 2 3 T A 2 E L L L U
G I
. F . .
l 2 3. 4.
I j i
8 1
INSTAT .I FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 100F 31 FIGURE F-8 o
6 o
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER: CIXE2ARX002 C 78
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE I h l' 8
n
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1 THROUGH E-3 [
i e
i o i
r I
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENTEVALUATME AS INSTAllJ!D THERE IS NO BOUNDING TEST AND THEREFORE NO RRE RATNG FOR THE ENCLOSURE DUE TO 1TE STRUCTURAL NTEItFACE NOT BBNG i
BOUNDED BY TUBC TEST 114. RENFORCING THE MTERFACE WITH THE STRUCIURE BY INSTAllJNG A'TICTURE FRAME
- WrIH STRESS SKM AND>TROWEL I GRADE REINFORCEMENT PER TUEC TEST I14 WEL RESULT M REASONABLE ASSURANCE THAT A 60 MINUIE RATING CAN BE OBTAINED. THE 3* AND 6* LBDS' WEL BOUND THE BOX CONRGURATION AS INSTAIJED. THE IEDS HAD A RATING OF 102 MERTIES WHICH EXCEEDS TIE 60 MINUTES OF THEE gSTRUCTURAi NTEltFACE BUT THE OVERA11 RATING OF THE ENCIDSURE WOutD BE 60 MINU1ES. a*
THE INSTA1JED CONRGURATIONS WR1 BE BOUNDED THERA &.11Y BY THE TEST 5 BECAUSE OF THE GREATER THICKNESS OF THE 3 HOUR FANELS > THAN THAT RBQUIRED FOR A 60 MINUTE RATING AND THE GREATER Em N MASS WHEN COMPARED AGAINST THE 3* IJID OF NEI TEST 2-3 AND Tt TUEC TEST 114. THE ENCIDSURE WEl BE BOUNDED STRUCTURA11Y ONCE THE CONCRETE NTEltFACE B REINRMtCED. TT B QUESTIONABt2 F A Gl THAN 60 MINUTE RATING COMPARABLE TO THE 102 MINUTES OBTAINED BY THE 3* AND 6" IADS M NE1 TEST 2-3, CAN BE OBTAllED DIE TO TIE IACK OF TESTING FOR GREATER 1HAN 60 MINUTES FOR THE 51RUCIURAL NIEItFACE.
WHEE A MINOR BARRIER OPENING OCCURRED M THE ENCIDSURE FOR BOTH TUEC TEST 114 AND NEI TEST 2-2(BASEIJNE), THE INSTALIED CONRGURAT10N !
D4VOLVES CABLES M ELECTRICAL BOXE3 WHICH WOULD NOT BE PRONE TO DAMAGE DUE TO FIRE RGHTING ACTIVITE!S OR FAIJ240 EXTBtNAL OEUE l DURING FIRECONDIDONS.
i
'N D
EJ O
.' i f
?1
l l
l l
! FIGURE F-3 INSTAU FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE110F31 8
PERFORMANCE I THERMO-1AO BARRIER SYS1DNPROTECTED COMMODfIY IDENTIRER. CIXE2ARX002 PARAMETERS 6 0
2 APPLJCABM HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT: 1-2,2-3,34,4-5,54 h 4
?
COMMODITY 3A INSME CONMWATM M TESM CONNmWS) 5A AlmCABLE 6A EVAWATM g EVAWATED TESTS REF.Na w l
CONDUTTSTRAIGHTRUN CONDUITSTRAIGir RUN NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME/NO p N
INSTAf Im) EVALUA110N 1 l
AND REQUIRED g.
NElTEST l-7 a O
(UPGRADE) 4" 3* AND 6" NEI 161- 2-3 (AS TESIED DOUNDS INSTAIJ Fn) INSTAf I F'V NO 3* AND 5* EVALUATION SIZE NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED (UPGRADE)
STEEL ALUMINUM NEI 16T 2-3 (AS TESTED BOUNDS y INSTAT I Fn) INSTAI f FTUNO g EVALUATION I '
MATERIAL SIEEL NEI TEST l-7 REQUIRED >
(UPGRADE) 11.6061.BS/FT NEI TEST 2-3 NEI TEST 2-3 (AS TESIED BOUNDS 3* COND. - 2.39 2S/FT. INSTAT IFD) INSTAf I Fn FOR 3" 6* COND .= 6.66 GS/FT. AND 6' OONDUITIN NEITEST2-3 AND 3" COND. - 7.58 LES/Fr. NEITEST l-7 FORTHE3*
TOTAL ENCWSED CONDUTTIN TEST l-gg33 5
- COND = 14.62 LBS/FT (UPGRADE) 7 .
I NE! TEST 2-3 (AS SAME/NO [*
INSTAf f Fn) EVALUATION ORIENTATION HORIZONTA1/ VERT 1 CAL llORIZONTA1/ VERT; CAL REQUIRED. 1 NE! TEST l-7 7 (UPGRADE) f.-
?
FIGURE F-4 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 12 0F 31 o o
PERFORMANCE I TIERMO-LAO BARRIER SYSTEM /PRultxtw COMMODITY IDDmF1ER. CIXE2ARX002 U PARAMETERS g 2 APPUCABLE HRE BARRER SYSTEM SEGMENT: 1-2,2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6 y H
?
BARRIER 3B INSMIB)CONMRADON 4B TES1H)CONMRAMS) SB AIW CABLE 68 EVALUA M / 8" EVALUATED TEST 3 REF.NO. .
NEl 'IEST 2-3 (AS SAME/NO *B INSTAIJ PD) EVALUADON $.
THERMO4.AG 330-1 THERM (M.AG 330-1 AND REQUIRED g-MATERIAI. PRE-SHAPED CONDUrr PRE-SHAPED CONDUrf NEI1EST l-7 3
- HALFROUNDS HAIE ROUNDS (UPGRADE)
NEl 1EST 2-3 (AS "IESIED BOUNDS INSTAtJFn) INSTATIFn NO AND EVALUAVON 1.25"
- 0.25" 1.00" + 0.250* - 0" NEI TEST l-7 REQUIRED >
TIBCKNESS (UPGRADE) %a NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME/NO INSTALLED) EVALUADON STHTENER AND REQUIRED (V-RIB) NONE NONE NEITEST l-7 IDCATIONI ORIENTATION NE! 'IEST 2-3 (AS SAME/NO INSTALLED) EVALUADON AND REQUIRED STRESS SW INSIDE AND OUTSIDE INSIDE AND OLTI3IDE NEI TEST l-7 2 IDCADON (UPGRADE) $
t u
?
, ,h l r i ., i{ t ' i' gU dhhu. *2/3gs O yEg9x > u $G >N R,h n 1
3 F S S 0 DO DO 3 M. NN N NN N N N
- 1 T O U U .
O O O E A N.B211D OD0 ODI OID OID G WFE 1AE BmT D N AE T NAE T
A P A REA V D1UD DllAUIER .UD t
- TT S S AQ TT S S AQ MAQ MAQ AVE EN AVB C TIERVE EN 1I ER VE SER SER 6
S S S S A A
(
A A
(
( (
E 3- 3 I
B 3- 3)- -) 7-2)D 7- 7- 2n A 13 2)D 7-l
)
E l E
) 2D I rF l
. CS T2 TD T2 TD T2 T T
. JE S si EII S1 SA S1 S S MT E1 SA EL E t E P TAT ER TA E T R 1 A TM T A TG TDI S NE G I TD 1 I I TD I E S NE I
E S NE I
I S E UP E PU 2 C E NIN N( N NI AN( NIN AN NIN AN 0 S 0
X R
S N A 2 N
- O E S S A I X ) U P R T I S E D S E
- C D ND V A O O U
L W
AD T J
J T
I OET nR O
n F
A E I U U F O WTA B .
1 P I V U B
. I R l P D 4 AUS A
- E E R
NL D NA E E j
g T T S
4 OV R R g SN R 1 I
N 5, CE E E NU I
N I
- E E 5- I T
I SO S I
D 4, I U DN D R I 4 M U 8 N N R I Y 3, S B U T. U T I
H T- OI A D 3- E R S O
OI R U RU B O
- E M R M O
2, 2-l C
P P SN I
. I C T 4 F D N .
E E
. D I M T l
h C G T. U
- E D T T E S
I U N s R O M S D O E P E I N C
- T M /
T S M N I O R O C E
- O ETS Y S H J N V
- T Y R A T O O E I D S R
I R W U n S n F
R E R A m B .
4 JFN I I
I R B N D j g I A I
- I R E O E R g AP T S A
T A A B R o E SD S
. T G H D m
I T NET N I
S A I
S N 4 E U SR D I O M
B A
C u
S A
B F
DO NP UP N
U R J m R O E
l P P OU H P RS N R T A SU F L
I AO A I 2 C
' HN H 5
) D E R S
(
E P HRES L T F- Cs Ntl E P A G
AR E AE I
Y I N N RO
R U RE O
R A
TU NS FAM I
O N G
- PP
FIGURE F-6 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE140F31 o 8
PERFORMANCE I TIIERM(MAO BARRER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODIIY IDENIlFIER. CIXE2ARX002 y PARAME N g C
2 APP 1JCABLE FIRE BARRER SYSTEM SEGMENT: 1-2,2-3,34,4-5,54 ?
4 A
BARRIER 3D NAUID CONHGURATION O MD CONNAMS) 5D APIMABLE @ EVAllIAM EVALUATED TESTS REF.NO. -
NEI Itait 2-3 (AS SAME.NO E INSTAllID) EVALUATION 3-REQUIRED 5' FASTENER 1/2" STAINLESS STEEL BANDS 1/2" STAINIESS STEEL BANDS AND o
- NEI TEST l-7 (UPGRADE)
NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 1ESTED BOUNDS INSTATIPn) INSTA11 Fn. NO AND EVALUATION FASTENER 12" MAXIMUM 12" MAXIMUM NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED >
SPACING R
sr NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SEE EVALUATION INSTALLED) E-2 AND FN VARIES. INSTALLERS HAD NO 2" MAXIMUM NEITEST I-7 N ANCE N (UPGRADE)
REQUIREMENTTO MAINTAIN FASTENER 1D JOINTSPACING.
NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME.NO INSTALLED) EVALUATION AND REQUIRED .o FASTENER NOT USED NOT USED NEI TEST l-7 $*
EDGE GUARDS (UPGRADE) k.
k t
u
_ .__ -- -_ . _ _ _ . . _.. _ _. . . _ _ _ _ _ .. _ . _ _ _. _ _ ~-- _ _ .
INSTAI .I FD TO TESTED FIRE BARR1hR EVALUATION PAGE 15 0F 31 o FIGURE F-7 8 PERFORMANCE I THERMCM.AOBARRIERSYSTEM/ PRO 1ErawCOMMODIIYIDENTIFIER. CIXE2ARX002 y
PARAM M g a
y 2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT: 1-2,2-3,3-4,4-5,54 INSTAUED CONMURAME 4E ESM OONMURAMS) SE AIMAIME 6E EVALUA N O BARRIER 3E EVAMIATED TEST 3 REF.NO. l -"
NONE NEl TEST 2-3 (AS NElTEST 2-3 E INSTAi1 m) BOUNDSTHE 6-INSTA11 m. THE 5' JOINTS AND SEAMS ARE REINFORCED NEITEST l-7 INSTAIIm WOULD o JOINT NONE WITH STRESS SKIN AND1 ROWEL (UPGRADE) HAVE TO BE' REINFORCEMENT GRADE UPGRADED'IO BE MECHANISMS BOUNDED BY NEI TEST l-7. NO EVALUA'I1ON REQUIRED SUPPORT MEMBERS WERE NEI m 2-3 (AS TESTED BOUNDS .B SUPPORTS ARE COMPLEIELY COVERED TO PROTECTED PORIING111IN NEI INSTAI J m) INSTAIJ m NO g TEST 2-3 AND EVALUATION 9:
STRUCIURE. INTERVENING S1 EEL IS TESTS 1-7 AND 2-3.
STRUCTURAL (X)VERED 18*. INC1.UDED INTERVENING SIEEL NElTEST l-7 REQUIRED h SUPPORTAND MEMBERS PRMECIED POR AN 18" (UPGRADE)
INTERVENING DISTANCE.
51 EEL PROTECTION EXPOSEDON AllSIDES EXPOSEDON AILSIDES NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 1ESTED BOUNDS INSTAIJ m) INSTAI1m NO AND EVALUATION IS NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED IDCARON (UPGRADE) .o OF 5a ENCIDSURE D<
2, d
ti
0023-00l77.TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page Aggn(gg32 l
g 3= I 5 hhl b I s
Ile I*I
' - II
- t 1 ,
i i c
- 11 1 18 l f x 5~
a g
2 essu8l
....r i
- y 3
- $ 4 R l
k h Y a $n l
? 2 i9
~
e y
@ 0 l
I l
?m!f
- s &
ll!s I.
l I e
e 1
= '
i g
8 a
8 g
s 2
isl Ell " "
- 2
8 $ $ e* e~; z b
i
i FIGURE F-8 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 17 0F 31 o 8
w
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENI1FIER ClXE2ARX002 N N
- 2. APPLICABM FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6 N I
S.
2.
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): E-1 AND E-2 g o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENT EVALUATION:
AS SHOWN THROUGH PARAMERER COMPARISONS,1HE INSTAI J Fn OONFIGURATION IS BOUNDED BY THE 3* OONDUTT OONFIGURATION IN NEI TEST 2-3. "INE 3* DIAMETER CONDUIT MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL 1EMPERATURE CRITERION (325* F OVER y g
AMBIENI)WAS EXCEEDED AT91 MINUIES
'INE 3* DIAMEIER OR STEEL CONDUIT CONFIGURA110N TESTED IN NEI1EST l-7 WOULD BOUND 1HE INSTALLED IF THE INSTALLED 9.
HAD All,JOINIS AND SEAMS UPGRADED WITH SIRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE CONSISTENT WITH1HATTEST. THE 3* STEEL >
CONDUrr IN MI TEST I-7 EXGEDED 1HE MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL 1EMPERATURE Gr!ERION AFIER 112 MINUTES WHRE A MINOR BARRIER OPENING OCCURRED IN 1HE 6* ISD IN NEI1EST 2-3,1HE INSTALL 2D CONFIGURATION INVOLVES CABI.ES IN CONDUITS WHIGI WOUID NOT BE PRONE TO DAMAGE DUE 10 FIRE FIGNI1NG ACI1 VITES OR FAI1JNG EXTERNAL OSIEC13 DUIUNG FIRE CONDri1ONS.
t e
t
?
INSTAIIFD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 18 0F 31 FIGURE F-3 8 PERFORMANCE I THERMOMOSUUUERSYSTEWPROHCTEDCOMMODmiIDemHER. CIXE2ARX002 PARAMERS g 2 APPucAatEnREauuuERSYSTEM SEGMENT NODES 2,4,5 p 3A INSTAu2D CWGERAlM 4A TESTED CONHOURAMS) SA AFPUCAME 6A EVALUATKN g COMMODITY EVALUA11!D TESTS REF.NO. p CONDUrrRADIALBEND (X)NDUIT RADIALBEND NEl1EST2-3 (AND SAMEL NO po INSTAUED) EVALUATION 1 TYPE AND RBQUIRED. g.
NEITEST l-7 :2 O
(UPGRADED) 4* DIAME1ER 3" AND 6" DIAMETER NEI 1EST 2-3 (AS TEST BOUNDS INSTALLED) INSTATIFn.NO EVALUATION
' SE 3* AND 5* DIAMETER NEITESTl-7 RBQUIRED (UPGRADE)
STEEL ALUMINUM NEI TEST 2-3 (AS TESTBOUNDS y INSTAMED) INSTALLED. NO g EVALUA110N 3E' MATERIAL STEEL NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED >-
l (UPGRADE) l 11.606 LBS/FT NEITEST 2-3 NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 1UTAL1MERMAL 3" = 2.39 LBS/Fr INSTAUED) MASS OF 6 = 6.66 utS/Fr INSTAIIm CONFIGURATION IS N NEI TEST l-7 NEITEST l-7 GREATERTHAN
- I" 3" = 7.58 LBS/Fr (UPGRADE) 1 HAT 1ESTED AND 5" = 14.621RS/Fr ISBOUNDED SEE '
EVALUATION E-l.
HORIZONTALTO VERTICAL HOR 12ONTAL1T) VERTICAL NEl 'IEST 2-3 (AS 1ESTBOUNDS
- INSTAIJ m) INSTAUED. NO AND HORIZONTALIN1HE SAME PLANE ORIENTATION AND EVALUATION u NEI1EST 1-7 REQUIRED o
~
M >-
c o
ll l
! i' gU dhkP g5*gD p >uW$x >
2E D- t=
1 3
F f 0 O E. SN N 9
1 E
HO N 0 .
D .N NDI O D .
N O . O A N.
G A WFE O1D NAtE 1 UET E OMAt OID NAE T OIT D NAE P AR V L LU UD B UD .UI R .UIR E A LU ELU ELU E
MAQ AVE TTS S AQ MAQ AVE MAQ AVE SER EN 1I ER VE SER SER e
S S S S A A A( A
(
( (
E 3- 3- 3 R 3- 7- 7- 2) D 7- 2) D 7-A ST 2) D 2) )
1 TD l l l E CS T TE T T2 TD E T St E T SER S SL S S l SA mT r ED S
E EI E EI TA E El TA E R A TU T TU 1 TD I T T TDl GP l QDl l QD 1 I E S E S I
B EENE NRAN EENE NRAN NI ANN NE N NE U NI AN(
5 N 2 O
I 0
0 X )
T R S D E
A A P U
L 2
E X
I W
AD R E A
H S R
).
H E
DI C S A J T E RA R3 T
U V
R P(S E E I
F NU L NA 1 N O
OV D R I T
CE 0O 3 N F N 3I l A I E D GC
- E D 5, 0 R I i
4, H
S AE S - D R n 2 MT "0 I
S A rD S E ( T 5 N B O E MU 2 E
I D RD 0 m
E M M O EN =
N O O R O N
B HO TC 'l N B I C T 4 F D N E E D T M T I
E I F G E
U 1 I S D s O M N
E RP E O
C T M /
T S M D O ETS Y S H E P
T Y R E
A R A E D SR I U H D R O S- I E E R R E S I A R I
I - R B N U I R O P O A E A B R C 1 D
T O I
F D 2
0 ).
3 N S A 35 A N M E
B u G13 E I C A T^ A( - D M C 8 4S 5 I S
R E
U P
8 ON 2 0 N I
T P
A MO 1 1 E I
H RI
- N I EC 5 O
r o
8 HE 2 N B I 2 3 TS 1 4 N E R LS A ES R
E)NI
/
O F- C S E E I OT WSM E NR RN A I I S T R MT AE R E R
R NY AT P
EK T
AK N8T E
FVCA N F
1 OM M M TH K TL S
> 2gyUB>O ghg. y 8".g1$2 h> , _
\
1 3
F I S O
0 M. D NN N O
N N N 2 HO U .O O O O E
G A N.
EFE ODID BPT OID T OTAE I
D OTD I
A I AE R NAE R N R N AE R MR DI UI LUI /UI /UI P E EA S T LU S AQ ELU MAQ ELU MAQ ELU MAQ EN ER VE AVE AVE AVE C I
S S S S _
A A
(
A
(
A
( -
(
E 3- 3-E 3- 3-I S 2) 7- 2) D 7- 2)D 7- ) 2)D 7- )
A T D l
)
E 1 1E l E CS TE TD TE T TE TD T!J TD E SL S WT Sl EIJ SL SA El SA EL S EL SA ER TA ER TA E TA ER TA TD IT I
A T I TG l S l TD TG I I TD S 11GP l S E EP E N NE E S N NE U P E N NE U NI N N( U NI AN NI AN( NI AN(
E D D R E
N li TjlE R S Vl ; -
2 lN
{'
I O 0 0 E E I A O I X ) 1 P S T T R T U U N S D A A 2 B- B- OD i E E
U L
E X
I M
AD E R E
R r T FR L
L A
C RE P P O T A J T MA I
I P S V
R U AP N E E F RL NA
K m OV 3S 7S NN S E CE 2 T T I
U D I
D 5 D N l
N SO N D M D NN I
R I H O U R Y 4 S TX S
TJ S U r. O T 2 E E ED ED OT RT A X X
S E I T R E RD I
U B K D ' R E E fl DN II DN e O "4 E t N I T EI I T EI
/
1 AO AO R o NM NM s HC HC I C T: E F D N F E T. T D T C M T U
l G U m E E D D E
s T O
R S
M N
O N
O F E C C
_ T W 1 S M S N R O ETS Y T O E S H N V
. T Y R R A M n O
_ D S E i J K F S n R R H D R E R J
N F m E I 1
. I i
R A B N R AA 1 I
A E T A n R O D
T I
ND S
_ T o H E
M I E N
. S A E D S"I I
S N m L B
M E DR D
. I A A T R NO N u C E UP P U R
E U P
W I T OU RS O n P T
R N R T A I -
"4 fU S
_ E /
1 l
AO I
A R
i 2 C P s HN H
_ 3 5
) D S E R S
(
E P E LA TRIM F- cS E P A R S E NR I Y G O NoN R uE AET R T T P P
R PA EPH R T N U IuC U RrA OM A N O
O J
S N NS E G RR I
B J J I
M F EA rP .
0023 00177-TR.002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A53 of A132 g L i i i i ,
i l l 11 5 l
ll!llfS!l Na Na !!E 1 E E E E a e 2 e -e Ii i,i,1 i s
, i1 i, si,1
,i nii,1
.ii el! s hi si i i=
1 1 _
a l l
!i j li i i l 8 l .
, s -
- E s i. si s,
b l- R l 8g s ~
l l J E
l li 5 1 l i s ldi-N
" s l l ll i
- _ , I Ili i i
,i i n i 18 ll ll li
I FIGURE F-7 INSTAT.IRD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 22 OF 31 o O
PERFORMANCE I THERMO LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMOOGY IDENI1FER. CIXE2ARX002 U PARAMETERS 2 APPUCABLE HRE BARRIER SYSIEM SEGMENT: NODES 2,4,5 y H
?
BN 3E INSTALLED CONHGURADON 4E TESTED CONHGURADON(S) SE APPUCABIE 6E EVALUA110NI 8 EVALUATED TEST 3 REF. NO. I*
NONE NEI TEST 2-3 = NONE NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 'IEST 2-3 BOUNDS E' INSTA11m) 1EEINSTAIJ m. @
TEST 1-7 DOES NOT 5' NEI TEST l-7 = TROWEL GRADE AND NEITEST l-7 BOUND 1NE o JOINT STRESS SKIN UPGRADES ON All (UPGRADE) INSTALLED. NO REINFORCEMENT JOINIS AND SEAMIDCA110NS EVALUATION MECHANISMS RBQUIRED. .
SUPPORTS ARE COVERED 10 S1RUCIURE. SUPPORT MEMBERS WERE NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 1ESTED BOUNDS d 1HEREIS NOINTERVENING S1 EEL. PROTECIED FOR FUILIINGTH IN INSTAIJED) INSTA 2 m. NO ]
TESTS 1-7 AND 2-3. NEI1EST 2-3 AND EVALUA110N e.
STRUCTURAL INCLUDED INTERVENING SIEcL NEI TEST l-7
- REQUIRED SUPPORTAND MEMBERS PROTECTED POR AN 18" (UPGRADE)
INIERVENINO DISTANCE. <
STEEL PROTECDON t
EXPOSED ON AllSIDES EXPOSED ON ALL SIDES NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME / NO !
INSTAJm) EVALUA110N AND RBQUIRED ' ,
NEI TEST l-7 !
IDCATION (UPGRADE)
OF 2' ENCLOSURE %
h u
C EJ t
FIGURE F-8 INSTAI.IFD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 23 OF 31 o 3
. Y i
g
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER CIXE2ARX002 h 9
o
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARPIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODES 2,4,5 j3
- :=
7 E
E-1 THROUGH E-2 S:
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E1 ENCIDSED MASS:
= 9.7201RFT 3-CIXE2ARX002 1-4*CONDUTr 4 -2E, #16 AWG -600V = 0.320IB/Fr E 2 -4E, #16 AWG -600V = 0.270IDFT S 2 - 16 PR, f16 AWG -600V = 1.2961R Fr k TOTAL = 11.606 tRFr >
E-2 THE INSTAL 1ERS HAD NO REQUIREMENTS FOR INE DISTANCE OF FAS1ENERS (BANDS OR TIE WIRES) TO CONDUIT SECI1ON Btr1T JOINES SO FASTENERTO XMNT DISTAN S VARY. THE INSTALLERS MAINTAINED 12* OR RESS BETWEEN FASTENERS AND THERE WAS A MINIMLN OF ONE FASTENER ON SMALLER SECI1ONS (1.EL MTIERED JOINTS AT RADIAL BENDS). THE TEST RESULTS DID NOT INDICATETHAT JOINT SEPARA110N WAS A FAILURE MODE FOR PRF SHAPED SECI1ONS,1MEREFORE FASTENERTO JOENT SPACING IS Nor CONSIDERED A CRTTICAL PARAMETER. THE INSTALLED CONFIGURATIONS ARE CONSIDERED BOUNDED BY1HE1ES1ED CONFIGURATIONS.
b k
t ti
. _ _ _ . ._ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ ___._ _ _ . _ _ _ . _.___ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . m _. ._ __ __
FIGURE F-8 INSTAI J ED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE24 OF 31 o 8
u
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM /FROTECTED COMMODITY IDEN11FIER CIXE2ARX002 h n
?
N h
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODES 2,4,5 -"
2' 2- :
5~
~3
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S)
- E-1111 ROUGH E-2 o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENT EVALUATION:
AS SHOWN 1HROUGH PARAMETERS COMPARISONS. THE INSTALLED CX)NFIGURATION IS BOUNDED BY 1ESTED CONFIGURATIONS IN NEl 2-3. d THE BOUNDING CONFIGURATIONS INCLUDE THE 3" DIAMETER ALUMINUM CONDUIT RADIAL BEND TESTED IN NEI1EST 2-3.1HE 3" I
DIAMETER CONDUIT RADIAL BEND MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL 1EMPERATURE OLTTERION (325"F OVER AMBIENI) WAS NOT EXCEEDED WHEN R
x THE TEST WAS SUSPENDED AT 102 MDRTIES. >
THE 3* DIAMETER STEEL CONDUIT RADIAL BEND TESTED IN NEI1EST l-7 WOULD BOUND THE INSTALLED IF THE INSTALLED HAD All. JOINT AND SEAMS UPGRADED WTIM STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE (X)NSISTENT WrIM THE1EST. THE 3* STEEL CONDUTT IN net TEST l-7 EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM INDIVIDUALTEMPERATURE CRTIERION AFIER 129 MINUTES.
ALTHOUGH THE 3" DIAMETER 00NDUrr IN NEI TEST 2-3 EXHIBITED MINOR AREAS OF BURNTHROUGH RX1DWING THE HOSE STREAM TEST, 1HIS ASSEMBLY HAD RECEIVED AN ADDITIONAL i1 MDF.mLS OF FIRE EXPOSURE AFTER EXCEEDDeG TEMPERATURE ACCEPTANCE CRTTERIA AT 91 MDATIES. THEREFORE THE INSTALLED BARRIERS AND 1HE STEEL CONDUtT SYSTEMS 1HEMSELVES WOULD PREVENT DAMAGE TO ENCIDSED CABLING DUE TO FIRE FIGNI1NG ACITVTTIES OR FROM PA111NG EXTERNAL OEMECIS DURING FIRE CONDITIONS.
E h
e 2
V:
_- . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ . . _- _ - _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _..m. ._ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
FIGURE F-3 INSTAI .I FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRER EVALUATION PAGE 25 OF 31 g PERFORMANCE I. UlERMNAG BAIUUER SYSTEMPROECIT.D COMMODmi IDENURER. CIXE2ARX002 PARAMEIERS g 2 ArrucAntE nRE BARiuERSYSEM SEGMENT NODE 6 -.
?
-1 COMMODITY 3^ N^Im CONRGURAEM M ESED CONHGURA1MS) M AIWCABW 6A EVAWADOW Y EVAWARD MM3 REF. NO. 8 (X)NDU[T INIERFAG WI"IR A STRUCIURE. CONDUTT/WALLINTERFAG NElTEST2-2 SEE EVALUATION -"
E-1. W 1YPE CABLES AIR DROPPING FROM CABLE TUECTEST 5.
TRAYS TD EMBEDDED WALL SLEEVES SOIEME 11-4 4" 3/4*,2* A 3" CONDUTIS NElTEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION o .
E-1.
24 AIR DROPPING CARI FR AT TUECTEST SIZE EMBEDDED WALL SEEVES SOIEME 11-4 SIEEL ALUMINUM NEI TEST 2-2 TEST BOUNDS INSTAII Fn. NO j
EECTRICAL CABES TUEC TEST EVALUAT10N > !
MAERIAL SOIEME 11-4 REQUIRED q I S
9-x s N/A ATINTERFAG N/A ATINIERFAG NEl TEST 2-2 1 MIS IS AN >
AND EVALUATION OF i
TUECTEST 1HE INTERFAG SCHEME 11-4 BETWEEN CONDUIT CONENI51 COVERAGE AND A TOTALENC men CONCRETE WAIL 1HERMALMASSIS NOTA '
OONSIDERATION IN THIS EVALUATION HORIZONTAUVERTICAL VERTICAUHORIZONTAL NE! TEST 2-2 TESTBOUNDS .
AND INSTAIIFn NO -
ORIENTATION TUEC1ESI* EVALUA110N SCHEME 11-4 REQUDLED h
k 2
'O l
f
0023 00177.TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A58 of A132 i* ll l
- as l
m!!
lill l
as lllil mll 1 li i,ali 0; iil iil ii q i,iis
- 8 2
1 i li
- s n ii 4
- lia aa "
. la
$ .? -
a
% . 3 $n ; 4 4 i l ig
- 2
, I si li I S i s a s i- a .
s i, ,s l O
- 5 g a l i L l a
a
! ea 8 l n
- g v ,
l
' n R 0 $
~
lm l 15 ll lill ll l
l
FIGURE F-5 INSTALIFD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 27 OF 31 g PERFORMANCE I. THERMO4AG BARRIER SYSTEM /HtOTEA;Itu COMMODIIY IDENI1 HEIL CIXE2ARX002 y PARAMETERS 8 2 APPIEABLE HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT. NODE 6
?
3C new2ED CONHGURADON 4C IESTED CONRGURATEMS) SC APPUCABM 6C EVALUADOW Y.
BARRIER EVALUATED TESTS REF. NO. 8 SCORE & FOLD *PICIURE FRAME" NElTEST 2-2 TESTED BOUNDS P PRE-BUrIERED
- PICTURE FRAME" BUITED10 RAGWAY COVERAGE BOLTED 10 CONCREHL INSTAIIPn. NO d' AND BOL1ED101HE CONCRETE EVALUA110N 1 JONTTYPE(S)
WALL PRE-BUITERED"PICIURE FRAME" TUECTEST REQUIRED o BUI1ED TO RAGWAY COVERAGE SCHEME Il-4 AND BOLTED 101HE CDNCRETE WAIL 51/4" 51/4* NEITEST 2-2 SAME/NO l
AND EVALUADON l
J wrGAP
,vecmr e SGEME 114 E
8 e
x WA AT WALLINIERFAG WA AT WAllINIERFAG NE1'IEST2-2 SAME/NO >
AND EVALUATON 1UECTEST REQUIRED ENN SWEME 114 BARRIER SPANS i
WA AT WALLINIERFACE WA AT WAllINIERFACE NElTEST 2-2 SAME/NO AND EVALUATION TUEC1EST REQUIRED.
SCHEME 11-4 NIERNAL SUPPORT y MECHANISMS g h
e k
2
.t
- i. r i ';*l ll ,. i l d 8W>
oSY8 . N . 8 " d' 3 g o m,5sOktM 1
3
._ F S S S O
I N DO DO DO O . N N.N N N.N NN N
- S I OU U U .N O 2
E T A N. OnO OnO BFT I DE On0 BF11D I
G UF BPTID AER OTD A
DTLU UI DI I A R UI DI A E I R NJA R E P V EA LU EA LU UI /AI E I U
. E TT SS AQ TT S S AQ TT S S AQ MAQ EN VE EN VB EN AVE D6 TI ER TI ER TI ERVB SER E
I 4 4- _
B 3 2- 4- 2- 4- 2- - 2 A T 2 T11 2 T1 2 T1 2 T1 CS S1 S1 S1 UE T S T T EE T EE -
S EE S EE S S TM PT P E TM E TM E TM CE E CE A T CE T CE 1 DEH 1
ENUC D
ENUC NATS NA1S NA1S NA1S
- S .
2 _
0 .
0 N X " _
R 2 F O
I A
2 )
1 F O -
E S T X (
N O E G
A I C O M D U
I S
U E _
T -
L AD T RE L M D A
O N UT A B I
X
._ V R GU A A _
E I R S
. E I F
I FL NA O M I f
K T OV H A D N CE C O E E D N D
- I D E A JG
. R I 1 G MA R YT S E
E A P O-L T RO A D I 6
E T E R
S S FM B OM D C T 2RE E N
O N L E M N O O " 1 t O _
- R I
O C : D 4
C B 1 1 N _
T F u N E F D 1 l
M O e Fx O E
. i T S E s O R M G
D E P E 2 E
. T /
M T S N O
1 F .
E D
. O T Y S
I T O N T S Y R R A
3 M A -
S E
- D U I U 1 -
R R G L M S _
F EI R
A R O I X
T 1 R N B N T R A
B E O R A M
I O -
- A B R C O J _
T S
G I
F D E
H C
A M
A E l D -
N L l N E OG
- I M
(
B A
A A C RA T E M C S T A
P FL R J N "}
E L P
I E S 2W H P R S l E
T A C T R N
- N L - E O
O O 'l H N 1
2 D 3 C B T -
. M S 6 K O D E R R F- CS E E N A NEP E NR m.
R A
Er Tn Si A
F NG A P
F S x NU F G E
D G RR B E I
F EA _
PP
)
- 'f[;i * !. l i. . i 8Og .
h 8" g5@"
d3Rgy o
. >3 >Cw 1
3 F W N O . O O I
. 9 DO T N N O
2 AN A U U O . .
_ E L F. L OID T OTID G AE A N AE R NA E
/UI R A
F VR VE L LU UI ELU E I MAQ E 2 MAQ AVE E AVE SFe SER SER E
6 W
B As 2-4
- 2-T1 4-2-
Tl 4-Ci 2 T1 S 1 2
S1 2
T SI T EE T EE S EE
- Um P
P A
S E
T TM CE S
E T
TM CE E
1 TM CE
. l E I D EH 1 E
EI UO E UC I
ENUC NATS N TS E
S I TS n
r
. a D
- N w n E S E AE O
I A
2 )
U GM GD
- T E X
S S AR I ONA I R A I DN LC I Z f G U
L C
nR A WT E EE EUW 1 N L V R G A MI TEO I L I
- E W DD SG1 t I E A E I MA I
A1 C W F V D EO *
- R I QE MEK M R I E ERD E E N MV N T I
- E E
)
R E
t R Y M NWT t I
C a
- R T S
E ASIOU F YIGE. N N A r n 6 E
T E V NS E R AS D O C
0 0
B u n D OO R I
E V IEWS ERA S E A A E p O OJ A CC RG N N RTL P ATP I O T T R
I C O E GAF "RSU N A A T. 4 F D N
. E E D T M
t TCE G
E i
S O S E R P
- T W M M
- O ETS h S M T Y R A R
n E
~
3 R R W F E U
R A
N F L I U B N I
- T I A E O A A B t C W
- E TS G F D E E
- A T N 4 E 2 E O B R I
M A
C ms C
R U N
- E P m O H P L C
- T A E E A
N N O O T
- I 2 E 3 N N A T
7 E R NS EM LDG ANN NO E
F- Cs E T MIS RAINLD W E AE Nl t I
R rEN DCA WTEEC C RVE E F S
- R MT R ORH U PE ORT T OWC P E U JOC RP T SO N OM FA A F E TUi R P E G
I RR B NM I
E S SD .
. F EA PP R _
! FIGURE F-8 INSTAI.IFD TO TESTED FIRE BARRa1 EVALUATION PAGE 30 OF 31 g O.
_8_
- l. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER. CIXE2ARXal2 h-t I Y 8"
- 2. APPLICABIE FIRE BARRAER SYSTEM SEGMENr(S): NODE 6 y S.
o a
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): E-1 THROUGH E-3
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E-1 'nHS EVALUATION IS FOR THE INTERFAO OF THERMO-LAG COVERAGE ON A CONDUrr WI1H A Wall. THE ONLY TWO TES1ED ARRANGEMENTS OF THERMO. LAG MATERIAL ABIJITING MASONRY ARE IN NEI TEST 2-2 IN WHIGI A THERMO-LAG BOX DESIGN UTILIZING 1 HOUR MATERIAL CONFIGURATION WAS ATTACHED TO 'INE fTH ING OF THE TEST DECK WTIH HIL11 BOLTS, AND TUEC d
y <
TEST SCHEME 11-4 WHIOIINCLUDED A SIMILAR BOX DESIGN UTILIZING 1 HOUR MATERIAL ATTACHED TO A CONCRETE WAIL IN NEI E ,
TEST 2-2 THERMO LAG V-RIB PANELS WERE SGMtED & FOIDED TO CREATE A BOX SHAPED ENCLDSURE WTni 3 INCH FLANGES All E AROUND WHICH LAY FLAT AGAINST1HE CONCREIE AND ACT AS A BASETHROUGH WHIm ANCHORBOL13 WEREINSTAIJED.THIS > '
FLANGED AREA PROVIDES STRUCIURAL SUPPORT AND THERMAL PRf7IECHON FORTHE INTERFACE AREA. TUEC TEST SCHEME 11-4 1TITIrrFn A SEPARATE"PICIURE FRAME" COLLAR AROUND A1HERMO. LAG BOX.1HE BOX WAS CONNECIED10 THE"PICIURE FRAME" WTnt STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE TO ENSURE STRUCIURAL SUPPORT.
E-2 THE INSTAllID IS NOT BOUNDED BY THE TESTED DUE TO 'nIE LACK OF STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE AT THE "PICIURE FRAME" AT THE STRUCIURE INTERFACE. THE ACCEPTABLE UPGRADE WOULD BE TO T1E THE "PICIURE FRAME" COVERAGE INTO THE CONDUTT COVERAGE WITH S1RESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE PERTUEC TEST SCHEME Il-4.
?
'a O
?.,
2 0 !
INSTAI J FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 31 OF 31 FIGURE F-8 8 e
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER
- ClXE2ARX002 g
~
~
?
N
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 6 6
8 I
s.
E-1 THROUGH E-2 g-
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S):
o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENTEVALUATION:
AS INSTAI I Kn, THERE IS NO BOUNDING 1EST AND *IHEREFORE NO FIRE RA11NG FORTHE STRUCIURE INIERFACE. THE PRINCIPAL ATTRIBtTIE MISSING FROM THE INSTAllID CONFIGURA110N IS STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE SUPPORT BETWEEN THE"PICIURE FRAME" AND CONDUIT COVERAGE PROVIDING ADDri1ONAL SIRUCIURAL AND THERMAL PRDIECI1ON ATTHE Df!ERFAM AREA.
E S
AN UPGRADE OF THE INSTAllID CONFIGURA110NS BY TYING THE "PICIURE FRAME
- COVERAGE Dfl01HE RACEWAY COVERAGE WITH $
STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE PERTUEC 1EST SCHEME 11-4, WIll. PROVIDE REASONABM ASSURANG THAT1HE INSTAIIED WEL BE y BOUNDED BY1 HAT 1EST AND PROVIDE A RATED DURA 110N OF 60 MINtTIES.
TESTED RACEWAYS EXHIBITED ACCEPTABE STRUCIURAL INTEGRITY IN 1HE AREA OF THE THERMO4.AG COLLARS FOllOWING THE HOSE STREAMTEST.
W k
m t
a
i PAGE 1 OF 31 FIGURE F-1 INSTAT.IRD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION 8 0
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- C2XE2ATSAB 8 -
?
-N s-"
- 2. BARRIEIUCOMMODITY LOCATION DATA- SOUIIITEXAS PROJECT UNIT'IWO
' FIRE ARENZONE 07TI.071 F ELEC. AUX. BUILDING, EL 20*-0" $:
8 O
j
- 3. REQUIRED RATING: 1-HOUR X 3-HOUR OTHER RES
- 4. FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENTS EVALUATED: SEE PAGE2 E.
- 5. FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEE PAGE 2 EVALUATION RESULTS: BOUNDED BY TEST NOTBOUNDED BY1EST y .
RATED BARRIERSYSTEM FURTHEREVALUATION REQUIRED (O'ITIER)
- 6. APPLICABLE TEST
REFERENCES:
NEI TESTS 2-2,2-3 AND 2-10 AND'IVEC TEST SCHEME Il-4 i
I t
t
'o u t
- 7. REMARKS: N/A 5 l ?
u l C w
FIGURE F-1.1 INSTAIJ RD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 2 OF 31 8
0
- 1. DIERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER: C2XE2ATSAB _b 9
- 2. h BARRIER RATING 3 '
BOUNDED BY .w TEST AS INSTAu En WIDIUPGRADE y NODE COMMODITY TYPE (Y/N) (MIN) (MIN) EVALPAGES 6-5' D
1 BOX CONFIGURATION N O 60 4-10 o 1-2 CAB 2 TRAY Y 60 86 Il-17 2 CABMTRAYRADIAL BEND Y 60 86 'a 8-24 2-3 CABM TRAY Y 60 86 11-17 3 CABGTRAY RADIALBEND Y 60 86 18-24 3-4 CABM TRAY Y 60 86 11-17 4 CABM'IRAY RADIAL BEND Y 60 86 18-24 4-5 CABG TRAY Y 60 86 11-17 %
5 CABMTRAY/WALLINTERFACE N 0 60 25-31 ]
e-x
- ?
2 m
9.
b ti
1 1 0023-00177.TR.002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A66 of A132 l J
5, 1
)
' all ' ~;*
- m a j j 3 e a t m E 1 h "
] n
\ L
- f
- t u _y 8 _I n
W 9' l
- 4 l
" i !
i 8 8 5 r m
i I .
-3 Y
l 4
l p l
' b
- H
+
\ ~4
\l
! W E
= a 8 - / ,
y --
e l l .
o A . ,
. .
- j m '
O .
, [ -
Q .
p , g s t
2 e o -
g M D
I 8 I 2
e i n . d N
8 a
b =
d 4
O U n
h f v y 1 a g 5
a w a u - . _ ,
FIGURE F-3 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 4 OF 31 g PERFORMANCE I Tl!ERM(MAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENIlFIER. C2XE2ATSAB h PARAMETERS g NODEI zp 2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT:
9 COMMODITY 3A ES E CON M RA E N 4A lWED CONRATEM(S) SA APPUCABLE M EVAWATMMU b EVALUATED TEST 3 REF. NO. -"
CAB 21 RAY AND CONDUrr GDS NE11EST2-3 DIFFERENT *g couuODmES, s.
TYPE CABES AIR DROPPING FROM CABT TUECTEST BOUNDINO WILL 5-TRAY 10 SEEVES SCHEME Il-4 DEPEND ON $
uAmm, MASS AND ORIENTA110N.
SEE EVALUA110N E-1 24" CABM TRAY 3" AND 6" LBDS NEITEST 2-3 DIFFERENT SIZES, BOUNDING WILL SIZE 24 AIR DROP CABLES FROM 2- TUEC1EST DEPEND ON STACKED 24" WIDE CABW TRAYS TO SCHEME 11-4 MATERIAI, MASS y EMBEDDED SLEEVES AND ORIENTATION. @
SEE EVALUATION 3 LI y.
STEEL ALUMINUM NEl al.:st 2-3 TESTED BtKJNDS y INSTALED NO MATERIAL ELECTRICAL CABES TUEC1EST EVALUATION SCHEME 11-4 REQUIRED.
28.284 G/FT 6* WD = 70.0 GS NEI1EST 2-3 SEE EVALUATION 3" GD = 5.62 GS E-2 CONIENW 1UECTEST TOTALENCLOSED 8.8 GS SOIEME Il-4 MASS HORIZONTAL HORIZONTAUVERTICAL NE11EST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS AND INSTALLED NO TUEC1EST EVALUATION ORIENTATION SCHEME Il-4 REQUIRED.
2?
k-2
0023-00177-TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A68 of A132 m m I lJ ii r m
a
' r. !
l' lill llil l rl llil llll r,
hvi i i r,
,h aWrI iI iW esl
, e,-
i ,
3 lg Eg"i -
1 I i,p, ! !
v ! s rl l w8 s; i i i *885 11 s! lil8 li i= l 2 i
- isl ii llsil i!
s a b v l l l! ! ! l g i
a E
! ig ig g ,
e 2
{
- ~ a 3 h i j i la il Idi il
FIGURE F-5 INSTAI J FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 6 OF 31 8
PERFORMANCE I THERMOLAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENITIER. P7YF1ATSAB O PARAMETERS g 2 APPUCABIE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT. NODEI h h.
BARRIER 3C INSTAMEDCONRAHM 4C HSMCONRAMS) E AIWCABLE 6C EVAWAN 8 EVAWATED TESTS REF.NO. .u PRE-BUTTERED BUIT XMNTS WIDI PRE- PREBUTIERED BUIT XMNTS WITH NEl'IEST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS lc BUTTERED
- PICTURE FRAME" BUTIED TO SOME SCORE AND MX.D INSTALLED. NO s.
EVALUA110N 2-THERACEWAYCOVERAGE AND BOL1ED JOENTTYPE(S) PRE-BUTTERED BUIT JOINTS WITH I TUECTEST REQUIRED. O 10THE CONCRETE i
SCORE AND MMD ON BOTTOht PRE- SCHEME 11-4 '
' BUTIERED "PIC1URE FRAME
- BUTIED 10 THE RACEWAY COVERAGE AND BOLTED 10 THE CONCRE11L s U4- s 1/4* NEITEST 2-3 SAME.NO AND EVALUATION o
JOINTGAP SCHEIS 114 3
?.
x 36* X 1r X 10* 6* LBD = 45' X 12" X 13" NE11EST 2-3 TESTS BOUND 3* 12D = fr X r X r INSTAI m. NO 1UECTEST EVALUATION NN 36* X 20" X 12" SGEME Il-4 REQUIRED.
SPANS INSTALLED AGAINST METAL BOX INSTALLED AGAINSTLBD NEllEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS '
INSTAR 1m. NO INTERNAL NONE TUECTEST EVALUA110N u
SUPPORT SCHEME ll 4 REQUIRED.
MECHANISMS
$a f e
2 0
! ( ' [' ' , ! l iIj .!.i -
l g g . y & h ".*B S @ 3 o g2as>r 2waa O k>Cw _
1 _
3 F S N
O I
DO O
_ 7 N .
N NN.N I
T N E NO 0 U O A O A N. O1D ODI D .
U OID G UF B! T E L T A LE NA1 E 1 R DIUA R A N ate P AR I V .UU
. V E11IU EA IUII E ELU E MAQ TTS AQ S E .
MAQ
- AVE EN VE E 3- AVE
L 4
B 4- 4- 3- 4- 3- -
AS 3- 3- T1 T 2 T11 2 T1 2 T1 2 S1 CS T S T S1 T S1 T EE E S EE EE S EE S NT P E TM S
E 1M E TM E TM A T CE T CE T CE T CE DEI I DEH I DEH I ENUO DEI I
ENUO ENUC NATS ENUC NATS NATS B
D S
NA1S _
_ A _
_ 3 _
T N A
_ O I
2 E
X )
_-. T 2 S C _
A U
L M
_. V R.
E NL U _
E I F NA _
_ K 1 1 OV _
N CE F E D
_ I D I M M
_ R I E H U U S
R Y T D
O S
D M I M
_ A DO E N H N X I X
B M A A A E B M N
_ E M "2 M O R
I O
C O
/
1 "2
1 "2 N T
_ F D E
N E M
. D T M U
_ E C T:
G E M .
T I S I S s O R M NE I
E MD
_ T M P
I E T
S N OJ O
_ O O ETS Y S D NM T Y A
_ n S R
E I
R U
DO AF R R R HT F E R L I R
R A
B N
N O
SN RE I
A A E C EM
_ T B R I
D LE I
AIR F
S G E E
_ A M TU N
I 4
O L
B A A M
U SQ NE T S I M C S D M R
_. R E
H T
J l
P P
A N N A
B I
X A SN EI
.G C E
._ M I R N APA
" O 2 "2 I 2 D 3
/
1 1 VS N _
_ M S 6 R O D E R RR R R F- C S NR E I
E NE EF3 N E1 E
N U A E AE R E P TY E T C N E
TG R MTE I
R ST p S NO SE U RO A AAJ AG FAM A F F FT S F D G RR B I D
E I
F EA PP
.ll!l llll l lIl
SHEI, SCHEME 11-4 PROTEC110N k
CONCRElE ON ONE SIDE. EXPOSED ON All, SIDES NEITEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS INSTATJPn NO CONCREIE ON ONE SIDE. 1UECTEST EVALUA110N SCHEME 11-4 REQUIRED.
LOCAVON OF ENCIDSURE y 2
2 2
C !
u
~ _ . - . . _ . _ _ _ _ - _ __
i 0023 00177.TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A72 ot'A132
! k
.E 2
N a l
! ,l l l !! l1l:
! l!
ii il!
ll g i 'lp!
P
!j ,i l
i
!,l-it tat lill.
lal; i a igi 111111111111 1 1 ,
e 8
z , !!I!!!!!B!!!
I I. El1il1 ;i i 1 ,.!b!
sg i i d
i! 11lll'i,! i
=
8 l g*l l- !
e ll!liJr!!m!.jhgl!al
,i i
illianil iiiiiii .. ii a - i,
- l gl mmmm 7 p, -
i -
l lg..i,gdil g in i l,lli, 3 i , ri.
g', $" .s ima a 0
E a a s
+
i
- . ..~.. .. .. - -.___ .. - . . - ~ . . . . - - ~ . _ . - . . . . - - _
0023 00177-TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A73 of A132 i L
i 0 I ,ill l li iel j i i ii i
! l;ill,l'lall i
i Iil,l!iil!I l
i l s ,
! e ie .g li l l B i 1 li
! l i!
si !ljlillisi 1
!i)i!.
! l- ; l
! l 8 i j;ii l i g i
,1 1 s ! !
! ! 1 l l a
!llil i
- lli!gl llili'llli
! l l 1- l l
G:
I !
l Ll llllll'lI!
lll! llili!
e ,. l
, f! i
> i : ;[ I! 1 i .
?T>Ug&O
. g Y8G? . E6g o. >EgE* # _
1 O 3 N F S S SE1 S U DO DEE D
O DO N NN.N NS .N N
.N I
MO N N.N U U U U OnO
- OnO I
0 O OnO ODI B2T D A N.
E U F O11D BFT D I
BFT I
BFTID _
G NAE LE E A A R UtR DllAUIR D2r A E R D1 A DI AUIE T R EA U I
P V E
I ELu EA LU EAWU TT AQ I
TT L EA TT S S AQ LU _
MAq TT S S AQ S S A AVE S S
. A SER E TINERVB ENER 1I VE EN TI EV E TINER VB 6
M B
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1 _
A 5T - - -
- 2 2 2 2 C S 2T T T T T J E S S S S S _
MT P E E E E E T T T T A T I I l I I
. E E E E E N N N N N M
. N B O
I A ) -
3 S
. T T A
A L U
L 2
E X
2 W
AD E R N
U A
C I
T C
A MTA T H T R E
V R Y F E E I
F MLUA G I
A A R V D
NV R 1 R I T
N CE R T T 4 N A
. E I E 5- D S E
7 2 L D E Y R I Y
4, T A
B A M 1
=
A T
R T 4
R C U Y N A I D 3, M T
- N A O 3 I B O 2,
W 4
X M R Z I
- E M 2- B U T R M A '4 L "4 O
- R I
O C
1 T:
A 4
C 2 A 2 H F D N
- E E
- D T M E C E G T T E
S
- s O R M E P E T /
M T S M E
O T Y
S H
. T S Y R N D S E N U R
I R R L R E I
R A M T H A I R B T T R E W G N A A C I O
B R A
- T G I
F R T Y Z
I _
S A E E S A R _
N L B R O I M A M Y T T H
(
M C S A F J
- R J N R M I
A E I P
I T B B I C H P A L I E T T A B C E % R E 8 E
A A "4 T 8 V C S
- I 2 1 2 1 Y n p
N 3
E T
I L a
n O I
F- C S D A t r SS T
. NR I R A E AE O pA R
U MT R E O
M = E 1
A M
E L
A M
T N
E I
R G FAM M T O RR O I
F EA O T PP C
l 0023-00177-TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A75 of Al32 E
E E I, h h h h
, e s e a c 8 z
E S Igl *
$I N 5
8 1 2 lia ;a -
, a e
@ E 5 h d 4 lm l ii , h i h I a _
F, ! a e s i e a l: ~
l L r
a d s -
=
le l lk l 5
3 l , $
d l*
1
. _ , $_ $. l la l i 18 l! lill il i
I ;! ',! ,r; l t !;!' :[
o8 y g GyHY $"- @1"5: 's tr gREs> o
.ya>a .>Cu 1
3 F S S S S E. ONO N I
O DO DO DO 3 t NN.N NN N NNN 1 HO U .
U U U .
OnO OD 0 E A N. OD ! IO OD.O G
I AF BPTID BETID LAER BE11D A
E DIU A D I A E UIR DLUI D lUI lA ER MR I EA LU EA LU P E C
6 BDTy EA L 1T A SS EN V TI E EA TT SS EN TI ER LU AQ VE TT S S AQ EN TI ER VE TTS AQ S
EN TI ER VE E 0 0 0 '0 B
AT 3 1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
CS T T E T S
T S S S WT l E E E T
E T
A T l
T I 1 I _
E E E E _
N N N N E
N O
I B
A )
S T S T
A A 2 3 Y U
L E
X M
AD N 1
A 2 RE O I R
A C. UT A J T
V R E NL U T T S
E I F NA I
U N I
R I T
I E 5- D E
G A
D R I Y
4, M R E D R l 4
3, T E A f D 3 M R T
R B O 2,
- L B O P
E M 2- E "4
/ P M 1 U
R I
O C
1 T.
C4 R
P s "4 2 S F D N E E D I M
E C E G E
1 T S S O E R P
M Y E
T /
M T
S M A R
O E T
Y S H T T S Y R R A S T
E L
E D S R
I R U N B A _
_ F M _
E R M C I IR A N
X _
R B O T T
.. I A E I S A B R C I N T I t I O F B A S A E E D G N
I 1
O L
B E R
A M
A C
M S E D R N I E E
U I T T H
P P U R T A 4 O
_ "4 P E /
- P C R I 4 U
_ I 2 3 P < 2 S 5
) D S E R 5 E L M A TRI 4 P TR
_ F- C S E r r A RE S S NR G N R ON I
E u OI N R MT AE R a P R A PR P EPH PA U RO E R E UA S TU NS C
. F PP j 44 I
l L 11I 'll
- ! iL [! l ,,l:i .!
ooU,8 4?g?8"*B$ EDo >E2e.x > ?m0 D 2,> i Y
1 3
F S N O I DO 0 1
NNN N 1 N 4
1 MO .
U A 0 A N. OD0 0 U E T O1D F B211D O11D 1 L G WE lAER NAE A NA E A AR Dl UI /UI R /UI R
_ V P V EA LU ELU E ELU E TT SS AQ MAQ E MAQ _
EN VE AVE E 2- AVE O TI ER SER SB SER E 0 0 0 0 B 5 1 1
1 1
AT C S 2 2 2 2 J E T T S
T S
T S
MT P
S E E E E A T T T T I I I I E E E E D
S N N N N N
O I B )
A S T S A T A
U L
2 E
R U E E I mL NA K F I N 5-0V 0E E E D i
D 4, E M M R I 4- U U Y S _
R I r
3, W D M I M A D 3
2,
- T N A
X A
I X
B O B A E E M 2- M M N M 1 2
- O R
I O
C T e "1
/ 2 1 "2 N F D N u E E M
M C U h E G M.
T T E S I S s O R M Nr I t E P E Mp T M /
T S
O M OJ O ETS Y S T NM T Y R A O E R DR D S R
I R U AF R R HT E A M N I R B N S E r R O R A A B
E R C EM E T O I
F D E l R l
S A E AU I
N M T I M B A M U S Q
( A T S NE M C S 4 D M I R R J I E 1 P
B N X . G H P A A SN EI T A B C E M I R A N "2
/ "2 A P O I 2 D 3
I 1 VS N S
6 E K R R R M D F- CS E E EG EE3 R E R A E NR AE I NE EP NNI N T f NU E
R T Y IC 0 TG R MT R E R ST TA S P 1
ENJ S O SE U OM A A AS A AG FA F F FD G RR B FE E I
F EA PP
- i!
- i
,i ! i
_- o8y@~ yI -
85bFE6go >gg9* p .
2% >M t 5.
_ 1
. 3 I F N S S
_ O O I
TO
. I DO 5 N U N N 1
AN O N N. 0 0 E
G U
L F. OID T On1D BF1 O1D 1 AE NA E NA E I A R A
P VR IUi R E ELu Dr E A LU UIE /UI R ELU MAq TTS S AQ MAQ E ave SER EN TI ER VB AVB SER 6
E I
B 0 0 1
0 1
1 AST 2 2
2
_ S uE TS T S
T S
MT E E E A T T T
_ I l I E E E E N N N S
E.R N R0 O B U1 I
I A ) CD T 3 T
S UE A A 2
R T E R
U L
._ A 2 RE OC S C. UT A T E V
F NA EE RT S _
_. K 1 I OV ES L N CE V I m E 5 D ) G A
_ D 4, E X N
. R I T ( IN O
R Y T 4-3, S
E SN D A D I 3-T TE RV E B O 2, E OR S O
E R
M M
O 2-l E
N O
. P X
E I C T 4
. F D N E E .T u 1 C M ET RX
. h E G Ut T E
_ T I S
_. s O CD
_ E R P
M E
UE R T W T R T E S E S V O ETS Y S R OC O
T Y, R A R T E S D
. T I R U DA R G
_ R I
E U
R A H EW R S E
U B N EL D I I A E O VE I
. A B R C OE S
_ T G H D E
CI S L S A E l E I
A N
I L
O L
B RG AN *8 N
M A
C M
S I 1 O
R I J
H P
P RVA E S
T A E N
. I 2 E 3 N SI AT E T
7 E R NS EM LDO ANN 0N N E R
F- CS NR E TMI S RAINL1T O U E AE I
R EN NCA UTEEC T
C RVE E I
TF S R MT R E R OR H U ORT 1 AOwC C
U JOF CE RPPET S O O NE G
L
- . - - -. .. - .~. . . . - . . - . . - - . - - - . - ._
l
- , 0023 00177-TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A79 of A132 l 5 1 l ; i!il l
5 Wi i l1 -
- l
- ill I
ii l
! 5 8 l !l1 l
la == === llle1 a l 1
m s :
11 111 181111111111i sillll lsa l
i l ;
j l e
g i
g
.............t 11 y g .
i 4
m i s 2
8 $
f E
8 l lis! 1 s
3 18 l
i l
s e
@li e
3 l
a i..iiiiiin i ill1l3 1
g,is l
- n!!!ii!!ig;i g =si l E R I e glle l = iiiiiiiii_!i ,llR-li ,
l_- y n s a:a a:=.:,a:
y I ! 8 l!lll!l i i a sm ill 8
i 1 !!Ill g = m a a Y = a ; i
0023 00177-TR-002, Revision 2
)
g .s g j
<dE i ii!ldI i
! , !11I, i l Ilills
! i; s W i i!
I 2 ll!lilsi a!
l 5 !inE i s s l
- ; i l e 1
a i
!lllla W
l1 l< 3 i
! s 1 e i i l
- e l 2 ie l'l i
l-
- 1 i e, i'li'll
! is i I
3 e
i e
2 i i e
e .olil.i ripei ii,pl,lli s
nil
1 FIGURE F-3 INSTAI.I FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 18 OF31 g I THERMO4AG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROITCTED COMMODITY IDENITIER. 07YF2ATSAB ?#
PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS 8
! q l 2 APPUCABLE HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT. NODES 2, 3,4 ?
H
?'
O 3A 94SMSMURATM 4A TESTED CONRGMTMS) M AMMABLE 6A EMAN $
COMMODITY EVAlllATED TESTS REF. NO. -
CABLETRAY RADIAL BEND CABIElRAY RADIAL BEND NEllTST 2-10 SAMElNO E EVALUA110N 6-
= REQUIRED g-o 24* CABIE TRAY 24* X 4* CABLE TRAY NEI TEST 2-10 TESTED BOUNDS INSTAIIFn. NO EVALUATION E REQUIRED N
STEEL ALUMINUM NElTEST 2-10 1ESTED BOUNDS }o-INSTAII Fn. NO EVALUATION MATERIAL REQUIRED 20.097 LB/FT 24*1 RAY = 12.741RFT NEITEST2-10 1ESTED BOUNDS '
INSTALIED. SEE EVALUATION E-1 CONTENI5/
TOTAL ENCf(1RFD MASS
?
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL HORIZONTAL AND VER11 CAL NEI1EST 2-10 SAME.NO W EVALUATION >-
ORIENTATION REQUIRED.
i
?:
r
0023-00177.TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A82 of A132 l E i
i l'ill lill lill lill
]
E h h h h
, e e a i g I lw I f b
e i .
[el l
3 s
b e :
i 9 :..
l -
n s s i; l !
i g i 11 I a g i $
l I s -
l *
! l !
- ia "l li l a i 1 t
4 g l 4
- - , b l l l ll l 15 ll lill ll
,! ll! lil li ' lll oo"y g y HU h " T s giaw> o. ga gm > wJE _
1 ~
3 F S S S S _
O W DO DO DO DO _
0 O NN NN N NN.N NN N DO. U U .O U U 2 .
On0 On O E
G A N.
BF OnI BFT D OnID BFT BF11D A
WN A R Dr i DI Al E
UIR DJ AUIE I R Dr AUIEJ R
P V E
EA EALU EA LU EA LU TTS AQ TT S S TT S S AQ I
SS T VE AQ S -
C E TiN E TINER VE E I
N ER I
E TI NERVE
( _
E L 0 0 0 0
1 1 B
AS T 1
1 2
2 2
2 CS T T T T UE PT S S S S P E E E E A 1 T T T l
1 I I E E E E C N N N N S
N O
I B
A )
S S
T 5 T
I N
A A 2
M C M Y U E X
D AD X A L 2 RE D R _
A C. UT OU A E
R T
V R E HL E T S
E H NA T I N I
R OV I _
T CE M A _
N D G _
m E D 4, w E A _
R I Y 3, M R
E D R T 2 E T E T
A I D S T I U R B O E D B-
- O P
M 4 E M O N
E R
/
1 P
U R
I O
C T C4 P s "4 2 S F ) N u H E T M h C G E
- T T E S
S O M
E R Y P E
. T M /
T S N O
S A R
. O ETS Y S D G T T Y R A R
D O
E L
E D S R
I R
U G
J D
B A
. E E R H E C L
I I
R R
A B N O
R E T S
A E A B R C D
T I N I
T G I
F M A
. S A E H D G N M I C l
B A
l A R E A D
T E M C I
S N T E R L I T E P I
U R H P B- O T A
- 4 P E / =
P
- R 1 4 U I 2 X P < 2 S 5
) D S E R S
(
E P E TR L TM F- CS NR m P A RES A RIS E AE Y G OI P R A N N R ON PA MT R T T PR SP R N EPl R E R T I UA TU NS C l
U O FAM A N I
O O
J SB N
FIGURE F-6 INSTAT J FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 21 OF 31 8
PERFORMANCE I THERM (MAG BARRER SYSTEM /PROTECRD COMMODrnf IDEN11HER. C2XE2AT3AB U l
PARAMETERS 2 APPUCABLE HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT: NODES 2. 3.4 d A
D BARRIER 3D INSTAllID CONHGURAHM 4D ME)CONHGURAMS) 5D APNCABIE M) EVAWAWEI 8 EVALUATED TEST 3 REF.FO. !4 1/2" BANDS 1/2" BANDS NEl TEST 2-10 SAMEINO W EVALUATION 2.
REQUIRED.
FASTENER TYPE o 12" MAXIMUM 12" MAXIMUM NElTEST 2-10 SAME/NO EVALUATION REQUIRED FASlENER >
SPACING E
3 e:
x VARIES INSTALLERS HAD NO MINIMUM 2" MAXIMUM NEITEST 2-10 SEE EVALUATION SPACING REQUIREMENTFROM JOINIS. E-2 FASTENER DISTANCEFROM JOINI3 NONE NONE NE1 TEST 2-10 SAME /NO ,
EVALUATION REQUIRED FASTENER ~?
EDGE GUARDS 5 O.
~
l 0023 00177-TR 002 Revision 0 Appendix A Page A85 ot' Al3:
N
' ill
. l' ill Illi ,
. 5 5 5 !
, a a e 5
e '
r #1 ll ga e8
- l 11 la !-
i a i ei i! l .
~ I !!s !
il i pl
!- l- l i, -
a ee a i 81 ;
a ! s 8
!! l.i I'il l i 2 i i gyd i l ;l, le 3ll al
!1 i
- , ; i s $ l t <llI ; I
_ gtbI?HE8M.
s
~ ysmg o >@go.F p T$a 0e 0 >Cl4 1
3 DL F
O H NA ATT. N I O C A BNSA .
3 N E ROET3 -
2 E B
E D
OIZTN2 IREI AT
_ E L D TO H TMS G L E NH N0T E
A I '
W N I P 1 I
A WEHT 1tE f
T FTROE R RD.N i
_ f N I UOTTD O QFSSDEE I
E W
W. ELD SS RE I
TN M
EY A O N0EI A
_. B SW A E N R PDTB A1HT A C C EMNYO C RA V0 E1 T EB DE S
E S AR E T E
H U
I C E DW O BNNN TT DU OO T I F H I H TF R A AS EDU HI O M
. T T AR TDB6 3 W PW EE W EONHC GE
_ N HR R GINH B O E TIET A I T
TI F
.i HNWBF I "5 D TO2D O S A . J T
l I
SN 8EE 1ID N 3 HNllA A
l A YO E O V LI AT 2 FFTS 1 TAAT E
I M NAC A R ORSN T X S
M TIH O*O "
2 4 U I0 NI A 2 C M A
HR 1 NHHD E4 U n 0E TI 3TT H
_. L R
))
I I
)))1 1 I I1 F a
3V E
_ A E EE TT EEEE TTTI OOOO n.D YIZ NSE I I S TF V I F
OO NN NNNM mE ND AI W f; A NENB E I T
((
TTTTTTTTTTTTTT
(((f EU EL Eu TNITC O HAB IR A
R N 8DJ B II1tII 7FW/DDJDDDmJJDFFFWFFFFWWF H C C A B A A TF T N R A MR AINTE I T E 4 1t1LltlI I m D 3
, 08600003700006 72460039300005 ET CO
".C 1
SU H OU R AO I TI T SN R I , 8.676008 4.300008 N N V. W E WFCINM I _
R I _
2 3I 44000300000s S Y I R
E O OIN A400
_ A B
T I
S E
- - =- EE L
B5T A R. P 3",
4 4 NEF I
C DHE EDA 6 -
D D A H 3 Y.
0 PITB A
YL
_ E O O L I
G E SlH TN2 l R M N AI VE C E R. RAIN ETWA R NS O
I AW N46 F M )
S 2- L O0 I 3 ENDH O TI IT N F
D O ( A Y.
X LE T - SLtR -
_ C T T AAF T EK E E N H O A C ULE FUU _
_ T u E T E RE rNOI DTOA N CCEA T -
s t G T H T A T l
A ASRo E I M U O E hod I D
T U G O N3T CA ME YAHT TS .T B E _
E E R E H O R G RF fl TSNOI U R . TN E s
_ O T S H E I A MER O JT I T O T VV V V 0 V V WE I I
R M V00 000VV0006K V0V06 060 60V 0 sW NC B A JODI
. D P E 1
- Y066 KK6 A6- OO 2 2 OOO-O2 2 K uE H KMAO ACV LTE ASR E /
T E BA T T ETR nNCDC -
I Me S R TOW WWOO OW WA OW WA AWWO C F F OINN 1
l T sI A O
_ Y EA AAWW21A2 A6 6 6A AW E U RD EE r NRBI I i S SO AEC E T _
A s B2122AA EH WN SA TME Hl l
A
_ 1 R
1 At 88468 888 # SRL e f. 8 828 t
1 HTT I
S HTl T
S Y E )
I t -
S I S R E TEOV -
N R R . ( "4 M- S- 33321 2 4 43 4
- 2 C F0P4 1
8 3 3 O
E R O 40 I 41 22t23I1321
- - - - 2 E S A T THDNS LI I I
R A N 3H W W NO OUCH TT f
SOAT R B l
ON T EY BA DOWSI PN _
E E I
F- : E A E E :
3 R AW SNHEM -
B R R
)
S 3
I F M BA HE F HA RPIiT
_ G N (N D 5 TD TR ESWDA V A E O O F
s T A
WTN3 N L- L I I n 2 S SE O TR LE B T T E E DO ITU S
_. O A A A m N
X 2
T O
NJ AOEE) CsN 8 M C I U U E C N 1 2
BTSRQ F- R L L L E E P A A R H P V V t 2-T A E E E E
U -
G I
_ F . . . .
I 2 3 4
5 i 0023 00177.TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Pa.r. A87 of A132 i
=i
~
e i .IIli lijii
!s!l.lIhl i
! - I l ii l'
- l B -
Ili llI! li s
! :s , 51 s E
- l i 3 i;
0 if l=lfgll SIllll1 0
le l s 2 Ilsl<-
la s l l ? l 2 E!5 8 ,1
- s i : i li a l
l 9
l= l l
2 e
Illll l.i,'181 l- . s ..
l '
! 8 1
I 8
il fl=lli1l.
g l l ll l l 1lisi!!i
~ ~ .
l
j
!: r r , .
- lt j !l , ' ,, ! I I 1 a
o8yg u 8! R5* o ygS9x ). yO 0 0 tmBJ 1
3 NN .
- N N EL I N01 OGBA T EE A F & F LG O 0 O O O
. 1 1
I T SN ERMA AO1 SN
.N NAARCRTT D .N
. I 5
MO A A D NnO NIOFCE NEOAU NnO 2 _
E A N. U' R UpT D I G
I F W L UFTID A TE N V OHNRL EA A E A V
A V
OJ BI UI R AE ATE O C1 S DV OI BI UI R AE
_ P NR T AT LU SUNEC ALSS I
I E TT A LU S LI WY E E E I E .
E 1 .
S S AQ AETADISNIS S S AQ E
SE 1
- E -
SE EN TI ER VE B VHERNAA OH 1ETB1AWMCT 1 EN TI ER VE M _
W B 4- 4- 4- 2- 4 2- 4-2- 2- -
A T3 2- T1 2 T1 2 T1 2 Tl 2 T11 2 CS T S1 T S1 T SI T S T S1 EE S EE S EE S EE S EE NE F
T S E 1M E TM E 1M E TM E 1M A T CE T CE T CE 1 CE T CE EH EH EH DE DE A
I E
N UC TS I
E N
UC TS I
E N
UC TS ENUG I
NATS ENUG I
NATS 5
B N
A S
MSE O
T A
2 )
BV AE
. I T E X
. U C L
A E V E
A WTA F GW LE L A
R ND V El l GU E HL I
P E 3
T BE AS S T N
E F I NA N T PD I U C E O R N l
I OV I OD D G11 B G Z CE L RE N NA A A I .
R I DB ) I C F R I
D I
A M X PW L R O H
R I M W RE C P M A E R Y OD I
S
- T J -
I E /
T AD 3 RE U C N I A
A rDO 5 E
T I U S 1 &
I R
I T C B M D D LY "
2, RE I
I M T C A I
T O N ABM R E M N BA "4 U A R O O C AR /3 C1 4
2E L
A E
E
/
N V E
I F
C T. u N
D w I E
M E B G T T O
E S
S R M E P E T M /
T S N A O
O ETS Y S D H T Y R A T I
D SR E I M W R
R E R A G L A
I R A T
A R
A B
B E MC F
R C
I T .
R D E M R .
T O F E
T A E S A.
N F V N U I I R >
I M B A
Y .
E l
A
(
M C S AE R I T R u M R 1 U N N E P T I
O I
r T D A 2C U L
E A Z I
R B
ATR "4 E
T A
/ O 1
2 3 A CS 2 S N H Y
3 E
T I L
, N O
F- CS D A 3 I
T NR E I R A E AE O P Y E 3
g T R MT R E M T E T A
g N E
U OM M I
O I
F EA O PP C -
0023 00177 TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page As9 of Ai32 E
=0 E mE O
! llh illi llh illi
, =
h,5 .= ,
h, l h5 l lh5 l
, a ll ell ell l8l5l n l l
8 3 1 il I, 11 l l !! l 1
ll!
al l l!-llill li .
i 4
- rl i g a -
g
! ! =! l!!
a i ,Wa* i< l 3 $ I $
i i 1
' l '
. _ , i s l l l l W.l li il Idl ll
t FIGURE F-5 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 27 OF 31 g PERFORMANCE I. THERMOMG BAIUUER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODQY IDENIFIER: C2XE2ATSAB PARAMEIN g 2 APPUCABLE HRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODE 5 l
w E INSW1ED CONRMATM C TESBCONRGURAMS) E AMMAME 6C EVAWATM/
BARRIER EVAWA1ED TESTS REF.NO. g PRE-BUTIERED *PICIURE FRAME- SCORE & POLD
- PICTURE FRAME' NElTEST 2-2 TESTED BOUNDS ."
BUITED10 RAGWAY COVERAGE BOLTED 10 CONCREIE. INSTAII FD, p AND BOLTED 10111E CONCRETE s' JOINT 1YPE(S) WAIL PRE-BUITERED *PICIURE FRAME" TUECTEST "g-BUITED1D RA WAY COVERAGE SCHEME 114 s AND BOL1ED TO'INE CDNCRETE WAIL l
s 1/4" s 1/4" NEI TEST 2-2 SAME/NO AND EVALUA110N TUEC1EST REQUIRED N GAP SCHEME 114 E
3 e.
x WA AT WALLINTERFAG MA AT WAILINIERFAG NEI TEST 2-2 SAME.940 y AND EVALUATION TUECTEST REQUDtED ENN SCHEME I14 BARRIER SPANS WA AT WALLINITEFAG WA AT WAllINTERFAG NEITEST2-2 SAMFJNO AND EVALUATION TUECTEST REQUIRED.
SCHEME I14 INTERNAL SUPPORT o
u ty;
$ a o t
> i
.Gs l
i
_._ .- . _ . . _ . _ . . _ . . . _ _ . _ - . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . _ . . - . . . . . _ _ _ . _ . _m ..__. . _.
FIGURE F-6 INSTAI.IFI) TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION . PAGE 2S OF 31 8
PFJtFORMANCE I. Tism wklAG BAIUUER SYSTEMPROTECTED COMMODITY IDEN!1FIER. C2XE2ATSAB U$
PARAMETERS o 2 APPIJCABIE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODE 5 .O_
.a 7'
-t BARRIER 3D INSTAllIDmOERATM e HSED OONIMRAMS) SD AFRJCABIE O EMMMI ?
EVALUATED TESTS REF.NO. g CONCREIE ANOIORBOLTS CONCRETE ANCHORBOLTS NElTEST 2-2 SEE EVALUA110N ."
AND E-l. "A TUECTEST I FASTENER E-SCHEME 11-4 TYPE 8 o
BOLTS SPACED A MAXD4UM N 12" BOLTSSPACED AMAXIMUM OF12* NElTEST2-2 SEE EVALUATION AND E-1 TUECTEST FN SOIEME 11-4 SPACING E
S x
1" - 2* FROM JOINTS AND EDGE OF l'-2* FROM JOINTS AND EDGE OF NEI TEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION 111ERMO-LAG 'll{ERMCM.AG AND E-1.
TUECTEST FASHNER SO1EME 11-4 DISTANCE FROM JOINTS M NONE E TEST 2.2 SA M AND EVALUATION TUECTEST REQUIRED FASTENER SCHEME 11-4 EDGE OUARDS .o 2
C E4 1 *
.. - . - . . . . . . . . .~-.... . . - . . . . - - - - . . - - . . . -- - - . . _ . . . . . _ . - - - - . . . - _ . . . . , - .. - - . ~ . _ .
FIGURE F-7 INSTAII FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 29 OF 31 g PERFORMANCE I. THERMO4AG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODEIY iDENTIFIEIL C2XE2ATSAB Y rARAME m 8 2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT: NODE 5 g
?
BARRIER 3E INSMIE CONMURADON 4E ETED CONMURAMS) SE AlW CABRE 6E EVALUANN/ N.
EVALUATED TESI3 REF.NO. 8 NONE . GROOVE AND RXD MEIHOD IS USED net 1EST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION -"
ATKMNTS WHERETHERMO-LAG E-2 E EARES OUTONTO THE CON 0 TETE. 6- t 8'
JOINT *PICIURE FRAME
- ISTIED INIO TUECTEST o REINFORCEMENT RACEWAY COVERAGE UITLIZING A SCHEME 11-4
! MECHANISMS STRESS SKIN AND11 TOWEL GRADE UPGRADE.
INTERVENING STEELIS COVERED 18" NONE NE1 TEST 2-2 TESTED BOUNDS p AND INSTAIJID NO %
TUECTEST EVALUATION g 51xuctuRAL SCHEME 11-4 REQUIRED. 9.
- i SUPPORTAND INTERVENING STEEL i PROIECTION AT A(X)NCREIE Wall AT A CONCRETE rFH.ING NEI TEST 2-2 SAME/ NO EVALUATION AT A CONCRETE Wall 1UECTEST REQUIRED.
SCHEME I1-4 .
1DCADON OF ENCIDSURE 2 W
- 3 2
t
.i
FIGURE F-8 INSTAI1 FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE30 OF31 o 3
Y 8_
- l. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- C2XE2A13AB d
- -s W
N"
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 5 3 E.
e.
S o
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): E-I THROUGH E-2 ,
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E-1 THIS EVALUATION IS FOR THE INTERFAG OF THERMO-LAG COVERAGE ON A CABLE TRAY WTIM A WAIL llE ONLY TWO TESIED ARRANGEMENIS OF'INERMO-LAG MATERIAL ABUTTING MASONRY ARE IN NEI TEST 2-2 IN WHICH A THERMO4.AG BOX DESIGN ITI1IlZING 1 HOUR MATERIAL CONFIGURATION WAS ATTAGED 10 THE tyrt ING OF THE TEST DECK WITH HIL'Il BOLTS, AND TUEC E S
TESTSGEME 114 WHICH INCLUDED A SIMILAR BOX DESIGN UHLIZING 1 HOUR MATERIAL ATTACHED TO A CONCRETE WAIL IN NE!
1EST 2-2 THERMO IAG V-RIB PANELS WERE SCORED & POLDED 10 GEATE A BOX SHAPED ENCIASURE WITH 3 INCH FLANGES ALL h AROUND WHICH LAY FLAT AGAINSTTHE CONCRETE AND ACT AS A BASE 1HROUGH WHICH ANCHOR BOLTS WERE INSTAR I Fn 11BS y
FLANGED AREA PROVIDES STRUCTURAL SUPPORT AND THERMAL PROIECI1ON FOR1HE INTERFAG AREA. TUEC TEST SGEME 11-4 '
, IIITr 17Fn A SEPARA1E
- PICTURE FRAME" 00llAR AROUND A 1HERMO4.AG BOX. THE BOX WAS CONNECTED 10 THE
- PICTURE l FRAME" WITH STRESS SKIN AND 1 ROWEL GRADE TO ENSURE SIRUCIURAL SUPPORT.
. E-2 1HE INSTALLED IS NOT BOUNDED BY 1HE TESlED DUETO THE LACK OF STRESS SKIN AND 1 ROWEL GRADE AT THE "PICIURE l FRAME
- AT1HE STRUCTURE DHERFACE. THE ACCEPTABE UPGRADE WOUID BE10 TIE THE"PICIURE FRAME COVERAGE INIO THE CABG TRAY COVERAGE W11H STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE PER'IVEC TEST SCHEME 11-4.
- Q h
m ,
2 C
u
d 0023 00177.TR.002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A94 of A132 d
i i= ,glli i,el1 s
I i Ellni l
5 il 8
l l9m)Eg g i l lm l lEE*!lB. l h
- lb sl8 5
8 h
- $ e 5
l ls sals
% i: Fgt i l ! *llPl5 s i is i s 2 [
lsll,21 s i l
!e $
a a
a! sli se aWlplsg a E =
l Ig<
e st E
l l
=
3 8
!8llWl "li
- g I llst e l 0 t 1: l 3
ie i i i l g 8lllli1l,1lllll i * : a s s
!!i l l I t
oSY8G?98[3l e21A> ?1 g a.
- 3 J 8
3 F
O 1
E D
E G R A
P I
U Q
E R
T N S
E O I
T T Y A B U D L E A D V N E 2
0 U R 0 O E X S H R E B T A R T R 7 O U F N F N X O 4-2 ) 1 O
I C W R 1 T
I "0- E T A T' '0 H S I
N T E U
2 R R O T L E U 1 L. E (
C A I F T7E H T
E U
V I T C El/0.G O T E N J 7N R E O0I M E
D E D I R P NI ED L 2
E T N A
T S R Y SOU G T Y 7-R T A ZB A S S l I
X/ P A D E AX E E T
R D B O T RA EU R E E N E M U S Y I R A R M EA C I
O B R 3-I O UE E H- :
D D A 2 F C OIRL E B 3 E D 2-D u SFE T N D 2 E t A U E
T T
- 1 i X U A s c A L O B R S
E E E T A T T T A V O D R E 2 I E
O R U S E N
- T P
/ N O T G D M O I H- N A :
E t T E P S L 1 A
1 M E E
$ C G E C I
A Y O E S N S S E
- T R L R S E Y M :
E S
N I R
T I E M T F E
I D G T E L R S T U R A O N Y S S T B M I T S Y E S A
G M A R S R E /
A O R E I
R N T N L- C D R E I O E
/
R E R R I L .
. O R A T B S M E R A A K
. 1 R
I R
I U B A U C R F- E R Q E B L I A
H A R E A L E E I R P M R T B R F I V P E U F E A R G
I 6.
F 1 2
3 4 5 7
- li
- ll,I' lli lill tliI!l l l lll' !ll ;I
i' lI gu"h ~ ?4?8".
- Fg,8 o 3g2$ > m%. Ce fPJ 8
3 F
O 2 S E E G G A
P A 0 47444741 4748 P 1 1- -2221
- - 321 81 8881 8581 82
- - - 23 L 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 21 1 1 3 A
V _
E _
2 E 0
0 D
N X A O R R)
I A GN PI 0 1 29222920292 21 1 1 21 81 21 0 T 7 UM 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 A F X GH(
U 2 NT L C I I A TW A
V R E k R R l E E F I I
R M
I Rn R
R N 1
Ar i A E Br )
B D AN 1 2 111 2 1 2 1 2 1 I TI O 9 0 999 0 9 0 9 0 9 O E Y SM N(
1 1 1 1 R
I T
I I
F D S D O A E M S
T M Y O B E C T D D O E ET S )N
/ NYYYYYYYYYYYN T T D NT( EY C U D E O
E T L O B L R E P C A / A T Me D D D F S N N N N R N i O E G E E E I s B B B T Y E I T N N S P A L I L
L L I R Y R A P A A L E , T U I
D U I
D I
D L I
Y G A O A A A R T I R C R T R W R I F /
A D O
NTTTTTTT I I l I I I I LIEI TTTT I I B O UUUUUUUUUUUU G
A M C DDDDDDDDDDDD L-M XNNNNNNNNNNNN O OOOOOOOOOOOOO 1 O C BCCCCCCCCCCCC 1 M R
F- E E H E R T D 1 2 3 4 5 6
- 2 2- 3 -3 4 56 - 76 7
U O 1 G N I
F I 2
INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE3 OF38 FIGURE F-2 8 e
- i. HERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDEM MM2 a
2.
SKETCH OFINSTAIJFD CONFIGURATION g 5.
g 4-S 3
,0 o 140bE 5 ZXE24rs4gl s
r4oos 4 3-4 Noor 2.
NoDr 3_
z-3 / x -z e ,i H M 'I /
<>/noot s 4.< c c-->
" I -3 C2.XEZyty.coz, _
\/ ,g
/ " '.
L-7
)
l nous F'
a cocc. \ >
NDE f $
3
FIGURE F-3 INSTAU FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 4 0F 38 g PERrORuANCE : nmRa>uG BARRIER SYSHEWPROurIED COMMODnY HMWHFIER. C2XE2ARX002 h PARAuE m s 8 a
2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSHiM SEGMENT NODEI y
-a
- =
3A MS LED M M URAM E M ESED CONRWRAMS) SA AIW CAB 12 M EVALUA M COMMODITY EVALUATED TES13 REF.NO. -
JUNCTIONBOXMOUIGED TO FIDOR EDS NEITEST2-3 DIFFERENT E COMMOD111ES, 6-TYPE CABLES AIR DROPPING FROM CABE 1UECTEST 11-4 BOUNDING Will 5' 1 RAYS TO WALL SEEVES DEPEND ON $
MATERIAL, MASS
' AND ORIENTATION.
SEE EVALUATION E-1 48* X 30* X 12' JUNCTION BOX 3" AND 6" LBDS NEITEST2-3 DIFFERENTSIZES, BOUNDING WEL 24 AIR DROP CABES FROM 2 1UECTEST 11 ' DEFEND ON SIZE STACKED 24" CABM 1 RAYS TO MATERIE MASS d EMBEDDED SEEVES. AND ORIENTATION. 1 SEE EVALUATION E.
E-1 E STEEL ALUMINUM NE11EST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS >
INSTAIIFn EECIRICAL CABES 1UECTEST Il-4 NO EVALUATION MATERIAL REQUIRED 11.606 LES 6" LBD = ~10.0 WS net 1EST 2-3 SEE EVALUA110N 3* IBD - 5.62 IES E-2.
8.8LRS 1UECTEST 11-4 TOTAL ENCIDSED MASS o
HORIZONTAL HORIZONTAUVERTICAL NE11EST2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS E" INSTATIFn. NO p ORIENTATION TUEC1EST 114 EVALUA110N e REQUIRED. o
FIGURE F-4 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAbei5 0F 38 o o
PERFORMANCE I THERMO-1AG BARRIER SYSIEM/ PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENIlFIER. C2XE2ARXD02 0*
PARAMETERS 8
2 APPUCABW FIRE BARRIER SYS1EM SEGMENT NODEI j N
BARRIER 38 INSTAMED CONMURAHW 4B MHD CONMURAMS)
EVALUATED 58 APRJCABW TEST 3
@ EVAUJAHM/
REF.NO.
h
_w DIERMO LAG 330-1 V-RIB PANELS D1ERMOLAG 330-1 V-pfRRFn PANELS NEI'IEST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS Jo INSTALLED. NO 1 2-
"IEERMO-LAG 330-1 V-RIBBED PANELS TUECTEST 11-4 EVALUATION MATERIAL ON SIDES AND TOP. FLAT PANEL ON O REQUIRED.
N BOTIOM AND AT "PICIURE FRAME" ATWAll 1.27 10.27 1.0" +0.25" - 0". NEI TEST 2-3 TESTBOUNDS INSTAIJ Fn. NO 62P .t 0.12T TUECTEST 11-4 EVALUATION REQUIRED. m MATERIAL TIBCKNESS 3a I
x l
INSIDE. ORIENTATION VARIES INIERNAL AND ORIENIED NE11EST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS l HORIZONTAL INSTAIIFn. NO STIFFENER EVALUAllON i N) INIERNAIJORIENIED TRAY 10 Wall 1UECTEST 11-4 REQUIRED.
g ON 1DP PANEL AND VER~8 ON SIDE PANELS.
INSIDE AND OUTSIDE BO111INSIDE AND OUTSIDE NE11EST 2-3 1ESTED BOUNDS
- INSTAIJ Fn. NO INSIDE ONLY TUEC'IEST 11-4 EVALUATION o STRESSS m REQUIRED. $a toCADON 2
I C 1 o
I FIGURE F-5 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 60F 38 g PERFORMANCE I 1HERMMG IWUUER SYSm&PROECED COMMODInf KarlEER. C2XE2ARX002 U '
' 8 t 2 APPUCABIE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODEI
-i Y
E INSTAMED CONMWATION 4C ESM CONMNWS) E APIMABLE 6C EMAN BARRIER EVALUATED TESTS REF.NO. -
PRE-BUITERED BUIT JOINIS. BUITS TD PRE-BUTERED BUITXMNIS WITH NE! TEST 2-3 INSTALLED IS @
CONCRETE FIDOR. SOME SCORE AIOtB BOUNDED BY NEI 6-TEST 2-3 BUTIS 5' ,
NN) PRE-BUTIERED BUIT AND SCORE AND TUEC1EST Il-4 NOTBOUNDED BY $
FOtB XMNIS. "PICIURE FRAME" TUEC1EST II-4 BOLTED 1D CONCREIE AND BUITED 10 RACEWAY COVERAGE.
s I/4" GAP s 1/4* GAP NEITEST2-3 SAME.NO EVALUA110N 1UECTEST 11-4 REQUIRED.
R E
- r 48* X 30" X 12" 6* LED = 45* X 12" X 13" NEI1EST 2-3 1ES1ED BOUNDS 3* IJtD = IS* X 8* X 8" INSTAIJFn. NO EVALUATION WS M HD 36* x 20' x 12" 1UECTEST 11-4 REQUIRED.
SPANS ,
I INSTAIIFn AGAINSTJUNCI1ON BOX INSTAIIFn AGAINSTIED NEITEST2-3 TESTED BOUNDS INSTAIJFn NO ,
NONE. TUEC TEST 11-4 EVALUA110N o INTERNAL SUPPORT h g
MECHANISMS 2,
h n ,
i n
FIGURE F-6 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 7 0F 38 ;
PERFORMANCE I DEMMAGBUUUERSYSm&PROTECIEDCOMMODmiIDDmFIER. C2XE2ARX002 p j
- 8 ,
2 APPUCABE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT. NODE I d 4
N.
BARRIER 3D MSTAMEDCONSWRAHM 4D TEE)CONFERAMS) SD APPUCABLE 6D EVALUATION / 8 l EVALUATED TESM REF.NO. ." l 1/2" STAD5 FM STEEL BANDS NEITEST 2-3 SAME.NO M !
12" STAINLESS STEEL BANDS n AND EVALUA110N 5. ,
1UECTEST 11-4 REQUIRED.
pg TYPE o j i
12" MAXIMUM 12" MAXIMUM NEITEST 2-3 SAME/NO i i
AND EVALUA110N TUEC TEST 11-4 REQUIRED. t FASTENER y
SPACING E
a sr i VARIES. INSTALLERS HAD NO MAXIMUM 2" MAXIMUM NEI TEST 2-3 SEE EVALUA110N l SPACING REQUIREMENT FROM XMNIS E-3.
1UEC TEST 11-4 FASTENER DESTANCE FROM JOINT 3 i
I l
l NONE NONE NEI TEST 2-3 SAME/NO EVALUA110N
' TUECTEST 114 REQUIRED. l?
pm EDGE GUARDS h 8
O m
. M i
ba N
FIGURE F-7 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 8 0F 38 8
PERFORMANCE I T11ERMO-IAG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROlTf!ED COMMODITY IDEN11FlER. C2XE2ARX002 U$
PARAMETERS g 2 APP 1JCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODEI y N
BARRIER 3E INSMlE)CONHWRAMN 4E TESMONHWRAMS) SE APPUCABM 6E EVALUA110N/ b EVALUATED TESTS REF. NO. -"
NONE NONE NE11EST 2-3 INSTAT I FD IS k BOUNDED BY NEI 6-JOINTS REINFORCED WITH STRESS TUEC TEST 11-4 TEST 2-3, BUT IS
{
SKIN, TROWEL GRADE AND STAPES NOTBOUNDED BY o JOINT WALL INTERFACE REINFORCED WITH TUECTEST114 REINFORCEMENT " PICTURE FRAME", STRESS SKIN, MECHANISMS TROWEL GRADE AND STAPLES-.
JUNCI1ON BOX SUPPORTS ARE INIERNAL SUPPORT MEMBERS WERE NElit5T 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS @
10 THE ENCLOSURE. INTERVENING STEEL PROIECTED FOR FUI.L ENGIM AND INSTAIIFD NO E IS COVERED 18*. INIERVENING SIEEL MEMBLRS WERE EVALUATION $
STRUCIURAL PROTECIED FOR AN 18" DISTANCE. REQUIRED. >
SUPPORTAND INTERVENING COVERED OUT 9" TUEC1EST Il-4 51 EEL PROTECI1ON AGAINST CONCRETE FLOORON 1 SIDE OPEN ON AllSIDES NElTEST 2-3 TESTED BOUNDS INSTAT.I FD NO AGAINST CONCREIE ON ONE SIDE TUEC TEST Il-4 EVALUA110N LOCATION 2 OF 's ENC WSURE >
o tJ 2
b
?
FIGURE F-8 INSTAT J FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGe9 0F38 8
u
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER C2XE2ARX002 y E>
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 1 8 E
5.
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1 THROUGH E-3 g
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
El THE EVALUATION COMPAltES DE COVERAGE ON A 48" X 30 X 12"JUNC110N BOX WTTH UE COVERAGE ON A 3" AND 6"1BD M TEST 2-3 AND DE BOX AND TIE STRUCTURAL INTERFACE M TUBC TEST 11-4. THE 6"12D 5 TIE ONLY BOXED COMMODITY WITHOUT JONT UFORADE WHOSE SIZE B COMPARABLE TO THE INSTAIHD JUNCTION BOX. THEY ARE DDTERENT TYPES OF COMMODITIES, BUT DE COVERAGE TECHNIQUES ARE
- COMPARABlJL BUTH HAVE PRE-BUITERED BUTT JOINI3, BOTH ARE COVERED WITH 3 HOUR MATEItlAL AND THE 45"IANG VERTICAL PANEL ON THE 6"IED Will. BOUND THE 48" WIDE PANEL ON 11E INSTAllJ!D JUNCDON BOX. >
' E E.2 ENCIDSED MASS.
g e-^
1 -4" CONDUIT = 9.72013/FT C2XE2ARXDB2
= 0.320IBlFT 4 -2/C, f16 AWO - 600V 2 -4dC, fl6 AWO -600V = 0.2'POIDFT 2 -16 PR, #16 AWO -600V = 1296IR/FT TOTAL = 11.606 LBtFT 12"OF C2XE2ARX002 = 1 X 11.606IRFT = 11_6061RFT TOTAL =ll.6061BFT NOTES.
I. THE CABLE WEIGH 13 WERE TAKEN FROM CALCUIATION EC - 5045, REV.1,*1tACEWAY WBGHT ANALYSIS". DIE PARTICIRAR CABLES CONTAINED M EACH RACEWAY WAS OBTAINED FROM CAIEULATION EC - 5046. REV. 4,' TOWER CABLE SIZING VEIUFICATION M FIRE WRAPPED RACEWAYS.
- 2. THE INSTALLED E BOUNDED BY 11E 3" LBD OF NE1 TEST 2-3 AND BY TUEC TEST 11-4. IT 5 NOT BOUNDED BY THE 6" LED M NEITEST 2-3 2 R
y F3 FASTENER SPACING WAS MAINTAINED AT 12" OR 1ESS. THERE WAS HOWEVER NO REQUIREMENT FOR BAND 10 JOINT SPACING SO DIAT DIM VARES DE INSTAIJED CONFIGURATION 5 A BOX RESilHG ON TIE FIDOR,WITH BANDS INSTALIED ON 11E SIDE PANE 13 WITHIN 4" OF DIE g w
JOINTS. THE SIDE PANEIS ARE IN COMPRESSION. TIE TOP PANEL E MISSING BANDING M ONE DGtECTION, BUT THE TOP PANEL JOINT 3 ARE NOT CONSIDERED A FAILURE MODE. ALSO THE 3 HOUR PANE 13 DID NOT TEND TO DISTORT M TEST 3 IJKE DE DENNER I HOUR PANELS. Q DIE O p
BAND TO JOINT SPACING B CONSIDERED TO BE INSIONIFICANT AND THE lNSTAllED B BOUNDED BY TIE TESTED CONFIGURATIONS.
C OJ
i FIGURE F-8 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 10 0F 38 g ti
, I. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER CIXE2ARX002 ~
g 9
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 1 h 8 ,
E
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1 THROUGH E-3 &
6' 3 i O .
t
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENTEVALUATION:
t AS INSTAllJ!D THEltE B NO BOUNDING TEST AND HIEREFORE NO FIRE RATING FOR THE ENCIDSURE DUE TO THE STRUCTURAL DUERFACE NOT BENG BOUNDED BY TUEC TEST II.4. REINFORCING THE INTERFACE WITH THE STRUCTURE BY INSTAtlJNG A *' PICTURE FRAME"WITH STRESS FKIN AND TROWEL GRADE REDWORCEMENT PER TUEC TEST 11-4 WR1 RESULT M REASONABIE ASSURANCE THAT A 60 MINUTE RATING CAN BE OBTAINED. THE 3* AND 6' IEDS > i WEL BOUND THE BOX CONFIGURATION AS INSTALLED. THE IEDS HAD A RATING OF 102 MINUIES WHICH EXCEEDS THE 60 MINUTES OF THE STRUCIURAL E INTERFACE BUT THE OVERA11 RATING W HE ENCIDSURE WOULD BE 60 MINUTES. @ .
E. !
THE INSTAllJ!D CONF 10URA110NS WR1 BE BOUNDED THERMA 11Y BY THE TESTS BECAUSE M THE GREATER THICKNESS OF THE 3 HOUR PANE 13 THAN >* ;
THAT REQUIRED FOR A 60 MINU1E RATING AND THE GREATER ENCIDSED MASS WHEN COMPARED AGAINST THE 3"IED OF NEI TEST 2-3 AND THE BOX M '
TUEC 1EST II.4. TIE ENCIDSURE WEL BE BOUNDED S1RUCIURA11Y ONCE THE CONCRETE MIERFACE B RENFORCED. IT B QUESTIONABIE IF A GREATER THAN 60 MINUTE RATING COMPARABIE TO THE 102 MINUIES OBTAINED BY THE 3* AND 6" LBDS IN NH TEST 2-3. CAN BE OBTAINED DUE TO HIE LACK OF TESTING FOR OREATER THAN 60 MINUTES FOR TIE STRUCIURAL MIERFACE. :
ALTHOUGH A MINOR OPENING DEVELOPED M HIE ENCIESURE FOR B01H 1UEC TEST 11-4 AND NH TEST 2-3, THE INSTAIJED CONROURATION MVOLVES CABIES M A BOX WHICH WOUID NOT BE PRONE TO DAMAGE DUE TO HRE FIGHTING ACT1VITIES OR FAllJNG EXTERNAL OEUECTS DURING FIRE CONDITIONS t
5 2
2
.5 i
i
FIGURE F-3 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE I10F 38 g rERFORMANCE I DEMMAG RUUUER SYSHMPROECTED COMMODITY H)DiTElER. C2XE2ARX002 U PARAMETERS h a
2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMDiT NODES 2,4,6 p M
COMMODITY 3A INSMM)CONMMAM 4A ENONMMAWS) M APPUCABLE 6A EVALUAU N EVALUATED TESTS REF. NO. .
CONDUrrRADIAL BEND CONDUIT RADIAL BEND NEITEST 2-3 (AND SAMP. NO f INSTAllID) EVALUA110N 3-TYPE AND REQUIRED. g' NEI1EST l-7 o (UPGRADED) 4" DIAMETER 3" AND 6" DIAMETER NEl TEST 2-3 (AS TESTBOUNDS INSTAllID) INSTAII m. NO EVALUA110N SIZE 3 AND 5* DIAMETER NEITEST I-7 REQUIRED (UPGRADE) u S1 EEL ALUMINUM NEI 1EST 2-3 (AS 1EST BOUNDS E INSTAfim) INSTAT.Im. NO Q-EVALUATION y MATERIAL STEEL NE11EST I-7 REQUIRED (UPGRADE) 11.606 IBSNT NEITEST 2-3 NEl 1EST 2-3 (AS TOTAL THERMAL 3' = 2.391RSNT INSTAIIED) MASS OF 6* = 6.66 LBSNT INSTATI m CONFIGURA110NIS I~ I I~
TOTAL ENCIDSED gg33 3' = 7.58 IESST (UPGRADE) 1 HAT TESTED AND
- 5" = 14.62 LBSNT IS BOUNDED. SEE EVALUATION E-1.
?
n HORIZONTALTD VERTICAL HORIZONTALTO VERTICAL NEI TEST 2-3 (AS TEST BOUNDS >
AND HORIZONTAL ININE SAME PLANE INSTALL 2D) INSTArim NO o ORIENTAM AND EVALUA110N [
NEI TEST I-7 REQUIRED {*
(UPGRADE) 3 a
i
_ ooOg.d h h".gs$:
gE!' > 2$38?t?
1 _
3 .
F /
0 N O _
2 O .
lO N SN N N N 1
l O D 0 O O E
G A N.
U F OlD l Nn1D UFT OIT D OIT D A L E NA E R O1 AE NAE NAE R P A V R .UI BiUI R .UIR . UI E ELU ALU ELU ELU MAQ aTAQ sS MAQ AVE MAQ AVE AVE eN VE ER SER SER B
6 SER I I S S S S A A
(
A
(
A
(
( _
2 B 3-3 3- 3
-)
7- 2) 7- 2 n) 7- 2n 7-AT5 CS 2)
D l
)
E FD 1 I
iF l
rF l
)
E UE i E TD sE r s SJ T S sI TD PT sR tI SA t R tI E t1 SA P
iU ER 1 I
U t i A T IA E T R A QD T G TD I TD l G
~
i l I P I QDl I E S I
E S NE P B EENE NRAN( U EENE NRAN N NE NI AN NINAN( U S
N 2 O 0 0 )
I X D T R S E
A A 2 P A)
U L
E X
2 MA D HLSI E
D C R E H I S
A UT A E R3 I
V U R U P(
E E I NL NA 1 N S O F
E N E A I GC R D I 6, 4,
M AE 'C E
D -
R YT 2 E S L rS
'0 S I -
A D I S
E T Or MU 5
2 NI B O D RD 0 E H E M N _
M O EN =
O T _
R O N
B HO "1 N O
B I C T 4 TC F N D w E T
l M -
E F r G E
I U _
1 T S D s O R M N
E O P E C T /
M T S D O E Y T
T S
S NA E
P Y R R A E E H D S R
I R U S D -
E I
E R E S .
L I R A M R T _
B N U _
I R O P A E O _
A B R C 1 D
T O I
F 0 ).
3 N S A E E 3R A N I-O B OH A3 E I A M L( "5 D M C S N - S 2 I
S R U I ON N E P 0 H P MO i E I
T A RD " N H _
EC 5 O
T O
B HE 2 N B -
I 2 3 TS 1 N N R
4 S _
E . I F- CS E I
A S E RE)NO I T S E
NR AE I
R I
R N K
KAT KN S
A C
D WNT mC ANE EC RD U ROFAM A M I T s DI I R TI S
G RR B O I
EA F PP _
' - ,l l 1 jll llil
~
8Og jA?8w. W320 O >}5 > ,=$ y " R t :?
8 3
F / S O N DO O . NN N N U .N N 3 IO 1 T O O O t
- A N. OnO BPT I
D OlD I D OTID U F l OT G
A L E A R DI I A R UI E NAE
.UIR NAE
/UI R N
/Ui AER P V EA LU ELU ELU ELU E
TTS VE S AQ MAQ AVE MAQ AVE mao AVE C E N ER TI SER SER SER
- 6 S S S S A A
(
A
(
A
(
(
E 3 3 3 I
3- - - -
B A 3 T 2)D 7- ) 2 n) 7- ) 2 n) 7-1 2)
D 7-l E
)
. CS TE l E TF l E iF TF UE SL TD SI TD sI T SI TD P T EL SA ET SA tI S ET SA
~
P TA ER TA ER 1A E TA ER I
. A T TGP l l T D'I G l l TD S
E N NE 1
1 E S I
G P
E S I
E S N NE U P E C NI N E U N( NI AN( NI AN NIT=N U N (
S D D R E E E S
N 2 R E
R N V O
- O 0 0 )
E I I A I X S T T P T R S n A N
( T U N A 2 E
O L
B- B- OD E F
U X I
T AD E
R E
R nT FR I
I A
L 2 C R E P P T A UA T ] O S I
P V R E GU =
I
=
I E I F
FL NA SS
I U
R E I
D 6, D 2R D l
N SO D
N E r D
- R I Y 4, T S TJ O Ts o N N U O
R T 2 E S ED S
- A I D S E
T T R E T RE RU U B O D F LND E I D M O E E "4 N E M N I T EI l r Er
/
F C
D T.
N 4
D E E T. T T
C M I U
I U
E E G D D T T E S N N s O R M O O E P E C C T M
/
1 S N S N R O T E O ETS Y S
I T N O V T Y R A R
I O n O
. E n D S R
I R U G
J D
r f
S F F E R I E l N I I
I R A B
A E r SS T A B R C i ND S
- T O I
F D E
M I E N I
S A E D ST S N 1 I U E DR D B A R NO I O A T N
- M C S E UP P U
- R E
U N I
I I OU RS O H
P P
T L N R B- F T A "4 F L U
- E R
/
1 AO I
A I 2 C P s HN H 3
5
) D S
- E K S
( P E T
M F- CS E E P A RI S NR i Y G ON E AE R T PA R MT U RO G FA RR E
M R
A B
T N
I O
J N M S
N U
NT Pl l U
SE C
M I
F EA PP
0023 00177.TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A108 of A132 l
z Z
$ kg ! k 8 b
i lW8i l l l l ll1 na na al5lff a E * *
-2 2- 2 2- 2 2
! ! lill llill il,Il ili!,!
e< f
=
d
[h h
!l Il l l
n l le . ,
l l 1 , i .
_ i e i i n g
,s -
a s ! I i l ll1 ll ll l l l li !
l l lll
, o l
I il!
ili i
l is W l li li l'ij !!
FIGURE F-7 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 15 OF 38 PERFORMANCE I THERMMAG BARRIER SYSTLMOIECTED COMMODITY IDENI1FIER. C2XE2ARX002 y PARAME1ERS g G
2 APPUCABIE FIRE BARRIER SYS1EM SEGMENT: NODES 2,4, 6 y
-I A
INSTAL 1EDCONFIGURATION 4E TESIED CONF 1GURAllON(S) SE APPUCABIE 6E EVALUA110NI 8 BN 3E EVALUATED TESTS REF. NO.
NONE NEI IEST 2-3 = NONE NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 'IEST 2-3 BOUNDS N INSTALLED) THE INSTAII FD f-,
TEST I-7 DOES NOT g NEI TEST I-7 = TROWEL GRADE AND NEITEST I-7 BOUNDTHE o JOINT STRESS SKIN UPGRADES ON AIL (UPGRADE) INSTAIIFD. NO REINFORCEMENT JOINIS AND SEAM IDCA110NS EVALUA110N l MECHANISMS REQUIRED. .
SUPPORTS ARE COVERED 10 STRUCTURE. SUPPORTMEMBERS WERE NEI 1EST 2-3 (AS TES1ED BOUNDS E 1HERE IS NOINIERVENING STEEL PROIECIEDFOR FULLLENGTHIN INSTAIIFn)
AND INSTAIJ Fn. NO EVALUA110N kZ TESIS I-7 AND 2-3. NEITEST2-3 STRUCTURAL INCLUDED INIERVENING SIEEL NEI1EST I-7 REQUIRED > '
SUPPORTAND MEMBERS PRO 1ECIED FOR AN 18" (UPGRADE)
INTERVEN N DISTANCE.
i STEEL PRO 1ECIl0N I
EXPOSED ON ALL SIDES EXPOSED ON AIL SIDES NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME / NO i INSTAtiFn) EVALUATION AND REQUIRED NEITEST I-7 LOCATION OF (UPGRADE) [a ENCLOSURE >
o o
k C
BJ
FIGURE F-8 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE e6 OF38 3
.s
_3
- l. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER C2XE2ARX002 j N
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODES 2,4,6 1
r 5"
- 3. E-1 THROUGH E-2 s EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): :)
t
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E-1 ENCIDSED MASS.
C2XE2ARX002 1 - 4* CONDIKT = 9.720 LE&T
- 4 -2/C, f16 AWG -600V = 0.3201R&T s 2 4/C,f16 AWG-600V 2 - 16 PR, f16 AWG -600V
= 0.2'701RST
= 1.296LB&T
[
r TOTAL = 11.60612&T >
NOIES.
- 1. THE CABLE WEIGNIS WERE TAKEN FROM CAlfULADON EC - 5045. REV. I,NAY WEIGHT ANALYSIS". THE PARTICtXAR CABES CONTAMED M EACH RACEWAY WAS OBTAINED FROM CAlfUIADON BC - 3046. REV. 4, *?OWER CABE SIZING VEIUFICADON M HRE WRAPPEDRACEWAYS.
- 2. THE INSTAIU!D B BOUNDED B Y THE 3 1BD OF NEI TEST 2-3 AND BY TUBC TEST 11 4. IT IS NOT BOUNDED BY THE 6* 1BD M NEI TEST 2-3 E-2 "INE INSTALLERS HAD NO REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DISTANCE OF FASTENERS (BANDS ORT 1E WIRES) TO CONDUTT SECTION BtflT JOINTS SO FASTENERTO JOINT DISTANCES VARY. THE INSTALLERS MAINTAINED 12* OR LESS BETWEEN FASTENERS AND THERE WAS A MINIMitM OF ONE FASTENER ON SMALLER SECI1ONS (1.E., MITERED JOINTS AT RADIAL BENDS). THE TEST RESULTS DID NOT y INDICATU'INAT JOINT SEPARATION WAS A FAILURE MODE FOR PRE-SHAPED SECI1ONS, THEREFORE FASTENER 10 JOINT SPACING IS a NOT CONSIDERED A CRITICAL PARAMETER. THE INSTALLED CONFIGURATIONS ARE CONSIDERED BOUNDED BY THETESTED CONFIGURATIONS. I 5
1 E
's
inn ,na;v A nnyi.nni,y rn.w, n,e;< inn n oe:- 1iii e,1, n
! i i
i ibo jasill
! gda l! '
i ilill1li 2
nls-lili ilipinlll el ER g
l l
8 l l l .
i IIIll!il ii lI i ll5 i i !
l
! ! i I i ll!illlIl l l l l ! !!!!lill a
j l ,g lllil'il jii illi lii 3
g s
a 8
- l_il$ l lE 1.: 88 58 8
[<l8 gI 5l llg!lislll
. 6 s l l l l
- s - - -
tl * '
oOO22y9hP W3@3 o 3
%35*> E$ . " 3. D ?'
S -
8 3 D " N I
l F S N S 3 TD T S
0 & DO U D RTN E 8
NN N OO NOU A T MO N B NN U FD 3 N 1
E O U Or VO nO
/
- N 0 G
A N.
O I
TD BFTAD I
F TD I
OnNO BF OT2 El '3 TI 1D A WFE N A E R E D1 UI AER DJ S OT NA E
AR /UI DJ UR E A "61ENU /UI R I f I P V E ELU EA LL EA LU 1D ELU MAQ TT SS AQ TT S S VE AQ TTD SS 1 R )N MAQ A AVE SEP E N VE TI ER EN TI ER ENANF(
1I NEOX 7 AVE SER 6 .l'l S S S S S A
(
A
(
A
(
A
(
A E (
3- 3- 3- 3-B 5 3- )
A T CS 2nP 7E l
)
2 n) 7-)
l E 2 n)
TF 7-l
)
E 2)
TE D 7-l
)
E 2 n)
TF 7-l
)
E J E T T D TF SA SJ TD SE TD Sl TD ST TD MT S JI EI SA EI SA El SA EI SA P EA ER TA ER 1A ER TAT ER TA ER A TTD TG I P T TGP T TG 1GP I I T 1G 1
l E SN E S l
l I E S I
E P P E S E S l
E U E U E U A
S NINAN( NEU NIN N( NI N N(U NI N( NIN N(
N 2
._ O I
0 0
X )
S L T R A A A 2 C U
L E
X 2
C W
AD N RE I
T R
7- E
_ A 6, UTA U T. T. T. FT V V U R R 4 FF F/ U E E I
5, NL T //
/S SB A
_ F NA T OV IG BE BI T R l I 5-CE LL L 2 N R N E 4, ) A 96 36 86
- 5. 4 O
Z I
D R 326 71 I R I Y M. M S
T S M 2
-= R
_ R T 3, E T '6 "5 U T .=.
D.D O
H A D I 3 2,
- T T U D D N
I S
TOO OO E MM 2-l N A A U E I CC CC "
R O A O * " L A
T S
E*
N36 "35 I C 4 C 3 3
_ T F D N E E D T M E C E G E
_ i s
T O
S
_- E R M P E L T /
M T S M A O E Y C T S H I T
_ T S Y R A R R E
D S R
I R U N
E V
_ F E R A M U 1 1
L I R
R B N R A T
E O T T A .
A B R C
) H O
N _
_ T G l
F G S A E I A
Z I
E M R
_ NI L-O B
A A R T
T F O
_ M C T
S S /
S H
_ R J 1 NI T
T B E P U I
_ H P L 6
. T A D E 0 N E 6 A
O
- T 1 I 2 3 C 4 S 1 Y N 3
E T
I L O I
F- C S D A T NR E E I
M M
M Y
T Z
I S
G T
A M
N#g T N
E
]
EA #
F PP C
- gU y4I8" W35" dRa9x >
yyaDG%?n 8
3 _
F S _
0 W DO _
9 O . N NN N N N -
- 1 DO O U 0 O _
E A N. T D OD. 0 1D G WFE O I
AE BF11D OT 1 D E OIKE
- A P A R /UI R V
N DI AUIE I R NA R
/UI N
/UI R E ELU EA LU TTS AQ ELU MAQ ELU MAQ MAQ S AVE AVE
- B AVE SER E TINERVE SER SER 6
S S S S
. A A A
(
A
(
( (
- U 3 3- 3
- - 3-B 3 2) 7- ) 2) 7- ) 2) 7- ) 2) 7- )
AT D D l E D 1 E
C S UE TE l E TD iI1 l E TD TE TD 1 F
- D 1
PT P
SJ EIA SA I ER eL TA SA ER Sl El TA SA ER 6IA 1
]
6AR A "E TD11G TDITG TD T G l TD I aG E S I
l l S NE P l E NS NE PU NE P S NE P E N U NIN AN( U B
5 NIN AN( U NI AN( NI AN(
~
N 2 0
O I
0 X )
R S T A T E
.- A 2 1 l
U D U EX2 MAD 0DS 3
0 I
S L C RE 3ND - T U
A 7-6, UA T G DN A CU "0 E O V H 5
6 NU LDO 2 N D E F 5, NA L
ER 0 O N
E m DD 4, D RHA "0 D 4 ESH - 0 I
. R I i 3, H S
HE TR 1 S N
R m 3, E P I
A D 3- T B O 2, E M 2-
_. M l R
I O
C T B
4
. F N _
u w E t
M _
. E r G i u E S -
s OR M E P E T W T S N O
T I E _
O ETS Y D
1 U D _
S I T R A 0DS 3 S .
Y E R 3ND U T
D S I R U G ON "5 2 E O .
E n R A m A CU 0 N D _
L RR B N O
L. E RDO
- O N -
I A BA E R C OPF MA I "5
2 N A E
T I F D RHA D S O E E l HH ES 1
I S
N h L B
E N I O A M T R I -
P
. M C S N -
U I B T I
D A I 2 B 3
N N 4
E R L S S R I O I K
N F- CS m A E E)
N NOD SI O NR N I A S E AE R K T SAT
. R MT E R M#
T A
C D
ENT T AC N H E EC RD
- U RO M A M *D T(DI S I R TI S
G FRRA B O F
I EA PP
8Uh h". gS5$ g3ax> y*E y:4 > v,,
8 3
F I S S 0 N DO DO 0 O . NN NN 2 lO U .N U .N N N A N. On0 On0 l
E O O .
G U F BF1 1D BF11D OID T OHD A L E I AE R D I AE NAE N 'A R E P AR DI UI I UIR .UIR .UI
. V E EALU EA LU ELU ELU TTS AQ S TTS AQ S MAQ AVE MAQ AVE C EN ER I
" I VE EN ER I
S S S S A
(
A
( A A
(
E (
3 B 3 3-L 3- 3- ) -
2 n) 7- 2) 7- 7- 2) 7-)
AT l
)
E n l
)
E 2n l D l E
CS TF TF i F F UE SI TD SI TD T sJ TD PT P ET TA SA ER ET TA SA ER T
MlA I
J S E tT
~ A 1
SA ER A T I
' G TDI I
T NE I
D'I G I
E S I
E P I
E NS NE G P I TD' S
E N NE I I E S PU 2 C NI N N(U NI AN( U NI AN N NI AN( _
0 S _
0 _
X R S N A 2 N _
O E X
S S A _
I ) T R P R _
T 2 C
S N D S E .
A I O O ND V -
W U J J
OET O L A:D T T I nR n _
I R1 T r O r A 7-6, UTA tB T t B i P i -
V R "4 P .
E 4 MU L D D AU A _
E / _
I F 5, NA E E 1 TS T S
K 1 I 5 OV R K s SN N
. E N 4, CE E t a NU I I I
E D 4-I
' i SO S R I 3, E I
J U DN N
D N
Y S l
B R B U T. U OTT
- f 3, E T-A f
D 3 T F- S OI B O 2,
- R P O RU D RU _
M P f
l N E
L D E N _
2- _
R I
O C T
- C 4
HC HC _
F N _
D w E T. _
t M l E Fx G
E T. U 1 T I D s O R
S M S D U N O
E P E I N C T M /
T S N N I
)
X R O (
O ET Y S
I T
O J
N E
V T SY R A T O O E R I D SR I
R U T t D S n R E R B FN r I
R A M D "4
/ J A 1 I. B N 1 I T R O E s AP A _
A B A E R C E
R TS T _
T I SD S _
S G F E m I T NET I
N I
A U SR S N
I M B L n A B DO D C A T -
NP N M C S E UP U R U N R E
I P I P OU RS O
R P
A N D-F L U E I
C AO A 1 2 3 HN H 5
) D S _
E K S
(
E P E T 1
.T M .
F- CS E P A R A RI S _
NR I Y G O N ON E AE R T T P R PA _
R MT R E R T N
N P U
EPl GU i
C _
U I
O J
S N D S E G RR B J U M I
F EA PP
FIGURE F-6 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 210F 38 g PERFORMANCE I IIIERMCMAG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER. C2XE2ARX002 Y PARAMEERS 8 2 APPUCABM FIRE BARRIER SYS1EM SEGMENT l-2,2-3,3,34,4-5,54,6-7 ?
N i>
BARRIER 3D INSMlED CONNURAMN O ESED CONMURATION(S) SD APPUCABM 6D EVALUATIONI EVALUATED TEST 3 REF.NO.
NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME.NO a INSTATIFn) EVALUATION h-REQUIRED 8, FASE NER 1/2" STAINLESS STEEL BANDS 1/2" STAINLESS SIEEL BANDS AND o
N NEI TEST l-7 (UPGRADE)
NEI TEST 2-3 (AS TESTED BOUNDS INSTALLED) INSTAII Fn. NO AND EVALUA110N FASE NER 12" MAXIMUM 12" MAXIMUM NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED d SPACING E) }9.
x NEl 1EST 2-3 (AS SEE EVALUATION INSTAiJ En) E-2 AND FASTDIER VARIES. INSTALLERS HAD NO 2" MAXIMUM NEITEST l-7 g REQUIREMENTTO MAINTAIN FASTENER (UPGRADE)
TO JOINTSPACING.
NEI TEST 2-3 (AS SAME.NO INSTAII Fn) EVALUA110N o AND REQUIRED $*
FASTENER NOT USED NOT USED NEI TEST I-7 EDGE GUARDS (UPGRADE) h 2,
i r;
.-. . _ _ . - .- . . _ . . - _ - . . _ . _ - -- - - - - - . . -. _ _ ~ . - .
FIGURE F-7 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 22 0F 38 8
PERFORMANCE I EERMCWD BauUuER SYSUMPRODERD COMMODmi EWIEER: C2XE2ARXM2 O PARAMETERS g 2 APPUCABE FRE BARRIER SYSIEM SEGMENE I-2,2-3,3,34,4-5,54,6-7 y 9
BARRIER 3E INSTAUE CONMURADON 4E EM CONMURAMS) SE AIWCARE 6E EVAWATIONI h EVAIEATED TEST 5 REF.NO. -"
NONE NEI 1EST 2-3 (AS NEITEST 2-3 $
INSTATJ Fn) BOUNDS 11E 5,-
INSTAIIm. THE B' JODUS AND SEAMS ARE REINFORCED NEI1EST l-7 INSTAIJ m WOULD $
JOINT NONE WITH STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL (UPGRADE) HAVETO BE REINFORCEMENT GRADE UPGRADED TO BE MECHANISMS BOUNDED BY NEI 1EST 1-7. NO EVALUATION '
REQUIRED SUPPORT MEMBERS WERE NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 1ESTED BOUNDS B SUPPORTS ARE COMPETELY COVERED 1D PROIECIED FOR ENGTH IN NEI INSTAIJFD) INSTAIJm NO 3 STRUCIURE. INTERVENING STEEL IS TESTS 1-7 AND 2-3. TEST 2-3 AND EVALUATION y.
STRUCTURAL COVERED 18". ING.UDED INIERVENING STEEL NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED y SUPPORTAND MEMBERS PR(yIECIED FOR AN IS* (UPGRADE) l INTERVENING DISTANCE.
s1 EEL PROTECTION i
l EXPOSED ON All, SIDES EXPOSED ON ALL SIDES NEI TEST 2-3 (AS 1ESIED BOUNDS INSTALED) INSTAIIPn. NO
! AND EVALUA110N IS NEITEST l-7 REQUIRED.
IDCATION (UPGRADE) ? '
OF $
ENCWSURE >
R.
D a ;
i i
FIGURE F-8 INSTAU En TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 230F 38 8
I. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- C2XE2ARX002 g a4 M
?
8
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): 1-2, 2-3, 3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7 r* ,
?
3
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): E-1 AND E-2 $ ,
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E-1 ENCIDSED MASS C2XE2ARXD02 1 -4" CONDUlT = 9.720 LB/FT d 4 - 2/C, f16 AWG -600V = 0.320 LE/FT T 2 -4/C, f16 AWG -600V = 0.210IE/FT E 2 - 16 PR, f16 AWG -600V = 1.296IE/FT W TOTAL = 11.606 ER/FT N01ES.
l
- 1. THE CABE WEIGHTS WERE TAKEN FROM CAILUIATION FI - 5045, REV.1, *1tACEWAY WBGHT ANALYSIS". THE PARTICIAAR CABES WNTAINED IN EACH RACEWAY WAS OBTAINED FROM CAlfULA110N EC - 5046. REV. 4 " POWER CABW SIZING VERIFICATION IN FIRE WRAPPED RACEWAYS.
- 2. THE INSTALL 2D IS BOUNDED B Y THE 3" GD OF NH TEST 2-3 AND BY TUEC TEST 11 4. IT IS NOT BOUNDED BY THE 6" LBD IN NEI TEST 2-3 E-2 DIE INSTALLERS HAD NO REQUIREMENT FOR DIE DISTANCE OF FASTENERS (BANDS OR TIE WIRES) TO CONDUTT SECI1ON BtTIT JODUS SO FASTENERTO JOINT DISTANCES VARY. THE INSTALLERS MAINTAINED 12" ORIESS BETWEEN FASTENERS AND DIERE WAS o A MINIMUM OF ONE FAS1ENER ON SMAIJIR SECTIONS (1.E., MTIERED JODES AT RADIAL BENDS). DIE TEST RESULTS DID NOT j INDICATE THAT JOINT SEPARA110N WAS A FAILURE MODE FOR PRE-SHAPED SECTIONS, DIEREFORE FASTENER TO JOINT SPACING IS y NOT CONSIDERED A CRITICAL PARAMETER. THE INSTAT J Fn CONFIGURATIONS ARE CONSIDERED BOUNDED BY1HE TESTED ._
CONFIGURATIONS. y I. '
8J
FIGURE F-8 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 24 0F 38 g tt
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER: C2XE2ARX002 8 3
?
-i A
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): 1-2, 2-3, 3, 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7 h i?
5-
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1 AND E-2 s' o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENTEVALUATION:
AS SHOWN THROUGH PARAMEIER COMPARISONS, THE INSTAT I Fn CONFIGURATION IS BOUNDED BY THE 3" CONDUIT TESTED >
OONFIGURA110N IN NEI TEST 2-3. THE 3" DIAMEIER CONDUIT MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL TEMPERATURE GITERION (325' F OVER lg AMBIENT) WAS EXCEEDED AT 91 MINITIES.
x
. THE 3" DIAMEIER OR STEEL CONDUIT CONFIGURA110N TESTED IN NEI TEST l-7 WOULD BOUND 11IE INSTAI I Fn IF THE INSTAllID >
HAD AllJOINTS AND SEAMS UPGRADED WrIII STRESS SKIN AND'IROWEL GRADE CONSISTENT WIlit11tATTEST.111E 3" STEEL CONDUlT IN NEI TEST I-7 EXCEEDED THE MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL 1EMPERATURE CIUTERION AFTER 112 MINUTES WHILE A MINOR BARRIER OPENING OCCURRED IN 11tE 6" 1BD IN NEI1EST 2-3, THE INSTALLED 00NF1GURA110N INVOLVES CABIES IN CONDUITS WHIGI WOUID NOT BE PRONE 10 DAMAGE DUE TO FIRE FIGKIING ACTIVII1ES OR FAllJNG EXTERNAL OEUECIS DURING FIRE CONDFI1ONS. ,
?
1 e
a t '
li
oOOg _.y9hw. WEE 3 >gg9{ [F$ 3 o > _ it 8
3 .
F I S S S SE1 - S O N DO DO DO DEE DO O
IO . N N NN N NN .N NS N NN .N U .N 5 U 2 T U 0 U U .
O Om0 OmOAE E
G A N.BOmO U
L F I
TD AE BmT1D OmO B ID T
AE B
1 1 B ID T
A A E REA I
DI LU UIR DJ AUIE R D I UI R DI A D1iUIR P V EA T
LU EA I
TT SS AQ TT AQ S S TTS AQ S TTS A S TTS AQ S
A EN I I VE ER EN TI ER VE EN ER I
' I VE ENV I
' I E EN 1I ER VE 6
S 7- S 7- S S S A l A l A
(
A
(
( (
- A M
B
( 3
- 3- 3- 3 7- 3) 7- T) 2) T) 2) 7-A 13 l E ) - )
)
E 2 m)
S TD 2m T
l E TD 2 m) i ED Tm ED Tm l TD 1
_. EE T SA S i 6AR sI tt TA Si Et T A SI EI SA 6tA t I
P ER EvA I A R 1A R 1A E T R 1
A TG TTS 1 G I' T G T G T G T E S I I E S EP I I I I l S I P S P E P l
E U P E N E U A N( E N NI N(U NI E N(U E NIN N( NI N N( U NIN 2 5 0
0 X
R N A 2
O I
E X )
_- S T 2 C
A
_ U L
W AD RE A UTA L V R U A C
E M A SS S I K m E D NL V E S D
S D
GW 03 SB GL 0 L
A TL NA T
R E
V I
D 5 03 20 R I E M 2 2 M 59 6. 0 OC =
R m i
D 1 1 57 Z1 "
O U == ==
I T RR 6 A D N M "5 "6 N OE D B O S D D L I
D D A A E T
U L
G2 L == A R
I O
C T M W 2 "
3 3 S A "3 "5 "3 "6 "3 "5 "3
_ F N D w a E
M E w G E
t s S I
O E R M E
T W T S
O B T Y
S N T SY R A E
D SR I R
W R E I
R A
i R B I
A T
R A
B E
R 1
F N
G S A E N I M B L I
O A M r A C S T S N M U N E
_ E P P
I L U L G O Z
D 4
D A N E 2 I
R O
E T
4 6 O I 2 A C "4 S 4 H 3
Y 3
F-E CS T
I D E L
A I
e N O
I T
A NR E R E
R AE MT O P Y Z I E T g T N
U R E M T S A E I
R G
OM FA RR M M T O O I EA O T F PP C
0023 00177 TR-002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page Al20 of At32 M
i ,,
=s
, !'ilill ilil i,,l li llill l i i i
s li l
- ha 8 i
l l
=
i l i a
g a
g l
1
?
a l i sg i
! = l l l g a
l l i ! i i 4
a i : i s i 8 !3 l E h
! , d
- ~ m 3 E h l !8 !! lI!l ll l
. . - - - .. - . . . . - . . . _ . . - = _ . . - .
FIGURE F-5 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 27 OF 38 o o
PERFORMANCE I THERMCMAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENHFIER. C2XE2ARX002 U PARAMETERS h C
2 APPUCABE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT:: NODE 5 y 3C NSTAurDCONmURAHM 4C ESNONMMAMS) SC APPUCABM 6C EVAWADOW =
t BARRIER EVALUATED TESTS REF.NO.
PRE-BUITERED BLTIT JOINTS- POST-BUITERED BUTT JOINTS NEI TEST l-7 TESTED BOUNDS -h (UPGRADE) INSTA1D!D. NO E EVALUATION h JOINTTYPE(S) PRE-BUTIERED BtTIT JOINTS WTTH NEI TEST 2-3 (AS REQUIRED. ![
SOME SCORE AND FOLD ON 1HE 6" INSTALLED o LBD l
< 1/4" GAP s1/4" GAP NEI TEST l-7 SAME. NO (UPGRADE) EVALUA110N l AND REQUIRED.
JOINTGAP NEI 1EST 2-3 (AS INSTATIFn) d E
8.
sr 48" X 3* X s' 3" LED = 18" X 10" X 10" NEI 1EST l-7 1ESTED BOUNDS T LED = 24' X 10" X 10" (UPGRADE) INSTAIIFn. NO EVALUATION UNSUPPORTED l REQUIRED 3* LBD = 18" X 10" X 10" NE! TEST 2-3 (AS 6" LBD = 47 X 12" X 13" INSTAIJ FD) ,
l i
INSTAIIFn AGAINSTCONDULET THE 'IESTED BARRIERS ARE NEl 1EST l-7 SAME.NO INSTAII Fn SO 1 EAT THEY ARE (UPGRADE) EVALUATION i SUPPORTED BY THE LBD*S AND REQUIRED.
NEl 1EST 2-3 (AS o INSTATIFD) $a i SUPPORT MECHANISMS >
~
l R.
C I es
- -- - - - _ _ ~ - - - - - _ - - _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _
,!lll i !:f [ ! i ! : ! ii ' ,: [ iht i 8 F g s $' "
ooOgh >ES9.x > 2$>U22Y i
8 3
F N O
I O
S W. N N I
T N 2 HO 0 0 A 0 E A N. O1D O1D U O1D F 1 .
1 L 1 G
A WE NA E R NAER A NAE AR L UI . UI V .UIR P V E LU ELU E ELU E MAQ MAQ AVB E MAQ AVB SER SER E 2-SE AVB SER 7- S 7- S 7- S 7- S l A
( l A
(
I A
( l A
(
E 3- 3 I
B 3- 3- -
AS T) 2 n) T) 2) T) 2) T) 2 n)
C S SE T
TF SE SE Tm SE TF ED ED ED ED WTE T AR E
S1 E1 TA TA R
S TM E
T T A R
S1 ET TA 1 A R
SI Et TAT A GD! T GDt T GD I T GD I
E UPNE S I
E UPNE S I
P E U NE S l
E UP NE I
S 2 N(ANI N N(ANI N N(ANI N N(AND 4
0 0
m X
R N A 2
O I
E X )
S T 2 C
A U
L MAD R E A L-UT A V I E G RLU E H NA R
I E D M D 5 U M R I Y
E D
H S U R T O S
D M I M A D I N H N X I A A X B O B M A E E M M
- 2 " M N O
R OC I
T G
/
1 2
1 2 N F D N D E l
E M M _
U _
E f F G M T E _
GS T S _
s O R M 0. PR E P E 1
T M /
T MM S W O M
O ETS Y S H NM _
T Y R R A
DR O
E _
L r
I R
R A
> lE T
S G H m l R AI E T U N M A L B
u a M SQ I C A T S U NE M
R C S O M I R E
U P
m I X I
.G H P A A SN EI T A B C E M I R A N
" O 2
'1
/ 2 AP VS N I 2 m 1 M S 6 E R R R RR O
R E R D
F- CS NR E E N
EG NN EF3 A E
I N ET N E U R
I AE EC E CN TG R MT R E R EN T
S A
TA S P AS T
S AAX NM SE AG U OM FA A F F FT S F D G RR B I D
E I
F EA PP l!ll l l,!llll i! l'l li i '
_m . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . , _ . _ . __ _ ______ _ _ _ _ _ _
FIGURE F-7 INSTAIJ FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 29 OF 31 PERFORMANCE i nummAG BAIUUER SYSTEWPRoma w COMMODmi IDENIN1ER. C2XE2ARXM2 y PARAMETERS 8 G
2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSUEM SEGMENT. NODE 5 y SE APPUCABIE N
4E TESTED CONRGURADON(S) 6E EVALUATION / -
BN 3E INSTALL.ED CONFIGURADON EVALUATED TESTS REF. NO. b NONE JOINTS REINFORCED WIDI TROWEL NEI TEST l-7 NEITEST 2-3 BOUNDSTHE hq GRADE AND STRESS SKIN. (UPGRADE) i INSTALLED BUT is'.
TEST l-7DOES S JOINT NONE NEI TEST 2-3 (AS NOT.NO o ,
REINFORCEMENT INSTATIFn) EVALUA110N !
REQUIRED SUPPORTS ARE COMPLEIELY COVERED. SUPPORT MEMBERS COVERED OUT NEITEST l-7 TESTED BOUNDS g INTERVENING STEEL CONDUTTS ARE FULLIENGTH. (UPGRADE) D6 FAT I Fn. NO 3 '
COVERED OUT 18". EVALUATION g.
STRUCIURAL SUPPORTMEMBERS WERE NEI TEST 2-3 (AS REQUIRED. E SUPPORTAND PROTECIED R)R Full.IENGTH AND INSTATIFn) >
INTERVENING INTE* 'ZNING STEELMEMBERS WERE STEEI. PROTECTED FOR AN IS* DISTANCE PROTECTION OPENON AILSIDES OPEN ON AllSIDES NEI TEST l-7 SAME.NO (UPGRADE) EVALUA110N AND REQUIRED.
NEI TEST 2-3 (AS IDCATION INSTAII FD) !
=
OF ;
ENCLOSURE
?
u 2
b a
l t
l FIGURE F-8 INSTAI .I En TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 30 OF 38 8
e
- 1. 'IRERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER: C2XE2ARX002 5 3
4
~
h
- n APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 5
- 2. h
?
- 3. EVALUATION REF.NO.(S): E-1 1 8
i o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E.1 ENCID5ED MASS C2XE2ARX002 1 -4* CONDUTT = 9.72012/IT 4 -2/C, f16 AWG -600V = 0.320IRIET 2 -4/C, #16 AWG -600Y = 0JPGIRIFT d 2-16 PR 816 AWG-600V = 1196IJi/FT g TOTAL = H.606 U W T g, x
4' OF C2XE2ARXD02 = 4' X ll.606tatFT = 46.424 IRS y NOTES.
- 1. TIE CABE WEIGHTS WERE TAKEN FROM CAIIIRADON EC - 5045, REV.1,* RACEWAY WEIGHT ANALYSIS *. DE PARTICIKAR CABES CONTAINED M EACH RACEWAY WAS OBTAINED FROM CAII1 RADON EC - 5046, REY. 4,
- TOWER CABIE SIZING VERIRCADON M FDtE WRAPPED RACEWAYS.
- 2. TIE INSTALLED B BOUNDED B Y TIE 3" LBD OF NEI TEST 2-3 AND BY RJBC TEST 11-4. IT B NOT BOUNDED BY TIE 6* 1BD M NE1 TEST 2-3
- 3. WEIGHT 3 FOR A 4" CONDUIET WERE NOT READE.Y AVARABE. CONSERVATIVELY USED TIE WEIGHT OF THE 4" CONDUIT FOR TIE LENGT11 OF THE COVERAGE.
E.2 BANDS WERE USED ON THE INSTALED CABG TRAY AND FASTENER SPACNG WAS MAINTAINED AT 12"OR ESS. THERE WAS HOWEVER NO REQUIREMENT FOR BAND TO JOINT SPACING SO THAT DIMENSION VARIES. THE ACTUAL INSTAUID CONFIGURATION B WITIEN 4" OF 111E JOINT ON m
TIE BOT 10M PANEL FOR THE HORIZONTAL SECTION WIDCH WOULD BE THE CRT!1 CAL JOINT. THIS COUPED WITH THE FACT THAT THESE ARE 3 %
HOUR PANE 13 WHICH DID NOT TEND TD DISTORT IN TIE TESTINO RESULT 3 IN TIE SPACING OF THE BANDS TO JOINT OREATER THAN 2
- BEING INSIGNIFICANT ANDTHE INSTALLED BEING BOUNDED BY THETESTED. TO MAINTAIN CONSERVATISM M TIES EVALUATION CitEDET B BEING TAKEN I FOR ONLY A 60 MINUTE BARRIER RATING INS 1EAD OF TIE 86 MINUTES OBTAINED IN NEI TEST 2-3
'g t
3
0023-00177.TR 002, Revision 0 Appendix A Page A125 or A132 5 El dI BR 2 'm 12 W l f glg
^
E l
3 g! 8 l l lE!hl I 4
l- l8 Ig 8 .g 4
8 ! i 5s s g R g D
g eld lg gg h U g
l.
e 1
g i
i, si. ,
! m b E 5 3l l $ $ $ l $8 i $ h n 2 Ej 8 '5 5
ss 88 !g
! B s
3 l 0
8 8 " :
- i 8 i-
! lg!llll
! lll i 1 s.
! e 2 2 lasi1it in l= .
$l8Elll i'8 ls B * =
8 ll 3
=l1Rllllll e
i is$ yg
- l, l 8
l i lglalil!ils a
- E .
l FIGURE F-3 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 320F 3S g PERFORMANCE I. THERMCMAO BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECED COMMOtXTY IDENIFIEIL- C2XE2ARX002 Y PARAMETERS 8
2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODE 7 y
N COMMODITY 3A INSTAUID CONNURATM 4A ENONNURAMS) SA APPUCABLE M EVALUADOW
- EVALUATED TESTS REF. NO.
CONDUTTINIERFAG %TTH A SIRUCIURE. CONDUTT/WALLIN1ERFAG NE1 TEST 2-2 SEEEVALUAVON -k l E-1. E l TYPE CABES AIR DROPPING FROM CABE 'IVEC TEST $-
l TRAYS TO EMBEDDED WAIL SEEVES SCHEME 11-4 [
4* 3/4",2* A 3" CONDUTIS NElTEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION E-1.
24 AIRDROPPING CABLES AT TUEC TEST SIE EMBEDDED WAI1 SLEEVES SCHEME 114 STEEL ALUMINUM NEI1EST 2-2 "IEST BOUNDS INSTAIIFn. NO MATER'AL EECTRICAL CABES TUEC1EST SGEME 11-4 EVALUAVON d REQUIRED R h
N/A ATINIERFAG NEI1EST2-2 THISIS AN N/A ATINIERFAG AND EVALUATION OF 1UECTEST '!HEINIERFAG SCHEME 11-4 BETWEEN CONDUTT CONIENTSI (X)VERAGE AND A TOTALEw1nitFn (X)NCRE1E WAIL
'INERMAL MASS IS NOTA CONSIDERATiONIN THIS EVALUATION HORIZONTAUVERDCAL VERBCAUHORIZONTAL NEI TEST 2-2 "IEST BOUNDS AND INSTAJPn. NO ORIENTA110N TUECTEST* EVALUATION m SCHEME Il-4 REQUIRED {
l '
T3 a
t Vi
, . .Il. i 8Og $M?8" . gss3o gS9A > ,
2g > G~ 2 b it 8 N N 3 O 0 S F I S 1
/
T DO 1 DO O
3 E.
HO A
U NN N U
A U NN N U .
3 L .
O . L O .
E JA N. A OmT B
I D A BmOAT DE I G UF E V I AE V E
A P VAR E D EALU T UR DI UR EA I
LU E
E . TTS S AQ E .
TTS AQ S
EN ER VE l
B E
SE 1
I
" I E
SE E
TI NERVE 6
4- 4- 4-S 2- 4 2 2- 2-T 2 T1 2 T1 2 T1 2 T1 1 S S 1 S1 S1 S
.I NT E TS E
T EE 1M CE EH T
S E
T I
EE I
' M CE EI T
S E
1 1
EE TM CE EH T
S E
E N
UC E N
UO TS E
N UC TS ENUC NATS B
5 TS 2
0 0
N X R
O I
A 2 S L
S E L T X E E A 2 C M N A
N A D U H AD P P E L RET B T N A .
WAU I
R A E T
V R HL V-L F T E EFlI NA - 1 1 A
L R i OV 03 0
- F CE 3 F EN D 3
G 3 0 T
U I
G '
R I m AD A "5 5
2 B R Y I MN E L- 2 1 L L A
A TDO 7 m C O 1
0 0
1 A
N N B M E MIE M +
- R E R D RT R 5 E N E E M O N
EA HL E
H
'0 5
2 6
T N O T N
R I
O C - B 4 TF T O 0 I N I T
F D N E E u T C M T E E G E
l U
1 T S D s O R M N
E P E O C
T M /
T S D O ETS Y M S I E P
T Y R A R A S E H L D R I
R W S- A E. E R n E N
- I U
U A
B N R P ).
R E
I I A E O T A B R C D
1 R 0H X
E T G H E 3 3 S A E 2 3(S D N I- L B
l GD N
- O A A I
M A T AN R
C U
S LU '5 L A
- E P m OO 2 N
H P MR i E R
T A Rf N E El "5 1
- iA l 2 O N I
2 B' 'l H 1 N I N
4 R E ,
S R I F- CS E 1
A S E E)N0101 MN S O NR N 1A I
E I R S D AE R m F A T SA R MT R E R E#
T A C
,n-a EN1 F
I C N EC D
E RI S
i l ;!
,! ' { !' , t! ' :l :$ . n>
>EaaE >
gUh FN.8"f35$ ,1 m=T >~wa > ,u 8
3 T .
_ F I O 1 O N N E O . SYEN 4
3 I
T O I N N N .
E A N. D BE0 S1 0 1D 0
1D 0
1D G UL E F 2D l E 1
O1 AE O1 E O1 E A AR l DDA U N
/UI R N A
/UI R N
/UIAR P
E V AN E T L ELU ELU ELU TUSA S MAQ MAQ MAQ N B1E OEV AVE AVE AVE
_ C 6
_ 2 1
4- 4- 4- 4-B S 2- 2- 2- 2-AT 2 T1 2 T1 2 Tl 2 T1 CS T S1 T S1 T SI T S1 UE PT S EE S EE S EE S EE P E TM CE E TM CE E 1M CE E TM CE A 1 T T T
_ 1 E
E UG I
ENUC DEH I DEH ENuC I DEH ENUC N NA1S NATS CS TS NAtS
_. 2 0
0
_ N X R
O I
A 2 )
E "E
EGE E
T X S (
M MAT A 2 N O A ARE U C I T R R FVC ER F
AD E ON L RE E . R CO G A UTA RE G V L-UT UY C A A I
E G I U I E TAE F R
F R
E 1 F
FL NA IC C I WH E E R
1 T OV PG P 1 T I
_ E I
N E
D CE " N D
E EOC DA1 E RD 0 N I
l N
I L
R I
I T R L R Y l
S E
OO F T EDE T1 1 l
A A W W L
A I D
O 7
E T &D T U DO T T B M D EE RT BIEBL A A O "4 E M OL E TDI
_ N CO RUN A
/
1 A A R
I O
C C SB PBAW S
/
N
/
N
_ T. 4 F u N t E D a E
i F
T r M G
E S
. s O R M E P E "E
_. T M /
T S N EGE E O MAI O T Y S T I
ARE
. T S Y R A R ER S E R FVC D R I
R U G EON RCO F E I
R A
I F G G I R B N UY C A A
- I R A E O IAE F R
F R
. A B R C C I
P WH 1 E E T O I F D E
GO I N
1 N
S A E I D AT I I N
L L I
M C
B A A E R RD L
L l M
R C
T S EOE ITT A l
A J N T L W W E l P
I H P U DO T T T A B TEBL EI DL "4 A A RUN A
/
1 A
/
A PBAW
/
I 2 C 3 5 N N 5
)
S D S
_. E E M F- CS
(
E P A TR L A TRIS NR P G RE S E AE Y T T OI P R A N N R ONPA R
U G
i D
O J
N I
O J
PR P UAS SB N
U EPH TU NS C I E M
_ F PP
FIGURE F-6 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRil .R EVALUATION PAGE 35 OF 38 8 ,
1 PERFORMANCE I. THERhDIAG BARRIER SYSTEM /PROTECIED COMMODmf IDENT1FER. C2XE2ARX002 Y PARAMETERS 8 ,
2 APPUCABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENE NODE 7 G u
3D INSTAME CONHGURAME 4D MM CONFIGURATKMS) 5D APPUCABU! 6D EVAWADOW g BARRIER EVALUATED 'ITSTS REF.NO. *g CONCRETE ANCHORBOLTS NElTEST 2-2 SEE EVALUA110N p NONEATIt4TERFACE <*
AND E-1.
1UECTEST b '
FASTENER SCHEME Il-4 5'
- o NONE ATINTERFACE DOLTS SPACED A MAXIMUM OF 12' NEITEST 2-2 SEE EVALUATION AND E-1 TUECTEST FN SCHEME 11-4 SPACING E
a
- o. .
p- >
NONE ATDUERFAG 1"-2* FROM JOINTS AND EDGE OF NEITEST2-2 SEEEVALUATION THERMO. LAG AND E-1.
1UEC1EST FN SGEME 11-4 DISTANCEFROM JOIN 13 NONE NONE NElTEST2.2 SAME/NO l AND EVALUATION TUECTEST REQUIRED o pm II EDGEGUARDS C
e O
~.
C 4J
FIGURE F-7 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 36 OF 38 g u
PERFORMANCE I. THERMCMAG BARRIER SYSUMPROHCTED COMMODITY IDENUFIER. C2XE2ARX002 Y*
PARAMETERS 8 2 APPUCABUI FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT NODE 7 G u
3E INSMM CONMWANN 4E ESHDCONMWAWS) SE API M ABLE 6E EVALUARON/
h BARRIER 6 EVALUATED TEST 3 REF. NO 8 NONE .
GROOVE AND FOtB METHOD IS USED AT)OINIS WHERETHERMO-LAG NEI UEST 2-2 SEE EVALUA110N E-2 h
Q FLARES OtfrONID THE CDNCREIE. E:
8 JOINT "PICIURE FRAME"IS11ED DRO TUEC1EST <>
REINFORCEMENT RACEWAY COVERAGEITITLIZING A SCHEME Il-4 MECHANISMS STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE UPGRADE.
NONE. NONE NEITEST2-2 SAME.NO g AND EVALUATION y 1UECTEST REQUIRED. R STRUCTURAL SCHEME Il-4 E SUPPORTAND >
INTERVENING STEEL PROIECDON AT A CONCRETE WALL AT A CONCRETE OFII.ING NEITEST 2-2 SAMF1NO EVALUATION AT A CONCRE1E Wall TUECTEST REQUIRED SCHEME 11-4 IDCA110N y OF y ENCLOSURE a D
ts 2,
t
?
__ _ ._ .. _ ._- __ _ _ . _ . - _ . . . __ _ . _ _ . _ ._ ___ . . . _ . _ _ - _ . . m... . _ _ . _ _
FIGLIRE F-8 INSTALLED TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE37 OF31 g
!3
_8
- l. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENTIFIER- C2XE2ARX002 h N
k
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 7 p S.
a o
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1 THROUGH E-3
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
E-1 'IMIS EVALUATION IS FORTHE INTERFA OFTHERMO-LAGCOVERAGEON ACONDUITWilE AWAIL THEONLYTWOTESTED y ARRANGEMENTS OF1HERMO-LAG MATERIAL ABLTITING MASONRY ARE IN NEI TEST 2-2 IN WHIGI A THERMO-LAG BOX DESIGN u tTrILIZING 1 HOUR MATERIAL CONFIGURATION WAS ATTACHED TO THE NII .ING OF THE'IEST DEOC WITH HIL'Il BOLTS, AND TUEC 3 1EST SCHEME Il-4 WHICH INCLUDED A SIMILAR BOX DESIGN ITTILIZING 1 HOUR MATERIAL ATTACHED 'ID A CONCRETE WAIL IN NE! 9.
TEST 2-21HERMO LAG V-RIB PANELS WERE SCORE & FOEDED TO CREATE A BOX SHAPED ENQDSURE WITH 3 INCH FLANGES ALL AROUND WIP' ' LAY FLAT AGAINSTTHE CONCRETE AND ACT AS A BASE THROUGH WHICH ANCHOR BOLTS WERE INSTALIID. THIS l FLANGED ARL PROVIDES STRUCIURAL SUPPORT AND 'IMERMAL PRO 1ECHON FORTHE INTERFAG AREA. TUEC1EST SGEME 11-4 l LTTILIZED A SEPARA1E
- PICTURE FRAME" CLM AROUND A THERMO4.AG BOX. THE BOX WAS CONNECTED 1D THE "PICIURE FRAME" WTIH SIRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE TO ENSURE SIRUCIURAL SUPPORT.
E-2 1HE INSTAI J Fn IS NOT BOUNDED BY THE TESIED DUE TO THE LACK OF S1PESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE AT1HE"PICIURE FRAME" AT THE STRUCIURE INIERFACE. 'INE ACGPTABG UPGRADE WOUtB BE TO TIE THE "PICIURE FRAME" COVERAGE INIO t THE CONDUIT COVERAGE WITH STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE PERTUEC TEST SCHEME 11-4.
?
2 C
t
- 1 ,
FIGURE F-8 INSTAT T FD TO TESTED FIRE BARRIER EVALUATION PAGE 38 OF 38 8
td
- 1. THERMO-LAG BARRIER SYSTEM / PROTECTED COMMODITY IDENI'IFIER- C2XE2ARX001 h Gu
- 2. APPLICABLE FIRE BARRIER SYSTEM SEGMENT (S): NODE 7 $
E 2-
- 3. EVALUATION REF. NO.(S): E-1 'HIROUGH E-2 5' s
o
- 4. EVALUATION (S):
SEGMENTEVALUATION.
AS INSTAILED, THERE IS NO BOUNDING TEST AND THEREFORE NO FIRE RATING FORWIE STRUCIURE INIERFACE. THE PRINCIPAL y ATIRIBUIE MISSING FROM THE INSTAf I E CONFIGURATION IS STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE SUPPORT BETWEEN THE "PICIURE u FRAME" AM) CONDUTE COVERAGE PROVIDING ADDri1ONAL SIRUCIURAL PROIECTION ATTHE INTERFAG AREA. }9. !
AN UPGRADE OF THE INSTAR J m CONFIGURATIONS BY TYING 1HE "PICIURE FRAME" OOVERAGE INIO THE RACEWAY COVERAGE WITH >
STRESS SKIN AND TROWEL GRADE PER1UEC TEST SCHEME 11-4, WEL PROVIDE REASONAB2 ASSURAN THATTHEINSTAIJ m WILL BE DOUNDED BY THAT1EST AND PROVIDE A RATED DURATION OF 60 MINUTES.
i TESTED RACEWAYS EXHIBITED ACCEPTABE STRUCIURAL INIEGRITY IN THE AREA OF THE THERMO4.AG COI1ARS FOLIDWING 1HE HOSE STREAM TEST.
i t
D*
G o
2 b
m 84 l l
i Page B1 OF B3 APPENDIX B 4
SUMMARY
OF RESULTS i
1 1
P l
9 l
l
Page B2 ofB3 Appendir B Summary of Results South Texas Project Unit One Bounded Anticipated Barrier Fire Rating By Barrier Rating (By Eval)
Classification Commodity Commodity Test Rating Applicable with Upgrade Applicable Fire Number Size Commodity (Y/N) As Insta!!cd Test (s) (Min) Tes:(s)
Area (1 or 3 thr)
(Min) 07 3 CIXE2ATSAB 24" Box N O N/A 60 TUEC Test 11-4 Configuration Cable Tray Y 60 NEI Test 2-10 86 NEl Test 2-10 Straight Run Cable Tray Y 60 NEl Test 2-10 86 NEl Test 2-10 Radial Bend CableTray/ Wall N O N/A 60 'RJEC Test Il-4 Interface CIXE2ARX002 4" Junction Box N 0 N/A 60 TUEC Test Il-4 3
Configuration Conduit Y 91 NEI Test 2-3 112 NEI Test I-7 Straight Run Conduit Y 102 NEI Test 2-3 129 NEI Test I-7 Radial Bend Conduit / Wall N O N/A 60 TUECTest iI-4 Interface
t f j y , . : l l ; ' . !l[t!! ili it
_ 3 B
f o l 3
- B e
g
. 4- 4 4-
. a 4
- 0 0 -
P l 1 I 7- 7- 7- 7- 1 l
e I 1
1
- 1 i 1 I 1 I 1
ba )s t s
e 2
t s
2 t
s t
s e
t s
e t
s t
s t
s t
s t
s e
ic (t e e e e lpe s T T e
T e T T T T T T T pT C C C l l ! I C A E I
E l
E E E E E E E E _
U N N V U N N N N U 1 I
' T T -
r e) i l r
r ae a vd _
B yEa gr )n 2 9 2 4 0 0 6 6 0 0 1 2 1 8 6
WB (
gh(pi UM 6 8 8 6 6 I 1 1 1 i
cii nt _
i t
nR t
aw -
A 0 0 3 3 3 3
e 1 1 - - -
- 2 2 l
2
- 2 2 2
ba )s A t s
t s A A t
s e
t s
e t
s e
t s
e A c (t / / /
o is l
pe
/
N T e
T e
N N T T T T N w pT l I l
E l
E l
E l
E T A E E -
N N N N N N t
s i t
l u n de s U r gl e na l
2 2 Be t iri ts 0 0 O O 1
0 1
0 O xR if j c
e r t aan BRI s 6 6 9 1 9 1 dn o o r
A ey P _
pr d e )
pa s a dn ysNt N Y Y N N Y Y Y Y N Am x e
uBe/
o TY(
m B u T _
S ht y n n y d l
l a xn n d l
o yu u la e u it i t
a rR a a r ne /cWe oio Bt a iR t t ie n t in g
le t
Wc o w xr Tt TB af ya nr u t uB ui u /a a Te o u S ou h r r dngh dnla dn d it rf
= Big f
n aa l
e g bi l
bi r ad el t
en cf ig t i nn Cr oi a Cd oi o4 no duen a CC C n t
C o CtS CaR ba l I uo t R oI -
C JC S C C
y t
i d
oer
- mi 4 2 "4 mS o
C 2
B 0 y A 0
- t ir de S X _
ob T R _
nm A A uu n
2 E
2 E
oN X X C 2 2 C C gorn) niu o t iaH t
ac 3 RG 3 3 r
i eM r o FOI(
er a e 7 ir 0 FA
1 e
(
, Revision 0 Page C1 OF C3
)
i APPENDIX C 1
4 I
UPGRADE TECHNIQUES 4
i l
i E
l 1
i 4
E 4
i 4
i I
f-h
+
T i
5
(
4 I
4 I
I h l
3 l <
4 i
's 1
f a
4 1
4 4
9
+ i n
,- -. - - . . . , a < - - -, r~ , , , , - - . .,
Revision 0 Page C2 OF C3 APPENDIX C UPGRADE TECHNIQUES This Appendix contains_ detailed descriptions of the upgrades to existing Thermo-Lag configurations referenced in Appendices A and B for structural interfaces.
1.0 Upgrade of Structural Interfaces per TUEC Test 11-4 1.1 Structural Interface Upgrade with " Picture Frame" where no frame currently exists.
1.1.1 Install stress skin around the perimeter of the enclosure extending approximately 3 in, onto sides of the enclosure, stapled to the Thermo-Lag panels with 9/16 in. staples and then flared out onto the concrete surface for an approximate 2 in. distance.
1.1.2 Install an approximate 3/16 in, thick layer of 330-1 Trowel Grade material over the stress skin.
1.1.3 Install 2 in. wide flat panel strips in a " picture frame" fashion over the stress skin portion which flared out onto the structural surface using 1/4 in diameter x 3 1/4 in. long "Hilti" bolts spaced at approximately 10 in. intervals and 1 in. from the edge of the panel strips.
1.2 Structural interface upgrade with stress skin and trowel grade where " picture frame" exists, but there is no stress skin and trowel grade joints reinforcement.
1.2.1 This is not a specific tested arrangement, but the following upgrades are based on tested joint reinforcement techniques used to reinforce other joints in TUEC Test 11-4.
1.2.2 Install an appro:r; Je 3/16.x thick layer of 330-1 Trowel Grade material extending approximately 3 in.
onto sides of the enclosure and flared out onto the
" picture frame" at least 2". Thermo-Lag panels that are installed over the panel that is bolted to the structure to cover the Hilti bolt should be removed before applying the trowel grade.
l l
r Revision 0 Page C3 OF C3 1.2.3 Install stress skin over the trowel trade and secure with 9/16" staples. Stress skin can be cut out as necessary to accommodate the bolts.
1.2.4 Apply a skim coat of Trowel Grade approximately 1/16" thick over the stress skin and staples.
Revision 0 Page D1 OF D3 APPENDIX D RECORD OF CONVERSATION WITH THERMO-LAG INSTALLER l
-,n ,
Revision 0 Page D2 OF D3 APPENDIX D Record of Conversation l l Telephone X l Meeting y Other To: McArthur Johnson From: John G. Crowther Company: HL&P STPEGS Phone No: N/A Date: 10/26/94
Subject:
Original Thermo-Lag Installation at STPEGS Summary of Conversation:
Backaround An interview was conducted on October 26,1994 with Mr. McArthur Johnson who was involved in the original installation of Thermo-Lag at STPEGS in the late 1980's. This interview was based on Mr. Johnson's best recollections. The information provided is to supplement information obtained from the installation manual and the QA records to determine how the Thermo-Lag configurations were constructed.
Summary of Conversation Materials
-
- STPEGS received prefabricated panels and preshaped conduit sections from 4 Thermal Sciences, Inc. (TSI). There were no panels or conduit sections fabricated on site. Panels were V-ribbed. Stress skin on 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> materials was on the inside and outside.
Installation
- The installation was to a quality control program. There were QC hold points in the work packages.
- Joints were pre-buttered, butt joints.
- V-ribs were pounded flat when it was necessary to make a joint fit.
- Material was not " thinned" or cut away in any manner which would result in less than minimum thickness.
- Radial bends were covered with mitered joints on conduit. Coverage on cable
i Revision 0 Page D3 OF D3 tray radial bends was provided by bending the panels to the extent possible without damaging the panel then mitering pieces to obtain coverage around the bend.
- Stress skin was no removed and, if damaged or loose, it was repaired or the piece replaced.
- Banding was the most prevalent fastener used with a maximum spacing of 12" (there was no maximum distance requirement of fastener to Thermo-Lag joint).
Tie wires were also used and panels against concrete structures were secured with expansion bolts.
i f
1 I
l t
. - - -