ML17309A949

Rev 0 to Electrical Cable Ampacity Correction Factors for Thermo-Lag Fire Barriers

ML17309A949
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	06/02/1998
From:	FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17229A785	List: L-98-175, Submits Response to NRC 980423 RAI Re GL 92-08, Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barriers. Calculations Referenced in Response Are Attached ML17229A786 ML17309A949
References
PSL-BFSM-98-005, PSL-BFSM-98-005-R00, PSL-BFSM-98-5, PSL-BFSM-98-5-R, NUDOCS 9806300527
Download: ML17309A949 (19)

Text

/

f St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 I Docket%os. 50-335 and 50-389 I I 98-175 Attachment 2 Page i

, Calculation No:

Title:

Y'V Original Issue No.

Descrigtion Date REVISIONS Chkd Date Appr Date 9806300527 98062b Pl PDR ADOCK 050003$ 5 P

PDR (

Form 82A, Rev 6/94

,i

t Page ii Calculation No.

Rev.

Title V

VP Page Section Rev.

Page Section Rev.

i 11lii 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 Cover List of Affected Pg Contents 1.0 Purpose 2.0 References 3.0 Methodology 4.0 Assumptions Bases 5.0 Calculation 6.0 Conclusion 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 Form 82B, Rev 6l94

Page iii CALCULATION %Pi 1BER

~,

REV.

Cover Sheet List of Effective Pages Table of Contents 1.0 2.0 3.0 5.0 6.0 Purpose/Scope References Methodology Assumptions/Bases Calculation Results Thermal Science Data for Thermo-Lag 330 and 770 Form 82C, Rev 6/94

CALCULATION NO.

REV~

SHEET NO.

1.0 Purpose/Scope GL 92-08 (Ref.

2.1) has required FPL to review the ampacity correction factors (ACF) used for raceway with fire barriers.

The ampacity correction factors were uodated calculation PTN-BFJM-96-005 and were based on testing performed at Omega P

by oint Laboratories.

The NRC in Reference 2.2 has expressed concern over the testing performed at omega Point Laboratories; therefore, this calculation will determine applicable ampa mpacity correction factors for St.

Lucie based on testing performed at Underwriters Laboratoxies.

This calculation will use heat txansfer relationships to evtrapolate the results from tested fire barriers to thicknesses which bound the thickness of fire barx'ier used at St.

Lucie Plant Units 1

and 2.

This calculation is intended to be a

conservative e:<trapolation of test data based on the laws of heat transfer and not a

thorough heat transfex evaluation.

2.0 References 2.1 GL-92-08, "Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barriers" Dated December 17, 1992.

2.2 Second Request for Additional Information - Generic Letter 92-08 "Thermo-Lag 330-1 Fire Barriers, St.

Lucie plant Units 1 and 2 and Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4",

(TAC NO.

M82809),

Dated April 23,1998 Addx'essed to T.F.

Plunkett and signed by Fredric J.

Hebdon, Director

2. 3 ASHRAE Handbook, 1991 Fundamentals 2.4 NRC Safety Evaluation Addressing Thermo-Lag Related Ampacity Derating Issues for Crystal River (TAC NO. M91772),

Dated November 14,

1997, Addressed to Roy A. Anderson and Signed by L. Raghaven, Project Manager 2.5 ANSI C80.1-1990, Table 2

"Dimensions and Heights of Rigid Steel Conduits"

2. 6 Underwriters Laboratories, Ampacity Test Investigation of Raceway Fire Barriers for Conduit and Cable Tray Systems, Dated May 8,

1996, File

NC1973, Project 95NK1/030 (Note: Recorded in Passpox t as REPORT NC1973) 2.7.

TSI inc., Thexmo-Lag 330 a 770 Thermal Properties (Included as Attachment 1) 2.8.

NEMA Publication WC3-1980, Rubber-Insulated Mire and Cable for the Transmission and Distribution of Electrical Energy.

Form 83, Rev 6/94

CALCULATXON NO.

RES~

SHEET NO.

3.0 Methodology I

E THERMO-lAG CONOUIT CABLE R(

Rt Rg Rs Heat transfer will be calculated per foot of raceway length in accordance with the following relationship:

(Tc Ta) / (Rf+ Q+ Rc+ Rs) q Tc Ts Rg R~

Rs Rate of heat transfer from raceway Temperature of conductor (904C/194'P)

Ambient temperature (404C/1044P)

Thermal resistance of all items within the raceway including the raceway itself Thermal resistance of the air gap between the raceway and the fire barrier material Thermal resistance of the fire barrier material Thermal resistance at the surface of the protected or unprotected raceway Form 83, Rev 6/94

CALCULATION NO.

V REV~

SH ET NO.

(

The heat transferred

'from the raceway undex steady state conditions is essentially equal to the X R losses within the conductors.

These heat values can be d t e

e exmined from the test data based on the measured current and size of conductor used.

T, and T, are fixed test parameters with values which are listed above.

The thexmal resistance values will be determined based on test data and physical properties as follows:

Rz will be calculated from the test data for raceway without fire barrier.

R will be calculated from test data for raceway with a fire barxier of tested thickness.

R, will be calculated based on the known thermal conductivity (k) for Thermo-Lag material.

R, will be based on known physical properties and the laws of convection and radiation heat transfer.

After all of the thermal resistance values have been established, the heat transferred can be calculated for the raceway with a

desired thickness of fire barrier by recalculating R, and R, considering the additional thickness.

Since the heat is a function of the current

squared, the ampacity correction factor (ACF) will be determined by the following relationship.

ACF ~ l /E

,/Z = (q~/q) where the subscript p refers to the protected raceway 1/2 As a test of the methodology, the test data for 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> fire barrier will be used to predict the ACF for the 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> baxrier test.

These results will be compaxed to the test data t6 demonstrate the conservatism of the methodology.

4.0 Assumptions/Bases 4.a The total heat o

at load used in the extrapolation of the ampacity correction factors associated with fire barriers will be based on the E R losses in the cables which will be representative of the total heat load.

The testing documented in Reference 2.6 included paired sets of conductors with the same current running in opposite directions; thexefore, the magnetic fields associated with this current will be effectively canceled.

Generally, inductive losses are minimal in plant application~

due to the practice of routing three phases of power cables in the same raceway.

inductive losses are accounted fox in the amoacity rating calculations for the cables.

4. 2 Surface emittance for cable,

raceway, and Thermo-Lag wi11 be assumed to be equal 0.9.

Note that a high emittance value will reduce the thermal resistance at surface having an overall effect of maximizing the ampacity de-rating from additional thickness of Thermo-Lag.

Foxm 83, Rev 6/94

CALCULATION NO.

REV~

SHEET NO.

4. 3 Heat transfer through the sides of cable tray will be> assumed to be er Th' zero.

is will reduce the heat transfer equation for tray to a

one dimensional h t t ea ransfer 4"

t 's equation.

As the tested cable tray is relatively wide,24" compared to th I

depth, this test is expected to be a good approximation for all cable tray widths.

4.4 The thickness of the Thermo-Lag in the tests is assumed to be at the minimum allowable thickness specified.

This thickness will provide a conservative ACF value as it maximizes the thickness of Thermo-Lag which must be added to reach the thickness Conduit 1 Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 3 Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 Tray 1 Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 3 Hour Thermo-Lag 330-1 0.625 Inches 1.25 Inches 0.625 Inches 1.125 Inches (Ref. 2.6 Page 6) 4.5 The calculation will be performed assuming the following bounding plant configurations:

Conduit With 1 Hour Barrier Bounded by 1 to 4" Conduit Maximum Barrier Thickness

= 1-1/2" Conduit With 3 Hour Barrier Bounded by 1 to 4" Conduit Maximum Barrier Thickness

~ 3-1/16" Tray or Banked Conduit With 1 Hour Barrier Bounded by 4" deep tray and 1 to 4" Banked Conduit Maximum Barrier Thickness

~ 1-1/2" Tray or Banked Conduit With 3 Hour Barrier Bounded by 4" deep tray and 1 to 4" Banked Conduit Maximum Barrier Thickness 3-1/16" Adjacent layers of fire barriers are assumed to be installed with a layer of trowel grade material creating a homogeneous thickness of Thermo-Lag material with no intervening air gaps.

An exception is the 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> upgrade which provides a second layer of Thermo-Lag 330 applied directly on the base layer.

For this case, the potential for additional thermal resistance at this interface will be ignored.

The conservative assumptions relative to the Thermo-Lag thickness applied will compensate for any additional resistance at this interface.

4.6 Raceway xs made of rigid steel, magnetic material, which is typical for power plant installations.

4.7 Banked conduit which is banked in a single plane can be assumed to be equivalent cable tray.

Both configurations involve a

cable mass arranged in a

shallow rectangular section.

Both configurations involve an air gap between the cables and the fire barrier material.

Form 83, Rev 6/94

CALCULATIONNO.

REV~

SHEET NO.

j 4.8 The thermal resistance values for all items within'he raceway and f h

between the conduit. and the'hermo-Lag material will be assumed to remain constant as additional thickness of Thermo-Lag is installed.

Considering that the geometry of these areas is not changed, this approximation is reasonable.

4. 9 This calculation is valid for indoor areas where the surrounding air and surface temperatures are relatively equal.

Air flow around the raceway is assumed to be the laminar flow region.

5.0 Calculation

5. 1 Determination of test heat loads Test heat loss in watts is calculated by the following equation:

qEEI RN q= Heat Per Foot I

Test Current R

Cable Resistance Per Foot N~ Number of Conductors Raceway Size (Conductor)

Test Current Resistance Per Foot Number of Conductors Heat/Ft Heat/Ft Watts BTU/Hr 1 II (1-4C/010)

.1" w/3 Hr Barrier

30. 5 31.8

~ 00136 5.06 5.50 17.27 18.78 4 II (12"3C/g6) 4" w/1 Hr Barrier 27.2 28.1

.000548 36

14. 60

15. 58 49.81

53. 17 4 II (12-3C/56) 4" w/3 Hr Barrier

26. 0 25.3

.000548 36 13.34 45 '2 12.63 43 '0 Tray (96-3C/S6)

Tray w/1 Hr Barrier 28.8 17.0

.000548 288 130 91 446 78 45.61 155.67 Tray (96-3C/56)

Tray w/3 Hr Barrier 28.0 16.4

.000548 288 123.73 422.30 42.45 144.87

1. Normalized test current is from Reference 2.6

2. Resistance per foot is from Ref. 2.8 Section 2.5, Table 2-6, Table 6-1

3. Multiply Watts by 3.413 to obtain BTU/Hr Form 83, Rev 6/94

CALCULATION NO.

EEV~

SHEET EO.

5.2 Determination of Thermo;Lag R values (R,)

For heat transfer through Thermo-Lag cylinder R= Ln(Ro/Ri)/2mkL (Ref. 2.3,Page 2.3)

RoEE Outside Radius Ri~ Inside Radius k= Thermal Conductivity ~ 0.1 BTU/Hr-FT-'F (Ref.

2.7)

L= Length

~ 1 Ft.

(Per Foot)

For heat transfer through Thermo-Lag sheet R= L/kA (Ref. 2.3,Page 2.3)

L Thickness k= Thermal Conductivity = 0.1 BTU/Hr-FT-4F (Ref. 2.7)

A= Surface Area A full tabulation of the Thermo-Lag R values for the various sizes is included in the spreadsheet below.

5.3 Determination of surface R values (R,)

The surface resistance will consider free convection and radiation heat transfer.

For free convection q,=hAb,T q,=heat transferred by convection h

convection heat transfer coefficient For horizontal cylinders in air h

.27(IT/L)'>

(Ref, 2.3,Page 2.12)

A = Surface Area L = Characteristic length in feet (diameter or width)

For radiation qE sAe (TE Ta )

q,~ Heat transferred by radiation s

= 1.714X10 BTU/Hr-Ft2-R, Boltzmann Constant A

Surface area e

Surface Emittance Es

.9 T

Absolute Temperature, Rankine (Ref. 2.3,Page 2.11)

(Assumption 4.1) q

=1.714X10

(.9)A(Tg -Tz )

Form 83, Rev 6/94

S CALCULATION NO.

RES~

SHEET EQ.

\\

T For total heat transfer'red from the surface q,

qc

+ qr q, =.27(dT/L)'T +

1.714X10

(.9)A(T~ -T~ )

qs

= ('27 (6T/L)

+

1,714X10

(. 9) (T> -Tg ) /6T]MT hT/q

= R

= 1/ t [.27 (bT/L) '

1. 714X10

(. 9) (T~ -Tg ) /IT]A)

S.4 Calculation of ACF S

The ACF is calculated usi.ng a

spreadsheet

.in accordance with the methodology described above.

A description of the spreadsheet follows:

OD/W This is an input value of the conduit outside diameter or cable tray width in inches.

Conduit diameters are obtained from Reference 2.S.

TH This value is the thermo-Lag thickness in inches.

ODT This is the outside diameter of the raceway with any wrap calculated from the OD and.TH.

For cable tray OD is not calculated because it will always be equal to W.

A The outer surface heat transfer area.

Note that for cable tray, both the top and bottom areas are included.

Area is calculated on the basis of a one foot length of raceway.

Rz Inside thermal resistance as defined above.

The value is calculated from the test data with no wrap in accordance with the following formula.

The Rz value.

calculated is then used for the cases with fire barrier installed.

Note that there is no Rg and Rt for this case.

Ri.

Ts hT/q - Rs, Where dT = 90'F (Temp drop from conductor surface to ambient)

R Gap thermal resistance as defined above.

The value is calculated from the test data for raceway with fire barrier in accordance with the following formula.

The Rs value calculated is then used for extrapolating cases with a different thickness of fire barrier.

Rg 5T/q -

(R~ + R, + R,),

Where 1T = 90'F Rc Thermo-Lag thermal resistance.

The value is calculated in accordance with the following equations which were developed above.

Conduit Tray RE= Ln(ODT/OD) /2<ks R,

TH/kA, k=.1 k=.1 (Ref. 2.7)

Form 83 Rev 6/94

CALCULATION NO.

REV~

SHEET NQ.

R$

Surface thermal resistance is calculated in accordance with the following equations which were developed above.

Note that the hT in this equation is between the surface and ambient and the T values must be in 'R.

The ambient temperature used is 1044F/564'R.

Rs

= I/( ~ 27 ( (T$-104) /ODT)

+

1 714X10

(. 9) ( (T$ +460) 564

) / (T$ 104) ] A Ts Surface temperature of Thermo-Lag or bare conduit.

The value is determined by iteration until q ~ qs.

Heat transferred

- For test cases, the test. data is used.

For extrapolated cases, it is calculated as follows:

q = dT/(R, +

R

+ R, + R),

Where bT = 904F ql Heat transferred from the surface

- Calculate heat transferred from the surface as follows:

q ~ dT/R Where 6T EE T$ - 1044F From continuity, the heat transferred from the surface is the same as the total heat transferred.

In order to solve the various cases, Ts is adjusted by iteration until q EE q'.

ACF Ampacity correction factor calculated by the following equation which was developed above.

ACF EE (q>/q)

Form 83, Rev 6/94

PSL-BFSM-98-005 Revision 0 Page 9 of 11 RACEWAYHEAT TRANSFER AND AMPACITYDE-RATING

- CONDUIT OD TH ODT A

Ri Rg Rt Rs Ts 4

q q'N IN IN SQFT BTU/HR-F BTU/HR-F BTU/HR-F BTU/HR-F F

BTU/H BTU/H ACF Values Extrapolated from 1" Conduit Test wl 3 Hour Wrap Test Unwrapped 1.315 0

1.315 0.3443 3.891 Test Wrapped 1.315 1.25 3.815 0.9988 3.891

-1.354 Extrapolated 1 HR 1.315 1.5 4.315 1.1297 3.891

-1.354 Extrapolated 3 HR 1.315 3.06 7.435 1.9465 3.891

-1.354

'l.3196 1.6952 0.5606 1.8912 0.5079 2.7571 0.3247 126.79 114.53 113.26 109.20 17.272 17.27~

18.775 18.78 1.043 18.23 18.23 1;027 16.02 16.02 0.963 5

I D*i 3

I t d I 4" 6 d It2

t. II~HW Test Unwrapped 4.5 0

4.5 1.1781 1.365 Test Wrapped 4.5 0.625 5.75 1.5053 1.365 Extrapolated 1 H 4.5 1.5 7.5 1.9635 1.365

~Et I hd 3 RR 4.5 3.D6 ID.62 2.18D3 1.385 Predict 3 HR Test 4.5 1.25 7

1.8326 1.365

-0.422

-0.422

-0.422

-0.422 0.4419 0.3901 0.3603 0.813 0.2957 1.3666

'0.285 0.7032 0.3116 126.01 123.16 116.98 111.99 118.33 49.81 49.81 53.17 53.17 1.033 43.88 43.88 0.939

'5.52 35.52 0.844 45.98 45.98 0.961 Yatues Extrapolated from 4" Conduit Test wl 3 Hour Wrap Test Unwrapped 4.5 0

4.5 1.1781 1.531 Test Wrapped 4.5 1.25 7

1.8326 1.531 Extrapolated 1 HR 4.5 l.5 7.5 1.9635 1.531 Extrapolated 3 HR 4.5 3.06 10.62 2.7803 1.531

-0.459

-0.459

-0.459 0.4465 0.7032 0.3136 0.813 0.2975 1.3666 0.2259 124.32 117.52 116.27 1

I l.63 45.62 45.52~

43.10 43.10 0.973 41.25 41.25 0.952 33.79 33.79 0.862

PSL-8FSM-98-005 Revision 0 Page10of 11 RACEWAYHEAT TRANSFER AND AMPACITYDE-RATlNG CABLE TRAY/ BANKEDCONDVlT W

TH A

Ri Rg Rt Rs Ts q

q'N IN SQFT BTUIHR-F BTUIHR-F BTUIHR-F BTUIHR-F F

BTUIH BTU/H ACF Values Extrapolated Test Unwrapped Test Wrapped Extrapolated 1 HR Extrapolated 3 HR Predict 3 HR Test from 4 X 24" Tray Test w/.1 Hour Wrap 24 0

4 0.071 24 0.625 4

0.071 0.228 24 1.5 4

0.071 0.228 24 3.06 4

0.0?1 0.228 24 1.125 4

0.071 0.228 0.1304 0.1302 0.1492 0.3125

.0.1534 0.6375 0.1585 0.2344 0.15 i 8 l62.24 127.22 122.06 117.03 123.95 446.78 155.67 117.70 82.21 13 l.40 448.78~

155.67 0.5SO 117.70 0.513 82.21 0.429 131 40 0.542 Values Extrapolated from 4 X 24" Tray Test w/3 Hour Wrap Test Unwrapped 24 0

4 0.082 Test Wrapped 24 1.125 4

0082 0155 Extrapolated 1 HR 24 1.5 4

0.082 0.155 Extrapolated 3 HR 24 3.06 4

0.082 0.155 0.1315 0.2344 0.1503 0.3125 0.1521 0.6375 0.1577 159.53 125.78 123.53 117.76 422.30 422.30~

144.88 144.88 0.586 128.36 128.36 0.551 87.23 87.23 0.454

CALCULATION NO.

HEY~

SHEET NO.

6. 0 Results The most conservative results for 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> and 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> conduit and cable tray are listed below.

The less conservative values from the spreadsheet can also be used for applicable field conditions.

0 Item ACF 1 HR Conduit

.94 3

HR Conduit 1 HR Tray (Banked Conduit) 3 HR Tray (Banked Conduit)

.43 Note that these correction factors are contingent, upon the maximum thickness,

'installation requirements, and size limits detailed in the Assumptions/Basis.

Discussion The calculation spreadsheet provided negative values for R for conduit.

A negative value for thermal resistance has no real physical meaning.

The negative value is a result of back calculating the resistance from test data.

As the total resistance is made up of 4 components, the negative value is simply a correction for a resistance value that is excessive for one of the other components.

The negative value does not interfere with the calculation because it is always added to the other components to obtain the total resistance.

When the methodology was used to predict the ACF for the tested 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> barriers using the test data from the 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> barriers, the results were as follows:

Predicted Value Test Value 4" Conduit w/3 hour barrier Cable Tray w/3 hour barrier

.96

.54

.97

.59 These results demonstrate that the methodology used to extrapolate the test data provides conservative and reasonably accurate values.

Form 83, Rev 6/94

APPROVED FlRE BARRIERS FOR THE bl U CLEAR l8 D VSTR Y thermO-hg'30-1 FlRE BARRlER MATER1AL PROPERTlES PSL-BFSH-98-OOS Attachment 1

Revision 0

page 1 of 2 This brochure presents tne major properties of THERMO-LAG in in(eras( for nuclear generating p(ant a pplicatian. Far addi(iona( data na(

'resented, consult TSf.

RAG(ATION RESISTANCE 2.12 x toe rads tata( 40 year integrated dose Atter frradiation no degradation tn tire resistive proper(les FIRE PROTECTIVE FEATURES ASTM E-84 Tesling for THERMO-LAG 330-1 Flame Spread Rating 5

Fuel Contributed Ra(ing

4

- Smoke Oeveloped Rating 15 ASTM E 84 Testing far THERMO-LAG Primer Flame Spread Rating 0

Fuel Contributed Rating

0 Smake Developed Rating

5 ASTM E.84 Tesling far THERMO-LAG 350-2P Topcoat Flame Spread Rating

5 Fuel Contributed Rsling

0 Smoke Developed Rating

0 bnc-hour and ~(rce-hour fire endurance tost In accordance with ASTM E-119, and

. ANI/MAERPlest "ANI/MAERPS(andard Rre Endurance Test Method to Oualily a Protective Envelope for Cfass 1E Electrical Circuits".

1/2 inch THERMO-LAGrated ane hour 1 Inch THERMO-LAGrated three hours s

~.. ASTM E-119 hose stream lest on cfectrical trays and conduit lor one and three hour rated THERMO-LAG (2-1/2 minute hose stream applica lion]

ASTM E-119 fire lasts for structural steel.

hangers to determine required THERMO-LAG thickness far one and three nour rating AMPACITYOERAT(NC Ampacity derating tests performed In accordance wi(h IPCEA Publication Number P-54-440 (Second Editfan) (lo determine cable base ampxci)y) snd NEMA Publicalian No.

WC51-1975. The lalfawing results were obtained (for 40 percen( loading):

One-Hour THERMO-LAG Barriers Tray

12.5 percent dere(fng Conduit

6.6 percent derating

'three-Hour THERMO-LAG Barriers Tray

17 percent derating

-- Conduit

l0.9 percent derating L(ECHANICAL(PHYS(CAL) PROPORTIES pensity wel 10.$ Ibs/galfon pensity dly 75~3 Ibs/h>

pry Weight 1/2 Inch thickness (one-hour rated) ~ 3.25 Ib/ftr pry Weight 1 Inch lhickness (three-hour rated) ~ 6.5 fb/ft(

Water based Tanxifa strenalh p5'F) 600 PSI Shear strength p5'F) 1100 PSI Rexural stltfness p5'F) 65 KSI Rexurxl s(rength p5'F] 2200 PSI Band strength p5'F) 575 PSI initial Modulus

~'F) 70 KS(

Thermal Canductirity (Linfired. fu(l cured) 0.1 Btu/hr ft.( F SEISMIC PROPORTT THERMO-LAGhas been qualified by slatic analysis for a very conservative loading. A value ot 7.5g horixontal. and 6.0g vertical accefera(ion.

combined biaxlxlly wxs used for lhe analysis.

These values bound mos( nuclear generating plant seismic cnteri ~.

os/ao/SS itcD Ts: 41 FAX 817 Tav 1112 PSL-BFSH-98-00'ttachment Revision 0

Page 2 of 2 THERMO-LAG 7TO PIRE BARRIER SYSTEM p~srmx. ~w~~ma~ ra.orzRzrZS Sprayed Density Hardness The~a.'on,ductivity Tensile St."ength Compressive S trert pter Hemra1 St:enyo Hexuzal Stiffness Bond Strertg&.

Initialibiodulus Shear StrertM 62Lhs/Fts

.lJBH PvH: P 850 PsT'25 psi 25CO psi 90 ksi 700 psi 8 RT 75,000 psi 1%

psi ASTM D 792 ScLore D

~iii C 177

'"ASTMD 638 ASTMD 695 ASTM D 790 AS' 790 AS' 952 ASTiMD 638 ASTMD 732 For addiuottat information, consult the THER904AC '77Q Ruling 'Matenai data shee'HERMAL SCIENCE, FIC.

2200 CaaseIts Drive St. Louis, Mssouri 63026 Tele: (314) 349-1233 Fax: (314) 349-1207 4 t~k i I Az~toirMhcrcin 4 ao"wite to t!Lc best of our Mowicdge. biowa~y i3orp~ or Impitod.

R'c2i'/-'