kingsa fd90 test report body cote.unlocked

8/14/2019 Kingsa FD90 Test Report Body Cote.unlocked

1/35

Bodycote Warringtonfire (Aus) Pty Ltd 2008

Bodycote Warringtonfire (Aus) Pty Ltd (formerly known as Warrington Fire Research (Aust) Pty Ltd)NATA Accredited Laboratory in the field of Heat and Temperature since 1991.

Laboratory - Unit 2, 409 - 411 Hammond Road, Dandenong, Victoria 3175, Australia.NSW Office Level 20, Suite 2002A, 44 Market Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000

Title:

Fire Resistance test of two singleleaf doorsets in generalaccordance with BS 476: Parts20 & 22: 1987 Section 6

BWA Report No:

2304900a

Test Applicant:

Danube Building Materials FZCOJebel AliDubai

Test Date:

26th November 2008


2/35


BWA Report No 2304900Issue Number 2304900a.2Page 2 of 35

DOCUMENT REVISION STATUS

Date Issued Issue No Description

26th December 2008 2304900a.1 Initial issue

12th January 2009 2304900a.2 Revised issue

SIGNATORIES

Prepared by: Reviewed by:

C. M. McLean K. G. Nicholls

On behalf of Bodycote Warringtonfire (Aus) Pty Ltd

GENERAL CONDITIONS OF USE

This report may only be reproduced in full without modifications by thereport applicant only. Copies, extracts or abridgments of this report in anyform shall not be made distributed or published by other organisationsor individuals without the permission of Bodycote Warringtonfire (Aus) Pty Ltd.


3/35



CONTENTS

1 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 4Test Assembly 4Test Specimen 4Assembly and Installation Methods 4Orientation 4

2 SCHEDULE OF COMPONENTS 53 TEST PROCEDURE 8

Statement of compliance 8Variations from test standards 8Pre-test conditioning 8Sampling / Specimen Selection 8Ambient Temperature 8Test Duration 8Instrumentation and Equipment 8

4 TEST MEASUREMENTS 9Furnace Temperature and Pressure Measurements 9Specimen Temperatures 9Deflection Measurements 9Heat flux Measurement 9Observations 9

5 TEST RESULTS 106 APPLICATION OF TEST RESULTS 11

Test Limitations 11Variations from the Tested Specimens 11Uncertainty of measurement 11

APPENDIX 1 DRAWINGS OF TEST ASSEMBLY 12APPENDIX 2 TEST OBSERVATIONS 18APPENDIX 3 INSTRUMENTATION POSITIONS 20APPENDIX 4 TEST DATA 24

A 4.1 Furnace Temperature 24A 4.2 Furnace Pressure 24A 4.3 Specimen Temperatures 25A 4.4 Deflection Measurements 31A 4.5 Heat Flux Measurement 32

APPENDIX 5 PHOTOGRAPHS 33


4/35



1 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS

TEST ASSEMBLY

The test assembly comprised a nominal 3200mm 3200mm 140mm thick

hollow core concrete block wall incorporating two single leaf doorsets.

TEST SPECIMEN

The test specimens comprised two single leaf particle board core doorsetsreferred to as Door A and Door B for the purposes of this test report. Furtherdetails are provided in Figures A1.1 to A1.8 and the schedule of componentsSection 2. The majority of dimensions have been provided by the test applicantand have been verified wherever practical by Bodycote Warringtonfire (Aus) PtyLtd.

ASSEMBLY AND INSTALLATION METHODS

The hollow core concrete block wall was built into a steel restraint frame,incorporating openings for the doorsets, by a building contractor at BWAMelbourne commencing on the 17th November 2008 and under the supervision ofa BWA representative. The test applicant supplied and installed the single leafdoorsets (including leaves, frames and all door hardware) commencing on the24th November 2008 and under the supervision of a BWA representative.

ORIENTATION

The specimen was installed with Door A swinging away from the furnace andDoor B swinging into the furnace.


5/35



2 SCHEDULE OF COMPONENTS

ITEM DESCRIPTION

DOOR A

Leaf Size 2400mm high 1000mm wide 60mm (nominal) thick door leaf.

Leaf Core The leaf core was stated by the test applicant to be nominally 60mm thick(made of two 30mm thick sheets laminated together) and designated asDANUBE KINGSA Core supplied by DANUBE.

KINGSA, as stated by the test applicant, is a particleboard material andhas a nominal density of 695 kg/m3 at a nominal moisture content of7+3%.

Leaf edging 3mm thick (nominal) hardwood Tasmanian Oak with a nominal density,as stated by the test applicant, of minimum 660 kg/m3.

Leaf Seals Lorient LP4006 Intumescent Strip, as stated by the test applicant, wasrebated within the bottom of the door leaf.

Lorient LP2004DS (Type 617 20mm wide 4mm thick) IntumescentStrip, as stated by the test applicant, was rebated into the door edgesand top bypassing hinges.

Hinges Laidlaw Hinges Model ref LG LA161 - 102.01.53

102mm 102mm 3mm 2BB Laidlaw hinges, made from Grade 13 SS,fixed with 4-off screw fixings (nom 10g 50 mm long stainless steelscrews) through each plate to the door leaf and door frame. The hingeswere fitted to the west side of the door leaf (looking from the unexposedside) with the door swinging away from the furnace. The hinges werebedded on 2mm thick Lorient intumescent hinge protection pads.

Hinge Locations There were 4-off hinges positioned at 240mm, 1210mm, 1935mm and

2180mm respectively from the sill to the centre of the hinge.Frame The solid timber door frame was 135mm wide 32mm thick with a door

seat rebate of nominally 19 mm deep 62 mm wide. The frame wasmade from Tasmanian Oak of a nominal density, as stated by the testapplicant, of minimum 660 kg/m3.

Frame Seals Lorient LP2006 Intumescent Fire Seals, as stated by the test applicant,were rebated within the perimeter of the frame, bypassing hinges.

Fixings The timber frame was secured to the opening in the masonry wall with19-off (8-off per vertical side and 3-off in the head) No14 75mm longsocket head screws into plastic plugs, as stated by the test applicant, atmaximum spacing 300mm with nominal 150mm at the ends.

Lockset Laidlaw Mortise latch set Ref LG LA60 - 5572.01.153 Euro profile

Laidlaw Mortice latchset with striker centrally located nominally 870mmfrom the sill and a backset of nominally 55mm. Laidlaw lever action doorhandles were to the unexposed and exposed sides. The latch throw wasnominally 12 mm. The Mortice lockset was additionally protected with2mm thick Lorient Intumescent Lock Protection Kit.

Closer Laidlaw (LA802) standard power adjustable overhead door closer,nominal 240mm long 55mm high 37mm deep, fitted to the unexposedside of the doorset.


6/35



ITEM DESCRIPTION

DOOR B

Leaf Size 2400mm high 1000mm wide 60mm (nominal) thick door leaf.

Leaf Core The leaf core was stated by the test applicant to be nominally 60mm thick

(made of two 30mm thick sheets laminated together) and designated asDANUBE KINGSA Core supplied by DANUBE.

KINGSA, as stated by the test applicant, is a particleboard material andhas a nominal density of 695 kg/m3 at a nominal moisture content of7+3%.

Leaf edging 3mm thick (nominal) hardwood Tasmanian Oak with a nominal density,as stated by the test applicant, of minimum 660 kg/m3.

Leaf Seals Lorient LP4006 Intumescent Strip, as stated by the test applicant, wasrebated within the bottom of the door leaf.

Lorient LP2004DS (Type 617 20mm wide 4mm thick) IntumescentStrip, as stated by the test applicant, was rebated into the door edges

and top bypassing hinges.Hinges Laidlaw Hinges Model ref LG LA161 - 102.01.53

102mm 102mm 3mm 2BB Laidlaw hinges, made from Grade 13 SS,fixed with 4-off screw fixings (nom 10g 50 mm long stainless steelscrews) through each plate to the door leaf and door frame. The hingeswere fitted to the east side of the door leaf (looking from the unexposedside) with the door swinging into the furnace. The hinges were bedded on2mm thick Lorient intumescent hinge protection pads.

Hinge Locations There were 4-off hinges positioned at 240mm, 1210mm, 1935mm and2180mm respectively from the sill to the centre of the hinge.

Frame The solid timber door frame was 135mm wide 32mm thick with a doorseat rebate of nominally 19 mm deep 62 mm wide. The frame was

made from Tasmanian Oak of a nominal density, as stated by the testapplicant, of minimum 660 kg/m3.

Frame Seals Lorient LP2006 Intumescent Fire Seals, as stated by the test applicant,were rebated within the perimeter of the frame, bypassing hinges.

Fixings The timber frame was secured to the opening in the masonry wall with19-off (8-off per vertical side and 3-off in the head) No14 75mm longsocket head screws into plastic plugs, as stated by the test applicant, atmaximum spacing 300mm with nominal 150mm ends.

Lockset Laidlaw Mortise latch set Ref LG LA60 - 5572.01.153 Euro profile

Laidlaw Mortice latchset with striker centrally located nominally 960mmfrom the sill and a backset of nominally 55mm. Laidlaw lever action doorhandles were to the unexposed and exposed sides. The latch throw wasnominally 12 mm. The Mortice lockset was additionally protected with2mm thick Lorient Intumescent Lock Protection Kit.

Closer Laidlaw (LA802) standard power adjustable overhead door closer,nominal 240mm long 55mm high 37mm deep, fitted to the unexposedside of the doorset.


7/35



ITEM DESCRIPTION

Supporting Construction

Description 140 mm thick hollow core concrete block wall.

Door Sill Four courses of solid concrete blocks 390mm 190mm 90mm with thetop course laid perpendicular (except two half end blocks) to the wall toform a sill for the doorsets.

Blocks above sill Twelve (12-off) courses of hollow core concrete blocks were laid on thesill to form the openings and an additional two (2-off) courses were laidabove the openings including one lintel beam course which included asingle D16 reinforcement rod with premixed concrete filling the void.

Sealant Lorient intumescent mastic was used to seal the gap (backed byRockwool) between the edge of the door frames and the openings in theconcrete block wall on both sides.


8/35



3 TEST PROCEDURE

STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE

The test was performed in general accordance with the requirements of

BS 476: Part 20: 1987 and BS 476: Part 22: 1987 Section 6 as appropriate forinsulated doorsets, other than the variations stated below.

VARIATIONS FROM TEST STANDARDS

The furnace temperature was measured by 6-off mineral insulated metalsheathed Type K thermocouples with wire diameters not greater than 1 mm andoverall diameter of 3 mm with the measuring junction insulated from the sheath.The thermocouples protruded a minimum of 25 mm from steel supporting tubes.

BS 476: Part 20: 1987 specifies the furnace temperature to be measured by 6-offNickel chromium/nickel aluminium wire contained within a mineral insulation andin a heat resisting steel sheet of diameter 1.5 mm, the hot junctions being

electrically insulated from the sheath. The thermocouple hot junction shall project25 mm from a porcelain insulator.

This variation, is considered to make the test slightly more onerous, howeverwould not have significantly affected the results of the fire-resistance test.

The furnace pressure varied more than as prescribed by BS 476: Part 22: 1987during the period of 90-95 minutes test duration but was below that prescribedmaximum pressure level variation +2 Pa. The deviation was only minor (pressureaverage was -3 Pa) and for a short period, therefore it is considered that thisvariation would not have significantly affected the results of thefire-resistance test.

PRE-TEST CONDITIONING

The specimen was stored in the test laboratory and was subjected to indoorambient normal laboratory conditions for 48 hours prior to testing.

SAMPLING / SPECIMEN SELECTION

The laboratory was not involved in the selection of the test specimen for test.

AMBIENT TEMPERATURE

The ambient temperature at the start of the test was 27C and varied between27C and 30C throughout the test..

TEST DURATION

The test was terminated after approximately 97 minutes 30 seconds afteragreement between the test laboratory and applicant.

INSTRUMENTATION AND EQUIPMENT

The instrumentation was provided in accordance with BS 476: Part 22: 1987except for the furnace control thermocouples as mentioned above.


9/35



The furnace temperature was measured by 6-off mineral insulated metalsheathed Type K thermocouples with wire diameters not greater than 1 mm andoverall diameter of 3 mm with the measuring junction insulated from the sheath.The thermocouples protruded a minimum of 25 mm from steel supporting tubes.

The non fire side specimen temperatures were measured by Type Kthermocouples with wire diameters less than 0.5 mm diameter soldered to 12 mmdiameter 0.2 mm thick copper discs covered by a 30 mm 30 mm 2.0 mminorganic insulating pads. The thermocouples positions are described in TableA3.1, and are shown on Figure A3.1 in Appendix 3. A roving thermocouple wasavailable to measure temperatures at positions that appear hotter than thepositions monitored by fixed thermocouples.

Deflection measurements were taken from calibrated tapes, fixed to the testspecimen, using a Telescope Levelling Instrument (Dumpy Level) Model 200B, atthe positions shown on Figure A3.2 in Appendix 3.

The furnace pressure was measured approximately 1000 mm above sill level.

Cotton pads and gap gauges were available during the test to assess theperformance under the criteria for integrity up to unexposed face temperatures of300C for both Doorsets. After that time gap gauges only were available toassess the performance under the criteria for integrity.

4 TEST MEASUREMENTS

FURNACE TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

Furnace temperature and pressure data are provided in A4.1 and A4.2 in

Appendix 4.

SPECIMEN TEMPERATURES

Specimen temperature data is provided in A4.3 and Table A4.1 and A4.2 inAppendix 4.

DEFLECTION MEASUREMENTS

Deflection measurement data is provided in A4.4 in Appendix 4.

HEAT FLUX MEASUREMENT

Heat Flux measurements are provided in A4.5 in Appendix 4.

OBSERVATIONS

A table that includes observations of the significant behaviour of the specimenand details of the occurrence of the various performance criteria specified inBS 476: Part 22: 1987 is provided in Appendix 2. Photographs of the specimenare included in Appendix 5.


10/35



5 TEST RESULTS

The specimen achieved the following performance when tested in accordancewith BS 476: Part 22: 1987 Section subject to the variations in section 3.

DOOR A

Loadbearing Capacity Not applicable

Integrity 96 minutes

Insulation 96 minutes

DOOR B

Loadbearing Capacity Not applicable

Integrity 87 minutes

Insulation 87 minutes

Note: - No failure of insulation on either specimen prior to integrity failure


11/35



6 APPLICATION OF TEST RESULTS

TEST LIMITATIONS

The results of this fire test may be used to directly assess fire hazard, but it

should be recognized that a single test method will not provide a full assessmentof fire hazard under all fire conditions. The results only relate to the behaviour ofthe specimen of the element of the construction under the particular conditions ofthe test; they are not intended to be the sole criteria for assessing the potentialfire performance of the element in use nor do they necessarily reflect the actualbehaviour in fires.

VARIATIONS FROM THE TESTED SPECIMENS

This report details the methods of construction, the test conditions and the resultsobtained when the specific element of construction described herein was testedfollowing the procedure outlined in BS 476: Parts 20 & 22: 1987. Any significantvariation with respect to size, constructional details, loads, stresses, edge or endconditions, other than those allowed under the field of direct application in therelevant test method, is not addressed by this report. It is recommended that anyproposed variation to the tested configuration should be referred to the testapplicant in the first instance to obtain appropriate documentary evidence ofcompliance from Bodycote Warringtonfire (Aus) Pty Ltd or another RegisteredTesting Authority.

UNCERTAINTY OF MEASUREMENT

Because of the nature of fire resistance testing and the consequent difficulty inquantifying the uncertainty of measurement of fire resistance, it is not possible toprovide a stated degree of accuracy of the result.


12/35



APPENDIX 1 DRAWINGS OF TEST ASSEMBLY

Figure A1.1: Masonry Wall Elevation


13/35



Figure A1.2: Test Specimen Elevation


14/35



A

A

C C

BB

DoorFrameheightmmoverall2454mm

Door Frame 1086mm Overall

Door Leaf width 1000mm Overall

DoorLeafHeight2400mmOverall

Locksetstrikepositioned950mmabovefloorle

vel

D

Figure A1.3: Doorset Constructional Drawing (Provided By Client)


15/35



SECTION AA

SECTION DD

Lorient LP2006

Lorient LP2004

(Type 617)

Lorient LP4006

Figure A1.4: Doorset Frame & Leaf Vertical Sectional Drawing (Provided By Client)


16/35



SECTION CC

SECTION BB

Figure A1.5: Doorset Frame & Leaf Horizontal Sectional Drawing (Provided By Client)


17/35



Figure A1.8: Lorient Intumescent Kit (Provided By Client)


18/35



APPENDIX 2 TEST OBSERVATIONS

Time

Min SecObservation

DOORSET A

0 0 Fire-Resistance Test was commenced and ambient air temperature wasapproximately 28C.

1 30 Smoke emissions had become evident from top section of the door leaf

2 15 Smoke emissions had become evident from the sides down to approximatelythe height of the second hinge from the top. (Nominal 500mm).

3 48 Smoke emissions had become evident from hinge side of door down to themiddle of the door.

4 53 An increase in smoke emissions became evident from around the door leaf.

7 29 Small emissions of smoke had become evident from the latch side at thebottom of the door.

10 30 Darkening of the face of door at hinge locations had become evident.

11 12 Darkening had become evident on the face of the door near to the latch set.

14 20 Reduction in smoke emissions had become evident.

19 55 Darkening that had become evident on the face of the door near to the latchset had increased.

21 42 Darkening had become evident around the 3rd hinge down from the top.

27 38 Smoke emissions had become evident around the latch set

29 16 Intumescent seal appears to have closed the gap between the sill and thedoorset.

30 30 Some darkening had become evident at locations along the bottom of the door.

32 17 Smoke emissions almost stopped with minor emissions continuing around thethird hinge down.

43 30 Smoke emissions had stopped

60 00 The door system had continued to maintain integrity in accordance withAS 1530.4-2005.

66 58 Some smoke had become evident emitting from along hinge side of door.

72 56 Increase in smoke emissions from above the door closer had become evident.

73 38 Charring of the area immediately above the top hinge had become evident.

74 46 Charring of the area near the 2nd hinge from the top had become evident.

79 41 Charring of the area near the 3rd hinge from the top had become evident.

87 14 Glowing of the door leaf edge had become evident immediately above thesecond hinge from the top.

89 58 Darkening of the area below the latch on the door frame had become evident.

90 00 The door system had continued to maintain integrity in accordance with

AS 1530.4-2005.91 23 Increase in smoke emissions had become evident immediately above the

latchset at the edge of the door leaf.95 21 Darkening of the door frame had become evident at the head of the specimen.

96 47 Sustained flaming of unexposed face at the mid-height hinge for greaterthan 10 seconds. Integrity failure of Doorset A in accordance withBS 476: Part 22: 1987. Failure on insulation in accordance with BS 476:Part 22: 1987, due to integrity failure.

97 30 Fire resistance test was stopped at the request of the test applicant.


19/35



Time

Min SecObservation

DOORSET B

0 0 Fire-Resistance Test was commenced and ambient air temperature was

approximately 28C.1 30 Smoke emissions had become evident along the top of the door.

2 55 Smoke emissions became evident along the sides of doorset and downapproximately 800mm.

4 53 An increase in smoke emissions had become evident from the specimen.

8 15 Darkening of the face of door had become evident above the latch set.

9 17 Darkening at the edge of the door on the hinge side had become evident atvarious locations.

14 20 A reduction in smoke emissions had become evident from the specimen.

24 43 Smoke emission stopped.

29 16 Intumescent seal appears to have closed the gap between the sill and thedoorset.

30 30 Some darkening had become evident at locations along the bottom of the door.49 30 Smoke emissions had become evident from upper latch side of the door.

54 30 Darkening of the top corners of the door had become evident

59 22 A 30 second cotton pad test was carried out at the upper west corner of thedoor leaf. Slight discolouration evident. No glowing or flaming of the pad hadbecome evident.

60 00 The door system had continued to maintain integrity in accordance withAS 1530.4-2005.

77 15 A small glowing spot had become evident at the top hinge side corner of thedoor leaf.

81 11 Glowing/charring had become evident at the top latch side corner of the doorleaf.

81 45 A 90 second roving thermocouple test was carried out 50mm from the top latchside corner of the door leaf resulting in a temperature of 121C.

85 53 A 30 second cotton pad test was carried out at the upper west corner of thedoor leaf. Slight discolouration evident. No glowing or flaming of the pad hadbecome evident.

87 48 Sustained flaming of unexposed face at the upper latch corner of thedoor leaf for greater than 10 seconds. Integrity failure of Doorset B inaccordance with BS 476: Part 22: 1987.Failure on insulation in accordance with BS 476: Part 22: 1987, due tointegrity failure.


20/35



APPENDIX 3 INSTRUMENTATION POSITIONS

Figure A3.1: Thermocouple Locations

Table A3.1: Thermocouple LocationsDoor A Door B

Location LocationT/C

x yDescription T/C

x yDescription

B1 282 1810 Top west. C1 282 1810 Top west.B2 782 1810 Top east. C2 782 1810 Top east.B3 532 1210 Midpoint. C3 532 1210 Midpoint.B4 282 660 Bottom west. C4 282 660 Bottom west.B5 782 660 Bottom east. C5 782 660 Bottom east.

B6 982 928 50 mm above latch. C6 82 1020 50 mm above latch.

Leaf

B7 912 868 50 mm east of latch.

Leaf

C7 132 960 50 mm west of latch.B8 16 1210 West at mid-height. C8 16 1210 West at mid-height.B9 1000 2426 Upper west corner. C9 1000 2426 Upper west corner.B10 532 2426 Mid-width of door

leaf.C10 532 2426 Mid-width of door

leaf.B11 965 2426 Upper east corner. C11 965 2426 Upper east corner.

Frame

B12 1048 1210 East at mid-height.

Frame

C12 1048 1210 East at mid-height.

East

B9

C2

y

x

x

y

East WestWest East

B10 B11

B1 B2

B3B8 B12

B6

B7

B5B4

C1

C7

C6

C4 C5

C3 C12C8

C9 C10 C11


21/35



Figure A3.2: Deflection measurement Locations

Table A3.2: Deflection LocationsDoor A Door B

Location LocationT/C

X yDescription T/C

x yDescription

DA1 980 2360 Upper east corner ofleaf.

DB1 82 2310 Upper west corner ofleaf.

DAF1 1035 2335 Upper east corner offrame.

DBF1 32 2360 Upper west corner offrame.

DAC 535 1200 Midpoint. DBC 535 1200 Midpoint.DA2 980 60 Lower east corner of

leaf.

DB2 80 110 Lower west corner of

leaf.DAF2 1035 25 Lower east corner of

frame.DBF2 10 80 Lower west corner of

frame.

DA1

DAC DBC

DA2DAF2

DAF1DBF1

DB1

DBF2DB2

y

x

x

y

East WestWest


22/35



Figure A3.3: Doorset A clearance measurements


23/35



Figure A3.4: Doorset B clearance measurements


24/35



APPENDIX 4 TEST DATA

A 4.1 FURNACE TEMPERATURE

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

BS 476: Part 20: 1987 Mean Furn Max Furn Min Furn

Figure A4.1: Furnace Temperatures vs. Time.

A 4.2 FURNACE PRESSURE

Time

(minutes)

Pressure(Pa)

Avg

Time

(minutes)

Pressure(Pa)

Avg

5-10 0 50-55 -2

10-15 -1 55-60 0

15-20 -1 60-65 1

20-25 -1 65-70 0

25-30 1 70-75 -130-35 1 75-80 -1

35-40 -1 80-85 -1

40-45 -1 85-90 -2

45-50 0 90-95 -3


25/35



A 4.3 SPECIMEN TEMPERATURES

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

8090

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 Integrity Limit

Figure A4.2: Doorset A Quarter point Temperatures vs. Time

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

7080

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

Average Integrity Limit

Figure A4.3: Average of Doorset A Quarter point Temperatures vs. Time


26/35



0

10

20

30

40

50

6070

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C

)

B6 B7 Integrity Limit

Figure A4.4: Doorset A Miscellaneous Temperatures vs. Time

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 Integrity Limit

Figure A4.5: Doorset A Frame Temperatures vs. Time


27/35



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 Integrity Failure

Figure A4.6: Doorset B Quarter point Temperatures vs. Time

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

7080

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

Integrity Failure Average

Figure A4.7: Average of Doorset B Quarter point Temperatures vs. Time


28/35



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 20 40 60 80 100

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

C6 C7 Integrity Failure

Figure A4.8: Doorset B Miscellaneous Temperatures vs. Time

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Time (Minutes)

Temperature(C)

C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 Integrity Failure

Figure A4.9: Doorset B Frame Temperatures vs. Time


29/35


30/35



Table A4.2: Quarter and centre point average temperature limits of Doorsets.Temp (C) at t (minutes)

Doorsett=0 t=30 t=60 t=90 t=97

Limit1

(Mins)

Doorset A 28 31 65 82 # 963

Doorset B 29 33 66 # # 87

3

1Limit time is the time to the nearest whole minute, rounded down to the nearestminute, at which the average temperature recorded by the thermocouples (quarterpoints) does not rise by more than 140K above the initial average temperature.

2Refer to Appendix 3 for locations of thermocouples as only a generic description isincluded in the table.

3Insulation failure due to integrity failure. No insulation failure prior to integrityfailure.

Notes:

-

Under limit column indicates the temperature limit was not exceeded during thereported period or up until the time of integrity failure if a failure occurred.


31/35



A 4.4 DEFLECTION MEASUREMENTS

-60

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Time (Minutes)

Deflection(mm)

DA1 DAF1 DAC DA2 DAF2

Figure A4.10: Out-of-Plane Deflection vs. Time of Doorset A.

Positive measurements show movement of doorset towards furnace andnegative measurements show movement of doorset away from furnace.

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

0 15 30 45 60 75 90

Time (Minutes)

Deflection(mm)

DB1 DBF1 DBC DB2 DBF2

Figure A4.11: Out-of-Plane Deflection vs. Time of Doorset B.

Positive measurements show movement of doorset towards furnace andnegative measurements show movement of doorset away from furnace.


32/35



A 4.5 HEAT FLUX MEASUREMENT

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.41.6

1.8

2.0

0 20 40 60 80 100Time (Minutes)

Irradiance(kW/m)

Recorded Radiation Emitted Radiation Integrity Limit

Figure A4.12: Heat flux emitted from Doorset A vs TimeRadiometer located central to the door leaf at 1000 mm away from the specimen.

Recorded radiation is radiation level at radiometer position and emitted radiation isradiation level (calculated) emitted from face of door leaf

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.41.6

1.8

2.0

0 20 40 60 80 100Time (Minutes)

Irradiance(kW/m)

Recorded Radiation Emitted Radiation Integrity Limit

Figure A4.13: Heat flux emitted from Doorset B vs Time

Radiometer located central to the door leaf at 1000 mm away from the specimen.Recorded radiation is radiation level at radiometer position and emitted radiation is

radiation level (calculated) emitted from face of door leaf


33/35



APPENDIX 5 PHOTOGRAPHS

Figure A5.1: Exposed face of test specimen prior to commencement of test

Figure A5.2: Unexposed face of test specimen prior to commencement of test

Door BDoor A

Door ADoor B


34/35



Figure A5.3: Unexposed face of test specimen after approximately60 minutes test duration

Figure A5.4: Unexposed face of test specimen prior tocompletion of test (approximately 7 minutes prior)

Door A

Door B

Door ADoor B


35/35


Figure A5.5: Exposed face of test specimen after completion of test

Door A

Door B

kingsa fd90 test report body cote.unlocked

Documents