1 Energy-Efficient, Flood-Damage- Resistive Residential Envelope Systems Testing (Final Project Review) June 16, 2005 Robert Wendt, Oak Ridge National Lab Heshmat Aglan, Tuskegee University Sherry Livengood, Oak Ridge National Lab
Jan 15, 2016
1
Energy-Efficient, Flood-Damage-Resistive
Residential Envelope Systems Testing(Final Project Review)
June 16, 2005
Robert Wendt, Oak Ridge National Lab
Heshmat Aglan, Tuskegee University
Sherry Livengood, Oak Ridge National Lab
2
Project Objective:
Investigate impact of flood water on performance of traditional and flood- damage-resistant residential envelope systems.
3
Project Background:
ORNL and Tuskegee University collaborated on this multi-year project
Sponsors: HUD, FEMA and DOE (initially) Tasks included:
1) Field testing and evaluation2) Best practices guidance3) Representative floodwater identification4) Laboratory testing and evaluation5) Pre-standards recommendations
4
Project Methodology: Field testing of full-size, complete system level
modules Controlled flooding with untreated lake water. Uncontrolled drying conditions (subject to local weather
conditions) Lab testing of full size representative system
sample Controlled “flooding” with representative flood water Semi-controlled drying conditions (similar to local
weather) Focus on wetting and drying damage. Address material property changes and
restorability
5
Experimental Facility at Tuskegee University
6
Field Test Modules
7
Crawl Space Test Module
Before and During Flooding
8
Field and Lab Testing was guided by:
Protocol for field testing Protocol for drying out test facilities Detailed evaluation format and data sheets Protocol for laboratory testing Specification for representative floodwater
9
Data Collected from Field Modules and Lab Samples
Visual observations (interior and exterior) Pictorial documentation Moisture content in various elements Relative humidity profiles Temperature profiles Mechanical properties Mold observations
10
Module C-4 field testing and evaluation
Further explored flood damage resistant envelope materials
Provided a reference point to compare lab testing results
Investigated the performance and impact of kitchen base cabinets
11
Module S-1moisture content of
gypsum wallboard
Interior wall (open cavity) South exterior wall (fiberglass insulation)
12
Module C-4 moisture content of gypsum wallboards
(Room C-401)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (Days)
Moi
stur
e co
nten
t
Wall 2 belowWall 2 aboveWall 3 belowWall 3 aboveWall 4 belowWall 4 aboveWall 6 belowWall 6 above
(Room C-402)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time (Days)M
oist
ure
cont
ent
Wall 1 belowWall 1 aboveWall 4 belowWall 4 aboveWall 5 belowWall 5 above
Water resistant green board with SPUF (Wall 1) or fiberglass (Wall 4) insulation in exterior walls
Conventional gypsum board with SPUF insulation in exterior walls
13
Module S-1 post flood interior wall mold growth
Mold growth
Post flood (12 days)
Water level
14
Module C-4 post flood interior wall conditions
Pre-flood condition Post-flood condition
15
Module C-4 temperature and relative humidity data
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60Time (Days)
Relat
ive H
umidi
ty (%
)
Interior partitionUnder ceilingExterior wall (South) - Wall 3Weather Station RH
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Time (Days)
Tem
pera
ture
(F)
Exterior wall Under ceiling Interior wall Temp out
16
Modules C-1 & S-1 flexural strength test data
Post 30 day drying period flexural strength of gypsum board based on four point bending tests
Module C-1 (Crawl Space)
Module S-1 (Slab on grade)
Exterior Wall (Fiberglass insulation) Interior Wall (Open Cavity)
Above water level Below water level Above water level Below water level
3.67 MPa 1.88 MPa 3.75 MPa 3.17 MPa
Exterior Wall (Fiberglass insulation) Interior Wall (Open Cavity)
Above water level Below water level Above water level Below water level
3.2 MPa 1.64 MPa 3.68 MPa 3.56 MPa
MPa = Mega Pascals
17
Flexural Strength for Wall 4 in Module 4-CGreen Gypsum with Fiber Glass Insulation
Sample # Max Stress (MPa)
(Below Water)
Max Stress (MPa)
(Above Water)
Max Stress(MPa)
(As Received)
1 3.6 5.9 5.0
2 3.9 5.9 5.1
3 4.7 5.7 4.5
4 3.9 5.8 5.0
Average 4.1 5.8 4.9
Aver. With SPUF
5.6 6.2 4.9
Moisture 0.2 0.4 0.2
Flexural Strength for Wall 4 in Module 4-CRegular Gypsum Board with Foam Insulation
Sample # Max Stress (MPa)
(Below Water)
Max Stress (MPa)
(Above Water)
Max Stress(MPa)
(As Received)
1 3.6 5.5 4.7
2 3.6 5.0 5.4
3 3.2 5.4 3.9
4 3.6 5.4 -
Average 3.5 5.3 4.7
Moisture 0.2 0.4 0.3
Modules C-4 flexural strength test data
Post drying period (180 day) flexural strength of green board and conventional gypsum board based on four point bending tests
MPa = Mega Pascals
18
Module C-4 - Vinyl flooring (above) and SPUF (below) inhibits subfloor drying
Moisture content in the subflooring
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (Days)
Mo
istu
re (
%)
Floor room 401Floor room 402
Wind blown rain
19
Module C-4 kitchen base cabinet tests
Pre-flood Condition Post-flood condition (30 days)
20
Mold growth behind base cabinet 10 months after flood exposure
21
Module C-4 exterior before and after flooding
Post-flood conditionPre-flood condition
22
Observations from Module C-4
“Water resistant” green board does not perform well under flood conditions
Wood sub-flooring between vinyl flooring and SPUF insulation will not dry
High ambient temperatures may impede mold growth
23
Best Practices Guidance:
Based on analysis/evaluation of field test data to determine performance of materials and systems
Provided flood damage resistance findings regarding:
- available materials/systems
- clean-up and restoration methods
24
Best practices guidance flyer
25
Representative floodwater – approach used
Identify most likely contaminants in flood water
Define representative flood water characteristics
Describe a reproducible representative floodwater for use in lab experiments
Use in tests of damage resistant systems and materials and evaluate results
26
Sources for defining floodwater components
Library/internet search of quantitative and qualitative components of flood water
Flood data from USGS/FEMA and analyze Survey and interview of flood plain
managers and other flood experts Flood Response Industry Advisory Group
(FRIAG)
27
Tasks to define floodwater components
Develop selected list of “typical” floodwater components and review with expert advisors
Create a replicable “recipe” for field experiments and review with expert advisors
Develop test plan for lab experiments and compare results with field experiments
Evaluate “recipe” and refine based on lab testing
Report findings as input to pre-standards process
28
Laboratory testing and evaluation
Develop and evaluate lab test protocols Compare lab test with field test results Evaluate proposed representative
floodwater Test samples with contaminated
floodwater – surrogate sewage, oil, staining agent (clay)
Provide input to pre-standard
29
Laboratory test samples were developed
Full scale testing of system performance
Conventional drywall and wall finish
SPUF insulation OSB sheathing and
vinyl siding Standard wood
framing and subfloor
30
Five identical samples were fabricated and tested
Inside Outside
Section
31
Sample - during immersion (flood) testing
32
Samples after draining “floodwater”
Floor and interior (drying in tank – days 4-8)
Exterior (drying in lab – days 8-28)
33
Sample-1 moisture content of gypsum wallboard compared with Module C-2
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0 10 20 30 40
Time ( days)
Moi
stur
e co
nten
t ( %
)
interior wall, C201, above water lineinterior wall, C201, below water lineinterior wall, C202, above water lineinterior wall, C202, below water lineWall-1, above water lineWall-1, below water lineWall-2, above water lineWall-2, below water lineWall-3, above water lineWall-3, below water lineWall-4, above water lineWall-4, below water line
Above the flood level
Below flood level
drying period
Module C-2Sample - 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (Days)
Mo
istu
re
Gypsun above water
Gypsum below water
Sample 1 - Tuskegee Lake Water
34
Samples – 1 & 2 lab temperature and relative humidity data
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (HRS)
Rel
ativ
e H
um
idity
(%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Tem
per
atu
re (F
)
Temperature
10/13/0412 pm
Relative Humidity
35
Sample - 1 flexural strength test data for gypsum wallboard
Post drying period flexural strength of conventional gypsum wallboard based on four point bending tests
Sample - 1 and Module S-1
Sample - 1 (SPUF insulation) Module S-1 (no insulation)
Above water level Below water level Above water level Below water level
4.31 MPa 4.41 MPa 3.68 MPa 3.56 MPa
36
Recommendations to pre-standards from representative floodwater
Accomplish additional work to develop a more representative floodwater
Test flood damage resistance with representative floodwater alone as basic test
If successful, then add individual contaminants to floodwater
Base certification on passing basic test alone with supplementary certifications for specific contaminants
37
Recommendations to pre-standards from laboratory testing
Revise NES and ORNL test protocols which do not adequately reflect results from field tests Water too benign Dries too quickly No mold development
Use test samples developed which have the potential to represent field conditions