• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

LVT product for wall covering...?

indyarchyguy

indyarchyguy

SAWHORSE
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
134
Location
United States
I have a client who is demanding the use of LVT product on a wall surface. The product has NOT been tested for smoke/flame for wall finish product per 803.1.1. The interior designer is indicating they only intend to use a "small" amount and insists there is a threshold percentage for walls...(ID has done this before). I am reviewing Chapter 8 of the 2012 IBC and do not see a place where it provides for a limited amount. The building is II-B construction, fully sprinklered, and this area is an A-2 occupancy type. Thoughts and suggestions much appreciated.
 
I would guess laminate-vinyl-tile...........survey says?

I see nothing in Section 803 that exempts "small amounts", it either meets the tests, or it doesn't.

Have them take it the AHJ Appeals Board, see if it flies............

JMHO
 
I was going for::::

803.2 Thickness exemption.
Materials having a thickness less than 0.036 inch (0.9 mm) applied directly to the surface of walls or ceilings shall not be required to be tested.
 
LVT is luxury vinyl tile, and is definitely thicker than 0.036 inch. Section 806 allows decorative materials and trim in limited applications, but either require compliance with NFPA 701 for fabric materials (not applicable in this case) or ASTM E 84/UL 723 with a Class C rating. LVT materials that I have specified have never been tested per ASTM E 84 because this type of flooring does not require it. Therefore, the material would not comply with the requirements for a wall application or as trim/decoration.
 
cda said:
I was going for::::

803.2 Thickness exemption.
Materials having a thickness less than 0.036 inch (0.9 mm) applied directly to the surface of walls or ceilings shall not be required to be tested.
Click to expand...

Yes I saw that as well. LVT is Luxury Vinyl Tile. Made by fairly high-quality companies such as Shaw, Miliken, etc. The product comes in a variety of sizes and is typically 2.5-3mm in thickness. The product they are looking at using is 2.5mm (0.098 in).
 
RLGA said:
LVT is luxury vinyl tile, and is definitely thicker than 0.036 inch. Section 806 allows decorative materials and trim in limited applications, but either require compliance with NFPA 701 for fabric materials (not applicable in this case) or ASTM E 84/UL 723 with a Class C rating. LVT materials that I have specified have never been tested per ASTM E 84 because this type of flooring does not require it. Therefore, the material would not comply with the requirements for a wall application or as trim/decoration.
Click to expand...

Ron,

Thank you. That was my opinion as well. However I was getting that they insisted they've done this before...per code, so after doing my search I wondered if I was missing something. The products they are wanting to consider were not tested in accordance with ASTM E 84 and certainly has never been tested in a wall application. You have fortified my stance.
 
cda said:
How thick is it

How do they intend to apply or have it stay on the wall
Click to expand...

It would be fully adhered similar to the same adhesive (if not exactly the same) that they use to apply it to the floor. However, some of the manufacturers have gone to making a product that only requires the perimeter tiles to be adhered and the field tiles to be left loose.
 
Have you checked with your FM? Bet they want to see label & or tests.
Have the manufacturer provide a test sheet, what of env. consequences?
 
Another possibility is if the building or fire dept would do a field test
To see if it burns
If it does burn how rapidly and any dripping flame
See if they would accept it if it does not burn or continue to burn
 
without looking up all of the details of ASTM E 84/UL 723 (that book has somehow went missing from this office) are those tests limited to walls and ceilings and not floors
Since this is typically a floor material I looked one up by Armstrong and found: but no mention of E84 could these tests be similar but rated to floors
FIRE TEST DATA:
ASTM E 648 Critical Radiant Flux- 0.45 watts/sq. cm. or more - Class I
ASTM E 662 Smoke- 450 or less
 
84 is the tunnel test, material oriented horizontally


E 648 is a floor covering test,, material tested in horizontal orientation


E 662 is basically how much smoke a material will generate
 
The ASTM E 84 test uses a tunnel-type furnace to conduct tests for determining flame spread index (FSI) and smoke-developed index (SDI). The SDI is determined using a photocell in a horizontal section of the exhaust vent, which measures SDI based on light intensity (more smoke, less intensity by blocking light). The ASTM E 662 test method only determines SDI and uses a different type of test chamber that employs a photomultiplier. A photomultiplier is slightly different than a photocell, but does essentially the same thing. There is nothing to show how the two methods compare. Flooring manufacturers may lean toward the E 662 method, since they do not want to pay for the more expensive E 84 test and obtain an unnecessary FSI.

The ASTM E 648 is nothing like the ASTM E 84 test in regard to measuring FSI, but could provide some insight on how a material may perform in the E 84 test. Whereas a test specimen is only burned in the E 84 test by direct flame contact, the E 648 places pilot flame below a radiant panel that is angled toward the specimen. The heat from the flame is radiated toward the specimen. After 5 min., the flame is then brought into contact with the specimen for another 5 min. and flame propagation is observed. The problem with comparing E 648 to E 84 is that the E 648 test method does not measure performance of a material in a vertical application. Although the E 84 test method is also horizontal, it uses the flow of air to try to drive the flame along the surface of the specimen (much like flames climbing a wall surface by rising heat); the E 648 does not attempt to force the flames down the length of the specimen.
 
The 705 test procedure, in a nutshell, is:
1) Remove a suitable sample of the material to be tested, 1/2” X 4” or greater.
2) In a safe location with no draft, expose the sample to a flame from a common kitchen match, or other similar source, for 12 seconds.
3) Remove the flame. The sample should self extinguish within 2 seconds, less than 4” of sample should have been consumed, and drippy fireballs, if any, should self extinguish upon or before contact with the ground.
 
cda said:
The 705 test procedure, in a nutshell, is:
1) Remove a suitable sample of the material to be tested, 1/2” X 4” or greater.
2) In a safe location with no draft, expose the sample to a flame from a common kitchen match, or other similar source, for 12 seconds.
3) Remove the flame. The sample should self extinguish within 2 seconds, less than 4” of sample should have been consumed, and drippy fireballs, if any, should self extinguish upon or before contact with the ground.
Click to expand...
Did you mean the NFPA 701 test?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cda
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top