Updated CRRC Presentation - Test Method Changes
-
Upload
jeffrey-steuben -
Category
Documents
-
view
163 -
download
1
Transcript of Updated CRRC Presentation - Test Method Changes
Jeffrey SteubenCool Roof Rating Council
Test Method Changes Impact on Roofing Solar Reflectance & Thermal Emittance
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 2
CRRC Mission
• Ratings • Research• Education
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 3
CRRC ResourcesDirectory Educational
Material
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 4
The CRRC Process
Manufacturers send samples to a test lab for initial testing
3-Year aging at three test farm locations
Aged testing at a test lab
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 5
Natural AgingOhiocool/temperate
Arizonahot/dry
Floridahot/humid
Image credit: Atlas Weathering Services Group
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 6
CRRC Label
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 7
Why Cool Roofing?
Image credit: LBNL Heat Island Group
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 8
Why Cool Roofing?
Image credit: LBNL Heat Island Group
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 9
Surface Properties
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 10
Solar Spectrum Reflectometer (SSR) Study
Image credit: Devices & Services Company
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 11
How it works
Sensors:
UltravioletBlueRedInfrared
Product sample
Tungsten
lamp
20° Angle
Image credit: Devices & Services Company
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 12
SSR Spectrum Modeling
Image credit: Devices & Services Company
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 13
Version 6 Changes • Two additional virtual sensors• Instrument calibrated against 155 tiles• Ten irradiance options available• Software update
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 14
Objective• Examine changes to C1549 resulting from
device hardware upgrade
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 15
Round 1 Study• 56 products tested
Version 5Air mass 1.5
Version 6 1.5E output
Version 6b891 output
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 16
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 17
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 18
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 19
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 20
Round 1 Conclusions• v6 1.5E closely correlated with v5
– Mean difference .003– Maximum difference .017
• v6 comparisons inconclusive– Sample depreciation– Product type variation
• Needs further study
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 21
Round 2• Confirm relationship between v5 and v6
Lab 6
Devices & Services
Lab 1 Lab 2 Lab 3 Lab 5Lab 4
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 22
Sample Set
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 23
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 24
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 25
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 26
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 27
Round 2 Conclusions• Eliminated sample depreciation problems
Average -.014 Average .015
v5v6
v5v6
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 28
Round 2 Conclusions
Average .004
v6
v5
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 29
SSR Conclusions• CRRC Technical Committee found
changes to be small• Did not vote to adopt version 6 b891 mode• Labs with v6 use v5 emulation mode to
maintain consistency
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 30
Thermal Emittance Slide Method Study
Image credit: Devices & Services Company
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 31
How it works
Image credit: Devices & Services Company
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 32
Slide Method
Image credit: Devices & Services Company
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 33
Objective• Determine impact of Slide Method on
roofing products currently tested using C1371
• Clarify role of sub-surface materials
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 34
Sample SetSample # Description
1 Gray modified bitumen capsheet2 Flat tile with white coating3 Metal panel with blue coating4 Curved tan tile5 White PVC field-applied coating6 Single Ply - 50 mil non-fleeceback7 Single Ply - 50 mil fleeceback8 Single Ply - 60 mil non-fleeceback9 Single Ply - 60 mil fleeceback
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 35
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 36
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 37
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 38
Trends – Higher Results
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 39
Trends – Precision
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 40
Conclusions• CRRC voted to use Slide Method on all
products except coatings on uninsulated metal panels
• Potentially will change to test field-applied coatings using Slide Method
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 41
Future StudiesASTM E408
ASTM E1918 Precision & Bias
Directionally Reflective Product Rating Method
Image credit: Kipp & Zonnen / Incognito Green Building
International Roof Coatings Conference – July 18, 2012Slide 42
Thank you
www.coolroofs.orgJeffrey Steuben
Cool Roof Rating [email protected]
(510) 482-4420 x288