Florida Building
Commission
Structural Technical
Advisory Committee
MINUTES
MARCH 02, 2016
1:00P.M.
Meeting was conducted via
Teleconference/Webinar:
public point of access:
Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Northwood Centre, Suite
90A, 1940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, FL
32399 (850) 487-1824
|
TAC
Members Present: Chairman;
James Schock; Chair, CW Macomber, Craig Parrino, Joe Hetzel, Daniel
L. Lavrich, Do Y. Kim, Jaime Gascon, Warner Chang, David
Compton, Cris Fardelmann Guests
Present: Kurtis
Gurley, David Prevatt, Bill Boyer, Joe
Belcher, Rob Viera, Charlie Kennedy,
Mike Eniss, Sal Delfino, RANDY NICHOLAS, William Miller, Dennis Mathis,
dwight wilkes Staff
Present: Mo
Madani, JOE BIGELOW, JIM RICHMOND, ROBERT LORENZO, Jim Hammers, Robert Benbow,
NICK DUVAL and April Hammonds via Teleconference. |
|
Ø Objective:
To review and accept the interim
report for the research projects on the Corrosion of Roofing Fasteners |
|
Meeting Minutes |
|
|
Objective |
|
|
1) |
Welcome and Opening Remarks: Meeting opened at 1:00pm with meeting protocols regarding
muting of phones and personal identification when speaking. |
|
2) |
Roll Call – Roll Call was taken with a quorum present. |
|
3) |
Review and Approval of Meeting
Agenda – Motion was entered by Dan Lavrich
and seconded by Compton to accept the Agenda as posted. Unanimous
approval. |
|
4) |
Approval of Minutes of Decenber 28,
2015 – Motion was entered by Dan
Lavrich and seconded by Cris Fardelman to accept the minutes as
posted. Unanimous approval. |
|
5) |
Review and accept the Interim
Report for the Research Project on the Corrosion of Roofing Fasteners. Dr. Kurtis Gurley of the College
of Engineering at the University of Florida provided a PowerPoint
presentation to give the TAC an overview of interim report for the research
project. He gave a brief background of the past work on this research
project. Next, he went over the 1-8 scoring system for the corrosion of
fasteners in this research project. He then went over the results from last
year’s research project which showed a wide disparity in the performance of
electrogalvanized fasteners from different manufacturers, a high failure rate
of the TAS 114 criterion for electrogalvanized fasteners, some of the fasteners
were electrogalvanized, but not marked as ASTM A641 or TAS 114 compliant, and
that the results provided a baseline against which to measure ASTM A641 and
TAS 114 compliant fasteners. He then went over the scope of work for this
year’s project which included working with Mark Zehnal, Florida Roofing and
Sheet Metal Contractors Association, Inc. (FRSA) to identify and procure test
specimens from suppliers located in North, Central and South Florida region.
His observations included ASTM A641 certified EG performance no better than
unlabeled EG fasteners from the previous year’s study, HVHZ compliant EG
fasteners which are presumed TAS 114 E compliant perform, in regards to
corrosion, no better than non-HVHZ ASTM A641, hot dipped fasteners perform
much better than EG fasteners and Mechanically Galvanized screws perform
better than EP screws. Another major observation of this year’s project was
that Miami-Dade approved EG fasteners did not reveal a single EG sample that that
passed the TAS 114E criterion of < 5% surface corrosion. Each of the 30
such fastener samples tested had a score of at least 3 (partial light surface
corrosion) on both the head and shaft, and most samples displayed significant
heavy corrosion. Dr. Gurley then proceeded to provide the TAC with some
additional work that needed to be completed for next round of testing which
included testing the fasteners after they had been driven into the substrate. Jaime Gascon mentioned that they
are a bit concerned with the results that were showing up and they had gone
back and checked their records. He then mentioned that they would be looking
a lot closer at the test reports they have on file. Next, he mentioned they
were concerned with the origin of those samples and that they wanted to get
as much information as possible about the origin of the samples so that they
could attempt to determine why the occurrences may have been happening. Do Kim commented that they results
were very good and that he was very concerned with failure level of
supposedly code compliant fasteners. Dan Lavrich stated that the performance relating to the
corrosion requirements set forth in the test criteria that the concern would
be whether or not the corrosion or lack of corrosion performance and whether
it had an effect on the structural performance of the fasteners had not been
tested. Do Kim responded that he
understood that the test results may not have had a direct correlation
between the test standards and fastener performance in the field but that he
hoped that we could get to a correlation through the work of Dr. Gurley and
his staff. Mo Madani stated that this report
was not looking at the life service of the fasteners but we are looking at
the applications of the fasteners such as its performance after it had been
driven into the substrate. He then stated the premise for this research
project was that because we are seeing premature failure which is an early
stage failure not really for the long term performance at this point. Dan Lavrich responded that the
real issue is how does the corrosion affect the performance of the fasteners
and that the research needed to be continue this research into the next stage
which would be the correlation of how the fasteners are expected to perform
structurally relating to how they are performing with corrosion. He then
noted that re-bar can have high corrosion levels before it is structurally
affected and that if you wanted some meaningful data the research would have
to be taken to the next level. Mark Zehnal responded that the
FRSA has been interested in this information for a long time because some
fasteners are corroding away before the life cycle of the shingles are expired and that it is important
to find out how fasteners are affecting not only shingle installation but
tile and metal fasteners from other groups as well and that if you put on a
20 year roof people expect the fasteners to last that long. Joe Hetzel then stated that it was
his understanding that the ASTM standards are prescriptive in nature as
opposed to the TAS standards which are performance based. He wanted to know
that if there was a concern that going with the prescriptive minimum ASTM
standards are insufficient and that all of these fasteners should be subject
to testing of a performance basis. Dr. Gurley responded that some of
the fasteners tested were ASTM A641 certified and Miami-Dade approved. He
then asked that if a fastener was stamped as Miami-Dade approved it would
also be assumed to be TAS 114 compliant which is the performance based
testing and that it was true that ASTM A641 outside of HVHZ is just
prescriptive with a certain zinc coating and that the research shows that
different zinc coatings perform differently and that those fasteners with
other zinc coatings. He then stated that those fasteners that are supposed to
have passed the TAS performance based testing are not passing that testing. Joe Hetzel responded that is there
an issue of acceptance of fasteners only on a prescriptive basis whereas in
order to really comply corrosion is a component of the acceptance criteria
and that you have to test all of the fasteners for performance. Mo Madani replied that based on
the research the prescriptive is complying just as good as the performance
and that there is no weakness in the prescriptive to the point where you want
to say major changes need to be made to the standard. Joe Hetzel replied that it may not
be the standard it may be the enforcement of the standard. He then asked if
the products were certified here or overseas during testing. Jaime Gascon responded that the
testing is performed here in the states and in order to achieve the listings
they review the test reports and that they are seeing successful results in
order to issue those listings. He also mentioned that they are comparing the
samples to the original submitted reports so that the manufacturers can
respond to discrepancies. Mo Madani then asked if Miami-Dade
have a QA on fasteners and do they go and take samples and verify
manufacturing as approved. Jamie Gascon responded that this
apart of the conditions of receiving a listing and recent testing is how they
have been able to monitor that. He then stated that they receive testing data
over the course of this year, last year and within the last few months. He
cannot recall a specific case where they have went to the field to pull
samples. Mo Madani asked Dr. Gurley if his
findings were that the prescriptive is just as good as the performance.
Mo Madani then asked that if when
Dr. Gurley accepted their samples did he go randomly and select the samples
that were really commonly used to find out whether the samples are not really
corrosion resistant as they claim to be. Mark Zehnal responded that they
had contractors go to the distribution stores where they roofing contracts normally
go to buy their products and buy off the shelves what was available and
what’s on the shelf is generally what’s shipped to job sites. He then asked
is this a problem with the fasteners or is this a problem with enforcement on
the jobsite? Is the contractor looking at the box? Is the inspector looking
at the box, or is this a problem that arises before the fasteners get to the
distributor. He then stated that there may be more than one problem involved
in this and the fact the fasteners came from contractors in the industry from
different places all over the State of Florida is a concern. Mo Madani replied that these boxes
in general are compliant to the code as stated. Dan Lavrich then entered a motion to accept the interim
report as presented. The motion was seconded by Jaime Gascon. This motion
received unanimous approval. |
|
6) |
Public Comment – no public comment |
|
7) |
Member Comment – No Member comment |
|
9) |
Adjournment |
|
|
|
Staff
Contacts: Joe Bigelow, Joe.Bigelow@myfloridalicense.com, (850) 717-1829;
Mo Madani, mo.madani@myfloridalicense.com, (850) 717-1825.
Note: This document is available to any person
requiring materials in alternate format upon request. Contact the
Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Office of Codes and
Standards, 1940 N. Monroe Street, Suite 90, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0772 or
call 850-487-1824.