| Author |
Message |
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan
Post Number: 632
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2013 - 12:29 pm: |    |
I have a client who wants to use this stuff (see http://www.schluterkerdiboard.com/media/KERDI-BOARD-Cutsheet.pdf). It is described as an "extruded polystyrene foam panel, with a special reinforcement material on both sides and fleece webbing for effective anchoring in thin-set mortar." I saw it last spring at a product show and wondered then if it complied with IBC Chapter 26. Has anyone used this or had it accepted or rejected by an AHJ? |
Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC
Senior Member
Username: redseca2
Post Number: 415
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2013 - 12:38 pm: | |
We have not used it on our large commercial and healthcare products, but I keep a sample on my desk.
Take a look at TCNA Assembly F128-11, it looks as if that floor tile assembly was written just for this product. |
Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: nwoods
Post Number: 545
Registered: 08-2005
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2013 - 12:41 pm: | |
I used it at a high end men's health club that had a number of individual shower stalls. Good product. The rep came out and showed the tile sub how to install the product, then came back when all the stalls were done. I felt very comfortable with the installed condition. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 638
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2013 - 12:51 pm: | |
I've never been able to get past the Code-required thermal barrier over foam insulation issue but none of my projects were ever willing to pay for it. Then again I've never called Schluter to see how they deal with the Code aspect of the product. |
Dale Roberts CSI, CCPR, CTC, LEED Green Associate
Senior Member
Username: dale_roberts_csi
Post Number: 110
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2013 - 06:10 pm: | |
Just an FYI Schluter is not the only manufacturer making this system
Durock Shower system http://www.usg.com/content/dam/USG/United%20States/Product%20Related/Shower%20Systems/DUROCK%20Brand%20Shower%20Systems/documents/language/english/Product%20Literature/durock-shower-system-catalog-en-CB628-usa.pdf
Wedi http://us.wedi.de/services/architects/architectural_course_summaries.php
As well as the company I work for
Custom Building Products
Custom Shower Installation Systems
http://www.custombuildingproducts.com/products/shower-installation-systems.aspx |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 639
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Monday, November 04, 2013 - 08:51 pm: | |
Thanks Dale.
It looks like Custom and USG both provide cement board as their tile backer product while Schluter and Wedi provide XPS. The Schluter data sheet lists compliance with ASTM E84 (no indication of what level it passes) which is not an IBC listed test for compliance with Chapter 26. Wedi claims to pass UL 1715 which is one of the criteria identified by IBC Chapter 26. |
Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap
Senior Member
Username: lgoodrob
Post Number: 226
Registered: 08-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2013 - 08:43 am: | |
Yes, Ken, I had noticed that about the ASTM E 84 results too. I had a request for Kerdi board from a client recently, but I talked him into cement board. He couldn't explain why the foam board would be better, and I am concerned about the fire rating. This was for a historic government building. I guess it would be lighter weight, but are there other advantages over cement board? |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 640
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2013 - 08:52 am: | |
The foam board can be scored and formed into a radius shape. Both products offer good water resistance though I suppose the XPS is more inherently waterproof, not that I would rely on the board to keep water out of the system. The upside of the cement board is that you have more options when selecting a waterproof membrane; for example XPS cannot be used with asphalt-based products such as the felt-faced peel-and-stick membranes as I recall. I presume that the facer system on the Wedi and Schluter products protect the XPS, but I can't say that for certain.
I reached out to Wedi and received a copy of UL 1715 testing on the Dow Styrofoam board that both Schulter and Wedi use. Bastion Lohmann at Wedi (http://www.wedicorp.com) was very helpful and seems like a good potential resource. |
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan
Post Number: 634
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2013 - 03:06 pm: | |
Schluter as responded to my inquiries with the following:
"2603.4 Thermal barrier. Except as provided for in Sections 2603.4.1 and 2603.9, foam plastic shall be separated from the interior of a building by an approved thermal barrier of 0.5-inch (12.7 mm) gypsum wallboard or equivalent thermal barrier material that will limit the average temperature rise of the unexposed surface to not more than 250° F (120°C) after 15 minutes of fire exposure, complying with the standard time-temperature curve of ASTM E 119. The thermal barrier shall be installed in such a manner that it will remain in place for 15 minutes based on FM4880, UL 1040, NFPA 286 or UL 1715. Combustible concealed spaces shall comply with Section 717.
"2603.9 Special approval. Foam plastic shall not be required to comply with the requirements of Sections 2603.4 through 2603.7 where specifically approved based on large-scale test such as, but not limited to, NFPA 286 (with the acceptance criteria of Section 803.2), FM4880, UL 1040 or UL 1715. Such testing shall be related to the actual end-use configuration and be performed on the finished manufactured foam plastic assembly in the maximum thickness intended for use. Foam plastics that are used as interior finish on the basis special tests shall also conform to the flame spread and smoke-developed requirements of Chapter 8. Assemblies tested shall include seams, joints and other typical details used in the installation of the assembly and shall be tested in the manner intended for use."
This is accompanied by test reports from an independent testing lab based on installation of Kerdi-Board over wood studs at 16 inches O. C. with a 12 by 12 inch porcelain tile finish (no thickness given for the tile). I am wondering if the results would be the same for steel studs or for thinner tiles such as ceramic mosaic tile or glazed wall tile. Contact me directly if you would like a copy of the test reports. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 642
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 05, 2013 - 03:41 pm: | |
Peter, what test method was used for the report you received? I presume it was one of those listed in Chapter 26.
If Schluter uses the Dow board, it seems that the board meets UL 1715 on its own merits (which surprised me) based on the test report I received from Wedi. That test report was from Omega Point for the Dow board, not limited to the Wedi product. |
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan
Post Number: 635
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 06, 2013 - 11:03 am: | |
The test was flammability testing to NFPA 286, Standard Methods of Fire Tests for Evaluating Contribution of Wall and Ceiling Interior Finish to Room Fire Growth - 2011 Edition. Testing was done by QAI Laboratories in Tulsa OK. These test report number is TG0284 and the date was 12/23/2011. |
4specs.com Home Page