Cool Roof Rating CouncilTechnical Committee

November 17, 2008

TRI PresentationTRI PresentationTile Rating Tile Rating

RecommendationsRecommendations

Scope of Research

Evaluate the current methods available.

Provide recommendations back to the CRRC for tile testing.

What we looked at

The 2 methods suggested by the CRRC were;

ASTM C1549 CRRC-1 utilizing the Reflectometer.

ASTM E1918 (modified) as per

Hashem outline utilizing the Pyranometer.

What the TRI did

Commissioned Ron OgawaRon Ogawa and Associates a certified CRRC lab to provide evaluation of the above test methods. Collaborated with Andre’ at ORNL.ORNL.

Provided a round robin test program in May of 2008.

Provided more in depth research with 2 independent labs

Testing Procedure Ron Ogawa performed the

following;

ASTM C1549 utilizing the Monte Carlo approach.

ASTM E1918 (Modified) utilizing the 9 tile (3 Meter) configuration per panel.

Simulated template method on tile

for C1549

Issue Considerations

The ability to provide delineation for tile profile effects.

The ability to address tiles with variegated color within the tile body.

We worked as Industry to Research We worked as Industry to Research the right approach for tilethe right approach for tile

ASTM C1549ASTM C1549ReflectometerReflectometer

ASTM E1918 ASTM E1918 PyranometerPyranometer

What the Round Robin Found Our research collaborated the

initial findings.The 1918 Pyranometer test

method as provided did not did not delineate the profilesdelineate the profiles of the tile as suggested.

Found Similar results as the Found Similar results as the Metal IndustryMetal Industry in not being able to get reliable data from E1918 method.

What we found

No ability to correlateability to correlate the C1549 results to the E1918.

Lack of consistencyLack of consistency in readings for similar tiles with the E1918.

The Method IS NOT Ready While E1918 does have positive

attributes as a test method, it is not repeatable and consistentnot repeatable and consistent for use; External affects of color and heat

come into play. Change in readings possible during

course of time frame (10:00AM – 2:00 PM)

Ability to have constant “clear” sky not likely. Small amounts of haze affect.

Reflectometer Approach

Attempts to follow the C1549 Monte Carlo testing procedure seemed to provide the most consistent readings.

Able to read flat and some curvature with consistent readings.

While not a perfect test method, seems to offeroffer the best we can the best we can identify at this timeidentify at this time.

Sample of Concrete tiles Looked at

Sample of Clay tiles Looked at

MFG Profile

Color C 1549 Avg.

# of Read

Std Dev

E 1918

Temp-late

MCA Low Tobacco* 0.302 30 0.003 0.282 0.359

MCA Med Tobacco* 0.293 30 0.005 0.284 0.348

MCA High Tobacco 0.358 30 0.004 0.257 0.357

MCA Low Irnwood* 0.181 30 0.002 0.180 0.231

MCA Med Irnwood* 0.173 30 0.004 0.169 0.224

MCA High Irnwood 0.232 30 0.005 0.183 0.238

Hanson

Low Bronze 0.227 60 0.015 0.207 0.227

Hanson

Med Bronze 0.246 48 0.009 0.159 0.240

Hanson

High Bronze 0.256 60 0.007 0.208 0.249

TRI – Cool Roof Rating Research Project

* Specimens sealed before ORNL tests

ORNLDATA

MFG Profile Color C 1549 Avg.

# of Read

Std Dev

E 1918

Temp-late

Hanson

Low Brown 0.136 60 0.008 0.117 0.128

Hanson

Med Brown 0.141 48 0.010 0.110 0.127

Hanson

High Brown 0.128 66 0.007 0.086 0.116

Eagle Low Terra-cotta

0.273 60 0.009 0.225 0.266

Eagle Med Terra-cotta

0.225 48 0.009 0.201 0.227

Eagle High Terra-cotta

0.253 60 0.007 0.201 0.247

Eagle Low Tan 0.219 60 0.011 0.188 0.223

Eagle Med Tan 0.186 48 0.007 0.128 0.183

Eagle High Tan 0.206 60 0.007 0.149 0.192

TRI – Cool Roof Rating Research Project

ORNLDATA

What we propose at this time ASTM C1549 with a TemplateASTM C1549 with a Template Create a template for a tile.

(Allows tile to be tested at same location at the 3 year mark)

Measure readings at 6 locations determined to best represent the tile and color variegation.

Perform on 9 tiles Total of 54 readings per test.

Had Ron Ogawa re-runC1549 Actual templateMethod on a flat tile

MFG Profile Color C 1549 Avg.

# of Read

Std Dev

E 1918

Temp-late

Hanson

Low Brown 0.136 60 0.008 0.117 0.128

Hanson

Med Brown 0.141 48 0.010 0.110 0.127

Hanson

High Brown 0.128 66 0.007 0.086 0.116

Eagle Low Terra-cotta

0.273 60 0.009 0.225 0.266

Eagle Med Terra-cotta

0.225 48 0.009 0.201 0.227

Eagle High Terra-cotta

0.253 60 0.007 0.201 0.247

Eagle Low Tan 0.219 60 0.011 0.188 0.223

Eagle Med Tan 0.186 48 0.007 0.128 0.183

Eagle High Tan 0.206 60 0.007 0.149 0.192

TRI – Cool Roof Rating Research Project

0.2760.276

Ron OgawaRon OgawaTemplateTemplate

Use exteriorexterior Paint and a small brushto add the information on back

Add “N”“N” on This side to

Indicate North for any retest for

Template alignment

Add MLT

Add Tile # (1 through 9)

Add SAP #

TRI Suggestion for a testing method. What we found Clay seemed to need less than

30 readings to meet the criteria. Concrete needed about 45-50 Our suggestion of 54 would

insure we have made the best possible effort to obtain a fair and proper reading.

Summary

We would recommend the C1549 test method with the Template configuration as suggested.

While not perfectnot perfect, it is the best best we can offer at this timewe can offer at this time.

We ask for the CRRC blessingCRRC blessing to utilize this method, since the time is running on the implementation date for formal ratings.