FM Global, a leading commercial building insurer, and its code-approved testing agency subsidiary, FM Approvals, have created a Very Severe Hail (VSH) impact resistance classification that could affect design professionals. FM Global Guidelines Traditionally, FM Global has recommended its insured building owners use moderate hail (MH) and severe hail (SH) classified roof systems for buildings located in areas FM Global considers to be susceptible to moderate or severe hail impacts. FM Loss Prevention Data Sheet 1-34 ("Hail Damage") provides a map identifying these regions. In recent years, the insurance industry in the United States has seen an uptick in losses from hail in terms of the number of claims experienced and costs of those claims. A majority of the hail damage occurs to roof systems and other rooftop components. In the latest version of FM 1-34 (April 2019), FM Global identified a new VSH region encompassing Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, most of Texas, and parts of Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico.  Per FM Global, this area was classified as a VSH region based on data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Weather Service and National Center for Environmental Protection's Storm Prediction Center. This data shows a concentration of reports of hail greater than 2 inches in diameter in this geographical region. Until recently, FM Approvals did not have VSH-classified roof systems available to satisfy its recommendation in the VSH region. In the interim, FM 1-34 recommended using assemblies tested to a Class 4 rating using FM 4473 ("Specification Test Standard for Impact Resistance Testing of Rigid Roofing Materials by Impacting with Freezer Ice Balls"). FM 1-34 indicates aggregate- and paver-ballasted roof systems can be substituted for MH- and SH-classified roof systems in the MH and SH regions. However, FM Global restricts the use of aggregate-ballasted roof systems on buildings taller than 150 feet, or in areas where the design wind speed is 100 miles per hour or greater. FM has indicated only paver-surfaced roof systems can be substituted for a VSH-classified roof system. FM 1-34 also contains recommendations for skylights, rooftop HVAC equipment, and other critical outdoor equipment in the MH, SH, and VSH regions. Hail Classifications FM Approvals traditionally has tested and classified membrane roof systems for MH and SH impact resistances using FM 4470 ("Approval Standard for Single-Ply, Polymer-Modified Bitumen Sheet, Built-Up Roofs (BUR) and Liquid Applied Roof Assemblies for use in Class 1 and Noncombustible Roof Deck Construction). This is the same test method on which many FM Approvals roof system classifications are based. Using FM 4470's procedure, MH-classified roof systems withstand a 2-inch-diameter steel ball weighing 1.19 pounds dropped from a height of 81 inches in a section of tubing. This results in an impact energy of about 8 foot-pounds (ft-lbs.) on the surface of the roof system test specimen. SH-classified roof systems withstand the same 2-inch-diameter steel ball dropped from a height of 141.5 inches, resulting in an impact energy of about 14 ft-lbs. on the surface of the roof system test specimen. FM Approvals recently updated its impact-resistance test method to include testing for the VSH classification. The new testing involves propelling 2-inch-diameter preformed ice balls at roof system test specimens using an ice ball launcher. The ice balls are propelled at 152 to 160 feet per second, resulting in an impact energy of 53 to 58 ft-lbs. on the surface of the roof system test specimen. With these higher test standards, new materials and assemblies are being developed and tested to meet the new ratings. Carlisle has introduced a new coverboard, EcoStorm, that can achieve the VSH rating. Carlisle currently has 133 approved VSH approved assemblies. For more information on EcoStorm VSH Coverboard, click here. Contact Brian Emert at Brian.Emert@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

The challenge with every design is making sure that it will work in a specific environment. Through understanding the principles of a "perfect wall" - one which contains a water-shedding layer, an air control layer, a vapor control layer, and a thermal control layer - we can generate a wall solution that will work in every environment. The control layers are listed in order of importance. All are important, but not equally important. The ranking comes from historic experience and the underlying physics. Controlling water in the liquid form (rain and ground water) has been the focus of architects for generations. Controlling air is a much more recent focus - less than a century. The corollary, however, is too often true for many in the industry. There should be no doubt, the water control layer is much more important than the air control layer. Controlling vapor is even more recent - only a generation or two. Air movement transports significantly more water in vapor form than does vapor diffusion and therefore air control is more important than the control of molecular water vapor. "Air barriers" are more important than "vapor barriers". Thermal control dates back millennia - but getting it wrong has rarely led to durability failures. The thermal control layer failures have been typically limited to comfort issues and operating cost issues. Hence, thermal control layers are listed last on the control layer "priority" list. In the last decade we have been successful at combining the water control layer, air control layer, and vapor control layer into a single layer that can be a film, coating, membrane, or sheet goods. We have also had good success with wrapping the exterior of a building with all of these control layers and then enclosing those control layers with the fourth control layer - the thermal control layer. This configuration, with the thermal control layer outboard of the water, air, and vapor control layers, allows the assembly to be constructed in all climate zones: cold, mixed, hot and humid, or dry. Even better, this configuration allows this assembly to enclose virtually all interior environments in all climate zones: offices, commercial, residential, institutional, pools, museums, art galleries, and data processing centers. The sole exception being refrigerated buildings and cold storage facilities. In such assemblies the location of the thermal control layer is "flipped" with the other control layers - the thermal control layer now becomes located on the interior of the other three control layers. Utilizing spray foam technology, you can create the "perfect wall" with spray polyurethane (SPF) which meets; Water Control Layer - SPF is inherently moisture resistant. Air Control Layer - SPF has an Air Impermeability of <0.02 (L/s/m2) @ 1 inch of mercury. Vapor Control Layer - SPF has a water vapor permeability of 1.4 perm @ 1 inch of mercury. Thermal Control Layer - SPF has an R-Value per inch of 6.9. This also allows for thinner walls and continuous insulation without thermal breaks. Visit the Carlisle Spray Foam Insulation website at carlislesfi.com for more information on how your next project could utilize spray foam insulation as a "perfect wall" solution. Contact Brian Emert at Brian.Emert@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

Wood nailers are often overlooked, but they are a very important component of a successful roof assembly. A horizontal wood nailer is used to provide an effective substrate for some installation details and for other roof accessories. In addition, it is used to provide solid protection for the edge of the membrane underlayment. At a minimum, wood nailers must be thick enough that the top of the nailer is flush with the top of the membrane underlayment. General Criteria: The width of the nailers must exceed the width of the metal flange of edgings, scuppers, etc. When treated lumber is specified, it is recommended that only lumber that has been pressure treated with salt preservatives be specified. Lumber treated with any of the wood preservatives such as, Creosote, Pentachlorophenol, Copper Naphthenate, and Copper 8-quinolinolate will adversely affect the membrane when in direct contact and are, therefore, unacceptable. If non-treated lumber is to be specified, it must be stored to protect from moisture sources. A seal should be provided between the non-treated lumber and a concrete or gypsum substrate. Methods used to fasten the nailer vary with building conditions; however, it is essential that secure attachment of durable stock be accomplished. Factory Mutual Loss Prevention Data Bulletin 1-49 (Perimeter Flashing) contains options for the spacing and sizing of fasteners based on the project wind zone. Wood nailers that are anchored to steel, wood, or masonry decking should not be less than 2" x 6" nominal (minimum 1-1/2" x 5-1/2"). Wood nailers should be Douglas Fir, Southern Yellow Pine, or of wood having similar decay-resistant properties. The American Wood Protection Association (AWPA) publishes the AWPA Book of Standards and is the industry standard for wood treatment. U1 is the specification for treated wood and outlines wood species, preservatives, and specifications for their Use Category System. This is a great resource when you have questions of when and where you should treat wood and what are the recommendations for various treatments. Carlisle SynTec publishes some topics in the Design References portion of our product binder, which can also be accessed on the Carlisle SynTec website. For more information on wood nailer attachment, including some drawings, click here. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

In 2012, the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) introduced the continuous air barrier requirement for new commercial construction. This meant that air and vapor barriers were now required for walls, and they must be tied to both the roofing assembly and the foundation. For years, many architects and designers only utilized an air and vapor barrier on the roof deck for high-humidity occupancies, such as swimming pools or food processing facilities. But the new requirement meant taking a hard look at the needs of all buildings and what a roof assembly could do for the building envelope. A single-ply membrane, as stated in the IECC and as tested utilizing the ASTM E2178 standard, qualifies as an air barrier and can satisfy the requirement for an air barrier on any given project. So why would you consider adding an additional air and vapor barrier to the roofing assembly? There are a couple of very simple reasons: Reason 1: Air Intrusion. While a properly installed roofing system will not allow air leakage (e.g., conditioned indoor air from exiting the building thermal envelope), it does allow air movement within the roof assembly. As the single-ply roof membrane is on the top of the assembly, indoor conditioned air can infiltrate into the roofing system and travel into the layers of insulation or cover boards. Why is this an issue? See Reason 2… Reason 2: Moisture Migration. Adding a deck-level air and vapor barrier is a great solution to prevent air intrusion and moisture migration. This also allows the wall air and vapor barrier to be tied together at the deck level, which allows the roof to be replaced more easily in the future. The contractor will not be modifying the continuous air barrier when re-roofing, as the roof is no longer that barrier. Carlisle SynTec provides many options for deck level air and vapor barriers: VapAir Seal MD for steel deck construction, direct to deck; VapAir Seal 725TR for Concrete Decks; VapAir Seal Flashing Foam for sealing around penetrations such as pipes; Go to the Air and Vapor Barriers Product Page on the Carlisle SynTec website for more information, specifications, and details. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

As discussed in the previous SpecTopic, "Cold Weather Installation Tips Part 1 - Low-VOC Bonding Adhesives and Primers", specifying and handling of building envelope products is challenging during the colder winter months. Single-ply membranes and rigid insulation boards need some extra consideration, as they can be adversely affected by outside temperatures. For starters, all membranes will need time to "relax" after being unrolled from the original packaging; this applies to EPDM, TPO, PVC and KEE HP. It is also suggested that membrane widths be limited to a maximum of 10 feet for adhered roofing systems. Treat flashing products and accessories as you would adhesives and primers, by utilizing heated storage enclosures or "hot boxes". This practice is strongly recommended when ambient temperatures are expected to fall below 40°F for an extended period of time. In all applications, but especially in cold conditions, insulation and underlayments must be stored so that they are kept dry and protected from the elements. Insulations should be stored on a skid, covered with a breathable tarp, and weighted to prevent wind damage. In winter months, ice and frost can form on the membrane. This can be difficult to see and can remain on the roof well into the day, especially on white membranes. This can be especially hazardous when working near the edge of the roof. Additionally, frost on metal edges and copings can create a very slick surface and cause ladders to slide and shift. Never step onto a metal coping when it is frost- or snow-covered. So for your next cold weather specification for single-ply membranes and rigid board insulation, include some installation precautions as mentioned. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

As temperatures fall and winter approaches, specifying and handling building envelope products – especially adhesives and primers – becomes a concern. Low-VOC adhesives and primers contain more water than standard adhesives and primers and can be adversely affected by outside temperatures. When specifying a low-VOC bonding adhesive or primer for a winter installation time frame, make sure to include information in the specification regarding cold weather application. This should include heated storage enclosures, or "hot boxes", for jobsite adhesive storage. This practice is strongly recommended when ambient temperatures are expected to fall below 40°F for an extended period of time. Adhesives and primers should be stored in locations where temperatures are between 60°F and 80°F. While working with adhesives, they should be rotated in hot boxes to ensure the temperature of the product stays above 40°F. Adhesives may appear gelled or lumpy when left for extended periods of time at temperatures below 40°F. If this occurs, return the material to room temperature for a minimum of 24 hours prior to use. In all applications, but especially in colder conditions, make sure you achieve the proper coverage rates for the adhesive or primer being used. Following coverage rates for Low-VOC adhesives and primers allows proper flash-off and reduces the trapped solvents which could lead to membrane blistering. For applications in very cold temperatures, Flexible FAST™ Adhesive may be necessary. Flexible FAST is a two-part polyurethane foam adhesive which is spray-applied and used with a fleece-backed single-ply membrane. The advantage of this system is that it can be sprayed using 15- or 50-gallon drums of Part A and Part B, which can be heated using drum or band heaters. This allows the material to stay warmer during application and lowers the minimum application temperature to 25°F. So for your next cold weather specification of Low-VOC adhesives and primers, include some installation precautions as mentioned. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 285 is a wall assembly fire test referenced by the International Building Code (IBC). This test requirement applies to Non-Combustible Construction, Types I, II, III, and IV. The use of this testing requirement is outlined in Chapters 14 and 26 of IBC, with exceptions added in the 2015 version of IBC. Two other fire tests are referenced in Chapters 14 and 26 as well: ASTM E84 "Test Methods for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building Materials" and ASTM E1354 "Standard Test Method for Heat and Visible Smoke Release Rates for Materials and Products Using an Oxygen Consumption Calorimeter". Several CCM products in the category of Water Resistive Barriers and Plastic Foam Insulation meet the exceptions in 2015 IBC, which means they would not trigger the need for an NFPA 285 test, but keep in mind that many CCM products have passed this assembly test with many other product combinations. Examples of products which would meet the exemption for Chapter 14 in 2015 IBC are R2+ SHEATHE, which is a foil-faced Polyisocyanurate wall board, and R2+ MATTE, which is a Class A Coated Glass Faced Polyisocyanurate wall board. Examples of products which would meet the exemption for Chapter 26 in 2015 IBC are Barrithane VP, a fluid-applied, vapor-permeable membrane at 20-mil and 40-mil cured thickness and 705FR-A, a rubberized asphalt composite membrane. Both of these products meet the ASTM E84 thresholds of ≤25 Flame Spread and ≤450 Smoke Development and ASTM E1354 threshold of 50 kW/m2. So for your next wall assembly, verify that your product meets the exemption or choose a product which has passed NFPA 285 testing for your specific wall assembly. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with further questions.

While ballasted roof systems aren't as popular today as they used to be, they are still being installed successfully across the country. Stone-ballasted roof systems began appearing sometime in the early 1970s. While they appear superficially similar to built-up roofing (BUR), there are major differences between the two systems. Both are topped with rocks, but BUR uses a thin layer of pea gravel or crushed stone no larger than a quarter-inch diameter partially embedded into the asphalt topcoat to protect it from the sun's UV rays. In a ballasted roof, the stones are much larger - at least an inch in diameter - and applied much more heavily. In fact, the weight of the stone ballast is what holds the roof components in place. The weight can vary from 10 pounds per square foot (the minimum allowed by code) to 25 pounds or more. The most common ballasted assembly was a loose-laid EPDM membrane over a rigid insulation board. By the 1980s, designers were integrating concrete pavers into ballasted roof designs, creating access paths, pedestrian walkways, and even rooftop plazas. When the green building movement came along in the late 1990s, it was natural to transition the ballast from stone to soil, creating vegetated or "green" roofs. Ballasted roofs are loose-laid; this means the contractor can assemble all the components, including the roofing membrane and insulation, without fastening them to each other or the roof deck. Membrane seams are sealed, of course, and the waterproofing layer is secured to the parapet and at roof penetrations, but it isn't adhered to the roof deck or the layers beneath it. By eliminating nearly all the adhesives and fasteners other assemblies require, ballasted roofs typically cost less and are quicker to install than other systems. EPDM is popular because it can be ordered in large sheet sizes, which minimizes seaming. TPO and PVC are also popular as single-ply roofing membranes under ballast. For designers, ballasted roofs provide a natural-looking surface that blends well with a range of architectural styles. With paver-ballasted designs, the roof can become a plaza, patio, or other usable outdoor space suitable for recreation, walking, or relaxation.  For the building owner, ballasted roofs are durable and long lasting. Stones or concrete pavers protect the waterproofing layer from UV rays, hail, and foot traffic. If repairs are needed, the loose-laid layers are easily taken up. And at the end of the roof's designed lifespan, the lack of adhesives ensures the membrane will be fully recyclable. Advantages Economy: Ballasted roofs use economical materials and are among the fastest to install. In fact, they have one of the lowest lifecycle costs of any roofing system on the market today. Scheduling: These roofs can be installed in a wide range of weather and temperature conditions, and close in the building envelope faster than most other systems. For occupied buildings, there are no offensive smells associated with the install. Aesthetics: Ballast can vary from large round cobblestones to pavers. This natural look is appealing to many building owners and architects. Rock can be combined with pavers to provide a variety of textures and utilitarian purposes. Amenity Space: With proper planning, ballasted roofs are suitable for plaza decks, walking paths, recreation areas, and other uses. Energy Efficiency: Ballasted roofs reduce heating and cooling loads. A system with a weight of 17 pounds per square foot saves as much energy as an ENERGY STAR-rated reflective roof. Fireproof: Stone and concrete are virtually fireproof, so ballasted roofs provide the highest fire rating available. Class-A fire resistance can be achieved without gypsum board underlayments or expensive fire-retardant chemicals. Durable: The stone or concrete pavers also provide protection from UV rays, hail, foot traffic, and extreme temperature fluctuations. Ease of Repair: Removal and re-installation of the ballast and insulation is easy, and both can be reused. No adhesives or fasteners are used, so it's easy to separate the components. Even in a complete replacement of the waterproofing membrane, the ballast stone or concrete pavers can be reinstalled. Recyclable: Most of the components are reusable and/or recyclable. Rocks, pavers, and rigid insulation board can be reused. The unadhered membrane is easy to remove and recycle. Stormwater Management: Green roofs and other options like Carlisle's Stormwater Retention Option can retain as much as 65% of the rainwater that falls during a storm. This can help owners and developers reduce fees.  Consult the EPDM Specification on the Carlisle SynTec Website here or consult the Ballasted Stormwater Retention Brochure here or contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com for further questions.

A building’s roofing system separates the damaging outdoor environment from the valuable interior contents. To be effective, it must be watertight. Although roof systems are inspected and sometimes flood tested prior to warranty issuance, small, difficult-to-see breaches in the membrane system can go unnoticed until damaging water leaks occur inside the building. Moreover, once a leak has developed it can be extremely difficult to locate the leak and perform the necessary repair, especially when overburden materials are installed. Enter Electronic Leak Detection, otherwise known as ELD. ELD systems have been around for 20+ years and are gaining popularity due to some revolutionary new products that have expanded testing capabilities. ELD systems come in two main varieties: low-voltage and high-voltage, with low-voltage being the most common. ELD systems work by creating an electrical potential difference between a non-conductive roof membrane and a grounded conductive structural deck or substrate. Testing is performed by applying water, which is conductive, to the surface of the roof membrane. The roof membrane will isolate the potential electrical difference between the deck and the water, but when a breach is present, the water will create an electrical connection to the grounded deck, pinpointing the exact leak location to the testing technician. A major benefit of ELD testing is that it can be performed at any time, even after overburden materials are installed. For ELD systems to be effective, a conductive substrate must be present directly below the membrane’s surface. Due to this requirement, membrane choice and application method can be limited. Two ELD companies that Carlisle has experience with are International Leak Detection (ILD) and Detec Systems. Products from either of these companies are permitted for use in a Carlisle warranted roof system but are not covered in the Carlisle warranty. ILD has been around since 2001 and promotes a conductive mesh that must be installed directly below the membrane for accurate testing of membrane systems over non-conductive decks. Due to the design of the conductive mesh, it is only acceptable for use under thermoplastic FleeceBACK® membranes adhered with FAST™ or Flexible FAST Adhesive. Detec Systems promotes a conductive primer called TruGround® that is roller-applied over the top layer of insulation, prior to adhesive application. Once dried, the membrane system can be installed as usual. TruGround conductive primer expands ELD testing capabilities, as it is suitable for use with bareback membranes and even black EPDM, which historically has not been compatible with ELD testing. Carlisle SynTec Systems has secured FM approvals for Detec’s TruGround in a number of different roofing assemblies. Those assemblies include: EPDM and TPO with CAV-GRIP® III adhesive over SecurShield®, SecurShield HD, DensDeck® Prime, and SECUROCK®. PVC with Low-VOC Bonding Adhesive over InsulBase®, SecurShield, SecurShield HD, and SecurShield HD Plus.  Contact Chris Kann with questions regarding ELD systems.

All construction materials, including foam plastics such as polyiso insulation, must provide a suitable margin of fire safety. Polyiso possesses a high level of inherent fire resistance when compared to other foam plastic insulations due to its unique structure of strong isocyanurate chemical bonds. These bonds result in improved high-temperature resistance (up to 390°F [199°C], more than twice that of other building insulation foams) which in turn leads to enhanced fire resistance. In addition, because polyiso does not melt or drip when exposed to flame, but rather forms a protective surface char, its fire resistance is further enhanced, especially in terms of flame spread and flashover potential. Polyiso passes both the ANSI UL 1256 and FM 4450 fire tests without a thermal barrier. Polyiso, a thermoset material, stays intact during fire exposure in the ASTM E84 or "Tunnel Test.” It forms a protective char layer and remains in place during the test, thereby meeting all building code requirements and contributing to a fire-safe building. For more information on polyiso’s performance in fire tests, visit the 'Technical Bulletins’ page on the PIMA (Polyiso Manufacturers Association) Website where you can find the following papers: Technical Bulletin 103: Fire Performance in Walls and Ceilings Discusses polyiso insulation as it relates to building codes in construction and fire tests in walls and ceilings, including ASTM E84 and ASTM E119. Technical Bulletin 104: Fire Performance in Roof Systems Provides an overview of polyiso insulation requirements for roof systems and key issues in fire performance, including the importance of the FM 4450 Calorimeter Tests and the UL 1256 Resistance to Interior Spread of Flame test. Technical Bulletin 105: Fire Test Definitions Provides an in-depth look at fire test procedures for building applications. Technical Bulletin 111: Class A and Class 1 Roof Assemblies Are Not the Same Explains why Class 1 and Class A are not the same. Technical Bulletin 111C: Roofing Regulations in Canada – Class A and Class 1 Roof Assemblies Are Not the Same Explains why Class 1 and Class A are not the same. Technical Bulletin 405: Fire Resistance Properties of Polyiso Foam Plastic Insulation Used in Wall Assemblies – Facts and Comparisons Looks at the minimum fire resistance properties required for foam plastic insulation and compares data on polyiso with other recognized combustible materials. Product Stewardship Paper 100: Polyiso Insulation and Flame Retardants New Product Stewardship report on polyiso and flame retardants. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

All single-ply membranes make for great roofing systems, but they can be used for a variety of other purposes too. EPDM, TPO, and PVC can be used in the lining of underground tunnels and can serve as liners for water retention ponds, irrigation canals, and other water containment systems. For years, EPDM membranes were used as pond liners – even before they were utilized for commercial roofing. You could see EPDM pond liners being used in agriculture for irrigation canals and ditches, by municipal water systems for retention ponds and spillways, and even in backyards as small ponds and water features. This is still true today, and EPDM has expanded into additional markets such as tunnel waterproofing. The number of large underground transportation tunnels used for vehicle traffic or metropolitan railways has certainly increased in the last few decades as traffic and access needs continue to outstrip the supply of existing infrastructure. These tunnels have to keep water out, whether they’re underneath a river or traversing through a mountain, and single-ply membranes meet their waterproofing needs with the same technology used on the roof. Different types of membrane offer specific benefits, from EPDM’s large sheet size to thermoplastics’ (TPO/PVC) seam weldability. Regardless of whether the tunnel is a boring project or a “cut and cover”, lining the tunnel can be accomplished using several different installation methods and can utilize EPDM, TPO, or PVC. For more information, please consult the links for the products or specifications on the Carlisle SynTec website below. Tunnels – Conventional Blindside Method Consult the Tunnel Waterproofing System – Conventional Specification and Details on the Carlisle SynTec website.  Tunnels – Cut and Cover Method Consult the Tunnel Waterproofing System – Cut and Cover Specification and Details on the Carlisle SynTec website.  Pond Liners Consult GeoMembrane Page for Pond Liner Products and Brochures on the Carlisle SynTec website.   Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

There are two recognized field test methods for determining uplift resistance of adhered membrane roof systems, both of which can be problematic: ASTM E907, "Standard Test Method for Field Testing Uplift Resistance of Adhered Membrane Roofing Systems," and  FM Global Loss Prevention Data Sheet 1-52 (FM 1-52), "Field Verification of Roof Wind Uplift Resistance."  Both test methods provide for affixing a 5’ x 5’ dome-like chamber to the roof’s surface and applying a defined negative (uplift) pressure inside the chamber to the roof system's exterior-side surface using a vacuum pump, like in the photo below.  An example of a test chamber used for negative-pressure uplift testing However, ASTM E907 and FM 1-52 differ notably in their test cycles and maximum test pressures for determining roof system deflections and whether a roof system passes or is “suspect”. Using ASTM E907, a roof system is “suspect” if the deflection measured during the test is 25 mm (about 1 inch) or greater.  Using FM 1-52, a roof system is “suspect” if the measured deflection is between ¼ of an inch and 15/16 of an inch, depending on the maximum test pressure; 1 inch where a thin cover board is used; or 2 inches where a thin cover board or flexible, mechanically attached insulation is used.  Test results' reliability  The reliability of the results derived from ASTM E907 and FM 1-52 is a concern, especially when the tests are used for quality assurance purposes. A note in ASTM E907 acknowledges its test viability. "Deflection due to negative pressure will potentially vary at different locations because of varying stiffness of the roof system assembly. Stiffness of a roof system assembly, including the deck, is influenced by the location of mechanical fasteners, thickness of insulation, stiffness of deck, and by the type, proximity, and rigidity of connections between the deck and framing system." For example, when testing an adhered roof system over a steel roof deck, placement of the test chamber relative to the deck supports (bar joists) can have a significant effect on the test results. If positioned between deck supports, the test chamber's deflection gauge will measure roof assembly deflection at the deck's midspan, which is the point of maximum deck deflection. Also, in many instances, field-uplift testing results in steel roof deck overstress and deck deflections far in excess of design values, which can result in roof system failure. These situations can result in false “suspect” determinations of a roof system. Industry position/recommendations Because of the known variability in test results using ASTM E907 and FM 1-52 and the lack of correlation between laboratory uplift-resistance testing and field-uplift testing, the roofing industry considers field-uplift testing to be inappropriate for use as a post-installation quality-assurance measure for membrane roof systems. Conclusion FM 1-52 is an FM Global-promulgated evaluation method and not a recognized industry-consensus test standard. The scope of FM 1-52 indicates that it’s only intended to confirm acceptable wind-uplift resistance on completed roof systems in hurricane-prone regions, where a partial blow-off has occurred, or where inferior roof system construction is suspected or known to be present. FM 1-52 was originally published by FM Global in October 1970. The negative-pressure uplift test was added in August 1980 and has been revised several times. The current edition is dated July 2012 and includes an option for "visual construction observation (VCO)" as an alternative to negative-pressure uplift testing. VCO provides for full-time, third-party monitoring to verify roof system installation is in accordance with contract documents. For more information, contact Craig Tyler.

For years, “going green” initiatives have been popping up in all aspects of our lives. In the construction industry, there are three main programs pushing buildings to be greener: LEED®, Green Globes, and Living Building Challenge (LBC). All three of these programs push for more sustainable buildings, but each takes a different approach to accomplish this goal. In this SpecTopics post, we will look at some of the differences between these three programs. Put simply, LEED and Green Globes are working toward making buildings more sustainable by improving existing standards, while LBC takes things a step further and promotes buildings that have little to no negative impact on the environment.  Overall Mission LEED wants to make buildings better for the environment, community, and those who use the building Green Globes wants to make buildings more environmentally efficient based on commonly valued environmental outcomes LBC promotes buildings that have a positive environmental impact   Certification Methods/Requirements  LEED  Points-based rating system (100 points possible)  Four levels of certification: Certified, Silver, Gold, and Platinum Green Globes  Points-based rating system (1,000 points possible)  Four levels of certification: 1 Globe, 2 Globes, 3 Globes, 4 Globes LBC  Seven petals (like those of a plant or flower) broken down into 20 imperatives; number of petals/imperatives completed determines award  Three awards are available (based on which path you take)  A Zero Carbon Certification and a Zero Energy Certification are available Main Points of Focus  LEED Location & Transportation, Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy & Atmosphere, Material & Resources, Indoor Environmental Quality, Innovation, Regional Priority, and Integrative Process Green Globes Project Management, Site Energy, Water, Materials & Resources, Emissions, Indoor Environment LBC Place, Water, Energy, Health & Happiness, Materials, Equity, and Beauty

As designers and architects try to meet green construction or net-zero energy goals, on-site power generation in the form of photovoltaic (PV) arrays is becoming more and more common. Preparing your roof to accept a PV system in the future is also increasingly commonplace. In general, robust roofs with extended warranties are the best candidates for PV systems. While a normal roof may only experience light foot traffic from the building owner or maintenance personnel a few times a year, a PV installation may need more frequent inspections (i.e. after significant storms or heavy snowfall, monitoring, etc.). So starting out with a thicker membrane, a cover board, and walkway pads are a must. It’s important that the PV array does not interfere with the roof’s drainage. This may mean some of the array will have to be supported by structural steel tubing or piping in lieu of traditional racking (which may rest on the roof utilizing ballast). It’s important to leave room for roofers to inspect or repair seams and flashings, so it may be necessary to raise the height of the array as not to obstruct roof penetrations. Always verify the type of PV array system to be installed on your roof and coordinate with your local Carlisle Field Service Representative (FSR) to assess the new or existing roof’s condition prior to beginning any work. Consult the SOLAReady Specification on the Carlisle SynTec website at or contact Craig Tyler with questions.

We’ve already discussed wind uplift design in a previous SpecTopics post (FM 1-90 vs. ASCE 7); this post will help you understand how those wind speed numbers relate to wind speed warranties.  To calculate wind uplift for a roofing project, you’ll need to determine the building type and local wind speed. In gathering this information, some designers look at the American Society of Civil Engineers’ ASCE 7 Wind Maps for their area, see a number like 90- or 120-mph, and think that is the wind speed their building will encounter. Therefore, they specify the same speed for their warranty (i.e. 120 mph local speed means I need a 120-mph wind speed warranty). Rest assured, this is not the case. ASCE 7 maps have contours with the local speeds in 10 mph increments. ASCE 7-2005 and ASCE 7-2010 were relatively straightforward; most of the U.S. was in a 90-mph zone. However, in 2016 ASCE deemed it necessary to have separate maps for each building risk category (Category I, II, III, and IV). This increased the wind speeds for most of the country, especially for projects with increased risk categories. Naturally, designers saw this increase and thought that since the local wind speed was increasing, they needed to ask for increased wind speed warranties. (i.e. 130 mph or more). Again, this is not the case. It’s true that warranted wind speed is the limit of 3-second peak gust recorded at the weather station nearest your building project, measured at 10 meters above the ground, during a weather event that affects your building project. But to achieve wind speeds over 90 mph, a cyclonic windstorm (tornado, hurricane, etc.) is generally necessary. If your building experiences a cyclonic windstorm, there will be flying debris, broken glazing, and other envelope breaches that could cause roof failure (over-pressurizing the building, detachment of decking from structural components, etc.). This would not be covered under a roofing warranty, regardless of the wind speed coverage. Keep in mind that a roofing warranty assumes that the building remains intact, the decking remains solid, the inside pressure of the building is generally equalized, and foot traffic is limited to maintenance and inspection of rooftop equipment. It is not building insurance. Like fires and vandalism, critical weather events such as tornadoes and hurricanes are covered by the building owner’s insurance carrier. Choose a warranted wind speed that makes sense for you and your client, but you don’t need to match that with your local wind speed. You’ll just be paying more for something you don’t need. Always verify your need for increased warranty wind speed before inquiring about matching your local wind speed with the warranty. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

This post focuses on the moisture phenomenon in concrete and the difference between lightweight and normal-weight structural concrete. Curing versus drying and the standards used to determine relative humidity levels are also addressed. Part II will address design recommendations and roof assembly selection. Moisture in Newly Poured Structural Concrete Roof Decks When investigating roofs for leaks, invariably, moisture is found beneath the roof membrane. However, the source of moisture is not always a roof leak. Newly poured structural concrete could be a contributor to the presence of moisture beneath a new or a replacement roof. Concrete is a mixture of several components that reaches its optimum strength through a chemical reaction induced by water. Concrete needs water to allow for flowability and workability, however, water also has adverse effects. Once the concrete has cured, the remaining water is considered “free water”, or moisture which is no longer consumed by the curing process. Rain and snow add moisture to exposed concrete roof decks and further prolong the drying. As an example, a 4” slab of structural concrete contains as much as 200 gallons of free water per 1,000 square feet. ​Structural Concrete Mix Ratio The ratio for both normal-weight and lightweight structural concrete (LWSC) is generally the same: •10-15% cement •60-75% aggregate (fine and coarse) •15-20% water The difference is in the aggregate; the lightweight aggregate is pre-saturated prior to mixing. The lightweight aggregate, which is made up of shale, slate slag, or clay, can absorb 5-25% of its mass. Normal-weight structural concrete, however, utilizes aggregates such as sand and stone, which are not as porous and do not need to be wetted before adding to the mix. The popularity of LWSC is increasing due to: •Lower building structural cost; •Lesser density for reduced dead loads; and •Environmental and sustainability claims. Drying Time To reach a 75% relative humidity for normal-weight structural concrete, it will take approximately three months. However, achieving the same 75% relative humidity for LWSC will take twice as long. According to the Portland Cement Association, the dry-down time for LWSC is more than normal-weight structural concrete. Standards for Moisture Testing For many years, the roofing industry has used a curing time of 28 days after the concrete is poured. However, there are test methods published by ASTM for determining the moisture content in concrete. Qualitative tests, such as the plastic sheet test and electrical resistance and/or impedance are good indicators of the presence of moisture in a given area but are not as accurate as quantitative tests. Quantitative tests, such as the moisture vapor emission rate test, surface humidity, or in-situ relative humidity tests demonstrate levels of moisture present in the concrete. The recommended quantitative test is the in-situ relative humidity test (ASTM F2170), in which a sleeved probe is placed in a drilled hole in the concrete and left in place for 24 hours. After the 24 hours, an electronic reader is attached, and the information is read directly from the sensor. The relative humidity reading should be less than 80% at a depth of approximately 40% of the thickness of the slab. The moisture values and test duration stated above have been slightly modified to better suit outdoor roof conditions.  Site Considerations The concrete pour schedule can affect moisture testing and provide inaccurate moisture values. Therefore, in phased construction, the field testing and the roofing installation should be aligned with the concrete pour schedule and ICRI-Certified Concrete Inspectors should be commissioned. For in-depth information, the International Concrete Repair Institute (ICRI) offers various resources that can aid with the proper steps required for testing and evaluation. Stay tuned for part II for recommendations on design and the selection of an appropriate roofing assembly.

An Alternative to Metal Roofing: Special Color TPO with Contour Ribs Carlisle’s TPO Contour Rib Profile offers the look of a standing seam metal roof with the performance of a TPO single-ply membrane. Each section of Contour Rib Profile is manufactured from the same weather-resistant compound as TPO membrane and enhanced with fiberglass for added dimensional stability. The product’s rectangular shape provides exceptional shadow lines for aesthetic appeal.  TPO Contour Rib Profile Quick Facts  Available colors: White, Gray, Tan, Terra Cotta, Patina Green, Slate Gray, Rock Brown, and Medium Bronze. Size: Each section is 1 1/4" tall, 2 1/8" wide (including welding flanges), and 10’ long; the vertical profile is 3/8" thick with a 1/8" alignment hole and a 1/8" fiberglass reinforcing cord. Packaging: 20 pieces per carton, each carton includes 25 connecting pins. Special-Color TPO Program Quick Facts - Carlisle has the industry’s most comprehensive special-color TPO program, with membranes and accessories in Medium Bronze, Patina Green, Rock Brown, Terra Cotta, and Slate Gray. - There are no minimum order quantities. - The following TPO products are available in the five special colors. 1. 60-mil standard reinforced TPO membrane – 5’ x 100’ and 10’ x 100’ rolls.  • 10’ x 100’ rolls – limited quantities stocked in Mississippi; large orders may require a one- to    two-week lead time.  • 5’ x 100’ rolls – require a short lead time; customers must order an even number of rolls.  2. 24” Non-Reinforced TPO Flashing – limited quantities stocked in Mississippi; large orders may require a one- to two-week lead time. 3. TPO Contour Rib Profile – limited quantities stocked in Mississippi; large orders may require a one- to two-week lead time. 4. TPO Coated Metal – made to order; requires a one- to two-week lead time. 5. 115-mil 12’ x 100’ FleeceBACK® TPO – manufactured at the beginning of each calendar quarter (January, April, July, October) to fulfill all orders that are in-hand by the 15th of the previous month (March 15, June 15, September 15, December 15). You can combine Contour Ribs with special-color TPO to create a simulated metal roof in Medium Bronze, Patina Green, Rock Brown, Terra Cotta, or Slate Gray.  Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

The demand for high-performance building envelope systems is on the rise. Energy codes such as ASHRAE 90.1 and the IECC continue to increase requirements aimed at creating more energy efficient and environmentally friendly designs. Some of these increasing code requirements involve the addition of continuous air barriers, as well as continuous insulation to wrap the entire building. Architects, specification writers, and designers have the almost impossible task of staying up-to-date on new code requirements, understanding how and why changes were made, and accurately and appropriately incorporating these changes into their designs. Over the last several decades, Carlisle Construction Materials (CCM) has become the premier single-source supplier of building envelope materials, including single-ply roofing, air and vapor barriers, waterproofing membranes, insulation, metal products, and more. Therefore, CCM is focused on educating and assisting design professionals through training courses, as well as helpful tools and materials, to minimize the learning curve experienced by architects when code changes occur. Here’s some information on CCM’s newest educational courses, tools, and materials to help you stay at the forefront of building envelope designs. Education is paramount to the success of building envelope projects, which is why CCM offers free courses to design professionals on various building envelope design considerations. CCM’s “Pushing the Envelope: Going Beyond Conceptual Design” is a 300-level, AIA-accredited course that explores proper product selection, material performance characteristics, test procedures, and best practices as they relate to building envelope systems. It is available online as a self-guided course here or you can request a face-to-face presentation here. CCM’s newest course, “Building Envelope Design – Understanding Codes, Best Practices, and Tie-in Detailing”, is a 400-level, AIA-accredited course available exclusively as a face-to-face presentation. This course helps raise awareness of code requirements as they relate to building envelope components and systems, with a focus on the all-important tie-in detailing needed to provide an air tight building. Common material misconceptions are also discussed. For more information on CCM’s Building Envelope Design course, or to request an face-to-face presentation, click here.  As energy code requirements increase the need for air barriers and continuous insulation, questions about fire safety may arise. In most cases, the International Building Code (IBC) requires compliance with NFPA 285, which is the Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Fire Propagation Characteristics of Exterior Wall Assemblies Containing Combustible Components. Carlisle Coatings and Waterproofing (CCW) offers both an online tool and mobile app that allow you to build an NFPA 285-approved assembly. When finished, a submittal document is created for the wall you designed, and this document can be provided to your building code official if your design is ever called into question. To build your NFPA 285 wall assembly, click here or download the app by searching “NFPA Guide” on the AppStore, GooglePlay, and Amazon. Since continuous air barriers became a requirement of energy codes, building designers have been given the difficult task of determining material compatibility and proper tie-in sequencing of dissimilar systems. CCM’s breadth of building envelope materials allows for the internal vetting of material compatibility, taking away the guesswork typically required from designers. CCM’s NVELOP details are easy to read and understand, illustrating the most common material combinations along with step-by-step installation instructions to create the continuous air seal required by energy codes. NVELOP details can be downloaded from the NVELOP website here. CCM is unique in its ability to provide a wide range of materials from a single source. Similarly, NVELOP is unique in its ability to provide a single-source warranty for the tie-ins between dissimilar CCM systems. However, the uniqueness of CCM and NVELOP can make specifying for public bid projects complicated. To address these difficulties, CCM developed the MasterFormat Specification Sell Sheet with instructions on how to write CCM and NVELOP as the basis of design in public bid project specifications, while keeping them open for competition. To download CCM’s NVELOP MasterFormat Specification Sell Sheet, click here. NVELOP is unique in its ability to provide warranty coverage for tie-ins between dissimilar CCM materials. Traditionally, applying for and receiving a warranty for tie-ins was either impossible or extremely difficult and involved lots of paperwork and time. NVELOP eliminates these issues with an easy online warranty application process. Once the individual CCM system warranties are purchased and received, visit NVELOP’s warranty application portal here and fill in the appropriate information. If you have questions about any of these building envelope tools, please contact Chris Kann at Chris.Kann@CarlisleCCM.com.

Wind uplift design for roofing can seem daunting to the uninitiated. But with a little help from online tools, it can be much more straightforward. Wind uplift is calculated for all buildings using formulas, tables, and wind maps developed by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) in their publication ASCE 7-2016. With a project’s location, building use/occupancy, building height, and roof plan, there are a number of online tools you can use to determine the wind uplift required for your building. The calculator used by the National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA) can be found at http://www.roofwinddesigner.com/. Once the uplift pressures for your building are determined, you must choose a design for your building that meets these pressures. Roofing manufacturers list their system designs through the DORA Directory of Roof Assemblies https://www.dora-directory.com/ or through Factory Mutual Global’s RoofNav® https://www.roofnav.com/Account/Login. The DORA Directory lists roofing assemblies based on uplift testing that various manufacturers have received through third-party verification, while FM’s RoofNav lists roofing assemblies that have been tested through FM Global’s own testing facility. Roofing assemblies that meet the minimum uplift requirements per ASCE 7-16 will meet the International Building Code (IBC); however, FM Global ratings may require additional enhancements based on their own calculations. The more stringent guidelines are due to the fact that FM Global is an insurance company and they approve designs before they issue coverage for a particular building. While FM 1-90 is a rating used by FM Global-insured buildings as a standard for their insurance coverage, the calculation of wind load for a particular building using ASCE 7 calculations is the basis for designing a roof meeting the IBC for all buildings, whether or not they are insured by FM Global. Meeting the standard for FM 1-90 will result in higher pressures in the perimeter and corners than using the ASCE 7 method, thereby increasing the cost of the construction of the roof. Changing these requirements at a later date or finding out your project does not require FM ratings may cause confusion during the bidding process and could result in higher bids. Always verify your need for FM Global before proceeding with wind load design. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

In moderate climate regions, and especially in southern states, specifiers are often tasked with selecting an air barrier that is vapor permeable. In many cases, they are advised by product manufacturers’ reps that products with a higher perm rating will deliver better performance. Various manufacturers have used this tactic to drive the sale of their products and limit competition. To counter this misleading marketing technique, it is imperative to understand permeance, how it relates to vapor retarder classification, and what it all means in terms of building performance.  Permeance indicates the rate of water vapor transmission through a material and is dependent on the material’s thickness, much like R-value in heat transmission. Permeance is often abbreviated to “perm”, which is the unit of measure used for vapor retarder classifications. A material’s perm rating is also what is needed when comparing the water vapor transmission of different building products.  The table below shows vapor retarder classification as accepted by the International Building Code (IBC). It is important to note that the less permeable a material is, the greater its resistance to water vapor transmission. Classification Definition Permeance I Vapor Impermeable Greater than or equal to 0.1 perm II Vapor Semi-Impermeable Greater than 0.1 perm but less than or equal to 1.0 perm III Vapor Semi-Permeable Greater than 1.0 perm but less than or equal to 10 perms Vapor Permeable Greater than 10 perms As the table above illustrates, any material with a perm rating greater than 10 is classified as PERMEABLE. Selecting a product solely because it has a higher perm rating than the definition of permeable doesn’t add any meaningful benefits to the performance of the system. The most important thing to consider when comparing perm ratings of various products is the test in which the perm rating was determined. ASTM E96 is the Standard Test Method for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials. ASTM E96 contains two test methods to determine the perm rating of materials: Method A (the desiccant method) and Method B (the water method). Results from these two test methods vary considerably and cannot be compared in any way. Therefore, it is extremely important when comparing and choosing a vapor permeable or vapor impermeable air barrier that the results are from the same ASTM E96 test method. Method B is the most commonly used for classifying materials due to the higher results it yields, representing a worst-case situation with an excess presence of moisture. Please contact Chris Kann at Chris.Kann@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

Today’s re-roofing market is going strong, making up 62% of all roofing work versus 38% for new construction. While most specifiers and roofers know the requirements for re-roofing to meet current building and energy codes, there is always a level of uncertainty when it comes to the structure of the roof itself. Can I tear off the old roof and start my new roof application with the existing deck? Or is something more required? Re-roofing work consisting of a complete tear-off is considered an Alteration – Level 1 for the International Existing Building Code (IEBC) 2015 and 2018 editions. In Chapter 5, an Alteration – Level 1 is described as, “includes the removal and replacement or the covering of existing materials, elements, equipment, or fixtures using new materials, elements, equipment, or fixtures that serve the same purpose”. Descriptions of the code requirements for Alteration – Level 1 are in Chapter 7 and include Section 707 – Structural, which describes two additional structural requirements for roof replacement: 1.(707.3.1) Where the re-roofing work is more than 25% of the roof area, and the building is assigned a seismic design category of D, E, or F (Chapter 20 of ASCE 7), unreinforced masonry wall parapets must be braced according to 301.1.4.2 of the International Building Code (IBC). 2.(707.3.2) If the existing roofing system is removed and the deck is exposed for more than 50% of the roof area and the building is located where the ultimate design wind speed is greater than 115 mph OR the project is located in a special wind region, all structural roof connections must be evaluated for the wind uplift, and if unable to support 75% of the wind load, they must be strengthened or replaced as defined in Chapter 16 of the IBC. These requirements will not affect all buildings. Checking with a structural engineer to determine the existing building’s seismic design category or evaluating wind uplift potential of existing structural components will increase the project’s cost. Additionally, more costs could be added if structural remediation is required. Always check with the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) for local requirements before proceeding with re-roofing work. Contact Craig Tyler at Craig.Tyler@CarlisleCCM.com with questions.

With the ever-increasing emphasis on airtightness in commercial buildings, many of today’s building envelope projects are taking an approach similar to that of the roofing industry, where products are sourced from and warranted by a single company. Traditionally, building envelope projects have used products supplied by multiple manufacturers for use in below-grade waterproofing, walls, and roofing systems. This poses several concerns for architects and designers, including product compatibility, system performance, and liability. Similar concerns are what led the roofing industry to shift to a single-source, “system” approach in the late 1980s. Today, most roofing systems are single source. These systems utilize materials designed to work together from the start, allowing suppliers to offer extended and unique warranty coverage and eliminate finger-pointing in the event of a leak. One of the biggest advantages of a single-source building envelope is the ability to avoid product incompatibility at tie-in junctions, which can lead to air barrier breaches. With its NVELOP Building Envelope Solutions program and wide breadth of manufacturing capabilities, Carlisle Construction Materials (CCM) is leading the way in the movement toward single-source building envelope systems. CCM’s NVELOP is the industry’s most comprehensive single-source building envelope solution, featuring a variety of waterproofing, wall, and roof system materials. NVELOP's ability to ensure the compatibility of dissimilar materials eliminates the guesswork architects have conventionally dealt with when designing a building envelope system, while still allowing for design flexibility. The program’s tie-in detail suite provides vetted tie-in options that have been tested for durability, compatibility, and constructability. Additionally, NVELOP’s unique single-source tie-in warranty, available for up to 15 years, significantly limits architect and specifier liability and provides peace of mind to the building owner. For more information, visit the NVELOP website at www.carlislenvelop.com. If you have questions, please contact Chris Kann at Chris.Kann@CarlisleCCM.com.

Carlisle Construction Materials (CCM) has learned that Tectum Inc. has voluntarily de-listed their decking products from the FM RoofNav site. Tectum Inc. produces structural acoustical roof decks made of wood fiber cement which absorb sound and are compatible with a wide variety of insulation and roofing materials. CCM’s roofing systems are compatible with Tectum decks and share many RoofNav-approved assemblies. Because of the de-listing by Tectum, the FM Approvals for wood fiber cement decks and all related RoofNav listings have been removed from the FM approval site for all roofing manufacturers, not just CCM. Consequently, all wood fiber cement deck ratings listed in Carlisle’s State of Florida Evaluation Reports have been added to the SPRI DORA (Directory of Roof Assemblies) listing website. These ratings will still be applicable and can be specified when using the SPRI DORA directory in lieu of specifying FM approved roof assemblies. Many specifiers use FM approval ratings as a general guide for design, but may be specifying them on buildings which are not insured by FM Global. When specifying for building projects that are not FM insured, the specifier may use SPRI DORA assemblies or UL assemblies. The SPRI DORA listing is a web application database of roof systems tested in accordance with standards referenced in Chapter 15 of the International Building Code (IBC). This service lists wind uplift load capacity on single-ply and modified bitumen roof systems. For more information on the listing, visit www.dora-directory.com or contact Brian Emert.     Brian Emert     Designer & Doc Dev Specialist     Design Services     brian.emert@carlisleccm.com

Welcome to the first installment of SpecTopics, a bi-monthly blog about topics related to designing and specifying roofing and waterproofing systems using Carlisle’s products. Carlisle has been a recognized leader in the roofing industry for more than half a century, manufacturing high-performance EPDM, TPO, and PVC single-ply membranes. Carlisle also offers roof garden systems, a full line of polyiso and expanded polystyrene insulation, and a host of steep slope underlayments, duct sealants, adhesives, and hardware. In addition to roofing, Carlisle services the waterproofing, framing, and general construction industries. This blog-based format will allow us to answer the most frequently asked questions we receive from architects and specifiers, as well as to share technical information and industry news. Our goal is for SpecTopics to serve as a resource for roofing, waterproofing, and building envelope issues. The focus will be on industry-wide issues that affect building product specifications and code approvals for roofing and air and vapor barriers. In the next few installments, we’ll cover trends in building envelope specifications, FM 1-90 requirements versus ASCE 7 requirements, and code-related language regarding re-roofing. Stay tuned; another SpecTopic will be published in two weeks. Contact Brian Emert for further information.     Brian Emert     Designer & Doc Dev Specialist     Design Services     brian.emert@carlisleccm.com