New ASTM Standard Replaces Felt Standards for Qualification of Synthetic Underlayments Greg Keeler, Technical Service Leader, Owens Corning Synthetic underlayments have been available for over 20 years and very early versions left a bad impression on some contractors. However, things have now changed for the better.
development – until now.
Why Synthetic Underlayment?
Early synthetic underlayments were tested and qualified for use under ASTM Standards that were intended to be applied to asphalt-impregnated felt underlayments. For many years, the International Codes (IBC and IRC) and the Florida Building Code have referenced ASTM D226, ASTM D4869 and ASTM D6757 – all standards that were intended to apply to asphaltic felt underlayments. The problem with that approach was that those standards are primarily composition driven. Since they were intended to be applied to asphaltic underlayments, there is very little testing that can be performed on synthetic underlayments. In fact, when a synthetic underlayment is tested under ASTM D226, for instance, the only tests that can be applied are the Unrolling, Breaking Strength and Pliability tests. Those that have installed underlayment know that those three tests alone demonstrate very little about a product’s suitability. It didn’t take too long for the roofing industry to recognize the unsuitability of the existing felt standards for assessing synthetic underlayments. As a result, several synthetic underlayment manufacturers worked with the International Code Council Evaluation Service (ICC-ES) to develop Acceptance Criteria for synthetic underlayments. Acceptance Criteria are similar to ASTM Standards, with a couple of distinct differences:
Roofing contractors are always looking for ways to do their job more efficiently and to provide product choices that they feel improve the quality and durability of the installed roof. Asphalt felt underlayments, also referred to as “felt paper” or “tar paper,” have served the roofing industry well for decades. However, there have always been shortcomings with these products. As the monikers indicate, the most prevalent drawback of these products is that they are essentially paper saturated with asphalt. The organic paper core of these products is sensitive to changes in humidity and tears easily. Because the paper core isn’t 100 percent saturated, the paper can still absorb moisture, which can cause waviness when installed on the roof. Generally, the heavier the paper core, the more waviness potential. The other major drawback of these products is their propensity to tear easily. Tearing is a concern especially where it occurs around fasteners when the product is enduring foot traffic during roof covering installation. Tearing is also a major concern when it comes to the ability of the underlayment to remain in place during a high wind event, especially if the primary roof covering has blown off. The above concerns were the primary drivers for the development of synthetic underlayments. Synthetic underlayments are designed to provide superior strength: resistance against both tensile (pulling) and tearing. However, the test standards for these products just hadn’t caught up to product
The History of Synthetic Underlayment Testing
■ They are not consensus-based standards; the test requirements and conditions of acceptance are determined by the manufacturer and ICC-ES with very limited input from industry stakeholders. ■ The Acceptance Criteria cannot be referenced in the I-Codes as a Reference Standard. Acceptance Criteria are deemed to be an alternative compliance path that applies to products for which the codes do not include prescriptive 12
FLORIDA ROOFING | April 2021
