TEST REPORT. Rendered to: INTEX MILLWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC. For: Rigid Cellular PVC Guardrail System Hampton RS40

Transcription

1 TEST REPORT Rendered to: INTEX MILLWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC For: Rigid Cellular PVC Guardrail System Hampton RS40 Report No: Report Date: 07/26/ Derry Court York, PA phone: fax:

2 TEST REPORT July 26, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 General Information Reference Standards Assembly Fastener Testing Guardrail End-Use Adjustments Structural Performance Testing of Assembled Railing Systems Closing Statement Revision Log Appendix A - Drawings Appendix B - Photographs

3 1.0 General Information 1.1 Product TEST REPORT Rendered to: INTEX MILLWORK SOLUTIONS, LLC 20 Bogden Boulevard Millville, New Jersey Rigid Cellular PVC Guardrail System - Hampton RS Project Description Report No: Test Date: 06/11/13 Through: 06/28/13 Report Date: 07/26/13 Architectural Testing was contracted by INTEX Millwork Solutions, LLC to perform structural testing on their Hampton RS40 rigid cellular PVC guardrail (railing) system. This report is in conjunction with Architectural Testing Report No.'s and , which include material test results which were used to determine the end-use adjustment factors applied to structural performance tests reported herein. The purpose of the testing is code compliance evaluation in accordance with the following criteria; however, INTEX Millwork Solutions, LLC does not plan on submitting the test results for evaluation: ICC-ES AC174 (approved January, 2012), Acceptance Criteria for Deck Board Span Ratings and Guardrail Systems (Guards and Handrails). ICC-ES AC was developed by the ICC Evaluation Service, Inc. (ICC-ES ) as acceptance criteria to evaluate compliance with the following building codes: 2012 International Building Code, International Code Council 2012 International Residential Code, International Code Council 1.3 Limitations Architectural Testing All tests performed were to evaluate structural performance of the railing assembly to carry and transfer imposed loads to the supports (posts). The test specimen evaluated included the balusters, rails, rail brackets and attachment to the supporting structure. The support posts were conventional construction and not within the scope of the evaluation. Posts were therefore not a tested component and were included in the test specimen only to facilitate anchorage of the rail brackets. Anchorage of support posts to the supporting structure is not included in the scope of this testing and would need to be evaluated separately. 130 Derry Court York, PA phone: fax:

4 Page 2 of Qualifications Architectural Testing in York, Pennsylvania has demonstrated compliance with ANS/ISO/IEC Standard and is consequently accredited as a Testing Laboratory (TL-144) by International Accreditation Service, Inc. Architectural Testing is accredited to perform all testing reported herein. 1.5 Product Description Hampton RS40 railing systems are comprised of rigid cellular PVC rails, balusters, and post sleeves produced by an extrusion process. Extruded products are mono-extruded. Test specimens consisted of one colored product identified by the manufacturer as follows: White. Drawings are included in Appendix A to verify the overall dimensions and other pertinent information of the tested product, its components, and any constructed assemblies. 1.6 Product Sampling INTEX Millwork Solutions, LLC supplied the assembled rail systems tested and reported herein. 1.7 Witnessing Joseph Umosella of INTEX Millwork Solutions, LLC was present on 06/13/13 to witness the following tests and/or test setups: Structural performance testing of assembled railing systems 1.8 Conditions of Testing Unless otherwise indicated, all testing reported herein was conducted in a laboratory set to maintain temperature in the range of 68 ± 4ºF and humidity in the range of 50 ± 5% RH. Test specimen materials were not stored in the laboratory environment for 40 hours prior to testing. 2.0 Reference Standards ASTM D , Standard Test Methods for Mechanical Fasteners in Wood ASTM D , Standard Specification for Establishing Performance Ratings for Wood-Plastic Composite Deck Boards and Guardrail Systems (Guards or Handrails) 3.0 Assembly Fastener Testing Re: ICC-ES AC174 - Section General The purpose of this testing was to simulate a 90 bracket loading condition for the in-line application, which addresses a situation when the guardrail system is to be installed with the top rails in a corner condition.

5 Page 3 of Test Specimens Short sections of the top rail were attached at each end to short sections of posts. Specimens were supplied to Architectural Testing Inc. by INTEX Millworks Solutions, LLC in a preassembled condition. The rail brackets were attached to treated 4x4 wood posts (Southern Pine) via stainless steel brackets with 3-1/2 in wide by 6 in high by 3/4 in thick sections of cellular PVC post sleeve material used as spacers between the bracket and wood post. Brackets were secured to the post and to the rail as described in Section 5.4 Fastening Schedule. 3.3 Test Setup The testing machine was fitted with the post sections at the top and bottom to accommodate anchorage of the rail and brackets. The top post section was attached to the test machine s crosshead with a swivel mechanism, and the bottom post section was attached rigidly to the base of the test machine. Reference photographs in Appendix B for test setups. 3.4 Test Procedure Testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D 1761 and by using a computer-monitored and -controlled INSTRON Testing Machine. Tests were run at a crosshead speed of 0.05 in/min, and each specimen was tested in tension to its ultimate load capacity. 3.5 Test Results Specimen No. Ultimate Load (lb) Deviation From Average % Mode of Failure % Fastener Withdrawal % Average 2470 Allowable Capacity lb OK 2 1 Average ultimate load divided by a factor of safety of three (3.0) 2 Acceptance criteria determined from the uniform load test: 50 plf x 96 in 12 in 2 brackets = 200 lb 3.6 Summary and Conclusions The maximum design load rating required for guardrail systems for use in IRC One- and Two-Family Dwellings and for rail lengths up to and including 8 ft for use in IBC All Use Groups is 200 lb. Therefore, fasteners / connectors reported herein meet the performance requirements of ICC-ES AC174 for use in corner conditions.

6 Page 4 of Guardrail End-Use Adjustments Re: ICC-ES AC174 Sections General Data from UV and freeze-thaw resistance testing reported in Architectural Testing Report No as well as temperature and moisture effect testing reported in Architectural Testing Report No was used for determination of applicable adjustment factors. 4.2 End-Use Adjustment Factors End-Use Factors Comparison (% Change) with Standard (Control) Conditions Rigid Cellular PVC Material Adjustment Factors ASTM D 7032 Criteria (as referenced by AC174) Strength 1 Stiffness 2 Strength Stiffness UV +11.1% +3.8% Loss within 10% Freeze-Thaw +3.5% +5.0% Loss within 10% Greatest of: +125ºF -35.9% -27.8% -20ºF +40.9% +17.4% Loss within 25% Moisture % +1.3% Overall End-Use Adjustment Factor: Moment or MOR (Modulus of Rupture) 2 EI (the product of MOE and the Moment of Inertia) or MOE (Modulus of Elasticity) 3 Product does not absorb moisture. Pursuant to compliance with ICC-ES AC174, the test loads were increased by the amount in excess of 10% for UV exposure and freeze-thaw cycling, as well as 25% for temperature and moisture effect. This sets the overall end-use adjustment factor at Therefore, tests are performed to a maximum test load equal to 2.81 times design load ( = 2.81). In addition, the deflection observed at design load is adjusted for the cumulative effect on stiffness properties in excess of the same tolerances specified for strength (0.97).

7 Page 5 of Stiffness Analysis For rails reinforced with aluminum, adjustment factors were further evaluated for their effect on the combined rigid cellular PVC/aluminum component by applying the strength or stiffness loss only to the percentage carried by the rigid cellular PVC, which was determined by relative stiffness analysis. Relative Stiffness Analysis - Horizontal Loading Hampton RS40 Rail and Aluminum Insert Member E (ksi) I y (in 4 ) EI y % Carried Top Rail Cap % Top Rail Base % Aluminum % EI= 2145 Greatest property loss for strength or stiffness is -36%. Applying this to the rigid cellular PVC component only, the overall effect is: 0.17 (1-0.36) = This represents a 6% loss for the combined rigid cellular PVC/aluminum component. ASTM D 7032 allows 25%; therefore, no adjustment factor was required for test loads applied to aluminum-reinforced rails. The full adjustment factor was applied to loading on rigid cellular PVC balusters, which were not reinforced with aluminum. Relative Stiffness Analysis - Vertical Loading Hampton RS40 Rail and Aluminum Insert Member E (ksi) I x (in 4 ) EI x % Carried Top Rail Cap % Top Rail Base % Aluminum % EI= 734 Greatest property loss for strength or stiffness is -36%. Applying this to the rigid cellular PVC component only, the overall effect is: 0.07 (1-0.36) = This represents a 3% loss for the combined rigid cellular PVC/aluminum component. ASTM D 7032 allows 25%; therefore, no adjustment factor was required for test loads applied to aluminum-reinforced rails.

8 Page 6 of Structural Performance Testing of Assembled Railing Systems Re: ICC-ES AC174 - Section General Railing assemblies were tested in a self-contained structural frame designed to accommodate anchorage of a rail assembly and application of the required test loads. The specimen was loaded using an electric winch mounted to a rigid steel test frame. High strength steel cables, nylon straps, and load distribution beams were used to impose test loads on the specimen. Applied load was measured using an electronic load cell located in-line with the loading system. Deflections were measured to the nearest 0.01 in using electronic linear displacement transducers. 5.2 Railing Assembly Description The Hampton RS40 guardrail systems consisted of extruded rigid cellular PVC rails with spaced balusters between the rail members. The level railing systems had an overall top rail length (inside of post to inside of post) of 96 in and 120 in with an overall rail height (top of top rail to bottom of bottom rail) of 39 in. The stair railing systems had an overall top rail length (inside of post to inside of post) of 72 in and 96 in with an overall rail height (top of top rail to bttom of bottom rail) of 40-1/2 in. Top and bottom rails attached to treated 4x4 wood posts (Southern Pine) via stainless steel brackets with 3-1/2 in wide by 6 in high by 3/4 in thick sections of cellular PVC post sleeve material used as spacers between the bracket and wood post. See Section 5.4 Fastening Schedule for connection details. One support block was used along the underside of the 72 in stair railing system, two support blocks were used along the underside of the 96 in stair and level railing systems and three support blocks were used along the underside of the 120 in level railing system. Support blocks were equally spaced along the length of the bottom rail. See drawings in Appendix A and photographs in Appendix B for additional details.

9 Page 7 of Component Descriptions The scope of testing performed and reported herein was intended to evaluate the Hampton RS40 series railing system consisting of the following components (see Appendix A for drawings): Top Rail: Flat Top Rail Cap 7/8 in high by 3-1/2 in wide extruded rigid cellular PVC flat profile Top Rail Base 1-1/2 in high by 2-15/16 in wide extruded rigid cellular PVC contoured rail profile Note: The Flat top rail cap (I x = in 4 ; I y = in 4 ) was deemed worst case from a stiffness analysis versus the Contoured top rail cap (I x = in 4 ; I y = in 4 ) and was therefore used for all performance tests reported herein. Bottom Rail: 1-1/2 in high by 2-15/16 in wide extruded rigid cellular PVC contoured rail profile Note: The Bottom Rail section is same section as top rail base rotated 180. Aluminum Reinforcing Insert: 1 in high by 1-3/4 in wide 6063-T5 extruded aluminum C section (0.12 in thick web; 0.06 in thick flanges) with four raceway channels running the entire length. Used in top and bottom rail of all systems. Balusters: 1-1/4 in square extruded rigid cellular PVC pickets Support Block: 1-1/4 in square extruded rigid cellular PVC picket cut to length and secured to the underside of the bottom rail as described in Section 5.4 Fastening Schedule. Rail to Post Connection: Level / Stair (High End) 1-1/8" high by 1-3/4 in wide (0.114 in thick) stainless steel plate with connection details as found in Section 5.4 Fastening Schedule. Stair (Low End) 1-3/4 in long with 1 in legs (0.114 in thick) stainless steel connection angle with connection details as found in Section 5.4 Fastening Schedule. Post Sleeves: 6 in high by 3-1/2 in wide by 3/4 in thick section of extruded rigid cellular PVC sleeve material used as spacers between the bracket and support post Support Post: Preservative-treated wood (Southern Pine) 4x4

10 Page 8 of Fastening Schedule Connection Top / Bottom Rail Bracket to Post Top / Bottom Rail Bracket to Rail - Level Top / Bottom Rail Bracket to Rail - Stair (High End) Top / Bottom Rail Bracket to Rail - Stair (Low End) Baluster to Top Rail Base and Aluminum Insert - Level and Stair Baluster to Bottom Rail Top Rail Base to Top Rail Cap Bottom Rail to Foot Block Fastener (2) #10-12 x 3" (0.131 in minor diameter) hex washer head, slotted drive, stainless steel screws (4) #8-15 x 1-1/4" (0.120 in minor diameter) trim head, square drive, stainless steel screws (4) #8-15 x 1-1/4" (0.120 in minor diameter) trim head, square drive, stainless steel screws (2) #8-15 x 1-1/4" (0.120 in minor diameter) trim head, square drive, stainless steel screws (1) #10-8 x 2-1/2" (0.112 in minor diameter, in shank diameter) trim head, square drive, type 17 point, stainless steel screw (1) #10-8 x 2-1/2" (0.112 in minor diameter, in shank diameter) trim head, square drive, type 17 point, stainless steel screw; (1) #10-8 x 1-1/2 (0.112 in minor diameter, in shank diameter) trim head, square drive, type 17 point, stainless steel screw (1) #8-12 x 1-3/4" (0.110 in minor diameter, in shank diameter), twist shank, trim head, star drive, type 17 point, stainless steel screw at both ends and third points (1) #10-8 x 2-1/2" (0.112 in minor diameter, in shank diameter) trim head, square drive, type 17 point, stainless steel screw

11 Page 9 of Test Setup The railing assembly was installed and tested as a single railing section by directly securing the 4x4 treated wood posts (Southern Pine) to a rigid test frame. The 4x4 treated wood posts were included only to facilitate anchorage of the test specimen and were not tested components. Transducers mounted to an independent reference frame were located to record movement of reference points on the railing system components (ends and mid-point) to determine net component deflections. See photographs in Appendix B for test setups. 5.6 Test Procedure Testing and evaluation was performed in accordance with Section 5.1 of ICC-ES AC174. The test specimen was inspected prior to testing to verify size and general condition of the materials, assembly, and installation. No potentially compromising defects were observed. One specimen was used for all load tests which were performed in the order reported. Each design load test was performed using the following procedure: 1. Zeroed transducers and load cell at zero load; and 2. Increased load to specified test load in no less than ten seconds. 5.7 Test Results Unless otherwise noted, all loads and displacement measurements were normal to the rail (horizontal). The test results apply only to the railing assembly between supports and anchorage to the support. The test load adjustment factor was increased from 2.5 x design load to 2.81 x design load for the infill load tests only. This increase in required maximum test loads was determined from test results as summarized in Section 4.0 Guardrail End-Use Adjustments. Key to Test Results Tables: Load Level: Target test load Test Load: Actual applied load at the designated load level (target). Elapsed Time (E.T.): The amount of time into the test with zero established at the beginning of the loading procedure.

12 Page 10 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No in by 42 in Hampton RS40 Level Guardrail System IBC All Use Groups / ICC-ES AC174 Specimen No. 1 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :16 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :14 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (96 in 12 in/ft) = 400 lb Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :50 greater than 1000 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with quarter point loading. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (96 in 12 in/ft) = 400 lb Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :45 greater than 1000 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with four equally distributed point loads.

13 Page 11 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 1 (Continued) Specimen No. 1 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 5 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) 1 Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End 2 Mid End 2 Net 200 lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :34 Deflection Evaluation: Limits per AC : h + l = + = 2.5" Result: greater than 500 lb without 1 Transducer at center of top rail disconnected during loading; therefore, a deflection reading at 200 lb was not recorded and net deflection could not be calculated. 2 Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. 3 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 6 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :29 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Specimen No. 2 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :12 greater than 141 lb without

14 Page 12 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 1 (Continued) Specimen No. 2 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :13 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (96 in 12 in/ft) = 400 lb Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :50 greater than 1000 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with quarter point loading. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (96 in 12 in/ft) = 400 lb Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :44 greater than 1000 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with four equally distributed point loads.

15 Page 13 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 1 (Continued) Specimen No. 2 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 5 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :38 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 200 lb = 1.37 in on a 96 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 1.37 in 0.97 = 1.41 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.5" > 1.41" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 6 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :33 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Specimen No. 3 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :19 greater than 141 lb without

16 Page 14 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 1 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :11 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (96 in 12 in/ft) = 400 lb Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :53 greater than 1000 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with quarter point loading. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (96 in 12 in/ft) = 400 lb Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :32 greater than 1000 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with four equally distributed point loads. Test No. 5 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :33 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 200 lb = 1.31 in on a 96 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 1.31 in 0.97 = 1.35 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.5" > 1.35" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements.

17 Page 15 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 1 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 6 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :36 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Test Series No in by 42 in Hampton RS40 Level Guardrail System IRC One- and Two-Family Dwellings / ICC-ES AC174 Specimen No. 1 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :17 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :15 greater than 141 lb without

18 Page 16 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 12 (Continued) Specimen No. 1 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :34 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 207 lb = 2.12 in on a 120 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 2.12 in 0.97 = 2.19 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.75" > 2.19" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :26 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Specimen No. 2 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :16 greater than 141 lb without

19 Page 17 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 2 (Continued) Specimen No. 2 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :10 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :36 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 200 lb = 2.10 in on a 120 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 2.10 in 0.97 = 2.16 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.75" > 2.16" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :27 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled.

20 Page 18 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 2 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :17 Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets greater than 141 lb without 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :11 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :33 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 207 lb = 2.15 in on a 120 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 2.15 in 0.97 = 2.22 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.75" > 2.22" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements.

21 Page 19 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 2 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/27/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :28 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Test Series No in by 42 in by 32 Hampton RS40 Stair Guardrail System IBC All Use Groups / ICC-ES AC174 Specimen No. 1 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :12 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :18 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (72 in 12 in/ft) = 300 lb Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail 1 Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 750 lb (2.5 x D.L.) :36 greater than 750 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with quarter point loading.

22 Page 20 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 3 (Continued) Specimen No. 1 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (72 in 12 in/ft) = 300 lb Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :00 greater than 750 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with four equally distributed point loads. Test No. 5 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :30 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 200 lb = 0.74 in on a 72 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 0.74 in 0.97 = 0.76 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.25" > 0.76" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 6 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :31 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled.

23 Page 21 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 3 (Continued) Specimen No. 2 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :17 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :10 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (72 in 12 in/ft) = 300 lb Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :32 greater than 750 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with quarter point loading. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (72 in 12 in/ft) = 300 lb Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :24 greater than 750 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with four equally distributed point loads.

24 Page 22 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 3 (Continued) Specimen No. 2 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 5 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :32 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 200 lb = 0.62 in on a 72 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 0.62 in 0.97 = 0.64 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.25" > 0.64" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 6 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :34 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Specimen No. 3 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :14 greater than 141 lb without

25 Page 23 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 3 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :11 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (72 in 12 in/ft) = 300 lb Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :30 greater than 750 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with quarter point loading. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 50 plf x (72 in 12 in/ft) = 300 lb Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail lb (2.5 x D.L.) :27 greater than 750 lb without 1 Uniform load was simulated with four equally distributed point loads. Test No. 5 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :28 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 210 lb = 0.60 in on a 72 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 0.60 in 0.97 = 0.62 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.25" > 0.62" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements.

26 Page 24 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 3 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 6 Test Date: 06/13/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :29 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Test Series No in by 42 in by 32 Hampton RS40 Stair Guardrail System IRC One- and Two-Family Dwellings / ICC-ES AC174 Specimen No. 1 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :14 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :15 greater than 141 lb without

27 Page 25 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 4 (Continued) Specimen No. 1 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :31 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 209 lb = 1.43 in on a 96 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 1.43 in 0.97 = 1.47 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.5" > 1.47" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :30 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. Specimen No. 2 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :11 greater than 141 lb without

28 Page 26 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 4 (Continued) Specimen No. 2 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :10 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :24 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 204 lb = 1.34 in on a 96 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 1.34 in 0.97 = 1.38 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.5" > 1.38" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements. Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :26 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled.

29 Page 27 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 4 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 Test No. 1 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Center of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :13 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 2 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 50 lb / 1 Square ft of Infill at Bottom of Two Pickets 141 lb (2.81 x D.L.) :11 greater than 141 lb without Test No. 3 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Displacement (inches) Load Level Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) End Mid End Net lb (D.L.) : lb (2.5 x D.L.) :24 Result: greater than 500 lb without Deflection Evaluation: Maximum rail deflection at 203 lb = 1.31 in on a 96 in rail Adjusted deflection for end use factors = 1.31 in 0.97 = 1.35 in Limits per AC174 2 h l : + = + = 2.5" > 1.35" ok Each end displacement was measured at the center of the support. Net displacement was the rail displacement relative to the supports. 2 Deflection limit calculation based on worse case 36" railing height to satisfy One- and Two-Family Dwelling requirements.

30 Page 28 of Test Results (Continued) Test Series No. 4 (Continued) Specimen No. 3 of 3 (Continued) Test No. 4 Test Date: 06/28/13 Design Load: 200 lb Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets) Load Level 1 Test Load (lb) E.T. (min:sec) Result 1000 lb (2.5 x D.L.) x :27 Each end withstood load equal to or greater than 500 lb without 1 Load was imposed on both ends of rail using a spreader beam; therefore, loads were doubled. 5.8 Summary and Conclusions The railing assemblies reported herein meet the structural performance requirements of Section 5.1 of ICC-ES AC174 as installed between adequate supports with guardrail details and Occupancy Classification as shown in the following table: Hampton RS40 Guardrail System Guardrail Type Baluster Top Rail Cap Code Occupancy Classification 96 in by 42 in 120 in by 42 in 72 in by 42 in 96 in by 42 in Level Stair 1-1/4 in Square Cellular PVC Picket Flat and Contoured IBC All Use Groups IRC One- and Two- Family Dwellings IBC All Use Groups IRC One- and Two- Family Dwellings The railing supports were not included within the scope of this testing, and these conclusions would apply only for a railing that is provided with adequate supports that provide equal or better substrate material (Southern Pine wood) for the fasteners used to anchor the rail brackets. Anchorage of support posts to the supporting structure is not included in the scope of this testing and would need to be evaluated separately.

31 Architectural Testing Page 29 of Closing Statement Architectural Testing will service this report for the entire test record retention period. The report retention will be four years from the report date. Test records that are retained such as detailed drawings, datasheets, representative samples of test specimens, or other pertinent project documentation will be retained by Architectural Testing, Inc. for the entire test record retention period. Results obtained are tested values and were secured using the designated test methods. This report neither constitutes certification of this product nor expresses an opinion or endorsement by this laboratory; it is the exclusive property of the client so named herein and relates only to the tested specimens. This report may not be reproduced, except in full, without the written approval of Architectural Testing. For ARCHITECTURAL TESTING: Kyle J. Evans Technician II Structural Systems Testing V. Thomas Mickley, Jr., P.E. Senior Project Engineer Structural Systems Testing KJE:vtm/drm Attachments (pages): This report is complete only when all attachments listed are included. Appendix A - Drawings (13) Appendix B - Photographs (7)

32 Page 30 of 30 Revision Log Rev. # Date Page(s) Revision(s) 0 07/26/13 N/A Original report issue This report produced from controlled document template ATI 00412, Revised 04/27/12.

33 APPENDIX A Drawings

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47 APPENDIX B Photographs

48 Photo No. 1 Assembly Fastener Test Setup

49 Photo No. 2 Infill Loading at Center of Two Balusters Photo No. 3 Infill Loading at Bottom of Two Balusters

50 Photo No. 4 Horizontal Uniform Load on Top Rail Photo No. 5 Vertical Uniform Load on Top Rail

51 Photo No. 6 Concentrated Load at Midspan of Top Rail Photo No. 7 Concentrated Load at Both Ends of Top Rail (Brackets)

52 Photo No. 8 Bracket to Post Attachment Photo No. 9 Bracket to Rail Reinforcing Attachment - Level and Stair (High End)

53 Photo No. 10 Bracket - Stair (Low End) Photo No. 11 Top Rail Base to Top Rail Cap Attachment

54 Photo No. 12 Top Rail Base to Baluster Attachment Photo No. 13 Bottom Rail to Baluster Attachment