Aarmourtherm® Foundation

Consultation Notification

If you have any questions regarding Aarmourtherm products please contact Tom Brundige, Aarmourtherm Foundation - (951) 787-8503. For specific questions contact Geoscience LTD as consultation charges may be applied to you. Aarmourtherm Foundation will not be responsible for any charges incurred by Geoscience LTD for consultations. Aarmourtherm Foundation provides free consultation for all Aarmourtherm products.

Exposure of Two Test Cubes

The Exposure of Two Test Cubes about

3/4" on a Side to a Vertical Tube

Furnance Enviornment (Comound No. 2-F)



Mr. Tom Brundige

(951) 787-8503


 Consultation Geoscience Technical Data Applied By

H. F. Poppendiek

M. O. Yambrach



September 2004




6260 Marindustry Drive

San Diego, California 92121


     Geoscience was requested to perform tube furnace tests for Mr. Brundige on his Compound No. 2-F coating material. One sample that was submitted consisted of a glass rock core that had been coated with a layer of Compound No. 2-F. A second cube consisted of no core material, but mulit-layers of Compound No. 2-F that had dried in place, yielding a solid cube.

     To be certain that the compound had been cured, the cubes were conditioned in an oven for a number of days at a temperature level of about 150 F.


     The coated glass rock cube appeared to be strong enough so that it was possible to install a surface thermocouple in addition to the center cube thermocouple as is required by ASTM E-136. In the case of the cube that was composed only of dried Compound No. 2-F, the surface thermocouple was omitted because the cube was somewhat fragile. With this one exception, the tests were conducted for both cubes closely following the procedures cited in ASTM E-136.


     In case of the glass rock coated cube, the system passed the noncombustibility criteria for this test standard. Specifically, neither the surface temperature nor the central cube temperature rises exceeded 54 F above the initial furnace temperature; the maximum outside surface temperature rise was only about 25 F. In addition, the flaming that was exhibited when the basket was lowered into the furnace ceases before the limited 30-second time period. Also, the mass loss was small.

     In the case of the cube composed only of dried compound No. 2-F, the central cube temperature was below the initial furnace temperature by approximately 50 F (at its peak) In the region past the peak, the cube center temperature dropped at a significantly greater rate than did the modest changes in furnace air temperatures. This latter feature verifies the ablative cooling effect of Compound No. 2-F which was also noted in high temperature emissiveity test work. Some details of these test results can be seen in the Appendix.


     It is clear that Compound No. 2-F passes the requirements listed in the standard for noncombustibility.


Torch Exposure Experiment

Torch Exposure Experiements for the Materials:

1)  Untreated Polyurethane Foam

2)  Polyurethane Foam Treated with Compound #2

3)  CFC Foam Treated with Penta Bromide



(951) 787-8503


Consultation Geoscience Technical Data Applied By

H. F. Poppendiek

W. R. Trimailo



February 2005




6260 Marindustry Drive

San Diego, California 92121


     Geoscience was requested by Mr. Tom Brundige to perform torch exposure tests for polyurethane sample, one that was untreated, another treated with Compound #2 and a third for CFC Foam treated with Penta Bromide. The purpose of such testing was to investigate the quantitative fire degradation characteristics that accrued when using Compound #2.

     The test methodology that was used in the study, as well as the test results, are described in the following two sections of this report.


     It was decided that the general procedures of ASTM E-285 be used in the torch testing. That standard utilizes an oxyacetylene torch whose flame temperatures are in the 6,000 F range. Because most fires do not attain that elevated temperature, it was decided to use a Benzomatic (MPP gas) torch whose maximum flame temperature is somewhat lower and the heat flux is lower. Further, it was decided to back off from the close torch spacing in the standard by increasing the torch/sample spacing to 8 inches so that more prototypical exposure temperatures result.

     A support stand was set up which made it possilbe to position 4" x 4" x 1" foam test samples in a vertical position so that the torch flame could impinge on the center of the test samples. Thermocouples were also attached to the backside of the samples; the thermocouples were located in line with the flame center.

     In addition to measuring the back backside temperatures, the output of a slug calorimeter was recorded on a millivolt recorder. Slug calorimeter data were required to establish the combined radiative and convective heat fluxes striking the frontside surfaces of the test samples.

     Weight losses that occurred during the test sample exposures were also measured using an accurate digital weigh scale. During the tests, observations were also made of smoke releases during the exposures. A ventilation system existed for the test stand so that personal were not exposed to diliterious reaction gases.


     Before starting the 29-second torch exposure testing, two 10-second exploratory tests were conducted (one on untreated polyurethane foam and a second one on polyurethane foam treated with Compound #2). The untreated polyurethane sample had a 2 1/4" diameter, 5/8" deep crater containing rivulets of plastic; the treated polyurethane had no crater and only slight surface color change in the area of flame impingement. Table I shows thte 29-second exposure results.

                                                               Table I


 Crater Dia, in 

 Crater Depth, in 

 Smoke Generated 

 Weight Loss, % 

 Untreated PU Sample

 (11.14 gm)

 2 3/4



 CFC Sample treated

 With Penta Bromide

 (8.73 gm)





 Compound #2 treated

 PU Sample







* There was no bottom (a hole existed through the 1" think sample).


     Figures 1, 2 and 3 depict the backside temperatures for the 29-second torch exposures.

     Figure 4 shows the temperature rise of the copper slug calorimeter. When substituting the experimental temperature-time derivative of 6.4 F/sec into the copper slug storage equation, one obtains a flux of 6,405 Btu/hr ft^2.

     It is also noted that no liquid foam material was in the evidence in the case of the Compound #2 treated sample, only a dark solid char powder, which may be acting as a thermal insulation.

Fig. 1-4