FMA/AAMA/WDMA Installation Update FMA Spring Conference Duck Key, Florida April 27, 2010 James D. Katsaros, PhD DuPont Building Innovations FMA Installation Committee Chairman
Key Flashing & Installation Codes & Standards KEY WINDOW / DOOR INSTALLATION STANDARDS: ASTM E2112 generic guidance for standard flanged windows, very comprehensive & hard to follow FMA/AAMA 100 extreme exposure for wood frame construction, mandates sill pan flashing, coastal region wall FMA/AAMA 200 & FMA/WDMA 250 surface barrier CMU systems, the Florida wall AAMA 2400 open stud construction, the southwest wall FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300/400 series door installations FLASHING CODES Regional Standards Developments May Effect National Codes More In Future. IRC R703.8 describes flashing principles (must be applied with correct shingling, drainage to WRB or exterior, install guidelines, reference to AAMA 711, etc) IRC R613.1 designates responsibility to window manufacturer to provide written flashing and installation instructions for each window FLASHING MATERIAL STANDARDS: AAMA 711-07 Self-Adhered Flashing Products AAMA 712-XX Mechanically Attached Flashing (under development) AAMA 7XX-XX Liquid Applied Flashing
FMA Installation Standards Document Fenestration Wall System Status (more details to follow) FMA / AAMA 100-07 FMA / AAMA 200-09 Flanged or Mounting Fins (Wood, Al, or Vinyl) Frontal Flanged (Aluminum and Vinyl) Wood Frame Surface Barrier CMU Minor edits completed based on AAMA / ASTM ballot & alignment with 200 series. Republish in 2010 Published in 2009 FMA / WDMA 250-10 Non-frontal flanged (Wood) Surface Barrier CMU Published in 2010 FMA / AAMA / WDMA 300 series Exterior Doors with mounting fins (300), brick mold (310) and box framed (320) Wood Frame Draft completed / testing at ATI Tampa March May, 2010 FMA / AAMA / WDMA 400 series Exterior Doors Surface Barrier CMU Will begin when 300 testing complete
FMA / AAMA 100 Wood Frame Wall System FMA_AAMA 100-07 Installation Guideline Published for Wood Framed Wall System (residential) under Extreme Exposure Conditions Details generic A1 (WRB before) flashing method based on both 4 self-adhered flashing and 9 mechanically attached flashing. Other sequences acceptable, but not detailed. Mandates drainage method / use of sill pan flashing (extreme exposure on water sensitive frame) Tested to 12 psf, (~70 mph winds) using the ASTM E331 or ASTM E547 water test, to simulate extreme exposure conditions. This pressure was selected based on the AAMA / WDMA / CSA 101/IS2/A440-05 criteria. FMA_AAMA 100
Surface Barrier CMU Wall System Current Wall Water Management Strategy: 1) Use the storage capacity of masonry wall to contain moisture 2) Rely on HVAC to handle inward driven moisture from hot/humid climate 3) Fill cracks / joints with paint / sealant (need to do this at least twice) When and where will cracks occur? Most vulnerable around the window/wall interface!
This presents unique Water management challenges: a drainage wall on top of a barrier wall Florida home construction with concrete blocks on first floor and wood frame on second floor
FMA / AAMA 200 FMA/WDMA 250 Coastal S/E Wall System FMA_AAMA 200-09 FMA_WDMA 250-10 The major emphasis is focused on sealing the surrounding area of the window s masonry opening in such a manner as to restrict liquid water from penetrating the wall at the window opening. We aren t dealing with the entire wall! We are protecting against cracks in stucco at the most vulnerable location (window / wall interface) with Liquid Applied Flashing
FMA/AAMA 200 FMA/WDMA 250 Require sealant on Rough Opening return and precast sill. Seal on face (either external or internal) is optional recommended practice / not mandatory. Benefit: Protects rough opening without impacting exterior surface interface with Stucco. Concern: Stucco adhesion to Liquid Applied Flashing on concrete sill and rough opening return This is the design in FMA/AAMA 2000-09 & FMA/WDMA 250-10 Figure taken from Lstiburek Design
FMA/AAMA 200 Testing Representative Installations tested at ATI (York, PA) and University of Florida Hurricane Research Center to water pressures in excess of 12 psf.
AAMA Liquid Applied Flashing Material Performance Standard AAMA task group formed to define material property requirements task group meets at AAMA National meetings & interim conference calls Application as specified for use in FMA/AAMA 200 & FMA/WDMA 250 standard practices for sealing CMU surface This is NOT just a block sealant needs to bridge gaps, seal through fasteners, have abrasion resistance & durability, and be compatible to surface applied stucco
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 Series 300 Flanged Doors 310 BrickMold Doors 320 Non-flanged / Box Frame Doors Wood Frame Construction Concrete (recessed or flat) or Wood Sill Nine specimens tested at ATI, 2Q10 4 have passed ASTM E547 to 12 psf, 5 have assignable causes for water intrusion, will be repeated
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 Series Door Installations - as installed week of 3/15-19/2010 Walls to be water tested week of March 27th Wall Test Plan Wall # Doc Wall System Door Attachment Door Type Door Responsibility Sill Configuration Sill Dimensions Door Dimensions (based on manufacture call #) Rough Opening (based on nominal door size per door mfgr spec) 1 300 Wood Frame Applied Flange Aluminum Sliding Glass Freddie Cole / John Holt Concrete Flat 5.0 x 6.8 60 1/8 x 80 7/8 2 300 Wood Frame Applied Flange Aluminum Sliding Glass Freddie Cole / John Holt Concrete Recessed 1.5" recess depth / 4" outside face to interior 5.0 x 6.8 60 1/8 x 80 7/8 3 300 Wood Frame Applied Flange Aluminum Sliding Glass Freddie Cole / John Holt Wood Floor (not grade) 5.0 x 6.8 60 1/8 x 80 7/8 4 310 Wood Frame BrickMold 5 310 Wood Frame BrickMold Entry Doors (frame only - opening blanked) Jim Krahn Concrete Flat 3.0 x 6.8 38 7/16 x 82 1/2 Entry Doors (frame only - opening blanked) Jim Krahn Concrete Recessed 1.5" recess depth / 4 9/16" outside face to interior 3.0 x 6.8 38 7/16 x 82 1/2 6 310 Wood Frame BrickMold 7 320 Wood Frame Box Frame 8 320 Wood Frame Box Frame Entry Doors (frame only - opening blanked) Single panel swing out Single panel swing out Jim Krahn Wood Floor (not grade) 3.0 x 6.8 38 7/16 x 82 1/2 Steve Strawn / Mike Westfall Concrete Flat 3.0 x 6.8 38 x 80 7/8 1.5" recess depth / 4" Steve Strawn / Concrete outside face to Mike Westfall Recessed interior 3.0 x 6.8 38 x 80 7/8 9 320 Wood Frame Box Frame Single panel swing out Steve Strawn / Mike Westfall Wood Floor (not grade) 3.0 x 6.8 38 x 80 7/8
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 Series Door Installations - as installed week of 3/15-19/2010 Walls to be water tested week of March 27th Wall # Flashing Head / Jambs Flashing Head / Jamb responsibility Liquid Applied Sealant on Sill Flashing Sill Pan Interior Seal (Jim K / Mike Stout) Test Resluts Protocol (ASTM E547 up to 12 psf ) 1 2 3 SAF exterior (PW 6" width) / sealant bead flange-frame interface & under flange (DRS) Mike Stout Jim Kat (DP white) Jim Kat / SureSill with FW corners OSI LEF Jambs / OSI seal sill & head double sided selfadhered flashing (DP SFVF) Jim Kat Jim Kat (DP white) none BR / Seal (OSI) SAF exterior (PW 6" width) / sealant bead flange-frame interface & under flange (DRS) Jim Kat or Mike Stout Jim Kat (DP White) + FW under sill pan Jim Kat / SureSill with FW corners OSI LEF Jambs / OSI seal sill & head Installation leaked at X psf at (location) Water intrusion through door blocking penetrated through operable portions of door, collecting in lower channel in door threshhold. Since weeps were blocked by bag / blocking, the water could not escape through weeps and spilled over to interior sill. Leak also noted at head of door interior. Test was stopped to drain channel and continued. Leads formed at 9 psf at corners of interior sill, between sealant and concrete sill. Concrete recess depth was not sized correctly - recess was fit for frontal flange door, but flanges were non-frontal flanged. This resulted in an open channel in the interior recess that was difficult to achieve a robust water seal. Leaks formed at sill pan end dams at 6 psf. Upon inspection after teardown, found that acrylic based sealant under sill pan had not cured and had no strength to hold sill pan in place. Sill pan likely pulsed during pressure exposure, stretch flexible end dams and forming a channel for water intrusion. 4 double sided selfadhered flashing (DP SFVF) Jim Kat Jim Kat (DP white) Marvin sill pan (Jim Krahn) BR / Seal (DRS) Installation pass 12 psf Water intrusion behind WRB entered interior outside of the established rough opening 5 sealant system (OSI?) behind brickmold Jim Krahn Mike Stout (PW grey) Marvin sill pan (Jim Krahn) OSI LEF Jambs / OSI seal sill & head Installation pass 12 psf Water intrusion behind WRB entered interior outside of the established rough opening 6 7 double sided selfadhered flashing (DP SFVF) standard backer rod and sealant (PW) Mike Stout (PW grey) + FW under sill pan Jim Kat / SureSill with FW corners Jim Kat BR / Seal (DRS) Mike Westfall / Mike Stout Mike Stout (PW grey) Full Barrier BR / Seal (PW) Installation pass 12 psf Water intrusion behind WRB entered interior outside of the established rough opening Installation passed 12 psf Water intrusion through sill product failure only 8 standard backer rod and sealant (PW) Mike Westfall / Mike Stout Mike Stout (PW grey) none BR / Seal (PW) Installation failed 3 psf too much water from door product 9 SAF (JW) with sealant (PW) Mike Westfall / Mike Stout Mike Stout (PW grey) site fab metal with JW SAF LEF (Dow GS) Jamb / PW Seal Jamb - sill Tested stopped at 6 psf water behind WRB entered interior
ATI Preliminary Test Report Wall Test Summary
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 Flanged Doors Test Specimen #1 ATI Report Test Specimen #1: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at approximately 3:30 minutes into the first cycle, water was observed at the interlock and at the head migrating into the sill track. Modifications to the specimen were made by removing all siding, adding a second layer of Protecto Wrap peel n' stick membrane to the head flashing. Retested at 3.13 psf; at approximately 3:00 minutes into first cycle, water was observed at the head dripping into sill track. Continued through all required cycles for this pressure group with all occurring leakage recorded from above. Test pressure was increased to 6.06 psf; leak at the head continued. Additional leakage occurred 1:00 minute into first cycle at the lower right corner between the 2 x 4 jamb studs. Continued through all required cycles for this pressure group with all occurring leakage recorded as stated above. Test pressure was increased to 9.20 psf; water was observed approximately 2:00 minutes into first cycle at the lower left corner of the frame and 2 x 4 sill plate. Testing continued through all four (4) required cycles for this test pressure group, with all occurring leakage as stated from above. Conclusion: Water intrusion through unit wasn t fully managed by installation. Repeat Installation Correcting Identifiable Flaws
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 Flanged Doors Test Specimen #2 ATI Report: Test Specimen #2: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at approximately 2:00 minutes into the first cycle, water was observed at lower left corner of the concrete sill and 2 x 4 framing. A negative pressure was applied to the specimen and a soapy water solution sprayed on the exterior corner in question; bubbles formed at wrinkle in Flex Wrap. (See photograph #1) The following modifications were performed; removal of vinyl siding and applied Protecto Wrap peel n' stick membrane to the exterior flange at the jambs and head. At the right side jamb18" of the flange remained exposed, and 36" on the left side jamb. Retested at 3.13 psf for all four (4) required cycles for this pressure group; no visible water penetration. Test pressure was increased to 6.06 psf; at 1:15 minutes into first cycle, water was observed infiltrating the lower left corner of the recessed concrete sill through the sealant at the concrete sill and threshold. Conclusion: Water intrusion at 9 psf at corners of interior sill, between sealant and concrete sill. Concrete recess depth was not sized correctly - recess was fit for frontal flange door, but flanges were non-frontal flanged. This resulted in an open channel in the interior recess that was difficult to achieve a robust water seal.
ATI Report: FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 Flanged Doors Test Specimen #3: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water Test Specimen #3 penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 6.06 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 9.20 psf; at approximately 2:00 minutes into the second cycle, water was observed at the right jamb; 4" up from the wood sill, infiltrating through the OSI TEQ Foam. (See photograph #2) Water was observed 2:30 into the second cycle between the Straight Flash and the Sure Sill. (See photograph #3) The following modifications were performed; removal of vinyl siding and Protecto Wrap 25 XL sealant was applied to OSI TEQ Foam at jambs. Retested at 9.20 psf; at approximately 2:00 minutes into first cycle water was observed at the lower left corner between the Sure Sill and Straight Flash, water was observed at 2:30 minutes into the first cycle at the right jamb caulk joint between the top of the Sure Sill and Flex Wrap. (See photograph #4) Water was observed dripping from the head near an installation fastener over the fixed panel; the water was contained in the main frame. Specimen was sprayed with dye and dissected by client. Conclusion: Water Intrusion at sill pan end dams at 6 psf. Upon inspection after teardown, found that acrylic based sealant under sill pan had not cured and had no strength to hold sill pan in place. Sill pan likely pulsed during pressure exposure, stretch flexible end dams and forming a channel for water intrusion.
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 310 Brick Mold Doors Test Specimen #4 Test Specimen #4: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at 1:00 minute into the second cycle, water was observed at the lower right corner between the frame and jamb stud at the sill. (See Photograph #5) The vinyl siding was removed and modifications were performed. Retested with test pressure at 3.13 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 6.06 psf; at the conclusion of the four required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 9.20; at approximately 1:00 minute into the first cycle, water was observed at the lower right corner between the Tyvek and jamb stud. (See Photograph #6) At the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, water was observed as stated. Test pressure was increased to 12.12 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, water was observed as stated during 9.20 psf, no additional leakage was observed. Conclusion: Water infiltration unrelated to installation WRB wrap method issue Test Specimen #4 PASSED
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 310 Brick Mold Doors Test Specimen #5 ATI Report: Test Pressure started at 3.13 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test Pressure increased to 6.06; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test Pressure increased to 9.20; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test Pressure increased to 12.12; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test Specimen #5 met the performance requirements. Conclusion: Test Specimen Passed!
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 310 Brick Mold Doors Test Specimen #6 ATI Report: Test Specimen #6: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 6.06 psf; at 3:00 minutes into third cycle; water was observed at the lower right corner between Tyvek and second layer of Flex Wrap approximately 1-1/2" up from the sill. (See Photograph #7) Test Pressure increased to 9.20 psf for four (4) cycles; leakage as stated during 6.06 psf continued, no other leakage was observed. Test Pressure increased to 12.12 psf for four (4) required cycles; leakage as stated during 6.06 psf and 9.20 psf continued, no other leakage was observed. Conclusion: Test Specimen passed; water intrusion assignable cause that can be corrected
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 320 Non-Flanged / Box Frame Doors Test Specimen #7 Test Specimen #7: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at 4:00 minutes into first cycle, water was observed at the lower right mechanical corner. (See Photograph #8) Upon further inspection, a void in the sealant was noted at the exterior bore plate; sealant was applied and retested. Test pressure was continued at 3.13 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 6.06 psf; water was observed entering through a penetration in the OSB outside of the test area. This is not considered a failure. Test pressure was increased to 9.20 psf; at the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, no visible water penetration was detected. Test pressure was increased to 12.12 psf; at 0:30 seconds into first cycle, water was observed at the lower right mechanical corner. (See Photograph #9) OSB leakage continued as stated. Retested at 12.12 psf; at 3:30 minutes into the forth cycle, water was observed at the lower right corner of the lock side jamb near the mechanical corner. At the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, water was observed as stated. Conclusion: #7 Passed.
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 320 Non-Flanged / Box Frame Doors Test Specimen #8 Test Specimen #8: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at 2:30 minutes into the first cycle, water was observed at the lower right corner, between the concrete sill and 2 x 4 jamb stud behind the Tyvek. (See Photograph #10) At the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, water was observed as stated. A soapy water solution was sprayed into the weep hole below the threshold followed by compressed air. Bubbles appeared at the interior lower right corner, between the concrete sill and 2 x 4 jamb stud behind the Tyvek. Conclusion: Repeat to correct assignable installation flaws
FMA/AAMA/WDMA 320 Non-Flanged / Box Frame Doors Test Specimen #9 Test Specimen #9: Test pressure started at 3.13 psf; at 2:30 minutes into the first cycle, water was observed at the lower left mechanical corner. (See Photograph #11) At the conclusion of the four (4) required cycles, water was observed as stated. Conclusion: Repeat to correct assignable installation flaws
FMA Installation Committee Next Steps Repeat FMA/AAMA/WDMA 300 series Installations 1,2,3, 8, and 9 to correct installation flaws repeat water testing (June?) Modify drafts of 300, 310, 320 documents based on learnings from installation tests,. Need full day FMA installation team meeting (face-to-face or webinar) to complete this (July?) Put 300 series to ballot by September Address Stucco-LAF interface concerns with 200 / 250 documents support Code adoption Start 400 Series drafts wall test in Fall? Initiate FMA / ATI Installation Training Course Test Forensics Evaluation Guideline
Challenges for Installation of Windows & Doors These highly variable fenestrations are installed a wide variety of climates, exposures and regional practices.that Desperately Need Regionally Specific Installation Details! High Wind / Rain Exposure Windows Before WRB Low E glazing / Insulated cavity Foam Sheathing AAMA 2400 Recessed Windows Open Stud Construction Vinyl Windows Wood Windows Extreme Temp Swings Extreme Storms Aluminum Windows Windows After WRB Brickmold Windows Concrete Slab Floors Hurricane Exposure Surface Barrier CMU Walls FMA / AAMA/ WDMA