Testing Building Constructions and the Performance Concept

(1)

Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:

Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider. Pour communiquer directement avec un auteur, consultez la première page de la revue dans laquelle son article a été publié afin de trouver ses coordonnées. Si vous n’arrivez pas à les repérer, communiquez avec nous à PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca.

Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at

PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information.

https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits

L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB.

Paper (National Research Council of Canada. Division of Building Research); no. DBR-P-701, 1976-10

READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE.

https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright

NRC Publications Archive Record / Notice des Archives des publications du CNRC :

https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=24629fee-f3fa-495f-8455-70aca8893771 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=24629fee-f3fa-495f-8455-70aca8893771

NRC Publications Archive

Archives des publications du CNRC

This publication could be one of several versions: author’s original, accepted manuscript or the publisher’s version. / La version de cette publication peut être l’une des suivantes : la version prépublication de l’auteur, la version acceptée du manuscrit ou la version de l’éditeur.

Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at Testing Building Constructions and the Performance Concept Legget, R. F.

(2)

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF CANADA DIVISION OF BUILDING RESEARCH

TESTING BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS AND THE PERFORMANCE CONCEPTj with s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o t h e work o f ASTM Committee E6 on

"Performance o f Building Constructions"

Robert F. Legget

(Formerly

-

1947-1969

-

D i r e c t o r DBR/NRC Chairman ASTM/E6

-

1954-1964)

DBR Paper No. 701 o f t h e

Division o f Building Research

(3)

TESTING BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS AND THE PERFORMANCE CONCEPT by R.F. Legget

ABSTRACT

Without well accepted testing methods, no "performance specification" can be used successfully; for testing methods to be widely accepted,

they must be standardized. This paper explains the need for standardized testing methods as applied to the performance concept of building. It also outlines the history of ASTM Committee E-6 which has as its task

the preparation and stimulation of the necessary standard methods of testing building constructions. Details of Committee membership, meetings and

activities are also included.

par R.F. Legget

Sans mgthodes d'essai bien acceptges, aucune "prescription descriptive du comportement" peut Stre utilis6e avec succGs; pour que des mgthodes d'essai soient couramment acceptses, elles doivent Stre normalis6es. Cette communication explique le besoin de m6thodes d'essai normalis6es comes elles s'appliquent au concept de comportement d'un bstiment. Elle donne 6galement un aperqu historique du Comit6 ASTM E-6 qui a eu 2

pr6parer et stimuler les mgthodes normalis6es n6cessaires pour la mise

2 l'essai d'6lgments de construction. Des dgtails sur les membres du

(4)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I n t r o d u c t i o n

.

. . .

. .

.

. .

.

. . . . . .

. . .

.

. . .

. .

20

B

.

Meetings and Membership o f E6

.. . .

" A l l t h e s e (buildings) must be b u i l t with due r e f e r e n c e t o d u r a b i l i t y , convenience, and beauty. D u r a b i l i t y w i l l be a s s u r e d when foundations a r e c a r r i e d down t o t h e s o l i d ground and m a t e r i a l s w i s e l y and l i b e r a l l y s e l e c t e d ; convenience, when t h e arrangement of t h e apartments i s f a u l t l e s s and p r e s e n t s no hindrance t o use, and when each c l a s s of b u i l d i n g i s assigned t o i t s s u i t a b l e and a p p r o p r i a t e exposure; and beauty, when t h e appearance of t h e work i s p l e a s i n g and i n good t a s t e , and when i t s members a r e i n due p r o p o r t i o n according t o c o r r e c t p r i n c i p l e s of symmetry."

These words provide an adequate d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e performance concept i n b u i l d i n g , of which much has been heard i n r e c e n t y e a r s . The words have added i n t e r e s t i n t h a t t h e y come from t h e t h i r d c h a p t e r of t h e opening book of t h e Ten Books on A r c h i t e c t u r e w r i t t e n by Marcus V i t r u v i u s P o l l i o , a Roman a r c h i t e c t , about two thousand y e a r s ago.

In almost every c h a p t e r of h i s Books t h e r e a r e s e c t i o n s t h a t have a t r u l y modern r i n g t o them. I t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g t h e r e f o r e t o f i n d t h a t he f u l l y a p p r e c i a t e d t h e f a c t t h a t b u i l d i n g s must perform w e l l , t h e i r design comprehending what i s now c a l l e d , f o r convenience and i n a form of o r a l shorthand, t h e performance concept.

If only t o show t h a t V i t r u v i u s was not a s o l i t a r y exponent o f t h i s modern approach t o design, consider t h e s e words with regard t o t h e payment of one of t h e workmen engaged on t h e b u i l d i n g o f Gloucester C a s t l e i n England:

"Wages of John Hobbys, mason, r i d i n g t o t h e quarry of Upton and t h e quarry of Frene t o pick o u t and prove good s t o n e s from t h e bad s t o n e s c a l l e d cropstone,

(6)

and marking and scrappling and proving the stones so picked out, so that the King shall not be deceived therein, at 6d. a day.''

All the elements of the complex and difficult problem of the approval of building materials

-

the expert assessment of the material in question, the proving (or testing) of materials to confirm personal judgement, and the marking (or certifying) of material found to be satisfactory - are to be found in this extract from the Exchequer Accounts of the King of England, dated 1442. Even in the Middle Ages, when building and

associated technical activities were generally at a low ebb, the same sound approach to building technology was therefore to be found; this could readily be demonstrated by a host of quotations from widely varying sources.

Today, fresh emphasis is being placed on the performance concept in building design. There is correspondingly a widespread demand for assistance in the selection of materials for building, the usual way in which this is expressed being a call for some system of 'approving building materials'. This will be a demand of increasing urgency as the pace of building throughout North America, already surprisingly high by comparison with that of just ten years ago, continues to

increase. Correspondingly, there is bound to be an increase in the use of factory-fabricated building elements and components and they, too, must be assessed and approved before incorporation into the final

structure.

It is essential, therefore, that there should be general

appreciation within the building industry on the one hand of the fact that, without well accepted testing methods, no 'performance

specification1 can successfully be used and, on the other, that the essential testing methods if they are to be of adequate service must themselves be standardized. This paper has therefore been prepared to explain the need for standard test methods in the quite desirable application of the performance concept in building and, complementary to this, to provide a brief history of the only independent committee known to be engaged on the preparation and stimulation of the necessary standard methods of testing building constructions. This is Committee E-6 of the American Society for Testing and Materials with which the writer was privileged to serve for some years. He acknowledges with appreciation the stimulation provided by the many discussions that he enjoyed with fellow members of this Committee while he was an active member and officer. He ventures to hope that this paper will indicate to some degree the challenge which he sees ahead for this important ASTM Committee, a challenge which, when fully implemented, could well make the Committee's work one of the most important of all ASTM activities.

(7)

(2) THE PERFORMANCE CONCEPT

The performance concept is almost as old as the art of building itself. It has received varied attention throughout the centuries but it can readily be shown that it has never really been forgotten. What, then, is new about the situation today that has given such renewed interest to this concept? Stated simply, it is the rate at which changes in almost all aspects of building are being introduced, forced by the almost frightening rate of development of modern technology. There are changes in user requirements, in standards of performance and safety, and in materials and methods of construction. These in turn have forced changes in the kind and extent of interaction between the work of designers, regulatory agencies, builders, manufacturers,

suppliers, and tradesmen. It may be argued with some justification that many alive today have seen more changes in building than had occurred in all the previous history of building and that what has just occurred in a lifetime will almost certainly be matched in the next few decades. Consider just a few of the changes in the practice of building in North America that have taken place in the last two decades: the widespread adoption of air conditioning for buildings large and small, including humidification in winter and the associated demands that this makes upon building enclosures; the "necessity" today for the inclusion in residential buildings of such items as tiled bathrooms and advanced heating systems; the widespread use of curtain wall construction for even the largest buildings and the corresponding developments in the use of precast concrete cladding panels; and, more recently still, the use of exposed steel as an architectural feature of large buildings.

Even though some of these features may change with changes in architectural fashions, they are now in wide use. They do create

problems; their performance should be predictable. The conclusion that performance of a completed building is fundamentally related to the process of design is inescapable. The designer is the one who must

identify what is desired in the way of final performance. t-le must also delineate satisfactory ways in which the desired result is to be

achieved. The designer therefore must take the prime responsibility for the performance of the completed structure.

In the days when the architect or engineer was the master builder, he was the expert in all phases of the work from conception to

completion of construction. He was taught under the old master-pupil system in which the accumulated experience and knowledge of the master was passed on to him, to be refined and extended through his own

experience. The master builder selected and controlled the 0,uality and use of the materials and so held under his own control all the factors involved in final performance. Any failure in the building, apart from acts of God, was clearly identifiable with the master builder and was his responsibility alone.

(8)

There were f a i l u r e s , n a t u r a l l y , s i n c e t h e d e s i g n e r ' s a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t t h e f i n a l performance was n e c e s s a r i l y l i m i t e d , even though t h e master-pupil system o f developing and p a s s i n g on t h e cumulative

experience o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n was a good one, being s t i l l sound i n p r i n c i p l e today. Every venture i n t o new m a t e r i a l s and new forms which went beyond t h i s accumulated experience and t h e i n t u i t i v e knowledge of t h e a r c h i t e c t became an experiment on t h e job, t o be e x p l o i t e d by him, t h e r e s u l t i n g experience being added t o h i s competence.

The fundamental i s s u e i n any approach t o performance can be i d e n t i f i e d c l e a r l y . I t i s t h a t t h e a b i l i t y t o design f o r any d e s i r e d r e s u l t depends e n t i r e l y on t h e a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t t h e r e s u l t i n advance. Design without such a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t involves experiment o r t r i a l - b y - use. I n former days t h e master b u i l d e r was t h e man b e s t q u a l i f i e d t o p r e d i c t t h e performance o f a l l a s p e c t s o f a b u i l d i n g . With t h e growth of b u i l d i n g technology a s it i s known today, t h e modern a r c h i t e c t has been surpassed i n h i s a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t i n v a r i o u s s p e c i a l a r e a s r e l a t e d t o c u r r e n t b u i l d i n g technology by t h e s t r u c t u r a l , mechanical, and e l e c t r i c a l e n g i n e e r s , by t h e manufacturers and s u p p l i e r s of s p e c i a l equipment, and even by some c o n t r a c t o r s and b u i l d e r s . He i s no longer t h e u n i v e r s a l e x p e r t and, although he continues t o be t h e d e s i g n e r , he must r e l y upon t h e s k i l l s of many o t h e r s , through t h e o v e r a l l b u i l d i n g system by which t h e i r v a r i o u s i n t e r e s t s and c o n t r i b u t i o n s a r e combined, t o support him i n t h e design o f t h e t o t a l b u i l d i n g t h a t w i l l perform a s intended.

The a r c h i t e c t o f today must, i n a s e n s e , d e l e g a t e some of h i s fundamental r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s a s a d e s i g n e r , while doing everything p o s s i b l e t o ensure t h a t t h e s e w i l l be c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d , assigned, and accepted by o t h e r s . Since it i s no longer p o s s i b l e t o experiment with new m a t e r i a l s o r components on t h e job, i n ways t h a t may involve t h e r i s k of f a i l u r e s , experiments, i n c l u d i n g v a r i o u s forms o f t e s t i n g

necessary f o r p r e d i c t i o n , must be c a r r i e d out i n a l a b o r a t o r y . This i s an o u t l i n e o f t h e s i t u a t i o n which must be d e a l t with i n developing and applying t h e performance concept.

The d e s i g n e r i s t h u s faced u l t i m a t e l y with a group o f d e c i s i o n s t h a t a r e fundamental t o t h e performance concept

-

whether t o make a choice i n each c a s e and s p e c i f y it o r , a l t e r n a t i v e l y , t o d e s c r i b e t h e q u a l i t i e s , f u n c t i o n , and performance r e q u i r e d . I n t h e former c a s e , he a c c e p t s i m p l i c i t l y f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h e choice he has made a s t o c o s t , performance, and g e n e r a l s u i t a b i l i t y . In t h e l a t t e r , he leaves t o o t h e r s t h e s p e c i f i c choice, s u b j e c t t o h i s c o n t r o l through t h e

performance s p e c i f i e d and probably a l s o t o h i s f i n a l approval. The choices which he must make a r e b a s i c a l l y t h e same a s t h o s e which f a c e code w r i t e r s

-

whether t o employ a r i g i d s p e c i f i c a t i o n o r a

performance-type approach. I n a c t u a l p r a c t i c e , most a r c h i t e c t s make much use of t h e former procedure b u t may employ t h e performance approach

i n some i n s t a n c e s . I n e i t h e r c a s e , t h e y must make use of t h e r e s u l t s of t e s t methods and s t a n d a r d s .

(9)

(3) THE NEED FOR STANDARD TEST METHODS

The need for accurate communication of technical information and for the clear designation of requirements is very great and pervades all phases of design and construction. Much of this information must be quantitative, and so measurement becomes necessary. This is easily recognized when such elementary quantities as length, weight, and number are involved. The determination of even such simple quantities,

however, may involve some difficulty. Recognized methods of test may become necessary in order to remove any ambiguity as to the meaning of the value quoted as, for example, the thickness of an insulation board or the volume of a concrete block.

The measurement of physical properties such as thermal conductivity may pose even more difficulty. It becomes even more necessary to follow carefully designated test methods in order to obtain comparable results for different materials, these always being related to the test method employed. The guarded hot plate test method is a performance test, involving performance under a carefully designated set of conditions, so that meaningful and comparable results can be obtained. When knowledge of heat flow is adequate, the overall heat flow through a wall can be predicted from known conditions of exposure, and the dimensions,

arrangement and basic properties of the component parts. When relevant knowledge is not adequate, a large-scale wall thermal test becomes necessary. Again, in order to make the results meaningful and

comparable with others, the conditions of the test must be carefully specified and controlled, in accord with some agreed test method. This is also a performance test. If it is not known how to relate the

thermal performance of a wall in the standard test to the actual

performance of the wall in practice, then measurements in situ may have to be considered.

When existing knowledge is inadequate for prediction and testing must be employed, it might be necessary in the extreme to test every new or different form or size of product proposed. This could pose a

continuing need for testing which would be in the long run both

cumbersome and costly. In the case of the walls previously referred to, there are a large number of ways in which a relatively few materials may be combined. Fortunately, in most cases, the thermal properties of walls can be predicted from a limited number of measurements made on the basic materials so that it is not necessary to test every different type of wall. It is this "fact of life" that forces the development of

knowledge through research, so that the performance results for specific cases can be predicted as far as possible from the use of theory in conjunction with simple measurements of primary quantities.

One can devise and describe a separate method of test for use in connection with every new practical situation as it is encountered, and use it as a basis for a performance approach for each particular case. This can clearly be a costly and very time-consuming approach. Clearly

(10)

accepted and regularly used, a much more orderly and less costly approach becomes possible. Different laboratories may then produce results that can be compared at any time. Manufacturers and others can determine in advance what the performance of their product will be, as measured according to that particular standard test method. A great deal of testing and retesting in accord with a variety of methods will thus be avoided.

A significant compromise must usually be made in order to gain this advantage. The method of test cannot on the one hand be "standard" and at the same time provide an entirely adequate basis for evaluation of performance for all possible practical situations. In all such standard methods of test, it is necessary to select one particular set of test conditions. Thus the standard window test method will be basically one by which windows can be compared rather than tested in association with their actual surroundings. The final step of predicting performance

in situ on the basis of an interpretation of the test results must still be accomplished.

It is always necessary to take into account the differences between the test conditions and those that pertain to the particular application on the job. This is a task for the expert. Where knowledge is

inadequate, it becomes necessary to rely upon experience and judgement In specific situations it may even be appropriate to carry out further testing of a special kind, despite the difficulties with specially devised methods already described. The adequacy of this approach is limited by the ability to anticipate the pertinent conditions which will finally exist and to simulate them adequately in the test or tests. This also requires the best knowledge and judgment of a competent professional worker, but with such aids he should be able to provide improved prediction of in situ performance, as compared with earlier empirical selection.

Some standard test method is essential, however, for the reasons that have been given, if designers are to have even the most simple of yardsticks against which to judge how the components they select will perform. Clearly, a standard test method by itself will be of little use to the designer. In simple terms, the use of standard test methods for measurement of the particular property with which they are concerned is comparable to the use of a ruler or a yardstick for measurement of length. It is possible with such an aid to measure unambiguously to some graded and generally accepted scale.

Only with such standard test methods available, and the means for their interpretation, does the "performance concept in buildingt1 begin to have meaning. This is the direction in which thinking about the performance concept must move, if this valuable

-

and indeed essential -

idea is to be fully applied in the buildings of the future. To talk about the performance concept without, at the same time, talking of the standard performance tests that are imperative, is equivalent to

(11)

type codes without realizing that all such codes must include clauses defining the test methods that must be used to equate the performance of one set of components with that of more conventional types is

comparable to discussing a financial contract which does not contain any provision for payment.

Without standard performance-type test methods available, devised along the best possible well-defined lines and based upon all the research results that can be used, and in the absence of sound

experience, talk about the performance concept is not very meaningful. Correspondingly, appreciation of the significance of performance tests results is essential to the designer so that he may know the criteria that he must apply in using test results in his design process.

In the same way, as will now be clear, there can be no such thing' as a "performance code1' but only a performance-type code, unless one is willing to go to the absurdity of regulating that "buildings must

perform satisfactorily." Systems of measurement of performance, even though subject to all the limitations outlined in this paper, are essential aids whereby the idea of performance may be embodied in

building regulations, and permit of a reasonable selection of materials and components while safeguarding the integrity and safety of the

structures to be built.

The performance concept in building is here to stay. It is greatly to be hoped that it will become more accurately, more widely, and more completely appreciated throughout the building industry. This will take place only if it is always associated with the concept of measurement, measurement that is based on standard test methods so that it cannot be misunderstood, measurement the results of which can be communicated to others without fear of wrong interpretation. This means standard test methods for building components on a scale never before seen or even visualized. In general, these will have to be laboratory tests. The significance of the results so obtained must be capable of assessment in relation to well-accepted and well-tried criteria. But in the final analysis, the most critical step of all is in applying in design the results of such tests, excellent as they may be, and this depends on the professional judgment of the designer - and for this there is no

substitute, not even computers.

(4) THE WORK _{OF ASTM COMMITEE E-6}

Providing standard methods of testing building constructions is the principal function of Committee E-6, its original title being on Methods of Testing Building Constructions, but now on Performance of Building Constructions, of the American Society for Testing and Materials. The test methods being developed by this committee are drawn up in accordance with the well-established procedures of ASTM. They are therefore

(12)

constantly under revision and will improve in character the more they are used and the more they are commented upon critically by those who use them. There is still a general lack of information regarding such standard test methods in regard to building constructions since this is a relatively new field, especially since building research has come to be widely recognized only in post-war years.

The scope of Committee E-6 was defined for many years as:

"To formulate methods of test for building (including housing) construction, including elements, connections and assemblies, under actual or simulated service conditions, applicable to the evaluation of such factors as materials, design, construction and fabrication, with special reference to the needs of building code and similar authorities with whom the committee has liaison."

It hill be seen that the special needs of building officials were recognized by ASTM in the approval of this directive to Committee E-6. Since the

work of this Committee can be seen to be exactly along the lines already discussed in general terms, an outline of its history may be useful. ORIGIN OF COMMITTEE

In reviewing its work at the close of the Second World War, the American Society for Testing Materials, through its Executive

Committee (which was then the name of the governing body), established an Administrative Committee on Simulated Service Testing under the Chairmanship of L.L. Wyman. The Society had recognized that some expansion of its

scope would be necessary in keeping with the greatly increased demands for standardization resulting from wartime experience. One of the first recommendations of Mr. Wymants committee was that the Society shculd organize a committee on methods of testing building constructions.

An exploratory meeting was held in Washington, D.C., at the National Bureau of Standards in September, 1945. D.E. Parsons (Chief, Building Research Division, NBS) was in the chair. Fifteen interested members attended.

The interests of the public with reference to the safety of buildings were dominant in the discussion as were also the needs of building code officials. Although the discussion began with a review of necessary structural tests, it was not long before it was pointed out that any new committee should be concerned also with tests of rain penetration through walls, the durability of buildings, properties of flooring that affect foot comfort, slipperiness of floors, sound transmission through building components,properties that control freedom from annoying vibrations and properties of one element of a structure that impair the satisfactory performance of other elements.

(13)

I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t t h o s e a t t e n d i n g t h e meeting were determined t h a t any t e s t methods developed must a p p l y n o t only t o

p r e f a b r i c a t e d c o n s t r u c t i o n but a l s o and e q u a l l y t o conventional con- s t ~ u c t i o n t h a t mlght have t o be t e s t e d i n t h e f i e l d . Future d i s c u s s i o n s were foreshadowed by some p o i n t e d comments on t h e corresponding need f o r performance c r i t e r i a which could be a p p l i e d t o t h e r e s u l t s of any t e s t s t h a t might be developed f o r b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n .

The broad scope of t h e d i s c u s s i o n s a t t h i s o r i g i n a l meeting w i l l be obvious from t h i s b r i e f summary. A l l t h e p o i n t s t h e n discussed have s i n c e been under a c t i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n by t h e committee e s t a b l i s h e d a s a r e s u l t o f t h a t meeting, s i n c e t h e g a t h e r i n g unanimously recommended t o t h e Executive Committee of ASTM t h a t a new committee on t h e t e s t i n g of b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n s should b e e s t a b l i s h e d . This recommendation was accepted, and arrangements were made f o r t h e holding of t h e i n i t i a l

meeting of Committee E-6, a s it was o r i g i n a l l y d e s i g n a t e d by t h e S o c i e t y , again i n Washington a t t h e National Bureau of Standards, i n January, 1946.

The meeting was a t t e n d e d by twenty men r e p r e s e n t i n g a wide spectrum of i n t e r e s t s i n t h e b u i l d i n g f i e l d , w i t h a p o l o g i e s f o r absence from eleven o t h e r s who had been i n v i t e d . A t t h e end of t h e meeting L . J . Markwardt, who had been d e s i g n a t e d temporary chairman, was e l e c t e d a s t h e f i r s t chairman, F.E. R i c h a r t a s vice-chairman, and J . H . Courtney a s t h e f i r s t s e c r e t a r y .

Once again t h e d i s c u s s i o n ranged over a wide f i e l d , with t h e s a f e t y of t h e p u b l i c , t h e needs of b u i l d i n g code o f f i c i a l s , and t h e importance of applying s c i e n t i f i c methods of house d e s i g n and con- s t r u c t i o n being emphasized. One i n t e r e s t i n g t o p i c was t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of applying s t r u c t u r a l t e s t methods and d e s i g n c r i t e r i a a s used i n t h e a i r c r a f t i n d u s t r y t o house s t r u c t u r e s , a procedure t h a t h a s s i n c e been followed and which h a s been r e p o r t e d upon a t a meeting o f Committee E-6

This o r i g i n a l meeting took c a r e f u l n o t e o f t h e work o f o t h e r ASTM committees which d e a l t with m a t e r i a l s used i n b u i l d i n g . This c a r e f u l l i a i s o n w i t h o t h e r ASTM committees h a s f e a t u r e d a l l t h e succeeding work of Committee E-6. The committee reviewed t h e f i e l d s i n which it might t a k e an immediate i n t e r e s t and decided on f o u r f i e l d s i n which work could be s t a r t e d . These were: (1) t e s t s of p a n e l s f o r l i g h t b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n ; ( 2 ) t e s t s of u n i t s employing f a s t e n i n g s ; (3) t e s t s of s t r u c t u r a l g i r d e r s ; and (4) t e s t s of three-hinged a r c h e s . I t w i l l be seen t h a t good p r o g r e s s was made a t t h i s i n i t i a l meeting and a s t a r t made a t work khich i s s t i l l i n p r o g r e s s .

DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMITTEE

By t h e time t h e committee met under L . J . Markwardtls chairmanship i n A t l a n t i c C i t y i n June 1947, e i g h t subcommittees had been organized

(14)

(1) panels, (2) connections, (3) large units, (4) general structural elements, (5) durability, (6) insulation, (7) sound transmission, and

(8) fire resistance. At succeeding meetings, continued progress was reported for each of these projects, but naturally some of them proved difficult to codify in the form of specific test methods. It was, however, not long before the Society accepted as Tentative Standards suggested

test methods for building panels, trusses, and sound transmission.

The committee met generally once a year in these formative years. As its work developed, the need for a review of actual test results

relating to its work became apparent. A session was arranged therefore for the Annual Meeting of the Society in Chicago in 1954 at which a group of papers descriptive of various aspects of testing building constructions was presented. A large attendance testified to general interest in this field and encouraged the officers of the committee to renewed efforts.

When he assumed the chairmanship of Committee D-7 on Wood

L.J. Markwardt was succeeded as chairman by J.A. Liska in 1951. K.F. Wendt was then elected as first vice-chairman due to the unfortunate illness of F.E. Richart. The committee losts its first secretary when J.H. Courtney died in 1951. He was succeeded by R.A. Biggs who served as secretary until

1960. At the meeting in Chicago in June 1954, R.F. Legget was elected chairman, and H. Perrine became vice-chairman.

Following the successful symposium in Chicago, the Advisory Committee of E-6 held a special meeting in Philadelphia in February 1955, at which the work of the committee since its formation was critically

reviewed and assessed, and plans were made for some internal reorganization. Ideas developed at this meeting were discussed at the next meeting of

the committee itself which was held in Atlantic City in June 1955. They became fully effective at the meeting of the committee in February 1957, at which a new subcommittee structure was organized which remained in effect for the next decade. Four of the old subcommittees were

reconstituted: those dealing with panel tests, tests on girders, durability, and sound transmission. Four new subcommittees were organized dealing

with tests on masonry, completed structures, vapor barriers under concrete slabs, and windows. To these a ninth working subcommittee was later added which started work in 1960 on the development of test methods for curtain walls.

Under its new arrangement, the committee followed generally the pattern of meeting approximately three times every two years,

associating its meetings with general meetings of the Society when possible, but holding meetings of its own when necessary for special purposes. For example, its meeting in October 1957, was held in Ottawa, Canada, in order that the members might see something of the current work of the Division of Building Research of the National Research Council of Canada.

(15)

The committee met in Washington in November 1960, jointly with the fall meeting of the Building Research Institute so that members of BRI could

see something of the work of Committee E-6 in action.

Correspondingly, the committee has joined with the Society in two West Coast Meetings, having a special session as a part of the Los Angeles meeting in 1956 and another session at the San Francisco meeting in 1959. Concurrently, membership in the committee continued to grow steadily. A constant check is kept to ensure that all members listed are participating actively in the work of the committee. The committee in 1958 adopted a set of By-laws for the guidance of its

operations and for the information of its members. Lists of Officers and Meetings are included as Appendixes A and B. As its work developed, the need for a small Executive Committee was seen to be necessary, as also the need for a second vice president and a membership secretary.

As the work of the Committee continued to grow and develop, in response to the demands upon it some reorganization of its administrative structure was seen to be clearly necessary. Desirable changes were

fully discussed by the officers and executive committee and implemented by formal action of the full Committee at its regular meeting in Denver

in 1969. It is not approppriate to discuss these changes here in any detail, but essentially the number of working subcommittees was increased to

12 and, scopes of subcommittee activities were redefined in line with the following new subcommittee structure:

0.0 Administrative 0.1 Executive

0.2 Planning 0.3 Editorial

0.4 Nomenclature and Definitions 1.0 Structural Performance

1.1 Horizontal Building Construction 1.2 Vertical Building Construction 1.3 Joining and Fastening

1.4 Complete Buildings

2.0 Service Performance 3.0 Acoustical Performance

(16)

4.0 I n f i l t r a t i o n Performance 5.0 Component Performance _{. ? .}

5 . 1 Windows and C u r t a i n Walls

A t about t h e same time, t h e S o c i e t y ' s headquarters was a b l e t o i n c r e a s e

i t s s t a f f support of t h e o p e r a t i o n s of t h e Committee, with consequent b e n e f i t t o t h e p r o g r e s s of i t s work. A c t i v i t y of t h e Committee c o n t i n u e s t o i n c r e a s e . F u r t h e r r e o r g a n i z a t i o n and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e development may c o n f i d e n t l y be a n t i c i p a t e d when t h i s i s seen t o be desirable.

STANDARDS SPONSORED BY COMMITTEE E6

The u l t i m a t e o b j e c t i v e of a l l t h e work of t h e committee i s

t h e p r e p a r a t i o n of soundly based s t a n d a r d t e s t methods f o r v a r i o u s b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n s f o r p u b l i c u s e . The following t e s t methods

have a l r e a d y been developed by t h e committee and i s s u e d a s ASTM p u b l i c a t i o n s with t h e d e s i g n a t i o n s noted, with s e v e r a l more approaching completion.

E72-74a Standard Methods of Conducting S t r e n g t h T e s t s of Panels f o r Building Construction.

E73 -74 Standard Methods of T e s t i n g Truss Assemblies.

E149-66-(73) Standard Method of T e s t f o r Bond S t r e n g t h of Mortar t o Masonry U n i t s .

E154-68-(75) Methods of T e s t i n g M a t e r i a l s f o r u s e a s Vapor B a r r i e r s Under Concrete S l a b s and a s Ground Cover i n Crawl Spaces. E196-74 Standard Method f o r Load T e s t s of Floors and F l a t Roofs. E241-68-(74) T e n t a t i v e Recommended P r a c t i c e s f o r I n c r e a s i n g D u r a b i l i t y

of Building Constructions Against Water Damage.

E283-68-(73) T e n t a t i v e Methods f o r Rate of A i r Leakage Through Windows. E330-70 Standard Method of Test f o r S t r u c t u r a l Performance of

E x t e r i o r Windows, Curtain Walls, and Doors under t h e I n f l u e n c e of Wind Loads.

E331-70-(75) Standard Method of T e s t f o r Water P e n e t r a t i o n of E x t e r i o r Windows, Curtain Walls and Doors by Uniform S t a t i c A i r P r e s s u r e Difference.

(17)

E40.5-70-(75) Standard Elethods for Wear Testing Rotary Operators for Windows.

E447-74 Standard Methods of Test for Compressive Strength of Masonry Assemblages.

E489-73 Standard Method of Test for Tensile Strength Properties of Steel Truss Plates.

E514-74 Standard Method of Test for Water Permeance of Masonry E518-74 Standard Method of Test for Flexural Bond Strength

of Masonry.

E519-74 Standard Methods of Test for Diagonal Tension (Shear) in Masonry Assemblages.

E529-75 Standards Methods of Flexural Test on Beams and Girders for Building Construction.

E540-75a Standard Definitions of Terms used in Building Construction.

E546-75 Standard Method of Test for Frost Point of Sealed Insulating Glass Units.

E547-75 Standard Method of Test for Water Penetration of Exterior Windows, Curtain Walls, and Doors by Cyclic Static Air Pressure Differential

(Three Standard Test Methods relating to Sound Transmission were passed to the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E 33)

SYMPOSIA

It has been a common experience of committees of ASTM to find their work greatly assisted by arranging for reviews of work in certain aspects of their assigned fields in the form of groups of papers which are presented at regular technical sessions of the Society. The success of the first symposium organized by Committee E-6 (at Chicago in 1954) has already been mentioned. This encouraged the committee in the development of further sessions of this type. A session was held as a part of the Second Pacific Area National Meeting in Los Angeles, Calif., in September 1956, at which five papers describing actual full-scale tests on house structures were presented. The committee was associated with Committee D-7 on Wood in this symposium, and also in one arranged by its sister committee at which a group of eight papers were given on seismic and shock loading on wooden structures and on glued-laminated and other types of constructions. These papers, together with those presented at other symposia sponsored by Committee E-6, have been published by the

(18)

Society in the very convenient form now used for special technical publications.

At the Boston meeting of the Society in June 1958, a well- attended symposium on some approaches to du~ability in structures was presented. In the following year, at the Pittsburgh meeting in

February, a symposium on the testing of windows was a main part of the general program. Both these symposia proved of great assistance to the respective subcommittees in the two fields.

The following Special Technical Publications have been issued by the Society under the auspices of Committee E-6; all are still in print and copies can be obtained on application to Society headquarters. Abstracts are given in Appendix D.

STP 166 Methods of Testing Building Constructions (1955) STP 209 Design and Tests of Building Structures

-

Seismic and

Shock Loading and Glued-Laminated and other Constructions (1957)

STP 210 Full-Scale Tests on House Structures (1956)

STP 236 Some Approaches to Durability in Structures (1958) STP 251 Testing Window Assemblies (1959)

STP 282 Papers on Building Constructions (1959) STP 320 Symposium on Masonry Testing (1963)

Symposium on the Effects of Sonic Boom on Buildings. ASTM, Materials Research and Standards, Vol. 4, No. 11, Nov. 1964.

Committee E-6 also sponsored, jointly with Committee E-5

on Fire Tests of Materials and Construction, a paper on "Exploratory Fire Tests with Small-Scale Specimens" by Harry D. Poster, published in the ASTM Bulletin, No. 228, Feb., 1958, p. 66.

RECENT HISTORY

Recent meetings, and the progress made, will be found summarized in Appendix B. It will be seen that meetings are now generally on a 9-month schedule. Some have been held jointly with other bodies but this has not always worked out satisfactorily, Officers have changed, as shown in Appendix A, regular elections being held in accordance

with ASTM procedures which are designed to develop reasonable continuity in committee administration while ensuring that all committees have

the continuing benefit of "new blood" in their roster of guiding officers. Liaison with other ASTM Committees

(19)

o f f i c e r s o f Committee E-6 have always made t o ensure c l o s e l i a i s o n with o t h e r Committees of t h e S o c i e t y t h a t d e a l with t e s t methods f o r i n d i v i d u a l b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s , and with t e s t methods i n s p e c i a l i s e d f i e l d s of

t e s t i n g of which Committee E-5 i s t h e main example d e a l i n g , a s it does, with F i r e T e s t s i n g e n e ~ a l , Committee E-6 h a s b e n e f i t t e d g r e a t l y from t h e cooperation t h u s developed, t a k i n g g e n e r a l l y t h e view t h a t , i n i t s f i e l d i f o n l y because t h e r e i s s o much t o be done, d u p l i c a t i o n of

e f f o r t must be avoided a t a l l c o s t s .

( 5 ) THE SIGNIFICANCE OF TEST RESULTS

The t a s k of Committee E-6 i s t o formulate methods of t e s t f o r b u i l d i n g ( i n c l u d i n g housing) c o n s t r u c t i o n , i n c l u d i n g elements, connections and assemblies, under a c t u a l o r simulated s e r v i c e con- d i t i o n s , a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e e v a l u a t i o n of such f a c t o r s a s m a t e r i a l s

d e s i g n , c o n s t r u c t i o n and f a b r i c a t i o n , with s p e c i a l r e f e r e n c e t o t h e needs of b u i l d i n g code and similar a u t h o r i t i e s with whom t h e Committee has l i a i s o n .

Because of t h e n a t u r e o f b u i l d i n g a c t i v i t y , t h e s e t e s t methods may be expected t o f i n d u s e p a r t i c u l a r l y i n s a t i s f y i n g t h e requirements of b u i l d i n g o f f i c i a l s . Proof t h a t new methods of c o n s t r u c t i o n , new combinations of b u i l d i n g m a t e r i a l s and t h e replacement of o l d accepted m a t e r i a l s by new products meet t h e p r o v i s i o n s of b u i l d i n g r e g u l a t i o n s can only be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y provided a s a r e s u l t o f s t a n d a r d t e s t s . These a r e u s u a l l y performed by some independent o r o t h e r w i s e a c c e p t a b l e

t e s t i n g agency. Correspondingly, i n t h e development o f new p r o d u c t s o r b u i l d i n g systems, manufacturers and c o n t r a c t o r s must know t h e s t a n d a r d s a g a i n s t which t h e i r p r o d u c t s o r systems a r e t o be judged, and be a b l e t o u s e g e n e r a l l y accepted s t a n d a r d t e s t methods i n t h e i r developmental work.

The q u e s t i o n of t h e minimum o r d e s i r a b l e v a l u e on t h e s c a l e provided by any s t a n d a r d t e s t method f o r measuring a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of performance i s not an e s s e n t i a l p a r t of t h e method. I t must, however, always be questioned whether t h e kind of measurement t h a t w i l l b e p r o - duced i s t h e one t h a t i s wanted, j u s t a s it i s a p p r o p r i a t e t o a s k , b e f o r e using a r u l e r , whether it i s a measurement o f l e n g t h t h a t i s wanted and whether t h e unitis of measurement a r e needed i n c e n t i m e t e r s o r i n c h e s .

I t f o l l o w s t h a t t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of a s t a n d a r d t e s t method by i t s e l f i s n o t going t o be o f v e r y much a s s i s t a n c e t o d e s i g n e r s . They must be a b l e t o i n t e r p r e t t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d f r o m . t h e t e s t . Since t h e s e r e s u l t s w i l l be measurements expressed i n p r e c i s e u n i t s , t h e range of v a l u e s w i t h i n which t e s t r e s u l t s should l i e must be known i f t h e y a r e t o be regarded a s s a t i s f a c t o r y . Such l i m i t s a r e what a r e g e n e r a l l y d e s c r i b e d a s "performance c r i t e r i a . "

(20)

There a r e some who d i s l i k e t h i s term when used i n a s s o c i a t i o n with r e s u l t s from s t a n d a r d t e s t s , b u t i t can be seen t h a t some such guide i s e s s e n t i a l i f s t a n d a r d t e s t methods a r e t o t a k e t h e i r proper p l a c e i n t h e p r o c e s s o f b u i l d i n g d e s i g n a s an a i d (but no more) i n t h e p r e l i m i n a r y assessment of probable performance. The f i n a l s t a g e

i n t h e o v e r a l l p r o c e s s i s t h e development by mutual agreement (through t h e concensus p r i n c i p l e ) o f a s t a n d a r d t h a t w i l l e s t a b l i s h what t h e minimum c r i t e r i a must b e , b u t t h i s can be done o n l y a g a i n s t a background o f long e x p e r i e n c e , and w i t h i n well-defined l i m i t s .

The c h a l l e n g e b e f o r e Committee E 6 i s t h e r e f o r e c l e a r b u t i t can be seen t h a t t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of t h e t e s t methods is only a p a r t i a l answer t o t h e problems o f t h e manufacturer, t h e c o n t r a c t o r and t h e b u i l d i n g o f f i c i a l . The r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d by t h e u s e o f such t e s t methods have t o be a s s e s s e d and r e l a t e d t o some s o r t o f norm i f t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r u s i n g t h e r e s u l t s a r e t o know whether t h e y a r e s a t i s f a c t o r y o r n o t . A s a simple example, t h e maximum permis- s i b l e v e r t i c a l d e f l e c t i o n i n beams o r t r u s s e s s u p p o r t i n g c e i l i n g s i n occupied b u i l d i n g s i s f r e q u e n t l y s t a t e d t o be 1/360 o f t h e c l e a r span. This f i g u r e may be s a i d t o be llcommon knowledge" i n t h e b u i l d i n g

f i e l d , b u t what o f t h e corresponding l i m i t i n g v a l u e s f o r o t h e r t e s t methods? I t i s t h e s e l i m i t i n g v a l u e s t h a t a r e commonly d e s c r i b e d a s t h e performance c r i t e r i a i n r e l a t i o n t o any s e t o f s t a n d a r d t e s t methods.

Performance c r i t e r i a may be d e f i n e d , w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o t h e t e s t methods b e i n g developed by Committee E6, a s t h o s e l i m i t i n g v a l u e s o r r a n g e s o f v a l u e s , w i t h i n which t h e r e s u l t s obtained should l i e i f t h e product o r c o n s t r u c t i o n t e s t e d i s t o be regarded a s g e n e r a l l y s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r t h e o b j e c t i v e s e r v e d by t h e t e s t method. I t must be s t r e s s e d t h a t Performance C r i t e r i a should n e v e r be s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l v a l u e s b u t always l i m i t i n g v a l u e s , o r ranges of v a l u e s , w i t h i n which t e s t r e s u l t s should f a l l . They a r e , t h e r e f o r e , g u i d e s , t o t h o s e who u s e t h e s t a n d a r d t e s t methods a s t o t h e v a l u e s t h a t a r e t o be used, o r a r e t o be regarded a s a c c e p t a b l e . I t i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e u s e r o f t h e t e s t r e s u l t s t o d e c i d e f o r himself what s p e c i f i c v a l u e o r v a l u e s he w i l l r e q u i r e i n o r d e r t o d e c i d e whether t h e product o r c o n s t r u c t i o n being t e s t e d i s a c c e p t a b l e ( l e g a l l y , i n t h e c a s e o f b u i l d i n g r e g u l a t i o n s ) o r n o t .

The s t e a d i l y i n c r e a s i n g number of s t a n d a r d t e s t methods, t h e i n c r e a s i n g complexity of modern b u i l d i n g and t h e c o n t i n u a l l y expanding number o f new b u i l d i n g p r o d u c t s and b u i l d i n g systems h a s a l r e a d y made it almost impossible f o r any one man t o be f a m i l i a r p e r s o n a l l y with a l l o f t h e technology involved i n t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f Performance C r i t e r i a even f o r t h e s t a n d a r d t e s t method a l r e a d y a v a i l a b l e . This s i t u a t i o n grows more complex w i t h t h e promulgation o f every new t e s t method. I t i s

c l e a r t h a t t h o s e b e s t a b l e t o s u g g e s t t h e limits w i t h i n which t e s t r e s u l t s should l i e a r e t h o s e who p r e p a r e t h e d e t a i l s o f t h e t e s t methods. J u s t a s

(21)

manufacturers, c o n t r a c t o r s , b u i l d i n g o f f i c i a l s and o t h e r s s h a r e f u l l y t h e i r s p e c i a l i s t information i n t h e d r a f t i n g of s t a n d a r d t e s t methods, s o a l s o may t h e y be expected t o s h a r e t h e i r s p e c i a l i s t knowledge a s t o t h e c h a r a c t e r o f t h e r e s u l t s t o be obtained from t h e t e s t s . For r e a s o n s a l r e a d y s t a t e d , t h e i n d i v i d u a l b u i l d i n g o f f i c i a l cannot be expected

t o p o s s e s s t h e n e c e s s a r y wide d e t a i l e d t e c h n i c a l knowledge f o r determining h i s own a c c e p t a b l e t e s t r e s u l t s , even though t h e l e g a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r r e q u i r i n g such r e s u l t s a s he may determine i s h i s and h i s a l o n e . He cannot a c c e p t t h e guidance of i n d i v i d u a l manufacturers o r s u p p l i e r s without running t h e r i s k of doing a d i s s e r v i c e t o o t h e r manufacturers and s u p p l i e r s .

A t e a r l i e r meetings of Committee E-6, about a decade ago, t h e r e were some v e r y p o i n t e d d i s c u s s i o n s a t which e x p e r t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f some o f t h e f i n e t r a d e a s s o c i a t i o n s t h a t s e r v e t h e b u i l d i n g i n d u s t r y voiced t h e i r o b j e c t i o n s t o t h e Committee "having a n y t h i n g t o do" w i t h s u g g e s t i n g t h e c r i t e r i a t h a t could be used w i t h t h e t e s t methods i t

was developing. This was perhaps understandable s i n c e t h e concepts t o which t h i s paper i s r e a l l y o n l y an i n t r o d u c t i o n were only t h e n being introduced i n t o North American b u i l d i n g technology i n any a p p r e c i a b l e manner. A t t h a t time, f o r example, t h e r e was r e a l l y o n l y one u s e f u l guide a v a i l a b l e f o r b u i l d i n g o f f i c i a l s who were i n t h e p o s i t i o n of having t o d e c i d e what c r i t e r i a t o u s e w i t h t e s t r e s u l t s upon which t h e y

had t o base t h e i r judgements o f approval. This was a small l e a f l e t published a s e a r l y a s 1947 by t h e Housing and Home Finance Agency,

a u s e f u l document which soon went o u t o f p r i n t i n view o f i t s u t i l i t y ( ' ) . Since t h a t t i m e , t h e s i t u a t i o n has developed c o n s i d e r a b l y b u t r e c e n t developments a r e o u t s i d e t h e scope of t h i s p a p e r . They have been admirably summarized by D r . N.B. Hutcheon, o f t h e D i v i s i o n of Building Research o f t h e National Research Council of Canada, i n two p a p e r s c o p i e s o f which are s t i l l a v a i l a b l e f o r t h o s e who wish t o pursue t h i s m a t t e r f u r t h e r ( 2 , 3 )

.

(6) THE CHALLENGE OF THE FUTURE

T e s t i n g methods, no m a t t e r how good, a r e no s u b s t i t u t e f o r sound judgement, f i r m l y based on good and r e l e v a n t e x p e r i e n c e , judgement t h a t i s t h e hallmark of t h e good d e s i g n e r . The experienced judgement of t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l w i l l always be t h e b a s i s f o r e x c e l l e n c e i n d e s i g n ,

(1) Performance Standards: S t r u c t u r a l and I n s u l a t i a n Requirements f o r Houses. 12p. H.H.F.A., Washington. June 1947.

(2) Hutcheon N . B . , Codes, Standards and Building Research. Technical Paper No. 357 of DBR/NRC. 31p., November 1971. (NRC 12304)

(3) Hutcheon N . B . , The Approval of Building M a t e r i a l s . Technical Paper No. 370 o f DBR/NRC. 6 p . , May 1972. (NRC 12639)

(22)

judgement t h a t i s n o t u n r e l a t e d t o experience with t h e performance o f b u i l d i n g s a s c o n s t r u c t e d .

T e s t i n g methods, t h e r e s u l t s t h e y g i v e and t h e c r i t e r i a a g a i n s t which such r e s u l t s must be judged can be, however, a most u s e f u l a i d t o t h e d e s i g n e r . They a r e a v i t a l t o o l f o r a l l who a r e engaged i n t h e

development o f i n n o v a t i o n i n b u i l d i n g , whether of m a t e r i a l s o r components, s o t h a t new concepts can b e t r i e d a g a i n s t t h e a c c e p t a b l e performance o f t h o s e a l r e a d y i n u s e . And t h e y a r e an e s s e n t i a l requirement f o r a l l Building O f f i c i a l s , charged w i t h t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of Building Regulations i n t h e i r e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g p e r p l e x i t y .

The r a p i d advance i n b u i l d i n g technology and i n t h e p a r a l l e l demands upon b u i l d i n g s by t h e i r owners and t e n a n t s means t h a t t h e d e s i g n e r must o f t e n d e a l w i t h unknowns, where h i s judgement can o n l y be i n t u i t i v e . There i s today no time f o r t h e experimentation t h a t n e c e s s a r i l y f e a t u r e d many b u i l d i n g s o f t h e p a s t . Advance t e s t i n g under c o n t r o l l e d c o n d i t i o n s t o t h e most s e v e r e l o a d i n g s t h a t can be contemplated i s t h e r e f o r e a

requirement of much modern b u i l d i n g d e s i g n even though t h e b e s t of t e s t procedures can n e v e r f u l l y i n c l u d e t h e element o f time, t h e time d u r i n g which t h e f i n i s h e d b u i l d i n g must perform s a t i s f a c t o r i l y . Here again i s where t h e

d e s i g n e r must e x e r c i s e h i s judgement i n making t h e b e s t u s e he can of t e s t r e s u l t s , d e s p i t e t h e i r l i m i t a t i o n s , i n h i s f i n a l d e c i s i o n s on d e t a i l s of d e s i g n .

Innovations i n b u i l d i n g may n o t prove t o be a s good a s t h e y a r e expected t o b e s i n c e "newness i s n o t a c r i t e r i o n f o r t r u t h " - t o r e p e a t an o l d b u t wise s a y i n g . They must perform a t l e a s t a s w e l l and a s economically a s t h e f e a t u r e s t h e y a r e intended t o s u r p l a n t . To ensure t h i s performance n e c e s s i t a t e s t h e t e s t i n g of both e x i s t i n g and proposed m a t e r i a l s o r c o n s t r u c t i o n s and t h e considered comparison of t h e r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d . Standard t e s t methods, prepared by an independent body such a s Committee E-6, a r e c l e a r l y n e c e s s a r y f o r such comparative purposes. I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , n a t u r a l and p r o p e r t h a t manufacturers o f m a t e r i a l s and components f o r b u i l d i n g s have always taken such a c o n s t r u c t i v e l y a c t i v e p a r t i n t h e work o f t h e Committee.

I t i s , however, i n t h e work o f Building O f f i c i a l s t h a t

s t a n d a r d i z e d t e s t i n g methods have t h e i r most c r i t i c a l and v i t a l r o l e t o p l a y . Building R e g u l a t i o n s , based on good Building Codes, w i l l c o n t i n u e t o i n c r e a s e i n importance i n e n s u r i n g t h e s a f e t y and s t r u c t u r a l s u f f i c i e n c y of b u i l d i n g s i n urban communities, even a s t h e y w i l l a l s o c o n t i n u e t o

i n c r e a s e i n s i z e , i n complexity and i n t e c h n i c a l c o n t e n t . So wide a

range do t h e y cover t h a t , even i n t h e l a r g e s t of c i t i e s , t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e i r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n can n o t p o s s i b l y be expected t o p o s s e s s a l l t h e c o l l e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e and judgement n e c e s s a r y f o r t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and j u d i c i o u s a p p l i c a t i o n . E s p e c i a l l y does t h i s apply t o t h e proposed i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o a c t u a l b u i l d i n g p r a c t i c e of new concepts of d e s i g n , new

(23)

factory-produced components and new m a t e r i a l s , f o r which no l o c a l experience of performance i s o r can be a v a i l a b l e .

I t i s h e r e t h a t t h e c r i t i c a l assessment, a g a i n s t well accepted c r i t e r i a , o f t h e r e s u l t s of w e l l conducted and s t a n d a r d t e s t s can be s o e s s e n t i a l an a i d t o Building O f f i c i a l s . Building O f f i c i a l s have t h e i r own unique c o n t r i b u t i o n t o make t o t h e development o f t h o s e s t a n d a r d t e s t methods t h a t , a s can a l r e a d y be seen, a r e s o u r g e n t l y needed i n e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g number i f b u i l d i n g technology i s t o advance a s it should, without undue d e l a y i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f sound i n n o v a t i v e p r a c t i c e s .

I t i s e n t i r e l y probable t h a t , b e f o r e t h e end of t h e p r e s e n t c e n t u r y , now l e s s t h a n twenty f i v e y e a r s away, t h e s i z e o f most of t h e l a r g e r urban communities of North America w i l l have doubled. An o f f i c i a l e s t i m a t e of t h e Government o f t h e United S t a t e s i s s u e d i n 1969 s t a t e d t h a t , by t h e y e a r 2,000 more t h a n 340,000 s q u a r e m i l e s would b e covered by

urban development a s compared w i t h 200,000 s q u a r e m i l e s when t h e r e p o r t was i s s u e d . This i n c r e a s e o f 140,000 s q u a r e m i l e s i s about equal t o t h e combined a r e a s o f England, Wales, Scotland and Czechoslovakia p u t t o - g e t h e r . To a s s i s t w i t h t h e sound p h y s i c a l developments t h a t must d i s t i n - guish t h i s phenomenal expansion, t e s t methods f o r b u i l d i n g c o n s t r u c t i o n s w i l l be e s s e n t i a l . The p r o v i s i o n of t h e s e t e s t methods makes t h e t a s k ahead o f ASTM Committee E6 a c h a l l e n g i n g one indeed.

(24)

APPENDIX A

1974 R.A. J o n e s

1972

-

1976 J . E . Ryan 1974 - 1976 D.E. Kennedy

SECRETARIES J . H . R . A . J . P . R.A. C . B . H.R. D . J . F.C. Courtney Biggs Thompson J o n e s Monk Jr

.

T r e s c h e l V i l d Pneuman MEMBERSHIP SECRETARY 1970 - 1974 D . J . Vild 1974 - 1976 L.W. Vaughan

(25)

APPENDIX B

A.S.T.M. COMMITTEE E6 MEMBERSHIP AND MEETINGS

No.

-

Meeting a t No. Present*

Members and Guests.

) (Mar. ) 15 1 9 24 15 13 15 - ? 6 2 0 34 34 3 8 26 2 5 3 2 42 64 34 36 4 1 59 3 0 34 31 3 3 4 2 3 8 n o t l i s t e d 3 6 4 7 33 24 38 2 1 37 42 2 8 Membership