http://jen.sagepub.

com/
Journal of Building Physics
http://jen.sagepub.com/content/1/2/116
The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/109719637700100202
1977 1: 116 Journal of Building Physics
Carlos J. Hilado and Heather J. Cumming
Fire Safety Aspects of Thermal Insulation

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:

International Council for Research and Innovation in Building and Construction

can be found at: Journal of Building Physics Additional services and information for

http://jen.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

http://jen.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:

http://jen.sagepub.com/content/1/2/116.refs.html Citations:

What is This?

- Oct 1, 1977 Version of Record >>

by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
116
FIRE SAFETY ASPECTS OF THERMAL INSULATION
Manuscript
received June 23, 1977
CARLOS J. HILADO AND HEATHER J. CUMMING
Fire
Safety
Center
University
of San Francisco
San
Francisco, California 94117
ABSTRACT: Thermal insulation materials and systems have an
important
role in the conservation of energy,
in the economical maintenance of com-
fortable environments, and in the profitable operation of industries. Proper
use of thermal insulation should take into account fire safety aspects. In
industry, one important
fire safety aspect is prevention of self-heating and
spontaneous combustion; ethylene oxide, heat transfer fluid, polyalkylene
oxides, and polyether polyols are given as examples. Fire protection to
maintain structural integrity and prevent decomposition of reactive chemi-
cals is
highly
desirable. In any structures occupied by people, fire toxicity
is an
important factor in
ability to escape from fires and in extent of fire
injuries.
INTRODUCTION
THERMAL INSULATION HAS an
important
role in the conservation of
energy,
in
the economic maintenance of comfortable environments, and in the
profitable
operation of industries. With the steady
increase in the cost of
energy, energy
conservation becomes an
increasingly important
factor in the economics of
every
application which involves heat. One of the
principal energy
conservation measures
in
any environment is the
judicious
use of thermal insulation materials and
systems
to minimize heat losses.
i
Because
safety should not be sacrificed in the search for
energy conservation, the
proper use of thermal insulation should take into account the
possible hazards in
exposure to fire. The
purpose
of this
paper
is to discuss some fire
safety aspects
of
thermal insulation.
FIRE PREVENTION CONSIDERATIONS
Many
thermal insulation systems
consist of
essentially
noncombustible materials.
Those
systems which utilize combustible materials are
generally
restricted to tem-
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
117
perature ranges
which
provide
a
margin of safety
below the temperatures
at which
such materials would
ignite.
As a fire
prevention measure, improper
use of combus-
tible materials should be avoided.
One
important
fire
prevention aspect of thermal insulation systems is prevention
of self-heating
and spontaneous
combustion. Although
an insulation material
may
be noncombustible, it is
likely
to be near or in contact with combustible materials.
At ambient conditions,
a combustible material may undergo
exothermic oxidation,
with a reaction rate so slow that the heat generated
is
easily dissipated
to the
surroundings.
If the reaction rate is increased for
any reason, and heat
dissipation is
restricted by the
presence
of thermal insulation,
the combustible material
may
exhibit
self-heating,
in that its
temperature
is observed to increase without any
external application of heat. If this process continues, it
may
lead to
ignition
of the
combustible material.
SELF-HEATING AND SPONTANEOUS COMBUSTION
Self-heating
or
spontaneous heating,
and its related, more spectacular phenom-
enon, spontaneous combustion, have been observed in thermal insulation contain-
ing combustible
liquids
and
vapors
which have leaked or spilled into the insulation.
In
England,
the
temperatures
of the insulation material or insulated material at
which fires have been
reported
to occur
range
from 80 to 150C. for essential oils,
160 to 250&dquo;C. for coal tar distillates, and 200 to 300C. for mineral oils [ 1 ] .
The reaction
causing self-heating may
be the result of air
oxidation, attack
by
microorganisms, decomposition, action by water or water
vapor,
or
catalysis by
impurities.
Self-heating
can occur if the volume of material exceeds the safe size,
much as an atomic
pile goes
critical.
Any
material
capable
of
self-heating
will
generate heat which is
dissipated
to the
surroundings by
normal mechanisms of heat
transfer, i.e., conduction, convection, and radiation. Under stable
conditions, heat
generation balances heat loss. When heat is
generated
more
rapidly than it can be
dissipated, there is a
continuing temperature
rise in the
self-heating material,
and a
hazardous situation can be created.
When a combustible material
exposed
to air is
progressively heated,
an increase
of internal
sample temperature
above the temperature
of the heat source is a true
indication of
self-heating. Since the observed
self-heating temperature
in
any appa-
ratus is affected
by sample size, surroundings,
and
heating rate, the deviation be-
tween the
self-heating temperatures
thus obtained and a &dquo;true&dquo;
self-heating
tem-
perature
(assuming
a true value exists) is not known. However, it can be
neglected
if
materials are
compared
under the same test conditions and the test results are used
for
comparison only and not as absolute values.
The wide
range
of
self-heating temperatures
exhibited
by
the various thermal
insulation materials shows
widely varying susceptibility
to
self-heating.
This
changes
with different combustible materials. Because one thermal insulation which is less
susceptible than another in one
type
of service
may
be more
susceptible
in a
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
118
different type of service, each insulation should be evaluated for
susceptibility
with
the
specific combustible material involved in the application. The variability of
composition, and therefore behavior,
of a
given
brand of thermal insulation over a
period
of time should be stressed.
Developing
the
ability
to predict
which thermal insulation materials would be
more
susceptible
to
self-heating requires
a
thorough
chemical and
physical charac-
terization of the materials already
tested and of the materials to be considered in
the future. Such characterization is not feasible at the
present time, because com-
mercial thermal insulation materials are
proprietary
in
composition,
difficult to
characterize, and variable in manufacture. Until such information is obtained and
the
predictive ability developed, experimental tests continue to be
necessary to
minimize fire hazard.
Because the surface
temperatures reported
in insulation fires are often
signifi-
cantly lower than
latoratory-determined autoignition temperatures of the combus-
tible materials involved [2] ,
an
apparent lowering
of
autoignition temperature
is
sometimes offered as an
explanation.
This
viewpoint
has some practical value in
that effective
autoignition temperatures
can be related to
safety guidelines
for
upper
limits of service
temperatures:
a
lowering
of
autoignition temperature means
that service
temperature must be reduced
accordingly
to maintain the same margin
of
safety.
The
presence
of ferric oxide has been found to lower
autoignition temperature
values for several
organic compounds [3] , and the contribution of thermal insula-
tion to
self-heating
and
lowering
of
autoignition temperature may
be due to the
presence of certain
impurities
in the
particular
material. In the specific case of
ethylene oxide, a
major
factor in
lowering
of
autoignition temperature may
be the
conversion of
ethylene
oxide to
acetaldehyde
which has a much lower
autoignition
temperature value [4].
Self-heating phenomena involving
combustible vapors
in contact with thermal
insulation can be illustrated by the
example
of
ethylene oxide. The
susceptibility of
various thermal insulation materials to induce
self-heating
with
ethylene
oxide has
been determined at Union Carbide
Corporation by
means of a
self-heating
test
which, in effect, determined the
self-heating temperature
observed when
ethylene
oxide/air mixtures are in contact with a
particular
material.
The
apparatus
in which the tests are conducted consists of a vertical stainless
steel
cylinder,
127 mm
(5 in) in diameter and 305 mm (12 in) high,
the sides of
which are heated
by
electrical
heating tapes.
A horizontal divider
plate,
152 mm
(6
in) from the
top, divides the interior of the
cylinder
into two equal compartments,
the
upper compartment serving
as the test chamber.
Only
a
portion
of the
cylindri-
cal cross
section, defined by
a vertical baffle 51 mm
(2 in) from one side, is filled
with thermal insulation material, in the form of
roughly
6.4 mm (/a in) cubes. The
ethylene
oxide and air are admitted through separate inlets of 25.4 mm (1 in) from
the bottom of the
sample chamber, directly opposite
each other and 25.4 mm
(1
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
119
in) apart.
The
top plate
is a loose fit which allows the
gas
mixture to vent. Thermo-
couples
in the inlet tubes measure the
temperatures
of the
entering gas streams, and
thermocouples
in the sample
measure the temperature
at two levels.
Depending
on
the particular sample,
either the
upper
or the lower sample thermocouple provides
the first indication of exotherms. The
self-heating temperature is considered to be
the temperature
at which an exotherm becomes noticeable on
temperature-time
ch a rts.
A
comparison of initial
self-heating temperatures
observed when various thermal
insulation materials were
exposed
to a 50/50 (by volume) ethylene oxide/air mix-
ture of
steadily increasing temperature
is
provided by
Table I, the data for which
were derived from a more detailed
paper [5] .
Table 1
Self-Heating
of Insulation Materials with 50/50 Ethylene Oxidel
Air Mix tures
The
susceptibility of various thermal insulation materials to induce
self-heating
with combustible
liquids
has been determined at Union Carbide
Corporation by
exposing liquid-soaked samples
of thermal insulation to air of
steadily increasing
temperature. The
apparatus
in which the tests are conducted consists of a vertical
heated furnace tube 220 mm
(8.75 in) long
with a 102 mm
(4 in) bor-e, heated
by
electrical current
passing through
nichrome wire in an asbestos sleeve wound
around the
tube, and an inner
refractory
tube 220 mm (8.75 in) long
with a 76 mm
(3 in) bore, inside which the
specimen
is
placed.
Air is admitted at a controlled rate,
and its
temperature is
steadily
increased
by
controlled increase in electrical
energy
input. The
temperatures of the air near the specimen and of the interior of the
specimen are measured
by means of
thermocouples.
The
self-heating temperature is
considered to be the
temperature at which an exotherm becomes noticeable on
temperature-time charts, usually the
temperature
at which the
sample internal tem-
perature exceeds that of the
heating
air.
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
120
A
comparison of initial self-heating temperatures
observed when various thermal
insulation materials were soaked with DOWTHERM® heat transfer fluid is provided
by Table 2, the data for which were derived from a more detailed
paper [5] . The
dependence of
self-heating temperature
on the
particular combination of thermal
insulation and combustible
liquid
is
emphasized by more recent data on
polyalky-
lene oxides (Table 3) and
polyether polyols (Table 4).
Table 2.
Self-Heating
of Insulation Materials with DOWTHFRM® Heat Transfer
Fluid.
Table 3.
Self-Heating
of Insulation Materials with Polyalkylene Oxide
I
Table 4.
SelfHeating
of Insulation Materials with
PolyetherPolyols
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
121
In
general,
differences between the values of initial self-heating temperatures
given
in Tables 1
through
4 should not be considered
significant
if the differences
do not exceed 20C. Reproducibility
varies with the sample
of material tested. For
example,
the 268C. value
given
for calcium silicate A in Table 1 is the
average
of 4
individual test results
ranging
from 245 to 295C.;
the 290C. value
given
for
calcium silicate B in the same table is the
average
of 4 individual test results
ranging
from 280 to 300C. The variation observed with
supposedly
the same materials
over a
period
of
years
can be considerably greater.
For
example,
the 320C. value
given
for
perlite
B in Table 1 is the
average
of 6 test results, ranging
from 265 to
380C., obtained from 1970 to 1973; the 251C. value
given
for calcium silicate C
in the same table is the
average
of 4 test results, ranging
from 229 to 290C.,
obtained from 1968 to 1973.
This
degree
of variation should not be
surprising.
Commercial thermal insulation
materials are manufactured to specifications
which include
properties
such as
density, thermal
conductivity,
and durability,
but not
susceptibility
to
self-heating.
Chemical
composition could
vary significantly
within
existing specifications.
FIRE PROTECTION CONSIDERATIONS
Thermal insulation
systems play
an
important part
in the efficient operation of
industrial plants because of the
appreciable
value of
energy employed
in
heating
and
refrigeration.
Because of their widespread
use in
manufacturing facilities, they
tend to be
among
the first materials subjected
to flame
impingement
in an acci-
dental fire. Their
performance
under fire conditions is therefore of
significant
con-
cern.
At the
very least, a thermal insulation
system
should
present
no
significant
fire
hazard, that is, it should not contribute
significantly
either as fuel for the fire or as
a means of
propagating
the fire. It would be more desirable if it
provided some
measure of
protection for the insulated
pipes
or vessels, preferably
for at least one
hour before
pipe
or vessel wall temperatures
reach a critical level.
A thermal insulation
system
is
judged
as
providing
fire
protection if it retards the
temperature rise of the insulated pipe
or vessel from
reaching
a failure
point
for at
least 60 minutes. A failure point of 538C. ( 1000 F.) was selected for two reasons:
first, steel
rapidly
loses its
strength
at
temperatures
above
538C., and, second, at
or near
53$C., many
reactive chemicals
decompose
with
explosive
violence.
A reviewer has
pointed
out that it is not widely agreed
that a criterion of 538C.
maximum allowable
temperature
after one hour of
exposure
is
appropriate for
chemical
plants, and that the results of investigations
into
plant disasters such as
that at
Flixborough,
when made public,
will have an
important bearing
on this
question. This
particular criterion was selected in the 1960s as the criterion for
giving
fire
protection credit to thermal insulation systems
in certain plants of Union
Carbide
Corporation,
and to date there has been insufficient evidence for
changing
this criterion. The 538C. temperature
level is cited as a critical level in ASTM E
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
122
119 [6] in tests for structural steel columns, beams, and
girders.
Since the ASTM E
119
procedure
is
firmly
established among
the fire
protection
and insurance
organi-
zations in the United States, selecting
a different temperature level without consid-
erable technical evidence would be unwise.
F ire
protection
is desirable, but in
many
cases it is more economically provided
by
water
spray
and other
systems.
The fire protection provided
in a structure often
affords sufficient
protection
for vessels and
piping.
In chemical process plants, units
handling
reactive chemicals
require
the maximum fire
protection and thus call for
fire-protective insulation, but such units usually comprise less than 10
per
cent of
insulation
applications in
any particular plant.
FIRE ENDURANCE OF INSULATED PIPES
A fire exposure test has its principal value in
simulating
the conditions that
would
probably exist in an accidental fire. In industrial
plants, particularly
in the
chemical process industries, a substantial
proportion
of accidental fires involve
burning liquids, so that vessels and
piping
tend to be
exposed to direct flame
impingement. Perhaps
the most vivid description of a
typically
severe fire would be
&dquo;a sea of fire&dquo; at the base of a still column or beneath a
pipe
rack.
The
requirements
of a fire exposure test should therefore include provisions for
direct flame
impingement,
for a fire source of substantial area, for direct
impinge-
ment of hot combustion gases,
for a rapid rate of temperature rise at the start of
the fire, and for
generous
access of air. These conditions were
provided by burning
gasoline
in a
large open pan.
The
exposure
fire should
provide
a maximum heat
rate, which is achieved
by
a considerable thickness of flame. Thicknesses
approach-
ing
1 meter are desirable to reduce radiation losses to the
surroundings.
The test
apparatus originally developed by
Union Carbide
Corporation [7,8]
consisted of the
following:
a steel fuel pan measuring
2.25 m
(7.5 ft) long,
1.2 m (4
ft) wide, and 0.45 m (1.5 ft) deep;
a steel
pipe support
rack to hold five 6 m (20 ft)
lengths
of 3 in. IPS pipe in a horizontal
plane spaced on 41 cm
(16 in) centers; five
6 m
(20 ft) long,
3 in. IPS, schedule 40 carbon steel
pipes per test; chromel-alumel
thermocouple wire with
porcelain
insulators and connections; a
multi-point
record-
ing potentiometer (two points
minimum for each
pipe);
fuel
supply
and control
equipment;
and water
supply
and
equipment
for water stream and water
spray
application.
Each 6 m. test
pipe
was cut at the center on a 30
angle
to
longitud inal
center-
line to form two sections. A chromel-alumel
thermocouple
was installed on the
inside wall of each section at
points
that located the
thermocouples 180 apart and
3 m
( 10 ft) from either end when the
pipe
was reassembled. The two sections were
welded
together to reform the
original
6 m.
long
test
pipe.
The
pipes
were
placed
on the
support rack so that the
thermocouples
were centered over the fuel
pan. The
open ends of each
pipe
were
packed
with
glass wool insulation to minimize air
movement
through
the
pipes.
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
123
The fuel
pan
was
charged
with water until the water level was 0.5 m
(1.67 ft)
below the horizontal centerlines of the test
pipes.
Gasoline was fed into the fuel
pan
until the water surface was covered, using
a fuel
sparger system
to distribute
the
gasoline evenly
over the surface of the water in the
pan.
The fuel was
ignited
so
that the five test
pipes
were
fully exposed simultaneously
to the fire. The fuel flow
into the
pan
was controlled so that the temperature
in a bare
pipe
would coincide
with the ASTM E 119 [6] standard fire
temperature
curve: 538C. (1000F.) in 5
minutes, 704C. (1300F.) in 10 minutes,
843C. (1550F.) in 30 minutes,
927C.
(1700F.) in 60 minutes.
Reviewers have
questioned
the desirability of
following
the ASTM E 119 fire
temperature
curve. The author agrees
that the ASTM E 119 fire
temperature
curve
does not
necessarily apply
for all the situations in which
attempts
are made to use
it, and is aware that other fire
temperature
curves have been proposed
which
may
have
equivalent
and
perhaps superior
technical
justification.
However, development
of a &dquo;standard&dquo; fire temperature
curve
appropriate
for industrial plant
fires does
not seem feasible at this time. Chemical
plant
fires are
probably
much more diffi-
cult to
generalize
than
building fires, because of the wide
variety
of
organic
com-
pounds
which could serve as the fuel in
spill fires,
and the multitude of plant
layouts which could constitute the fire environment.
Any proposed plant
fire tem-
perature curve would be economically prohibitive
to
develop
and validate, and
would
probably never attain the same acceptance
as the ASTM E 119 fire
tempera-
ture curve
among
the fire
protection
and insurance
organizations
in the United
States.
Experience with the test showed that the ASTM E 119 fire
temperature
curve
could be
approximated by controlling
the fuel at a rate of 3.8 1/min (1 gpm)
for
the first 5 minutes
exposure,
6.9 1/min (1.8 gpm)
for the next 10 minutes
expo-
sure, and 9.5 1/min (2.5 gpm)
for the remainder of the exposure.
After one hour of fire
exposure, during
which
period temperatures
were re-
corded as a function of
time,
the fuel was shut off and the fire allowed to
go
out.
Each test
pipe
was inspected and the observations recorded. After 16 minutes, the
fuel was
reignited
and burned for 5 minutes to restablish full
exposure conditions.
The fuel was then shut off and water at a rate of 280 1/min (75 gpm)
was
applied
to the insulation in a
straight
stream through
a 38 mm
(1.5 in) nozzle from a
distance of 18 m (60 ft) for 1.5 minutes. The water
application
was then
changed
from a
straight
stream to a
spray
and continued until the residual fuel burned out.
A second
inspection of each test
pipe
was made and observations recorded.
This test
procedure
was
duplicated
and modified
by
Dow Chemical
Company
[9] . Sensitivity
to weather conditions was reduced but not
entirely
eliminated
by
conducting
the test inside a
specially designed building.
In
general, thermal insulation materials which exhibit
shrinkage
or thermal shock
upon exposure to fire
give
their best performance
when
applied
in double layers
with
staggered joints to
prevent
direct
impingement
of flame on the
pipe through
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
124
breaks in the insulation
system.
Fire resistance is also influenced
by
the thickness of
insulation
applied,
and
by
the
coating
or
covering applied.
The fire
performance data made available
by
Union Carbide
Corporation
and
Dow Chemical
Company
on thermal insulation
systems
evaluated
by
this test pro-
cedure are
presented
in Table 5. Because of economic and air
pollution considera-
tions,
it is doubtful that
many
more tests will be conducted on this scale; smaller-
scale, less
polluting
tests are
being developed.
Table 5. Fire Endurance of Pipe Insulation Systems.
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
125
Table 5. Fire Endurance of
Pipe
Insulation
Systems
(continued)
Many
of the thermal insulation materials listed in this table are no
longer
com-
mercially
available in the
compositions
tested because of
replacement
of
any
asbes-
tos used and other
composition changes,
but
they
are included for the
following
reasons:
first, the
availability
of as
complete
a
compilation
as
possible provides
a
useful information source to workers in this field,
and is
particularly helpful
to
those
developing
smaller-scale tests; second, information on insulation materials
used for
years, though
in
many
cases
replaced
with asbestos-free
modifications,
helps those
experienced with insulation to relate this
type
of information to their
experience; and third, many
materials which are no
longer commercially
available
are still in service and may continue to be in service for years.
A smaller-scale fire
exposure
test for
pipe
insulation which offers the
advantages
of lower cost and reduced smoke
generation
has been
developed [ 10] .
The fire
performance data made available
by
Union Carbide
Corporation
on materials evalu-
ated
by this test are
presented
in Table 6. On the basis of test results, it
appears
that
some of the asbestos-free insulation materials are
comparable
in fire behavior to the
older
asbestos-containing types.
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
126
Table 6. Fire Performance of Pipe Insulation Materials in 2%-Inch Double Layer
Application.
FIRE TOXICITY CONSIDERATIONS
Toxic
gases generated
from the
pyrolysis
and combustion of thermal insulation
materials can be an important
factor in the ability
of
occupants
to
escape
from a
burning sturcture, and in extent of fire
injuries.
Carbon monoxide
poisoning
has
been found to be a
major
factor in fire deaths; the extent to which
gases
other than
carbon monoxide increase the toxic threat in fires
depends on the chemical com-
position of the material and on the many
variables in an actual fire.
A
screening
test method for relative toxicity used at the
University
of San
Francisco involves the
exposure
of four Swiss albino male mice in a 4.2 liter
hemispherical chamber to
pyrolysis
effluents
generated by pyrolyzing
1.00
g
of
material in a
quartz
tube in a tube furnace. Most of the work has been
performed
using
a
heating
rate of 40C/min from 200 to 800C without forced air flow, to
simulate the conditions of a
developing fire; 270 materials have been evaluated
using
this test
procedure [11 ] .
Relative toxic test data on some construction and
thermal insulation materials are
presented
in Table 7.
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
127
v
0
or
g
C4
m
g~
-5
lh
o
ct
k.
t
.!:i
.~5
1

Q#
t::
O
Il
a
c
1
E
(I)
f
T3
C
C
.0 .;::; ~
d 6
~
,j
8~
V b
q~
t b
0
o e
Q
~.=
Q X EV
:~
)0: &dquo;;!-
R o , <
.* q~ % i
~ S S S
~ ~
I E
< h
c
~
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from
128
REFERENCES
1. P. C. Bowes, B. Langford, "Spontaneous Ignition
of Oil-Soaked
Lagging,"
Chemical and
Process
Engineering (May 1968)
2. C. J. Hilado, S. W. Clark, "Autoignition Temperatures of
Organic Chemicals," Chemical
Engineering,
Vol. 79, No. 19, 75-80 (September 4, 1972).
3. C. J. Hilado, S. W. Clark, "Discrepancies and Correlations of Reported Autoignition
Tem-
peratures," Fire Technology,
Vol. 8, No. 3, 218-227 (August 1972).
4. C. J. Hilado, F. H. Small, "Isomerization as a Possible Mechanism for Apparent Lowering
of
Autoignition Temperature of Ethylene Oxide," Journal of Fire and Flammability, Vol. 6,
No. 1, 44-49
(January 1975).
5. C. J. Hilado, "Self-Heating
of
Organic Compounds with Thermal Insulation," Journal of Fire
and
Flammability, Vol. 5, No. 4, 321-333 (October 1974)
6. American Society for
Testing
and Materials, ASTM E 119-73, ASTM Standards, Part 18,
610-628 (November 1974).
7. D. H.
Way,
C. J. Hilado, "The Peformance of
Rigid
Cellular Plastics in Fire Tests for
Industrial Insulation," Journal of Cellular Plastics, Vol. 4, No. 6, 221-228 (June 1968).
8. D. H.
Way, C. J. Hilado, "Fire Tests for Thermal Insulation Systems for Pipes," Fire Tech-
nology, Vol. 4, No. 4, 271-283 (November 1968).
9. W. J. McMillan, "Testing Pipe Insulation Systems," Loss Prevention, Vol. 8, American Insti-
tute of Chemical
Engineers,
New York, New York (1974).
10. G. E. Snyder, "A Fire Exposure Test for
Evaluating
Thermal Insulation," Journal of Fire
and
Flammability, Vol. 6, No. 3, 362-372 (July 1975)
11. C. J. Hilado, H. J. Cumming, "A Compilation of Relative Toxicity Data," Journal of
Consumer Product Flammability, Vol. 4, No. 3, 244-266 (September 1977).
by chidi edim on June 25, 2014 jen.sagepub.com Downloaded from