Item 1: Proposal: Change the wording within the specification. Add the word heterogeneous to section 4.1.2 and 6.2. Delete the word and in section 126.96.36.199 and 188.8.131.52. 184.108.40.206 Fibrous backing, and 4.1.2 Type II Heterogeneous (Layered) rubber sheet floor covering with backing 220.127.116.11 Fibrous backing, and 6.2 Heterogeneous (Layered) Rubber Sheet Floor Covering The product shall consist of a wear layer, intermediate layer(s), and a backing. The surface coloring or mottling shall be uniform throughout the entire thickness of the wear layer, but need not extend through the intermediate layer(s). The backing shall be fibrous or foamed rubber. The wear layer, intermediate layer(s) and backing shall be thoroughly bonded so as not to delaminate under normal use. Rationale: The reason for changing the wording from Laminated to Heterogeneous is to use the existing and correct definition per F141. Changes to 18.104.22.168 and 22.214.171.124 are only edits. Item 2: Proposal: Replace the existing wording in section 7.6 with the new underlined text: 7.6 Resistance to Light When tested in accordance to Test Method F1515, the color change of the rubber sheet floor covering shall have an average Delta E not greater than 8.0 after 300 hours or exposure to light, simulated by a properly fitted xenon-arc radiant energy source. Task group F06.80.13 will continue to search for a test method or develop a test method to address this requirement. Existing Q-UV and Xeon-Arc test methods used to test rubber flooring resulted in extremely high failure rates which are not typical in everyday use of these products. Rationale: The F1515 test method was not developed to test rubber flooring. The rubber tile and stair tread specifications do not have the requirement to test for resistance of light. They state that test results had extremely high failure rates, which is not typical in everyday use of these products. This is a result of excessive oxidation of the surface of the rubber, caused by the combined heat and UV exposure that is supposed to simulate rapid ageing of the floor sample. In the real world the floors are cleaned on a regular basis and that process slowly removes the oxidation as it develops, which is why failures are not typical with rubber flooring. As it currently stands, the F1515 is not a suitable test method for rubber flooring. In previous tests, a selection of colors of the sheet products without backing were chosen to be tested and they passed the requirement of 8 on the Delta E scale, resulting in the inclusion of this test method within this specification. Different colored flooring from the same compound will give different results when tested to ASTM F1515 as the color pigment used within the flooring will have a direct influence on the result. Todays market demands new colors with more environmentally friendly pigments. If this section in the specification is not updated then this will inhibit the development of greener, healthier, rubber floor coverings, clearly a restrictive practice like this should not be allowed within F06. Some rubber tiles sold in the US Marketplace are cut from sheet products, as it stands, if new pigments are used to produce new colors, the same batch of flooring could meet the tile specification and fail to meet the sheet specification. This does not make sense and is also a restrictive practice. The proposed removing of this Performance Requirement will level the playing field by having the same requirements for all rubber sheet, tile and stair treads.
flooring; resilient; rubber; sheet; with backing; Flooring/floor covering systems--specifications; Rubber flooring; Backing fabrics/materials; Building materials/applications--specifications;
Citing ASTM Standards
[Back to Top]