Wessel, Shipp, Rosenthal Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems ASTM INTERNATIONAL Selected Technical Papers STP 1588 Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems STP 1588 Editors: Robert A Wessel Paul H Shipp Guy L Rosenthal Selected Technical Papers STP1588 Editors: Robert A Wessel, Paul H Shipp, Guy L Rosenthal Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems ASTM Stock #STP1588 DOI: 10.1520/STP1588-EB ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959 Printed in the U.S.A Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Wessel, Robert, editor | Shipp, Paul, 1949- editor | Rosenthal, Guy, editor Title: Advances in gypsum technologies and building systems / editors, Robert Wessel, Paul Shipp, Guy Rosenthal Description: West Conshohocken, PA : ASTM International, 2015 | Series: Selected technical papers ; STP1588 | “Contains 11 peer-reviewed papers presented at a symposium held May 21, 2015 in Anaheim, CA”—Foreword | “ASTM Stock #STP 1588.” | “DOI: 10.1520/STP1588-EB.” Identifiers: LCCN 2015030715 | ISBN 9780803176218 Subjects: LCSH: Gypsum—Congresses | Fire resistant materials—Standards—Congresses | Building materials—Congresses | Drywall—Congesses | Plaster—Congresses Classification: LCC TA455.G9 A38 2015 | DDC 693/.6—dc23 LC record available at http://lccn.loc gov/2015030715 Copyright © 2015 ASTM INTERNATIONAL, West Conshohocken, PA All rights reserved This material may not be reproduced or copied, in whole or in part, in any printed, mechanical, electronic, film, or other distribution and storage media, without the written consent of the publisher Photocopy Rights Authorization to photocopy items for internal, personal, or educational classroom use, or the internal, personal, or educational classroom use of specific clients, is granted by ASTM International provided that the appropriate fee is paid to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/ The Society is not responsible, as a body, for the statements and opinions expressed in this publication ASTM International does not endorse any products represented in this publication Peer Review Policy Each paper published in this volume was evaluated by two peer reviewers and at least one editor The authors addressed all of the reviewers’ comments to the satisfaction of both the technical editor(s) and the ASTM International Committee on Publications The quality of the papers in this publication reflects not only the obvious efforts of the authors and the technical editor(s), but also the work of the peer reviewers In keeping with long-standing publication practices, ASTM International maintains the anonymity of the peer reviewers The ASTM International Committee on Publications acknowledges with appreciation their dedication and contribution of time and effort on behalf of ASTM International Citation of Papers When citing papers from this publication, the appropriate citation includes the paper authors, “paper title”, STP title, STP number, book editor(s), page range, Paper doi, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, year listed in the footnote of the paper A citation is provided on page one of each paper Printed in Bay Shore, NY October, 2015 Foreword THIS COMPILATION OF Selected Technical Papers, STP1588, Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems, contains peer-reviewed papers presented at a symposium held May 21, 2015, in Anaheim, CA The symposium was sponsored by ASTM International Committee C11 on Gypsum and Related Building Materials and Systems and Subcommittee C11.01 on Specifications and Test Methods for Gypsum Products Symposium Chairpersons and STP Editors: Robert A Wessel Gypsum Association Hyattsville, MD Paul H Shipp USG Corporation Libertyville, IL Guy L Rosenthal USG Corporation Libertyville, IL Contents vii Overview Fire Resistance Testing of Fire Rated Gypsum Wallboard—The Last 20 Years Howard Stacy and Deg Priest Effect of Gypsum Board Orientation on Board Fall-Off in Fire Resistance Test Assemblies Mohamed A Sultan 10 Advances in Materials and Measurement Methods for Interior Building Noise Control Benjamin M Shafer 30 Effects of Chemical Modification on Calcium Sulfate Castings Exposed to High Temperature Dick C Engbrecht and Deidre A Hirschfeld 41 Innovation in Cold-Formed Steel Framing Michael C Kerner and J R Smith 67 Evolution and Innovation in Drywall Joint and Corner Finishing, 1900–2015 Guy L Rosenthal 84 Fifty Years of Test and Measurement of Gypsum Drywall Michael G Danks 97 Measurement of Free and Combined Water of Gypsum Mark R Flumiani, Jim Turner, and Virginia Trimble Fifty Shades of Green: Gypsum Board Manufacturers and the Evolution of Green Building Stephen Meima and Susan Hines v 120 138 Water-Resistant Barriers in Stucco Wall Cladding Systems: History, Design Guidelines, Lessons Learned, and Laboratory Testing Amrish K Patel 151 StuccoMetrics: Performance Testing and Evaluation of Drainage Screed Flashings and Drainage Subassemblies Used in Stucco Drainage Wall Systems Jeffrey Bowlsby and Christine Diosdado 176 vi Overview C11: A Celebration of a Century of Service This year, 2015, ASTM Committee C11 on Gypsum and Related Building Materials and Systems celebrates 100 years of service and standardization Through a century marked by significant growth and development, punctuated by economic downturns, recessions, and the great depression, plus a number of wars and domestic upheaval, Committee C11 met and functioned continuously Surviving committee documents, mostly annual reports of the committee, give us the names and enable the recognition of those who have served as main committee officers and subcommittee chairmen, along with those who have been honored with various committee and society awards across the decades Although many of these named individuals occupied leadership positions and others received public recognition of exemplary service, a committee is more than just its leaders and award recipients It should always be remembered that the work, contributions, and participation of those whose names have been lost performed valuable services along the way to move the committee and its documents forward Committee C11: Officers, Subcommittees, and Membership The first annual report filed by Committee C11 on Standard Specifications for Gypsum and Gypsum Products appeared in the 1915 ASTM book of annual committee reports At that time, the Committee consisted of 22 members and five subcommittees The 1916 annual report lists a total of 30 members and the 1917 report identifies the committee as “Committee C-11 on Gypsum.” The name of the committee was changed again in 1973 to the committee “on Ceilings and Walls.” In either 1979 or 1980 (there was no annual report filed in 1979) the committee was redesignated as Committee C11 “on Gypsum and Related Building Materials and Systems,” the current name for the committee The number of active subcommittees has hovered steadily between five and seven as the committee scope was expanded from gypsum and gypsum plaster to include associated products such as studs and accessories, and most recently, Exterior Insulation and Finishing Systems (EIFS) The membership has grown each year from the original 22 members to over 360 members today vii The founding officers, members, and subcommittees listed in the 1915 annual report were: Committee Officers R J Wig, Chairman H W Forster, Vice-Chairman V G Marani, Vice-Chairman L I Neale, Secretary Members—Non-Producers Abrams, D A Emley, W E Forster, H W (Vice-Chairman) Froehling and Robertson Froehling, H Handy, J O MacGregor, J S Miller, R P Norton, C L Pittsburg Testing Laboratory Riddle, C W Slater, W A Underwriters’ Laboratories Waid, D E Wig, R J (Chairman) Members—Producers American Cement Plaster Company Apted, A H Brown, H J Grand Rapids Plaster Company Gypsum Industries Association Inc Haigh, De Lagnel Jewett, M B Marani, V G (Vice-Chairman) Neale, L I (Secretary) Southard, G L Southern Gypsum Company Tupper, E United States Gypsum Company Webb, S G Wilder, F A viii The Committee was made up of the following five subcommittees: Subcommittee I on Gypsum for Various Uses, chaired by H J Brown Subcommittee II on Gypsum Plasters, chaired by De Lagnel Haigh Subcommittee III on Structural Gypsum Products, chaired by W A Slater Subcommittee IV on Testing Methods, chaired by W E Emley Subcommittee V on Nomenclature, chaired by S G Webb The original officers of the committee consisted of the chairman, two vicechairmen, and a secretary The number of vice-chairmen was reduced to one in 1938 By 2010 the number of new member applications, which were managed and processed by the secretary, was deemed to be sufficient to justify the creation of a new officer position in the form of a membership secretary Over the 100-year life of the committee, the following individuals served as main committee officers in the offices indicated: Chairmen 1915–1919 1919–1926 1926–1937 1937–1953 1953–1964 1964–1968 1968–1972 1972–1979 1979–1980 1980–1986 1986–1992 1992–1994 1994–1995 1996–2001 2002–2007 2008–2013 2014– R J Wig W E Emley J W Ginder L S Wells G W Josephson Max Barth G W Josephson Richard A Kuntze C E Kallem Richard A Kuntze Archie E “Gene“ Erwin George W Green James L Houser Dick C Engbrecht Keith A Poerschke Michael C Kerner Pamela Shinkoda Vice-Chairmen 1915–1916 H W Forster & V G Marani 1916–1926 F A Wilder & R P Miller 1926–1931 H E Brookby & R P Miller 1931–1936 H J Brown & R P Miller 1936–1938 H J Brown & L S Wells 1938–1943 H J Brown 1943–1944 vacant ix BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 was coined by Dr Raymond LaTona of SGH in the 1970s, aptly describes a soffit corner or horizontal framing member condition that is either partially or completely wrapped with stucco cladding without an adequate means of drainage or ventilation The repeated wetting of weather-exposed stucco clad wood and metal framing components over prolonged periods may cause deterioration of the concealed WRB, wood framing decay, steel framing corrosion, biological growth, and may cause an ultimate reduction in the structural integrity and capacity of the structural framing components [11,12] At long-spanning stucco buckets, the most pronounced water damage appears at the bottom mid-span of the beam, which corresponds with the maximum deflection At short-span beams, water damage appears more uniform along the bottom of the beam, resulting in damage at the ends as well as the mid-span In both scenarios, deterioration along the beam may require removal and replacement of the beam Although this problematic condition of stucco buckets has been the focus of much litigation and repair effort, building codes and the stucco industry as a whole have failed to define stucco buckets or to mandate drainage or venting provisions to mitigate the problem Figure and Fig 10 reveal wood framing deterioration observed at the same location shown in Fig 8, after removal of the stucco cladding Corrosion of metal framing members of a stucco bucket condition at metal framing can occur as depicted in Fig 11 The stucco bucket problem is real and requires the attention of the stucco industry to address and resolve FIG Wood decay at stucco bucket 185 186 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems FIG 10 Wood decay at stucco bucket FIG 11 Corrosion of metal framing at stucco bucket BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 A 1969 combination drainage screed flashing/ventilation by Robert Arnett on behalf of the Fry Reglet Corp., Fig 12, attempts to address this soffit corner condition by providing a specialized stucco soffit corner drainage screed flashing and framing cavity ventilation component [13] Arnett’s soffit molding introduced a non-sloped, non-perforated drainage surface and the use of extruded aluminum and, eventually, extruded polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and similar drainage screed flashing components to the marketplace However, to our knowledge, no testing to evaluate their drainage efficiency has been performed Today, stucco drainage wall cladding systems include acrylic admixtures within the stucco mixture, J-metal lath accessories with and without perforations (Fig 13) used as drainage screed flashings, and acrylic-based polymer finish coat materials that may adhere to the drainage screed flashing and bridge the drainage gap A drainage screed flashing component alone does not create a means of drainage for a stucco wall cladding assembly Rather, the drainage screed flashing component along with the WRB and stucco cladding assembly combine to create a drainage subassembly that serves the greater wall cladding system Critical components of the drainage subassembly also include the wall framing substrate support conditions, the continuity and integrity of the WRB system (which may include self-adhered flashings or defined drainage cavities), the drainage screed flashing component, lath, lath fasteners, stucco mixture, including additives, the finish coat material, and the installation of each component The current code requirements and assumed drainage performance of foundation drainage screed flashings and drainage subassemblies were developed in an era before acrylic admixtures, J-metal lath accessories used as weep screed flashings, and before acrylic-based polymer finish coat materials FIG 12 Combination drainage screed flashing/ventilation by Fry Reglet Corp 187 188 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems FIG 13 J-metal lath accessory without perforations DESIGNATED DRAINAGE SCREED FLASHINGS The industry is becoming increasingly aware of the need for additional stucco wall cladding drainage screed flashings and subassemblies The historical record indicates the stucco industry recommended drainage screed flashings at window and door heads and similar openings in stucco wall cladding from the earliest days of using stucco drainage wall cladding systems Although these wall opening drainage flashings are considered good practice, current building codes not require them Today’s requirements for stucco wall cladding drainage subassemblies were developed for relatively short drainage walls (single and two-story construction) Contemporary architecture, which features increasingly taller, multistory buildings (Fig 14), places additional demands on stucco drainage wall cladding systems For example, more extreme weather exposures on taller buildings, including intense wind-driven rain, require higher performance of stucco drainage wall cladding systems and redundant drainage subassemblies for reliable performance Redundant drainage subassemblies are not currently recognized or required by minimum stucco industry standards Performance Testing of Drainage Screed Flashings and Drainage Subassemblies GENERAL TESTING PROGRAM AND PROTOCOL Our performance testing program focused on the qualitative drainage efficiency of 20 different test specimens consisting of commonly used drainage screed flashings BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 FIG 14 Multistory building clad with stucco and drainage subassemblies The testing program was limited to the construction and evaluation of these 20 test specimens where no duplicates or controls were made or evaluated; therefore, anomalous conditions may have affected the results Although reasonable care was used to avoid false or misleading results, this program is a qualitative evaluation performed for comparison purposes; it should not be considered or relied upon as an exhaustive study or as statistically significant However, the program results are valid for comparing systems Additional comprehensive testing and evaluation is encouraged Lastly, our test results may not represent actual field conditions DRAINAGE SCREED FLASHING CONFIGURATIONS The range of drainage screed flashing component types currently available consists of several different configurations made of several different materials Each has an attachment flange and ground dimension that determines stucco thickness The drainage surface of drainage screed flashing components is the focus of our study This drainage surface can be categorized into five generic combinations: slope or nonsloped, solid or perforated, and with or without an exposed capture flange based on the individual drainage screed flashing characteristics Each drainage screed flashing tested was made of galvanized steel sheet metal material and had identical 3/4 in 189 190 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems grounds and, therefore, nominally identical drainage surface areas Drainage screed flashings constructed from other materials are available but were not tested We tested five drainage screed flashing types; these are depicted in Fig 15 Drainage Screed Flashing Types • Type 1: Sloped, solid drainage surface • Type 2: Sloped, perforated drainage surface, 1/2 in dia weep holes, 6.25 in o.c., holes per specimen • Type 3: Non-sloped, solid drainage surface, no exposed capture flange • Type 4: Non-sloped, perforated drainage surface, exposed capture flange, 1/2 in dia weep holes, in o.c., holes per specimen • Type 5: Non-sloped, solid drainage surface, exposed capture flange DRAINAGE SUBASSEMBLY VARIATIONS We also considered the effects of the stucco cladding—specifically, how it may affect drainage efficiency at the drainage screed flashing drainage surface We selected four different stucco cladding assemblies with the five drainage screed flashings to create our drainage subassembly specimens for testing, evaluation, and comparison Stucco Drainage Subassembly Types • Type A: Basic Portland cement-based plaster mix; prepackaged ASTM C926 sand, cement, fibers mixture with only water added • Type B: Type A basic mix plus the addition of a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE; Teflon) isolation tape bonded to the drainage screed flashing drainage surface FIG 15 Drainage screed flashing types BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 • • Type C: Type A basic mix plus the addition of a 1:1 diluted mix water using 1:1 water:acrylic admixture Type D: Type A basic mix plus a primer and textured acrylic polymer finish TEST APPARATUS Our objective was to evaluate and compare the drainage efficiency characteristics of representative drainage screed flashing components, constructed into stucco drainage subassemblies at their drainage surfaces only, as influenced by the variations in the characteristics of the stucco cladding assembly adjoining the drainage surface Twenty individual test specimens were constructed as illustrated by Fig 16 and Fig 17, using predetermined combinations of the five different drainage screed flashings and four variations of the stucco cladding assembly to emulate segments of the various stucco drainage subassemblies for evaluation and comparison Each test apparatus was nominally 12 in long and in tall and included a water inlet, water outlet, and water drainage collection tray Each apparatus included a free drainage cavity configured to deposit water immediately at the inside corner of the drainage screed flashing to effectively negate drainage efficiency losses related to the vertical drainage plane behind the stucco cladding assembly An impermeable membrane was installed on one side of the drainage cavity with a permeable membrane and the permeable stucco on the opposite side Therefore, water absorptive losses FIG 16 Typical test specimen 191 192 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems FIG 17 Cross section of drainage subassembly test apparatus into the permeable membrane and stucco cladding assembly were factors impacting each test because they would be in a real world stucco drainage subassembly TESTING PROTOCOL Our testing protocol followed a modified version of the EG356 and ASTM E2273 testing precedents as performed by Koester From EG356 we reference: 3.1.5 Drainage Test: The moisture drainage system components shall be tested in accordance with ASTM E2273, as modified by this evaluation guideline [Test specimens]…shall be tested A…slot fault…shall be located at…the top of the test specimen…exposing the water resistive barrier A full-width watertight collection trough…with the same capacity…shall be fastened to the [test specimen] directly under the horizontal component of the moisture collection BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 system A quantity of water shall be weighed and evenly poured…into the upper trough 3.1.5.1 Conditions of Acceptance: After the water application period…an additional collection period shall be allowed At the end of the collection period the volume of water in the collection trough shall be weighed and reported Anecdotally, ASTM E2273 requires collection periods of 75 and 60 and a minimum drainage efficiency of 90 % to be considered acceptable for the entire cladding system being tested Although our testing is not intended to comply with EG356 or ASTM E2273, we sought to understand the comparative drainage efficiencies of, commonly used stucco drainage screed flashing components in commonly used drainage subassemblies The testing protocol was performed on each specimen and limited to a 20-min test duration, and results were measured This allowed evaluation of a limited and controlled the amount of water introduced into each specimen, and this was measured before it was introduced into and after it drained out of the specimen The laboratory grade scale used to weigh the water was a new, calibrated 2000 g scale with accuracy to 0.1 g This process facilitated a simple calculation for determining the drainage efficiency of each drainage subassembly specimen: water out water in 100 ¼ drainage subassembly efficiency (%) The testing protocol was performed on each specimen at two different stages The first test was performed when the specimen was completely cured yet dry under ambient room temperature and humidity conditions After the first test was allowed to saturate the specimen, a two-hour intervening drying out period commenced and then the test protocol was repeated on each specimen This two-stage process allowed the stucco to absorb water during the first test in order to observe any change in drainage efficiency when the stucco was previously wetted PERFORMANCE TESTING RESULTS Results of the stucco drainage screed flashing and drainage subassembly performance efficiency testing were calculated and tabulated The reporting indicated in Table is for the second stage of testing after specimens were preconditioned during the first stage; they are presented as follows: Observations and Discussion Based on our evaluation and comparison of the stucco drainage subassembly drainage efficiency performance testing, we observed the following: All but three drainage subassembly specimens drained adequately within the alloted time For those subassemblies that drained, all performed the majority of their drainage within a few minutes of receiving water (Fig 18) The testing 193 194 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems TABLE Performance testing results of the 20 test specimens Means of Drainage Subassemblies Comparative Drainage Efficiency Performance Stucco Cladding Subassembly Types A B C D Screed Drainage Screed Flashing Basic Basic mix Basic mix with Basic mix with Type Description mix w/Teflon Acrylic Admix Sloped, Solid 89 % 51 % 94 % 0% Sloped, Perforated 94 % 91 % 97 % 32 % Non-Sloped, Solid 50 % 80 % 86 % 0% Non-Sloped, Perforated, 91 % 90 % 94 % 23 % 84 % 83 % 91 % 0% Acrylic Finish Capture flange Non-Sloped, Solid, Capture flange protocol was performed for 20 durations on each specimen, but generally the majority of drainage within each specimen occurred within the first few minutes Three drainage subassembly specimens with the acrylic polymer finish, which included drainage screed flashings without weep holes, where the acrylic finish was bonded to the exposed drainage screed flashing surface, provided no drainage; drainage did not occur during the testing period In field conditions, stucco clad assemblies may undergo a number of thermal cycles; these thermal cycles may break the acrylic bond over time FIG 18 Water draining readily along base of test specimen BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 The drainage subassembly specimens with the acrylic polymer finish, which included drainage screed flashings with weep holes, where the acrylic finish was bonded to the exposed drainage screed flashing surface, provided significantly reduced drainage—as much as 65 % less drainage than other drainage subassemblies Drainage only occurred through the weep holes as depicted in Fig 19 whose puddles of water align with the weep holes in the drainage screed flashing Subassembly drainage efficiencies typically improved from 5–50 % after being preconditioned during the first testing stage, except for the D-group (acrylic finish) specimens, which suffered reduced efficiency by as much as 65 % during the second testing stage Most specimens without an acrylic finish generally drained acceptably well, some better than others Perforated drainage screed flashings provided high drainage efficiencies Perforated drainage screed flashings provided 5–7 % greater drainage efficiency above their otherwise identical non-perforated counterpart Drainage screed flashing Type 3, solid surface, non-sloped, non-perforated, drained noticeably slower, and the specimen absorbed more water than other screeds Acrylic admixtures with any drainage screed flashing provided high drainage screed efficiencies Acrylic admixtures improve curing, reduce stucco water absorption when cured, reduce stucco cracking, and improve drainage subassembly efficiencies over a basic stucco mixture drainage subassembly FIG 19 Drainage at weep holes in the drainage screed flashing 195 196 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems 10 The acrylic admixture manufacturers written instructions suggest a 1:2 or 1:3 mixture of admixture to water solution as a mix water replacement The mix water solution used for our testing was a 1:1 proportion of acrylic admixture: water, an intentionally rich mixture, to better gauge the effects of the admixture on drainage subassembly efficiency 11 Mortar plug extrusions through perforations in the drainage surface of the drainage screed flashing (Fig 20) did not impede drainage by any perceptible amount They did not create a seal with the perforation in the drainage screed flashing, and water freely flowed in the gap between the mortar plug extrusion and the drainage screed flashing perforation 12 The applied Teflon drainage surface coating was intended to promote drainage efficiency where there was concern that even a basic stucco mix might stick to the drainage screed flashing Testing indicated that a slight to moderate reduction in drainage subassembly efficiency was the actual result The use of Teflon tape in this manner is not conventional and is best avoided Stucco industry resources suggest various drainage surface isolation approaches—most commonly rag-wiping the drainage surface with WD-40, which is an orange-colored water dispersant Concerns by stucco craftsman include that the WD-40 may drain down over the finished stucco surfaces below drainage screed flashings and may stain, leave a residue, or cause other stucco or finish surface damage that may or may not be repairable without significant effort WD-40 as an isolation method on drainage screed flashing drainage surface should be avoided FIG 20 Mortar plug extrusion through perforation in drainage screed flashing BOWLSBY AND DIOSDADO, DOI 10.1520/STP158820150010 13 Specimen sizes were very small (6 in by 12 in.), which should not result in significant shrinkage dimension Yet visible shrinkage did occur in many specimens at their outer perimeter interface with the casing bead frame, and drainage did occur at this gap, which was measured to be as little as about mils (0.008 in.) wide Conclusions Drainage screed flashing components with perforations, whether sloped or nonsloped, provide the highest drainage efficiency Stucco drainage wall cladding systems with textured acrylic polymer finish coat require drainage screed flashing components with perforations to facilitate drainage Acrylic admixtures reduce stucco water absorption when cured, reduce stucco cracking, and improve drainage subassembly efficiencies over a basic stucco mixture drainage subassembly A Teflon coating on the drainage surface of drainage screed flashings does not enhance and somewhat diminishes drainage efficiency Mortar plug extrusions through perforations in drainage screed flashing drainage surfaces did not impede drainage by any perceptible amount References [1] Portland Cement Association, Portland Cement Stucco, Typical Construction Details, Publication P4, 1920, p 15 [2] Standard No 25, Standard Recommended Practice for Portland Cement Stucco, American Concrete Institute, Detroit, MI, 1920 [3] Portland Cement Association (PCA), Plasterer’s Manual: For Applying Portland Cement Stucco and Plaster, P21, PCA, Chicago, IL, 1948 [4] California Lathing and Plastering Contractors Association (CLPCA), Lathing and Plastering Reference Specifications [with 1972 Amendments], CLPCA, Los Angeles, CA, 1965 [5] “Method Developed to Alleviate Leakage through Stucco Walls,” The California Plasterer, Vol 28, No 9, 1953, p 13 [6] International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), 1967 Uniform Building Code, Section 4706 (e), ICBO, Los Angeles, CA, 1967 [7] International Code Council (ICC), 2009 International Building Code, Section 2512.1.2, ICC, Country Club Hills, IL, 2009 [8] International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), 1967 Uniform Building Code, Section 424, ICBO, Los Angeles, CA, 1967 197 198 STP 1588 On Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems [9] International Code Council, 2009 International Building Code, Section 2502, ICC, Country Club Hills, IL, 2009 [10] International Code Council, 2009 International Building Code, Section 2510.6, ICC, Country Club Hills, IL, 2009 [11] Spagna, F J and Ruggiero, S S., “Stucco Cladding—Lessons Learned from Problematic Facades,” Performance of Exterior Building Walls, ASTM STP 1422, P G Johnson, Ed., ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2003, pp 214–230 [12] Spagna, F J and Ruggiero, S S., “Disturbing Trends in Conventional Stucco Cladding Systems,” The Construction Specifier, Vol 54, No 2, pp 41–48 [13] Arnett, R W “Soffit Molding,” U.S Patent No 3,486,283, 1969 Wessel, Shipp, Rosenthal Advances in Gypsum Technologies and Building Systems STP 1588 ASTM INTERNATIONAL Helping our world work better ISBN 978-0-8031-7621-8 Stock # STP1588 www.astm.org