Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Why Steel? Performance Study of Hollow Metal, Aluminum, Wood, and Fiberglass Doors and Frames Prepared by Key Marketing Group October 2012 This report.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Why Steel? Performance Study of Hollow Metal, Aluminum, Wood, and Fiberglass Doors and Frames Prepared by Key Marketing Group October 2012 This report."— Presentation transcript:

1 Why Steel? Performance Study of Hollow Metal, Aluminum, Wood, and Fiberglass Doors and Frames Prepared by Key Marketing Group October 2012 This report was sponsored by the following steel door and frame manufacturing associations: Steel Door Institute (SDI), Hollow Metal Manufacturers Association (HMMA) and Canadian Steel Door Manufacturing Association (CSDMA). A Division of

2 What is Why Steel? Why Steel? is the first performance study ever to compare hollow metal, wood, aluminum, and fiberglass doors and frames based on test data and expert insight. The results are presented in Performance Tables that allow youan architect, specifier, facility owner or manager, or other industry professionalto easily compare the performance of the materials in various categories. After reviewing this presentation, we encourage you to ask yourself, Why steel? We think youll like the answer. 2 You are welcome to download and share the complete Why Steel? report, located at the SDI, HMMA, and CSDMA websites.SDIHMMACSDMA

3 Performance Tables Objective To accurately illustrate the different performance characteristics of various door materials, utilizing standards and tests where possible. Methodology The first six tables are quantitative, with measurable performance characteristics such as a sound transmission coefficient (STC) and fire rating. These results are provided by independent testing organizations, such as Intertek or UL. 3

4 Performance Tables Methodology The remaining five tables lack a definable metric, such as vandal resistance. These factors are still very important in material selection. The content of these tables was obtained from manufacturer and association websites. In all cases, the performance tables were reviewed with industry professionals. More than 20 individuals from 15 manufacturers or trade associations were interviewed and/or reviewed the performance tables prior to publication. 4

5 Swing Test (Cycle Test) 5 Material Relevant Standards Standard Metrics Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Hollow Metal ANSI million cycles is common Standard maximum requirement is 1 million cycles; hinges replaced multiple times during test. Hollow metal doors have been successfully tested to 10M cycles. Wood ANSI o Wood failed the one million cycle test performed by Intertek on 2/27/2012. Aluminum ANSI Ө Aluminum failed the one million cycle test performed by Intertek on 2/27/2012. FiberglassANSI ,000 – 500,000 ӨFiberglass failed the one million cycle test performed by Intertek on 2/27/2012. Wood, aluminum and fiberglass each failed the one million cycle test performed by Intertek.

6 6 Fire Rating Material Maximum (Best Case) Metrics Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comparative Cost ($, $$, or $$$) Comments Hollow metal3 hours$ Only door material that offers a three hour fire rating. Twenty minute hollow metal doors generally perform to a three hour standard. Wood90 minutesӨ$$ Wood must use an intumescent seal, which expands when hot. Wood doors are not approved for all hardware, therefore there are fewer options. Aluminum60 minuteso$$ Fiberglass90 minutesӨ$$$Fiberglass requires an intumescent seal. Hollow metal is the only material that offers a three hour fire rating.

7 7 Acoustical Performance Material Relevant Standards Typical Range Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comparative Cost ($, $$, or $$$) Comments Hollow Metal ASTM E90 ASTM E413 ASTM E336 STC 32 – STC 55$ Tested as complete operable assembly. Steel products for pairs normally range from STC 40 – STC 53. Hollow metal sound doors can achieve a three hour fire rating. Vision lites are available. Wood STC 32 – STC 51 Ө$$ Wood doors are tested as components only. Highest fire rating of a wood acoustic door is typically only 20 minutes. STC paired doors are not available. Vision lites are not available. AluminumNo dataoN/A Aluminum doors are not suitable for sound reduction. FiberglassSTC 29 – STC 36o$$$Rarely used for STC doors. Hollow metal has the highest STC rating at the lowest cost.

8 8 Thermal Performance Material (core) Relevant Standards Typical U- Factor Range Typical Measured Overall R-Value Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Hollow Metal (Polyurethane) ASTM C ASTM C ASTM E Ө Hollow metal doors with a polyurethane core transmit little heat compared to other materials. Its U-Factor is just above fiberglass. Hollow Metal (Polystyrene) Ө Hollow Metal (Honeycomb) Ө Hollow Metal (Steel Stiffened) o Hollow metal doors with a steel stiffened core transfer the most heat out of the hollow metal core materials. Wood Ө Wood doors transfer more heat than fiberglass and hollow metal doors with a polyurethane core, however their thermal transmittance is relatively low. Aluminum o Aluminum doors allow the most heat flow of all the materials. Fiberglass Fiberglass doors have the best thermal performance of the materials.

9 9 Hurricane Resistance Material Relevant Standards Size Maximum Tested PSF Comparative Cost ($, $$, or $$$) Comments Hollow Metal Miami Dade County Florida Building Code 40 x x PSF 90 PSF $$ Highest PSF resistance. Most vendor choices (i.e. size). Wood 40 x x PSF Not available $$$ N/A Typically residential. Aluminum 40 x x PSF$$$ Fiberglass40 x 8080 PSF$$$ Hollow Metal - NOA Aluminum – NOA Fiberglass – FL 7026 Hollow metal provides the highest hurricane resistance.

10 10 Tornado Resistance Material Relevant Standards Maximum (Best Case) Metrics Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Steel FEMA 361 International Code Council 500 Pass Steel passes the FEMA 361 and ICC 500 tornado test (250 mph wind speeds). WoodFail o No wood door, with or without metal sheathing, has successfully passed FEMA 361. AluminumFail o Not listed for tornado resistance. FiberglassFail o Not listed for tornado resistance. Wood, aluminum and fiberglass have not passed tornado resistance tests.

11 11Abuse Hollow metal is sturdy, which is ideal for high abuse locations. Material Relevant Standards Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Hollow Metal HMMA Hollow metal is the most vandal resistant material. It is a sturdy material; ideal for high usage or high abuse situations. Wood o Material is soft; easily penetrated. Less options and flexibility than steel. Aluminum Ө Material can be bent. Fiberglass Ө Material can be cracked.

12 12Sanitation Stainless steel doors have superior anti-microbial properties to other door materials. Relative Performance - Sanitation (Anti-microbial Properties) Material Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Stainless Steel Custom stainless steel has excellent anti-microbial properties with a custom seamless edge. Washes easily and sanitizes. Hollow Metal Ө Great use for hollow metal. Washes easily with appropriate finish and a custom seamless edge. Antimicrobial resin is available for additional protection. Wood o Porous material. Antimicrobial resin is available. Aluminum o Very porous; hard to sanitize. Very few aluminum doors have anti-microbial protection. Fiberglass o More porous than metal; not common in medical or food handling.

13 13 Corrosion / Water Resistance Stainless steel doors are commonly specified for corrosive environments. Material Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Stainless Steel Custom stainless steel has excellent anti-microbial properties with a custom seamless edge. Washes easily and sanitizes. Hollow Metal Ө Great use for hollow metal. Washes easily with appropriate finish and a custom seamless edge. Antimicrobial resin is available for additional protection. Wood o Porous material. Antimicrobial resin is available. Aluminum o Very porous; hard to sanitize. Very few aluminum doors have anti-microbial protection. Fiberglass o More porous than metal; not common in medical or food handling.

14 14 Maintenance and Repair Hollow metal doors do not crack or dent easily. Material Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Hollow Metal Repaired with body filler. Does not crack and does not dent easily. Often repaired in field for low cost, including re-welding. Wood o Gouges easily. Expensive to repair, but may be repaired in some circumstances. Aluminum Ө Dents. Must be replaced when dented as it cannot be reannodized. Fiberglass Will crack before it dents. Unable to cost effectively repair cracks.

15 15Longevity Hollow metal has the longest life of any of the materials studied and can last years. Material Common Lifecycle (If installed and maintained properly, excluding hardware) Performance Best Medium Ө Worst o Comments Hollow Metal years Hollow metal is sturdy, and field repair is possible and relatively inexpensive. Wood Up to 15 years; much lower in high abuse environments o Worst. Wood is soft and dents and gouges easily. AluminumAbout 15 – 20 years Ө It is a hard material but longevity is problematic as it cannot be repaired. FiberglassAbout 20 years Ө Hardier than wood; cant repair if cracked. Fiberglass is a newer material so historical data doesnt exist.

16 Conclusions Steel has many performance advantages over wood, aluminum and fiberglass. Steel doors and frames provide the best strength, repair and maintenance, and longevity of any standard product. These advantages translate into lower lifetime cost of ownership for steel doors and frames. 16

17 Thank you Judy Key Johnson Scott Johnson Key Marketing Group (o) (m)


Download ppt "Why Steel? Performance Study of Hollow Metal, Aluminum, Wood, and Fiberglass Doors and Frames Prepared by Key Marketing Group October 2012 This report."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google