Protocol B Version 1 Procedure and Test Results

[ziff house]

you are good ,ever work in forensics? [or maybe i should get a microscope too!] HaHa!ya, i just ran some on with the brush i was using [el slob-o], i need a clean room if i ever go into production.

[Richard Nisley]

Detailed Fabric Description:
http://www.eventfabrics.com/

Supplemental information from Richard Nisley:
I tested the air permeability of this WPB UL shelter material at .8 CFM. To put that number in perspective, the Polartec Neoshell WPB material has a spec. value of .5 CFM.

The good news is that this material’s combination of breathability and virgin hydrostatic head is excellent. The bad news is that there were already a number of membrane damage spots. The eVent is only between 30 and 100 micrometers thick. Without a third layer or a liner, it is vulnerable to damage from any sharp or abrasive surface.

The micrograph at the end of this submission shows an example of one of the many damaged areas I discovered looking at the surface under the scope at only 60X magnification. For the hydrostatic head test, I selected an area without surface damage to get an intact membrane test.

The link to supplemental high resolution micrographs, for this material, is below. Each time you left click your mouse over an image it will increase in resolution up to a max of approximately 1600 x 1200.

High Resolution & High Magnification eVent Submission Images

60x top lit micrograph to illustrate one of the damaged eVent areas

[Richard Nisley]

Detailed Fabric Description:
http://www.eventfabrics.com/

Supplemental information from Richard Nisley:
I tested the air permeability of this WPB UL shelter material at .4 CFM. This is exceptional quality material with a perfect weave and tricot backing. The eVent membrane is of uniform thickness and the surface is flawless.

The link to supplemental high resolution micrographs, for this material, is below. Each time you left click your mouse over an image it will increase in resolution up to a max of approximately 1600 x 1200.

High Resolution & High Magnification eVent Submission Images

40x top lit micrograph to illustrate tricot construction and the eVent membrane

[Richard Nisley]

Detailed Fabric Info:
http://www.cubictechnology.com/CTF3%20PRODUCT%20INFO%20PACK%2007192010_4c.pdf

Supplemental information from Javan Dempsey:
– Weight: 30.6g/m^2
– Waterproofness: ~9,000mm of hydrostatic head at 100mm Diameter
– Tear strength: ~45 N
– Breathability: ~1100 g/m^2 / 24 hours @ 75 F & 47% RH

Supplemental information from Richard Nisley:
The test head on my commercial HH tester is approximately (within 10%) the same size used for the CTF Waterproofness speciation listed above. This material tested 0 CFM air permeability in one location and .15 in another location. For each of the two random sampling areas, there was one pinhole that appeared at about 1,500 mm H2O but stayed static in size. I am guessing this is what accounts for the discrepancy between the two slightly different air permeability readings.

The Breen colored side appears to be the typical CTF3 Dyneema grid held together with Breen colored adhesive. The adhesive and Dyneema grid serves as a screen foundation for an additional Mylar sheet used temporarily during the manufacturing process; it is designed to be peeled off the colored side by the end-user. The WPB urethane coating is placed on the back side (white side). The removable Mylar sheet apparently keeps the PU from protruding through the colored surface during the manufacturing process and reduces the amount of PU required for a lighter material.

The link to supplemental high resolution micrographs, for this material, is below. Each time you left click your mouse over an image it will increase in resolution up to a max of approximately 1600 x 1200.

High Resolution & High Magnification CTF3 Submission Images

40x top lit micrograph to illustrate the foundation screen of Dyneema fibers and adhesive that serve as the foundation for the polyurethane which is coated on the other side (white side)

[Konrad .]

Richard, I know Steve from suluk46 mentioned that there is a layer that he had to peel off the wpb cuben…something he was initially unaware of. Was curious to know if the wpb cuben had this layer removed?

From Steve's site: "…Some of you may notice that I had originally stated a weight of 5.5 oz. Well, guess what, Cubic Tech informed me that I did not remove the protective layer off of one side of the fabric. I peeled it off and voila! Half the weight!"

[Javan Dempsey]

Konrad, that stuff has had the layer peeled.

I ran into the same problem before Steve. The test piece is from some mitt patterns I cut out too small.

[Richard Nisley]

Detailed Fabric Info:
http://www.cubictechnology.com/CTF3%20PRODUCT%20INFO%20PACK%2007192010_4c.pdf

Supplemental information from Richard Nisley:
The air permeability of this WPB UL shelter material tested at 0 CFM.

The normal CTF3 grid of Dyneema fibers are laid out and adhesive is applied. A WPB polyurethane coating is applied to both sides. It appears that after the initial coating is applied, a ridged surface is created by mechanical rollers/brushes. The pressure applied by the roller on one side appears to be less than the other side. Whether this intentional or not isn’t known but I strongly suspect it was an manufacturing equipment adjustment problem. The prior submission has the same deeper PU pattern that one side of this submission has. There are two apparent benefits derived from the ridges: 1) it protects the coating from wear, and 2) it creates dead air space for additional warmth between it and the garment surface below.

For the two HH samples taken, there was only one pinhole in one sample.

Do to the unique construction of this submission, numerous supplemental micrographs were posted on the external site. The link to supplemental high resolution micrographs, for this material, is below. Each time you left click your mouse over an image it will increase in resolution up to a max of approximately 1600 x 1200.

High Resolution & High Magnification CTF3 Submission Images

40x top lit micrographs are provided to show the PU ridge pattern that was created on each side of the material

[Richard Nisley]

Detailed Fabric Info:
http://www.cubictechnology.com/CTF3%20PRODUCT%20INFO%20PACK%2007192010_4c.pdf

Supplemental information from Javan Dempsey:
Purchased from ZPacks Oct/Nov 2010; on a 54" roll

Supplemental information from Richard Nisley:
The micrographs show the Mylar sheets are pinched into convex ridges at random spots on the surface. Contamination in the Mylar shows up as black specs. Some micrographs show the Dyneema fibers not bound at the normal junction points.

Do to the unique construction of this submission, numerous supplemental micrographs were posted on the external site. The link to supplemental high resolution micrographs, for this material, is below. Each time you left click your mouse over an image it will increase in resolution up to a max of approximately 1600 x 1200.

High Resolution & High Magnification CTF3 Submission Images

40x top lit micrograph showing the Mylar convex creases, contamination, and unbonded Dyneema junctions

[Richard Nisley]

Detailed Fabric Info:
http://www.cubictechnology.com/CTF3%20PRODUCT%20INFO%20PACK%2007192010_4c.pdf

Supplemental information from Javan Dempsey:
Purchased from Cubic Tech Feb 2011; on a 54" roll

Supplemental information from Richard Nisley:
If you compare the external site's micrographs for this submission versus the prior submission, the quality differences are dramatic. I would be reasonable to expect the service life of this submission to be much longer. None of the supplemental information comments for the prior sample are applicable to this sample.

Previously committed but still pending submissions, that were not received by April 22, will not be tested by me. The batch 2 aging report is all that remains for me to do.

Do to the unique construction of this submission, numerous supplemental micrographs were posted on the external site. The link to supplemental high resolution micrographs, for this material, is below. Each time you left click your mouse over an image it will increase in resolution up to a max of approximately 1600 x 1200.

High Resolution & High Magnification CTF3 Submission Images

200x bottom lit micrograph

[Richard Nisley]

Enough said… this project is now complete!

Summary Aging Chart

Summary Aging Chart Source Data

I also placed the "Protocol B Aging Source Data" pdf in my BPL profile gear list location. Now the source data is also available to those without Windows Live accounts.

[Roger Caffin]

Hum … very waterproof when virgin, but don't some of the Cuban Fiber fabrics go downhill fast!
Interesting …

Cheers

[Daryl and Daryl]

Richard,

And this year's Nobel Prize goes to…..Richard. Thanks for all the good work.

Soooo, if I'm reading this chart correctly, the following statement might follow:

For the best waterproofing that lasts the longest use PU Nylon, Plastizote or Event (3 layer best). Right?

Daryl

[Daryl and Daryl]

Here's a video showing the breathability of event:

event

[ziff house]

stuff, good work ! I'll be nice and dry in my downhill shelter!

[Richard Nisley]

Daryl,

"Best" starts holy wars between zealots for each "material religion" and so I will avoid using that term. Every person who makes a "rain proof" related gear decision has an implicit hierarchy of musts and wants. The chart is just data; it is not a score of musts and wants.

If your primary objective is the longest "rain proof" life (defined to be an aged HH > 1,500 mm H2O) then, the chart data shows which materials exhibit that characteristic. For the average thunderstorm, you don’t need more than 1,500 mm H2O to be “rain proof”. In other words 1,700 mm won’t keep you drier than 1,500 mm H2O. You mentioned some, but not all of those materials in the chart that meet your criteria.

[Daryl and Daryl]

Richard,

Thanks for the clarification. You are both a diplomat and a scientest.

Daryl

[. .]

The variance between batches of the same Cuben fiber fabric IDs is not insignificant. I wonder if QC is improving over time?

[Konrad .]

Hi Richard, thanks for all the hardwork. I'm having a hardtime accessing the source data. The link is leading me to a dead page. Not sure if it's just me. Thanks

[Richard Nisley]

Aaron,

You asked a very interesting question and I have no idea what the answer is. Ken Larson has been trying to find the answer to it without any success to date. Cubic Tech does not test standard materials for applications other than those specifically mandated under contract (usually in advanced aerospace and near space applications).

Silnylon is another product in which the manufacturers don't generally provide hydrostatic head specifications or QC test for it. Offsetting this shortcoming, to some degree, was the remediation research done by Jim Woods. I thought that Ziff House's research with 2 part urethane coating might be the CTF3 equivalent but, it flaked off fairly quickly during the aging tests.

[Daryl and Daryl]

Konrad,

I also get a dead link about half the time I click the link. The other half I get the chart. I have no idea why.

Even when you get the chart you might miss it. It is small and off to one side of the screen. You must enlarge it.

Daryl

[Konrad .]

Hi Daryl, I've been getting the chart up fine most of the time, but its the 2nd link containing the source data that isn't working for me.

Also, were there some cuben samples that didn't make it through all 4 tests? A quick glance seems like some might be missing ( I think a couple samples from David Olsen). I'm hoping to find the optimal cuben weight that I can trust for semi-long term durability in terms of HH. I can see that 1.26oz/yd and above faired pretty well…I'm curious to know how the .70oz stuff did, but it looks like Ziff's sample was the only one, but it's not quite true to OEM specs given the extra urethane coating added.

[Richard Nisley]

Konrad,

Even I can't get the files on the external site to open some of the time. I just refresh my browser window and then re-click the link until I get it to work. The .pdf file has all of the source data and test notes.

If a Submission size was not large enough for a virgin test and an aging test then only the virgin test was done. This was part of Protocol B to insure that Roger Caffin always had a virgin copy for verification.

Batch 1 (submissions 1 – 22) only had one aging cycle done because most of the submissions dropped below the 1,500 mm minimum either before or after the first aging cycle. Submissions 23 – 49 had four aging cycles because the majority of the samples maintained more than 1,500 mm H20 even after the first aging cycle.

Submissions that weren't aged have a brown background. Non coated fabrics were not aged because they were not fly or floor materials. There were two batch 2 CTF3 submissions that were too small in size for a separate aging sample and have a brown background. Submission 23 had a virgin reading of 703 mm H2O (.75 oz/yd2) and submission 41 had a virgin reading >3,515 mm H2O (.51 oz/yd2).

The notes in the .pdf file also provide information supplemental to the ISO 811 test results. For example, the 3 layer eVENT had one pin hole that showed up for the first time on the fourth aging cycle.

[David Olsen]

So I have to sign up for something called windows live to view the data?

I try very hard not to use windows stuff if I can. :^).

[Richard Nisley]

Dave,

It was my understanding that you didn't have to do anything but click my links. If that doesn't work for you, then email me. I will reply to your email with the two data files as email attachments.

[Ryan W]

The first link works fine and looks great by the way. The second link is also requiring me to sign into windows live.

Thanks for the work, most informative.

[Author]

Posts