Astm E96-96m 2014
Astm E96-96m 2014
Astm E96-96m 2014
1. Scope E177 Practice for Use of the Terms Precision and Bias in
1.1 These test methods cover the determination of water ASTM Test Methods
vapor transmission (WVT) of materials through which the D449 Specification for Asphalt Used in Dampproofing and
passage of water vapor may be of importance, such as paper, Waterproofing
plastic films, other sheet materials, fiberboards, gypsum and D2301 Specification for Vinyl Chloride Plastic Pressure-
plaster products, wood products, and plastics. The test methods Sensitive Electrical Insulating Tape
are limited to specimens not over 11⁄4 in. [32 mm] in thickness E691 Practice for Conducting an Interlaboratory Study to
except as provided in Section 9. Two basic methods, the Determine the Precision of a Test Method
Desiccant Method and the Water Method, are provided for the
measurement of permeance, and two variations include service 3. Terminology
conditions with one side wetted and service conditions with
low humidity on one side and high humidity on the other. 3.1 Definitions of terms used in this standard will be found
Agreement should not be expected between results obtained by in Terminology C168, from which the following is quoted:
different methods. The method should be selected that more “water vapor permeability—the time rate of water vapor
nearly approaches the conditions of use. transmission through unit area of flat material of unit thickness
1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units induced by unit vapor pressure difference between two specific
are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in surfaces, under specified temperature and humidity conditions.
each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each Discussion—Permeability is a property of a material, but the
system shall be used independently of the other. Combining permeability of a body that performs like a material may be
values from the two systems may result in non-conformance used. Permeability is the arithmetic product of permeance and
with the standard. However, derived results can be converted thickness.
from one system to the other using appropriate conversion water vapor permeance—the time rate of water vapor
factors (see Table 1). transmission through unit area of flat material or construction
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the induced by unit vapor pressure difference between two specific
safety problems, if any, associated with its use. It is the surfaces, under specified temperature and humidity conditions.
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro- Discussion—Permeance is a performance evaluation and not
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica- a property of a material.
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
3.2 water vapor transmission rate—the steady water vapor
2. Referenced Documents flow in unit time through unit area of a body, normal to specific
2.1 ASTM Standards:2 parallel surfaces, under specific conditions of temperature and
C168 Terminology Relating to Thermal Insulation humidity at each surface.”
1
These test methods are under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee C16 on 4. Summary of Test Methods
Thermal Insulation and are the direct responsibility of Subcommittee C16.33 on
Insulation Finishes and Moisture. 4.1 In the Desiccant Method the test specimen is sealed to
Current edition approved Oct. 15, 2014. Published January 2015. Originally
the open mouth of a test dish containing a desiccant, and the
approved in 1953. Last previous edition approved in 2013 as E96– 13. DOI:
10.1520/E0096_E0096M-14. assembly placed in a controlled atmosphere. Periodic weigh-
2
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or ings determine the rate of water vapor movement through the
contact ASTM Customer Service at [email protected]. For Annual Book of ASTM
specimen into the desiccant.
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on
the ASTM website.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
through the specimen from the water to the controlled atmo- test conditions that have been useful are given in Appendix X1.
sphere. The vapor pressure difference is nominally the same in The temperature chosen shall be determined according to the
both methods except in the variation, with extremes of humid- desired application of the material to be tested (see Appendix
ity on opposite sides. X1). The relative humidity shall be maintained at 50 6 2 %,
except where extremes of humidities are desired, when the
5. Significance and Use conditions shall be 100 6 1.8°F [38 6 1°C] and 90 6 2 %
5.1 The purpose of these tests is to obtain, by means of relative humidity. Both temperature and relative humidity shall
simple apparatus, reliable values of water vapor transfer be measured frequently4 or preferably recorded continuously.
through permeable and semipermeable materials, expressed in Air shall be continuously circulated throughout the chamber,
suitable units. These values are for use in design, manufacture, with a velocity sufficient to maintain uniform conditions at all
and marketing. A permeance value obtained under one set of test locations. The air velocity over the specimen shall be
test conditions may not indicate the value under a different set between 0.066 and 1 ft/s [0.02 and 0.3 m·s-1]. Suitable racks
of conditions. For this reason, the test conditions should be shall be provided on which to place the test dishes within the
selected that most closely approach the conditions of use. test chamber.
While any set of conditions may be used and those conditions NOTE 1—Simple temperature control by heating alone is usually made
reported, standard conditions that have been useful are shown possible at 90°F [32°C]. However, it is very desirable to enter the
in Appendix X1. controlled space, and a comfortable temperature is more satisfactory for
that arrangement. Temperatures of 73.4°F [23°C] and 80°F [26.7°C] are in
6. Apparatus use and are satisfactory for this purpose. With cyclic control, the average
test temperature may be obtained from a sensitive thermometer in a mass
6.1 Test Dish—The test dish shall be of any noncorroding of dry sand. The temperature of the chamber walls facing a specimen over
material, impermeable to water or water vapor. It may be of water should not be cooler than the water to avoid condensation on the test
any shape. Light weight is desirable. A large, shallow dish is specimen.
preferred, but its size and weight are limited when an analytical 6.3 Balance and Weights—The balance shall be sensitive to
balance is chosen to detect small weight changes. The mouth of a change smaller than 1 % of the weight change during the
the dish shall be as large as practical and at least 4.65 in.2 [3000 period when a steady state is considered to exist. The weights
mm2]. The desiccant or water area shall be not less than the used shall be accurate to 1 % of the weight change during the
mouth area except if a grid is used, as provided in 12.1, its steady-state period (Note 2). A light wire sling may be
effective area shall not exceed 10 % of the mouth area. An substituted for the usual pan to accommodate a larger and
external flange or ledge around the mouth, to which the heavier load.
specimen may be attached, is useful when shrinking or warping
6.4 Thickness-Measuring Gage—The nominal thickness of
occurs. When the specimen area is larger than the mouth area,
the specimen shall be determined using a thickness-measuring
this overlay upon the ledge is a source of error, particularly for
gage with an accuracy of 61 % of the reading or 0.0001 in.
thick specimens. This overlay material should be masked as
[0.0025 mm], whichever is greater.
described in 10.1 so that the mouth area defines the test area. NOTE 2—For example: 1-perm [57 ng·Pa-1·s-1·m-2] specimen 10 in.
The overlay material results in a positive error, indicating [254 mm] square at 80°F [26.7°C] passes 8.6 grains or 0.56 g/day. In 18
excessive water vapor transmission. The magnitude of the error days of steady state, the transfer is 10 g. For this usage, the balance must
is a complex function of the thickness, ledge width, mouth have a sensitivity of 1 % of 10 g or 0.1 g and the weights must be accurate
area, and possibly the permeability. This error is discussed by to 0.1 g. If, however, the balance has a sensitivity of 0.2 g or the weights
are no better than 0.2 g, the requirements of this paragraph can be met by
Joy and Wilson (1)3 (see 13.4.3). This type of error should be
3 4
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of The minimum acceptable is to perform this measurement each time the sample
this standard. is weighed.
11.1 Fill the test dish with desiccant within 1⁄4 in. [6 mm] of
vapor flow in the designated direction. When the sides of a the specimen. Leave enough space so that shaking of the dish,
product are indistinguishable, three specimens shall be tested which must be done at each weighing, will mix the desiccant.
by the same method. When the sides of a product are different
and either side may face the vapor source, four specimens shall 11.2 Attach the specimen to the dish (see 10.1) and place it
be tested by the same method, two being tested with the vapor in the controlled chamber, specimen up, weighing it at once.
flow in each direction and so reported. (This weight may be helpful to an understanding of the initial
moisture in the specimen.)
9.2 A slab, produced and used as a laminate (such as a
foamed plastic with natural “skins”) may be tested in the 11.3 Weigh the dish assembly periodically, often enough to
thickness of use. Alternatively, it may be sliced into two or provide eight or ten data points during the test. A data point is
more sheets, each being separately tested and so reported as the weight at a particular time. The time that the weight is made
provided in 9.4, provided also, that the “overlay upon the cup should be recorded to a precision of approximately 1 % of the
ledge” (6.1) of any laminate shall not exceed 1⁄8 in. [3 mm]. time span between successive weighing. Thus, if weighings are
made every hour, record the time to the nearest 30 s; if
9.3 When the material as used has a pitted or textured recordings are made every day, a time to the nearest 15 min
surface, the tested thickness shall be that of use. When it is would be allowed. At first the weight may change rapidly; later
homogeneous, however, a thinner slice of the slab may be a steady state will be reached where the rate of change is
tested as provided in 9.4. substantially constant. Weighings should be accomplished
9.4 In either case (9.2 or 9.3), the tested overall thickness, if without removal of the test dishes from the controlled
less than that of use, shall be at least five times the sum of the atmosphere, but if removal is prescribed necessary, the time the
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
more reliable achievement of equilibrium conditions. Analyze barrier in service, proceed as in 11.3 except place the dish in an
the results as prescribed in 13.1. inverted position. The dish must be sufficiently level so that
11.4 Terminate the test or change the desiccant before the water covers the inner surface of the specimen despite any
water added to the desiccant exceeds 10 % of its starting distortion of the specimen due to the weight of the water. With
weight. This limit cannot be exactly determined and judgement highly permeable specimens it is especially important to locate
is required. The desiccant gain may be more or less than the the test dish so that air circulates over the exposed surface at
dish weight-gain when the moisture content of the specimen the specified velocity. The test dishes may be placed on the
has changed. balance in the upright position for weighing, but the period
NOTE 5—The WVT of some materials (especially wood) may depend
during which the wetted surface of the specimen is not covered
on the ambient relative humidity immediately before the test. An apparent with water must be kept to a minimum.
hysteresis results in higher WVT if the prior relative humidity was above
the test condition and vice versa. It is therefore recommended that 13. Calculation and Analysis of Results
specimens of wood and paper products be conditioned to constant weight
in a 50 % relative humidity atmosphere before they are tested. Some 13.1 The results of the rate of water vapor transmission may
specimens may be advantageously preconditioned to minimize the mois- be determined either graphically or numerically.
ture that the specimen will give up to the desiccant. This applies when the 13.1.1 Dummy Specimen—If a dummy specimen has been
specimen is likely to have high moisture content or when it is coated on
the top (vapor source) side.
used to compensate for variability in test conditions, due to
temperature or barometric pressure, or both, the daily recorded
12. Procedure for Water Method weights can be adjusted by calculating the weight change from
initial to time of weighing. This adjustment is made by
12.1 Fill the test dish with distilled water to a level 3⁄4 6 1⁄4
reversing the direction of the dummy’s weight change, relative
in. [19 6 6 mm] from the specimen. The air space thus allowed
to its initial weight, and modifying all the appropriate specimen
has a small vapor resistance, but it is necessary in order to
weight(s) recorded at this time. This permits earlier achieve-
reduce the risk of water touching the specimen when the dish
ment of equilibrium conditions. An alternate procedure, par-
is handled. Such contact invalidates a test on some materials
ticular for tests of long duration and more than six weighings,
such as paper, wood, or other hygroscopic materials. The water
is to subtract the arithmetic mean slope of the rate of weight
depth shall be not less than 1⁄8 in. [3 mm] to ensure coverage of
change of the dummy specimen from the arithmetic mean slope
the dish bottom throughout the test. However, if the dish is of
of each similar specimen to get an effective rate of weight
glass, its bottom must be visibly covered at all times but no
change. These procedures are also desirable if the specimen is
specific depth is required. Water surges may be reduced by
changing weight due to a curing process while under test.
placing a grid of light noncorroding material in the dish to
13.1.2 Graphic Analysis—Plot the weight, modified by the
break the water surface. This grid shall be at least 1⁄4 in. [6 mm]
dummy specimen when used, against elapsed time, and in-
below the specimen, and it shall not reduce the water surface
scribe a curve that tends to become straight. Judgment here is
by more than 10 %.
required and numerous points are helpful. When a straight line
NOTE 6—For the Water Method, baking the empty dish and promptly adequately fits the plot of at least six properly spaced points
coating its mouth with sealant before assembly is recommended. The (periodic weight changes matching, or exceeding 20 % of the
water may be added most conveniently after the specimen is attached,
through a small sealable hole in the dish above the water line.
multiple of 100 times the scale sensitivity), a nominally steady
state is assumed, and the slope of the straight line is the rate of
12.2 Attach the specimen to the dish (see 10.1). Some water vapor transmission.
specimens are likely to warp and break the seal during the test. 13.1.3 Numerical Analysis—A mathematical least squares
The risk is reduced by preconditioning the specimen, and by regression analysis of the weight, modified by the dummy
clamping it to the dish ledge (if one is provided). specimen when used, as a function of time will give the rate of
12.3 Weigh the dish assembly and place it in the controlled water vapor transmission. An uncertainty, or standard deviation
chamber on a true horizontal surface. Follow the procedure of this rate, can also be calculated to define the confidence
given in 11.3. If the test specimen cannot tolerate condensation band. For very low permeability materials, this method can be
on the surface, the dish assembly shall not be exposed to a used to determine the results after 30 to 60 days when using an
temperature that differs by more than 5°F [3°C] from the analytical balance, with a sensitivity of ≈1 mg, even if the
control atmosphere to minimize the risk of condensation on the weight change does not meet the 100 times the sensitivity
specimen. When results of water vapor transmission are requirement of 6.3. These specimens must be clearly identified
expected to be less than 0.05 perm [3 ng·m-2·s-1·Pa-1], a in the report.
FIG. 1
13.4.3.1 If the cup assembly includes any edge masking this 13.6.2 A graphic analysis of the data, according to 13.1.2 is
correction shall be made. shown in Fig. 1.
13.5 Metric units and conversion factor are given in Table 1. 13.6.3 A linear least-squares analysis of the data according
to 13.1.3 gives the slope of the straight line as 0.225 6 0.002
13.6 Example (in SI unit)—In a desiccant test on a sample of
g·h-1, with a linear regression coefficient > 0.998.
medium density glass fiber insulation the following results
WVT = 0.225 g·h-1 ⁄ 0.01642 m2
were recorded. = 19.595 grains·h-1·ft-2 (' 3.81 × 106 ng·m-2·s-1)
Thickness of the specimen = 25.81 mm S = 2775.6 Pa
Test area = 0.01642 m2 R1 = 0.523
Mass of the test specimen = 20.44 g R2 = 0
Mass of the desiccant = 554.8 g Permeance = 3.81 × 106 ng·m-2·s-1 ⁄ (2775.6 Pa × 0.523)
Initial mass of the test assembly = 1.257810 kg = 2630 ng·m-2·s-1·Pa-1
Thickness of air layer in the cup = 15 mm
13.6.4 Corrections for Resistance due to Still Air and
Elapsed
Mass of
Change Chamber Chamber
Barometric Specimen Surface:
the Test Pressure
Time in Mass Temperature RH Permeability of still air layer (Eq 5)
Assembly mm Hg
(h)
0.000
(g)
1257.810
(g)
0.000
(°C)
22.83
(% )
52.60
(kPa)
744.7
5δ a 5
2.30631025 3101325
461.53 s 22.791273.15d 399860 S 22.791273.15
273.15 D 1.81
Legend:
s = standard deviation
CV = percent coefficient of variation (s × 100/ Mean)
LSD = least significant difference between two individual test results based on a 95 % confidence level = 2=2s
NOTE 1—Material B was Teflon5 PTFE fluorocarbon resin brand of tetrafluoroethylene. It was extremely difficult to provide a seal to this sample, which
accounts for the poor repeatability.
Water vapor resistance of the test specimen + corrections 15. Precision and Bias
= 1 / Permeance = (1 / 2630) m2·s·Pa·ng-1
= 3.80 × 108 m2·s·Pa·kg-1 15.1 Precision—Table 2 is based on interlaboratory tests
The water vapor resistance of the test specimen conducted in 1988 and 1991.5 In 1988 four materials (A, B, C,
= (3.80 × 108 − (7.6 × 107 + 4.0 × 107)) m2·s·Pa·kg-1 D) were tested using the dessicant method and the water
= 2.64 × 108 m2·s·Pa·kg-1
Permeance of the test specimen method in triplicate. Fifteen laboratories contributed data, with
= 1 / (2.64 × 108 m2·s·Pa·kg-1) full results secured from four laboratories. In 1991 ten labora-
= 3.79 × 10-9 kg·m-2·s-1·Pa-1 tories contributed data for material E, using triplicate
= 3790 ng·m-2·s-1·Pa-1
Permeability specimens, again using both the dessicant method and the
= 3790 ng·m-2·s-1·Pa-1 × 0.02581 m water method. Tables 3 and 4 are based on another interlabo-
= 97.8 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1
ratory test conducted in 1995–96.(7) One material at a nominal
thickness of 1 in. (25 mm) was tested by ten participating
14. Report
laboratories. Results from only nine laboratories were used in
14.1 The report shall include the following: the analyses because of the presence of severe outliers (see
14.1.1 Identification of the material tested, including prod- Practice E691) in the observation of tenth laboratory.
uct thickness for homogeneous materials (not laminated) 15.1.1 Test results were analyzed using Practice E691.
greater than 1⁄2 in.,
15.2 Additional precision data and analysis for this test
14.1.2 Test method used (desiccant or water),
method is based on an interlaboratory study (#512) conducted
14.1.3 Test temperature,
in 2010. Six laboratories participated in this study, analyzing
14.1.4 Relative humidity in the test chamber,
four different extremely low permeance materials. Procedure
14.1.5 Permeance of each specimen in perms (to two
A, desiccant method at 73°F/50% RH, was used. Each “test
significant figures),
result” reported represents an individual determination, and all
14.1.6 The side of each specimen on which the higher vapor
participants reported three replicate test results for every
pressure was applied. (The sides shall be distinguished as “side
material. Practice E691 was followed for the design and
A” and “side B” when there is no obvious difference between
analysis of the data; the details are given in ASTM Research
them. When there is an obvious difference, this difference shall
Report No. C16-1040.6
also be stated, such as “side A waxed” and “side B unwaxed.”),
15.2.1 Repeatability limit (r)—Two test results obtained
14.1.7 The average permeance of all specimens tested in
within one laboratory shall be judged not equivalent if they
each position,
differ by more than the “r” value for that material; “r” is the
14.1.8 The permeability of each specimen (as limited by
13.3), and the average permeability of all specimens tested,
5
14.1.9 Include a portion of the plot indicating the section of Supporting data have been filed at ASTM International Headquarters and may
be obtained by requesting Research Report RR:C16-1014.
the curve used to calculate permeability, and 6
Supporting data have been filed at ASTM International Headquarters and may
14.1.10 State design of cup and type or composition of be obtained by requesting Research Report RR:C16-1040. Contact ASTM Customer
sealant. Service at [email protected].
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
NOTE 1—The average of the cell averages gives the permeability for the round robin material, according to the dry cup measurements, as
3.10 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1.
NOTE 2—The repeatability standard deviation is 1.6 × 10-1 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1.
NOTE 3—The reproducibility standard deviation is 4.9 × 10-1 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1.
TABLE 4 Results on Precision from Interlaboratory Testing—Wet Cup Measurements on expanded polystyrene
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Permeability (ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1)A
Lab x̄ s d h k
Spec #1 Spec #2 Spec #3
1 2.90 3.14 2.94 2.99 1.29E-01 -3.58E-01 -0.94 0.77
2 3.50 3.46 3.52 3.49 3.06E-02 1.43E-01 0.37 0.18
3 4.23 3.76 3.65 3.88 3.08E-01 5.29E-01 1.39 1.84
5 3.32 3.29 2.97 3.19 1.94E-01 -1.58E-01 -0.41 1.16
6 2.61 2.82 2.80 2.74 1.16E-01 -6.08E-01 -1.59 0.69
7 3.53 3.18 3.41 3.37 1.77E-01 1.92E-02 0.05 1.06
8 3.30 3.42 3.29 3.34 7.23E-02 -1.42E-02 -0.04 0.43
9 3.75 3.97 3.67 3.80 1.55E-01 4.46E-01 1.17 0.93
x= sr sx̄ sR
3.35 1.67E-01 3.82E-01 4.06E-01
A
1 perm in. = 1.45 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1
Legend:
x̄ = Cell average or the average from one laboratory
s = Cell standard deviation, or the standard deviation for one laboratory
x= = Average of the Cell averages
d = Cell deviation or the difference (x̄ − x=)
sr = Repeatability standard deviation (within a laboratory)
sR = Reproducibility standard deviation (between the laboratories)
h = the between-laboratory consistency statistic
k = the within-laboratory consistency statistic
NOTE 1—The average of the cell averages gives the permeability for the round robin material, according to the wet cup measurements,
as 3.35 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1.
NOTE 2—The repeatability standard deviation is 1.7 × 10-01 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1.
NOTE 3—The reproducibility standard deviation is 4.1 × 10-01 ng·m-1·s-1·Pa-1.
interval representing the critical difference between two test 15.2.4 Any judgment in accordance with statements 9.1.1
results for the same material, obtained by the same operator and 9.1.2 would have an approximate 95% probability of being
using the same equipment on the same day in the same correct.
laboratory.
15.2.1.1 Repeatability limits are listed in Table 5 below. 15.3 The precision statement was determined through sta-
15.2.2 Reproducibility limit (R)—Two test results shall be tistical examination of 72 test results, submitted by six
judged not equivalent if they differ by more than the “R” value laboratories, for four materials. The four materials were de-
for that material; “R” is the interval representing the critical scribed as:
difference between two test results for the same material, Material A: 6 mil high barrier PVdC-based film
obtained by different operators using different equipment in Material B: 10 mil high barrier PVdC-based film
different laboratories. Material C: 15 mil high barrier HDPE-based film
15.2.2.1 Reproducibility limits are listed in Table 5 below. Material D: PET film/1 mil aluminum foil/PET film lamination
15.2.3 The above terms (repeatability limit and reproduc-
ibility limit) are used as specified in Practice E177.
APPENDIXES
(Nonmandatory Information)
X1.1 Standard test conditions that have been useful are: X1.1.4 Procedure C—Desiccant Method at 90°F [32.2°C].
X1.1.1 Procedure A—Desiccant Method at 73.4°F [23°C]. X1.1.5 Procedure D—Water Method at 90°F [32.2°C].
X1.1.2 Procedure B—Water Method at 73.4°F [23°C].
X1.1.6 Procedure E—Desiccant Method at 100°F [37.8°C].
X1.1.3 Procedure BW—Inverted Water Method at 73.4°F
[23°C].
X2.1 An ideal sealing material has the following properties: X2.1.8.2 The seal normally assembled to an empty dish
X2.1.1 Impermeability to water in either vapor or liquid with no specimen and so tested.
form. X2.2 The following materials are recommended for general
X2.1.2 No gain or loss of weight from or to the test chamber use when the test specimen will not be affected by the
(evaporation, oxidation, hygroscopicity, and water solubility temperature of the sealant:
being undersirable). X2.2.1 Asphalt, 180 to 200°F [82 to 93°C] softening point,
X2.1.3 Good adhesion to any specimen and to the dish meeting the requirements of Specification D449, Type C.
(even when wet). Apply by pouring.
X2.1.4 Complete conformity to a rough surface. X2.2.2 Beeswax and rosin (equal weights). A temperature of
X2.1.5 Compatibility with the specimen and no excessive 275°F [135°C] is desirable for brush application. Pour at lower
penetration into it. temperature.
X2.1.6 Strength or pliability (or both). X2.2.3 Microcrystalline wax7 (60 %), mixed with refined
crystalline paraffin wax (40 %).
X2.1.7 Easy handleability (including desirable viscosity and
thermal of molten sealant). X2.3 The materials listed in X2.3.1 are recommended for
X2.1.8 Satisfactory sealants possess these properties in particular uses such as those shown in Fig. X2.1. The suggested
varying degrees and the choice is a compromise, with more procedure described in X2.3.2 applies to an 113⁄8-in. [289-mm]
tolerance in items at the beginning of this list for the sake of
those at the latter part of the list when the requirements of 7.2
are met. Molten asphalt or wax is required for permeance tests 7
The sole source of supply of the microcrystalline wax known to the committee
below 4 perms [240 ng·m-2·s-1·Pa-1]. Tests to determine sealant at this time is E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., Polymer Products Dept.,
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Wilmington, DE 19898. If you are aware of alternative suppliers, please provide this
behavior should include: information to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive
X2.1.8.1 An impervious specimen (metal) normally sealed careful consideration at a meeting of the responsible technical committee,1 which
to the dish and so tested, and you may attend.
FIG. X2.1 Apparatus for Water Vapor Transmission Tests of Large Thick Specimens
square specimen if its permeance exceeds 4 perms [240 that the area enclosed by the lines is as nearly as possible a
ng·m-2·s-1·Pa-1] (limited by evaporation of sealants). 10-in. [254-mm] square. The template may be used for
X2.3.1 Materials: marking. Dip each edge of the specimen in molten asphalt up
X2.3.1.1 Aluminum foil, 0.005 in. [0.125 mm] minimum to the line, so that the test area is defined and all edges are
thickness. coated with a heavy layer of asphalt. Place the specimen over
X2.3.1.2 Tape, meeting the requirements of Specification the pan containing water or desiccant. Lightly oil the template
D2301, vinyl chloride plastic pressure-sensitive, electrical or coat with petroleum jelly on its outer side, and place on the
insulating tape. specimen. Pour molten asphalt into the space between the
X2.3.1.3 Cement, contact bond, preferably rubber base. template and the rim of the pan. After the asphalt has cooled for
a few minutes, the template should be easily removable.
X2.3.2 Procedure:
X2.3.2.1 Step 1—Seal aluminum foil around edges of X2.5 Hot wax may be applied like asphalt. It may also be
specimen, leaving a 100-in.2 [0.0654-m2] exposed test area on applied (freely) with a small brush. Its lower working tempera-
each side. Use contact bond cement as directed by the ture may be advantageous when a specimen contains moisture.
manufacturer. X2.6 Several designs for dishes with supporting rings and
X2.3.2.2 Step 2—Spread sealant on inside of rim and ledge. flanges are shown in Fig. X2.2. Various modifications of these
Place desiccant (dry), or water and surge control material (wet) designs may be made provided that the principle of prevention
in pan. Press specimen in place. Avoid squeezing compound of edge leakage by means of a complete seal is retained. The
into the test area. dishes may be constructed of any rigid, impermeable,
X2.3.2.3 Step 3—Coat outside of rim and bottom of ledge corrosion-resistant material, provided that they can be accom-
with contact bond cement, and place foil strips from edge of modated on the available analytical balance. A lightweight
template, around rim, and bottom of ledge. metal, such as aluminum or one of its alloys, is generally used
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
X2.4 A method of using hot asphalt, as applied to a 10-in. for larger-size dishes. In some cases when an aluminum dish is
[254-mm] square-mouth dish with ledge and rim, is as follows: employed and moisture is allowed to condense on its surface,
there may be appreciable oxidation of the aluminum with a
X2.4.1 Apparatus: resulting gain in weight. Any gain in weight will ordinarily
X2.4.1.1 Template—A square frame of brass or steel, 3⁄16 in. depend on the previous history of the dish and the cleanness of
[5 mm] thick and 3⁄4 in. [19 mm] deep. The 3⁄16-in. [5-mm] the surface. An empty dish carried through the test procedure
thickness is tapered to zero at the bottom of the frame where it as a control will help to determine whether any error may be
will touch the test specimen and maintain a 10-in. [254-mm] expected from this cause. When aluminum dishes are used for
square test area. the water methods, a pressure may develop inside the assembly
X2.4.1.2 Sealant—Asphalt (see X2.3.1 used at the proper during a test due to corrosion. This can cause seal failure or
pouring consistency of 375 to 450°F [179 to 232°C]. otherwise affect the result. Where this is a problem, it can be
X2.4.1.3 Melting Pot, for the asphalt, electrically heated, overcome by providing inside the dish a protective coating of
with one dimension greater than 113⁄8 in. [289 mm]. baked-on epoxy resin or similar material. Dishes with flanges
X2.4.1.4 Small Ladle, for pouring. or rings that project from the inner walls of the dish are to be
X2.4.2 Procedure—Mark the 113⁄8-in. [289-mm] square avoided, as such projections influence the diffusion of the
specimen with a line at an equal distance from each edge, so water vapor. The depth of the dish for the water procedures is
FIG. X2.3 Template Suitable for Use in Making the Wax Seals on
Test Dishes
X3. PROCEDURE TO CALCULATE DEPENDENCY OF WATER VAPOR TRANSMISSION RATE ON RELATIVE HUMIDITY
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
X3.1 The dependency of the water vapor transmission X3.3 Data Analysis
(WVT) rate of materials on relative humidity (RH) can be
X3.3.1 From the slope of the time versus mass change data
determined using a combination of desiccant and water method
(8). plot, for each chamber RH levels, the rate of WVT for the
corresponding test specimen at a specific chamber RH level is
X3.2 Procedure determined according to 13.2.1.
X3.2.1 Dry cup tests with desiccant method test set up but X3.3.2 The WVT rate is plotted against the chamber RH.
also with additional chamber RH levels other than 50% are This results in two separate but intersecting plots.
carried out. Three chamber RH levels: 50%, 70%, and 90%
X3.3.2.1 If the plots are linear and intersect at 50% chamber
shall be selected.
RH, it is concluded that the material under consideration is
X3.2.2 Wet cup measurements with water method test set up nonhygroscopic and the rate of WVT does not depend on the
but at two chamber RH levels are to be carried out. Two local chamber RH.
chamber RH levels, 70% and 90% shall be selected.
X4.1 In 2010-2011 an inter-laboratory study using Proce- test, or were not taking action to correct faulty seals or
dure A was conducted using thin, extremely low permeance otherwise determine a cause.
materials as the test specimens. The statistics from this study
X4.4.3 The types of materials tested can be expected to be
related to precision of the method are covered in Section 15 of
very consistent. One exception could be foil or foil
these test methods.
laminations, which can contain pinholes of a size or number
that can produce apparently outlying results. These will be
X4.2 In addition to developing a precision statement, a
detectable over a light box. The foil lamination samples in this
number of other objectives was targeted in undertaking this
study were pre-screened for presence of pinholes, and only
round robin. Those objectives and a discussion of the findings
pinhole-free specimens were used.
are discussed herein:
X4.4.4 The primary problem encountered in testing ex-
X4.3 Provide experience testing extremely low and “zero tremely low permeance materials then would appear to be
perm” materials. inadequate or failing seals. It is critical that operators monitor
X4.3.1 Many labs that conduct the E96/E96M tests do not data early on for apparent outliers. When one is suspected,
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
have occasion to test such materials. The materials tested in the whether or not a breach in the seal is visible in the test dish, the
study ranged from anticipated values of about 0.015 perm seal should be “re-flowed”, the specimen taken out of the test,
down to zero perm. All materials were 0.015 in. (0.38 mm) or a replacement replicate started.
thick or less. Circumstances were such, however, that the final X4.4.5 It is strongly recommended that a program be set up
group of participating labs in fact did have experience testing to provide either water vapor transmission rate or permeance,
in this range. As such, input from inexperienced labs was not and correlation coefficient computation, real time at each
available. weighing. This way outliers can be spotted immediately and
checked for cause.
X4.4 Determine what difficulties are encountered in testing
at these levels. X4.5 Application of correlation coeffıcient:
X4.4.1 With one exception, no notable difficulties were
X4.5.1 The correlation coefficient indicates if a strong linear
reported by the labs. One lab was consistently obtaining loss of
relationship in the coordinate data points exists.
weight during the tests. An assignable cause was not
determined, and it was decided not to use their results. X4.5.2 Very high correlation indicates a very straight line
Otherwise, there was no feedback on problems with the test. slope for the weight gain per unit time, which in turn can be
used as an indication of steady state.
X4.4.2 The occurrence of outliers indicates problems that
were undetected or uncorrected by the operators, or both. The X4.5.3 High correlation is not necessarily expected when
outliers are always high results. Absent the presence of obvious testing materials of extremely low permeance, since the slope
defects in the test specimens, which would be visible under of the weight gain per unit time is approaching zero, and any
normal lighting or over a light box, the cause for outliers is variation in the test conditions has a greater impact on
invariably inadequate sealing to the dish. It would appear that individual weighings. Zero or near-zero permeance tests may
operators were not recognizing outliers appearing early in the never show good correlation.
REFERENCES
(1) Joy, F. A., and Wilson, H. G., “Standardization of the Dish Method for of Water Vapor Transmission on Relative Humidity,” Insulation
Measuring Water Vapor Transmissions,” National Research Council Materials: Testing and Applications; 3rd Volume, ASTM STP 1320, R.
--`,`,``,`,,,`,,````,`,,,,``,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
of Canada, Research Paper 279, January 1966 , p. 263. S. Graves and R. R. Zarr, Eds., American Society for Testing and
(2) McGlashan, M. L., “Physico-Chemical Quantities and Units,” Royal Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1997, pp. 456-470
Institute of Chemistry Monographs for Teachers, No. 15, 1971, p. 8. (7) Kumaran, M. K., “Interlaboratory Comparison of the ASTM Standard
(3) Schirmer, R. ZVDI, Beiheft Verfahrenstechnik, Nr. 6, S.170, 1938. Test Methods for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials (E96-95),”
(4) Pedersen, C. R., Ph.D thesis, Thermal Insulation Laboratory, The Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA, American Society for
Technical University of Denmark, 1990, p. 10. Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, Vol 26, No. 2, March
(5) Hansen, K. K. and Lund, H. B., “Cup Method for Determination of 1998, pp. 83-88.
Water Vapor Transmission Properties of Building Materials. Sources
(8) Kumaran, M. K., "An Alternative Procedure for the Analysis of Data
of Uncertainty in the Methods,” Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium,
from the Cup Method Measurements for Determination of water
Building Physics in the Nordic Countries, Trondheim, 1990, pp.
Vapor Transmission Properties," Journal of Testing and Evaluation,
291-298.
(6) Lackey, J. C., Marchand, R. G., and Kumaran, M. K., “A Logical American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
Extension of the ASTM Standard E96 to Determine the Dependence Vol. 26, No. 6, November 1998, pp. 575-581.
ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.
This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.
This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the Copyright Clearance Center, 222
Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, Tel: (978) 646-2600; http://www.copyright.com/