[CCMC 12009-R] CCMC Canadian code compliance evaluation

From: National Research Council Canada

CCMC number:

12009-R

Status:

Active

Issue date:

1989-08-31

Modified date:

2022-11-25

Evaluation holder:

Huntsman International LLC

10003 Woodloch Forest Drive
The Woodlands TX 77380
United States
Website: www.huntsman.com
Telephone: 1-281-719-6000

Product name:

Rubinate® 1840

Code compliance:

NBC 2015

Evaluation requirements:

CCMC-TG-060523.08-15 "CCMC Technical Guide for Binders for Oriented Strandboard (OSB) and Waferboard"

In most jurisdictions this document is sufficient evidence for approval by Canadian authorities.

Learn more about CCMC recognition Look for the trusted CCMC mark on products to verify compliance.

Code compliance opinion

It is the opinion of the Canadian Construction Materials Centre that the evaluated product, when used as a binder for oriented strandboards (OSB) in accordance with the conditions and limitations stated in this evaluation, complies with the following code:

National Building Code of Canada 2015

ID	Code provision	Solution type
09-23-15-02-00-0-00	9.23.15.2. Material Standards	Alternative
09-23-16-02-00-0-00	9.23.16.2. Material Standards	Alternative
09-23-17-02-00-0-00	9.23.17.2. Thickness, Rating and Material Standards	Alternative
09-27-10-01-00-0-00	9.27.10.1. Material Standard	Alternative
09-29-09-01-00-0-00	9.29.9.1. Material Standard	Alternative
09-30-02-02-00-0-00	9.30.2.2. Materials and Thickness	Alternative

The above opinion is based on the evaluation by the CCMC of technical evidence provided by the evaluation holder, and is bound by the stated conditions and limitations. For the benefit of the user, a summary of the technical information that forms the basis of this evaluation has been included.

Product information

Product name

Rubinate® 1840

Product description

The product is a binder made from polymeric diphenylmethane diisocyanate (PMDI) used for the manufacturing of waferboard and OSB. PMDI is produced from aniline and formaldehyde reacting together using hydrochloric acid as a catalyst. The reaction produces a complex mixture of polyamines, which are phosgenated to obtain a polyisocyanate mixture. All raw materials react completely during the process.

Manufacturing plant

This evaluation is valid only for products produced at the following plant:

Product name	Manufacturing plant
Product name	Geismar, LA, US
Rubinate® 1840	Product evaluated by the CCMC

Product evaluated by the CCMC Indicates that the product from this manufacturing facility has been evaluated by the CCMC

Conditions and limitations

The CCMC’s compliance opinion is bound by this product being used in accordance with the conditions and limitations set out below.

The product may be used for the bonding of strands in the manufacturing of OSB products that are intended to conform to the requirements of CSA O437.0-93, “Standard on OSB and Waferboard” as referenced in CSA O325-07, "Construction Sheathing.”
Each finished wood product (e.g., OSB panel) that uses Rubinate^® 1840 must conform to CSA O325-07.

Technical information

This evaluation is based on demonstrated conformance with the following criteria:

Evaluation requirements
Criteria number	Criteria name
CCMC-TG-060523.08-15	CCMC Technical Guide for Binders for Oriented Strandboard (OSB) and Waferboard

The Report Holder has submitted technical documentation for the CCMC’s evaluation. Testing was conducted at laboratories recognized by the CCMC. The corresponding technical evidence for this product is summarized below.

Test board physical properties
Property	Unit	Average		Individual
Property	Unit	Requirement	Result	Requirement	Result
Modulus of rupture (MOR) (after preconditioning)	MPa	≥ 17.2	38.5	≥ 13.8	25.7
Modulus of elasticity (MOE) (after preconditioning)	MPa	≥ 3 100	5 254	≥ 2 480	4 135
Internal bond (after preconditioning)	MPa	≥ 0.345	0.632	≥ 0.276	0.570
Bond durability - MOR after 2-hour boil (tested when wet)	MPa	≥ 8.6	20.3	≥ 6.9	15.5
Bond durability - MOR after six cycles	MPa	≥ 8.6	33.6	≥ 6.9	23.6
Thickness swell: 24-hour soak	%	≤ 25	8.5	≤ 30	9.9
Linear expansion: oven-dry to saturated	%	≤ 0.40	0.23	≤ 0.48	0.28
Linear expansion: 50% to 90% RH	%	≤ 0.20	0.10	≤ 0.24	0.13

Table 1. Creep properties
Property		Units	Average		Individual
Property		Units	Requirement	Result	Requirement	Result
Creep properties at 20°C	cumulative creep	mm	≤ 1.7	1.52	≤ 2.04	1.63
Creep properties at 20°C	secondary creep		≤ 0.4	0.29	≤ 0.48	0.33
Creep properties at 20°C	irrecoverable creep		≤ 1.1	0.92	≤ 1.32	0.98
Creep properties at 30°C	cumulative creep	mm	≤ 2.2	2.36^{Table footnote (1)}	≤ 2.64	3.18^{Table footnote (1)}
Creep properties at 30°C	secondary creep		≤ 0.4	0.21	≤ 0.48	0.27
Creep properties at 30°C	irrecoverable creep		≤ 1.5	1.60^{Table footnote (1)}	≤ 1.8	2.19^{Table footnote (1)}
Percent increase at higher ambient temperature (30°C) of creep properties	cumulative creep	%	≤ 35	56^{Table footnote (1)}	≤ 42	95^{Table footnote (1)}
Percent increase at higher ambient temperature (30°C) of creep properties	secondary creep		≤ 0	−27^{Table footnote (1)}	0	−18^{Table footnote (1)}
Percent increase at higher ambient temperature (30°C) of creep properties	irrecoverable creep		≤ 50	74^{Table footnote (1)}	≤ 60	123^{Table footnote (1)}

Table 2. Retention of residual properties
Exposure		Residual property requirements (MPa)
		MOR				MOE				Internal bond^{Table footnote (1)}
		Average		Individual		Average		Individual		Average
		Req't	Result	Req't	Result	Req't	Result	Req't	Result	Req't	Result
After 2-hour boil (modified)		≥ 8.6	36.4	≥ 6.9	24.0	≥ 1 550	5 576	≥ 1 240	4 683	≥ 0.104	0.323
After six-cycle test		≥ 8.6	33.6	≥ 6.9	23.6	≥ 2 015	5 060	≥ 1 612	3 567	≥ 0.035	0.153
At −20°C		≥ 17.2	43.6	≥ 13.8	25.5	≥ 3 100	5 810	≥ 2 480	4 702	≥ 0.0345	0.681
After fungal exposure	Aspergillus niger v. teigh	≥ 13.8	39.3	≥ 11.0	32.7	≥ 2 480	5 253	≥ 1 984	4 542	≥ 0.207	0.501
After fungal exposure	Penicillium luteum	≥ 13.8	38.2	≥ 11.0	28.6	≥ 2 480	5 119	≥ 1 984	4 226	≥ 0.207	0.390
After soaking in 1% hydrochloric acid		≥ 7.7	28.2	≥ 6.2	20.4	≥ 2 480	5 080	≥ 1 984	3 995	≥ 0.069	0.147
After soaking in 1% sodium hydroxide		≥ 12.0	28.5	≥ 9.6	21.3	≥ 2 325	4 480	≥ 1 860	3 619	≥ 0.155	0.244
After soaking in water		≥ 14.6	34.6	≥ 11.7	24.8	≥ 2 790	4 979	≥ 2 232	4 251	≥ 0.224	0.321

Administrative information

Disclaimer

This evaluation is issued by the Canadian Construction Materials Centre (CCMC), a part of the Construction Research Centre at the National Research Council of Canada (NRC). The evaluation must be read in the context of the entire CCMC Registry of Product Assessments and the legislated applicable building code in effect.

The CCMC was established in 1988 on behalf of the applicable regulator (i.e., the provinces and territories) to ensure—through assessment—conformity of alternative and acceptable solutions to regional building codes as determined by the local authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) as part of the issuance of a building permit.

It is the responsibility of the local AHJs, design professionals, and specifiers to confirm that the evaluation is current and has not been withdrawn or superseded by a later issue. Please refer to the website or contact:

Canadian Construction Materials Centre
Construction Research Centre
National Research Council of Canada
1200 Montreal Road
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0R6
Telephone: 613-993-6189
Fax: 613-952-0268

The NRC has evaluated the material, product, system or service described herein only for those characteristics stated herein. The information and opinions in this evaluation are directed to those who have the appropriate degree of experience to use and apply its contents (i.e., AHJs, design professionals and specifiers). This evaluation is only valid when the product is installed in strict compliance with the stated conditions and limitations of evaluation and the applicable local building code. In circumstances where no applicable local building permit is issued and that no confirmation of compliance ‘for use in the intended field application’ is undertaken, this evaluation is null and void in all respects. This evaluation is provided without representation, warranty, or guarantee of any kind, expressed, or implied, and the NRC provides no endorsement for any evaluated material, product, system or service described herein. The NRC accepts no responsibility whatsoever arising in any way from any and all use and reliance on the information contained in this evaluation with respect to its compliance to the referenced code(s) and standard(s). The NRC is not undertaking to render professional or other services on behalf of any person or entity nor to perform any duty owed by any person or entity to another person or entity.

Language

Une version française de ce document est disponible.
In the case of any discrepancy between the English and French version of this document, the English version shall prevail.

Copyright

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the CCMC.

Code Compliance via Alternative Solutions

Where a design differs from the acceptable solutions in Division B, then it should be treated as an "alternative solution." A proponent of an alternative solution must demonstrate that the alternative solution addresses the same issues as the applicable acceptable solutions in Division B and their attributed objectives and functional statements. However, because the objectives and functional statements are entirely qualitative, demonstrating compliance with them in isolation is not possible. Therefore, Clause 1.2.1.1.(1)(b) identifies the principle that Division B establishes the quantitative performance targets that alternative solutions must meet. In many cases, these targets are not defined very precisely by the acceptable solutions [...] Nevertheless, Clause 1.2.1.1.(1)(b) makes it clear that an effort must be made to demonstrate that an alternative solution will perform as well as a design that would satisfy the applicable acceptable solutions in Division B—not “well enough” but “as well as.”

National Building Code of Canada, Sentence A-1.2.1.1.(1)(b)

The CCMC has determined that compliance with this provision of the Code has been demonstrated as an Alternative Solution. The evaluation report provides a summary of the basis of CCMC's compliance opinion.

CCMC's code compliance opinions

All CCMC evaluation reports are opinions of code compliance established in accordance with the National Building Code of Canada, Subsection 1.2.1. "Compliance with this Code," which requires compliance to be achieved by:

complying with the applicable acceptable solutions in Division B, or
using an alternative solution that will achieve at least the minimum level of performance required by Division B in the areas defined by the objective and functional statements attributed to the applicable acceptable solutions.

The CCMC assesses compliance with Canadian building, energy and safety codes, and is trusted by over 6,000 regulators across Canada.

Report a problem on this page

Date modified:: 2022-11-25