I have thought about this question for a while, so now I will ask it.
Are products that are tested to European standards or other foreign fire tests legal to use in the US?
For example I am specifying Cembrit fiber cement panels. Their literature indicates the products were tested to EN 12647 for fire category / class and tested to EN 13501 for fire rating. These products are not tested to ASTM or UL standards. Therefore, are these products allowed to be installed on US projects?
Only if you can get the Building Official to accept it as an “alternative material, design and method” per IBC Section 104.11 (or similar requirement if the jurisdiction uses their own administrative requirements).
If you can prove that it complies “with the intent of the provisions of the code,” the B.O. can approve the use of such materials.
Ronald, I was afraid you were going to say that. Do you want to tell the architect or shall I?
But seriously I find that many of my clients give me all sorts of foreign products to specify. Sometimes the products lack any sort of technical information. Luckily (knock on wood) the team has not been called about by the building official for having nontested products on the project.
Aside from citation as basis of design in a project spec, it is certainly legal for design professional to use foreign testing to aide in project selection.
What gets me is the products that designers pick that do not indicate that they have been tested at all. When you raise the question with the manufacturer, they get very huffy and want to know why they should go to this expense.
Some of the US distributors of these products are very aware of the situation and make an attempt to get the manufacturer to comply. This effort is often rebuffed, leaving the distributor in a difficult place.
You may want to request information on how the other standards compare to the standards listed in the building code.
I have tried what Mark suggests, and feel there is not a meaningful way to compare fire tests. Take ASTM E84 - Surface Burning Characteristics. The results of the test are not meaningful except to compare how other products do in the same test. The European test is different, and it is meaningless, in my opinion, to make an engineering judgement in comparison. If any of you know of a meaningful way to compare US and EU flame spread, please let me know.
US firms have been looking for Rosetta Stone converting US standards to ISO/EU/eieio standards. It doesn’t exist. Not only that, but there are often differences between European countries using the same standards (different countries have the same standard numbers, often with slightly different content).
No US testing, not compliant. I’ve yet to find a BO that accepts ISO/EU but that hasn’t stopped the use of untested products. BTW, check with the insulation manufacturers who have run NFPA 285 testing. They may have tested your cladding without bothering the let the cladding company know.
David, I’m confused by your example. I’m assuming you’re looking at Cembrit as an interior finish because you’re asking about fire testing. I’m not aware of any requirement in the code for fire testing for fiber cement siding … unless it was a requirement due to something else, like a requirement to test the exterior wall assembly per NFPA 285.
For interior testing, you would need ASTM E 84, UL 723, or NFPA 286 testing. The datasheet here (https://www.cembrit.no/media/2035757/cembrit-construction-datasheet.pdf) notes that it has been tested per ASTM E 84 and would easily be Class A (Flame Spread: 0, Smoke Developed: 10). This allows you to use it as a wall or ceiling finish for any occupancy group. So, what further testing are you looking for? Is there something I’m missing here?