 |
|
|
Impact Resistant Roofing Products An
open letter to our customers and partners concerning the issues related to Over the years the costs of hailstorms has increased to the point where in some sections of the country, it is a major factor in increasing the cost of homeowner’s insurance rates. In an attempt to keep the cost of homeowner’s insurance affordable, the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) adopted a program where if a consumer installed impact resistant roofing, their homeowner’s insurance cost would be reduced. The amount of the cost reduction depended upon what type of product was installed and the location. TDI chose to use the UL-2218 test to rate roofing products as to their impact resistance. TDI’s program created a market based incentive for manufacturers to produce and supply products that were able to withstand impact. After a short period of time, some insurance companies expanded the basic concepts outlined in the TDI plan to other states in the hail-affected regions. There are a number of questions and points raised by those opposed to this effort. These include comments about the validity of the test, the reaction of insurance companies to roofing that may have been tested but then is damaged in a hailstorm, and the labeling requirements. LABELING One of the main objections to this type of program raised by roofing manufacturers was the “labeling” requirement. To qualify for the Impact Resistant Roofing incentive, the roofing product not only must pass the test, but each shingle is also required to be labeled with the name of the product, the name of the manufacturer, the fact that it was tested to the standard and the year of manufacture. This type of labeling is not unheard of. In Dade County Florida, similar labeling requirements exist and have not had a major impact on the cost of roofing to the homeowner. THE TEST Over the years there have been several types of tests offered to shed light upon hail/impact resistance of roofing products. The tests have used projectiles, man made ice balls, and, of course, steel balls. Much of the current discussion of the UL 2218 test centers on the concept that steel balls do not impact the same as hail would. Any test performed will not perfectly mimic a natural event. This is due to a number of issues, but chief among them is that tests are done under controlled conditions. Control of conditions or variables is not possible in nature. When testing to determine how products will react when specific stresses are applied to the products, we control as many of the variables as possible. The UL-2218 test uses steel balls dropped from predetermined heights on to shingles. This allows us to deliver a set amount of “impact” or “kinetic” energy. In this test, the variable is the different shingles. Therefore, if we “stress” them the same, it provides us with the ability to see product-to-product differences. Does that mean that this product or that product being successful in the test are more or less resistance to impact than to products which were not successful in the test? Frankly, the answer is yes it does. It does in that we know that one product has the ability to withstand, under those conditions present in the test, more or less impact energy. It is also argued by some, that the test is not stringent enough in that it does not deal with the sudden drop in temperature that generally proceeds impact from hail in the real world. Nor does it address the issue of “aged” products’ resistance. Malarkey agrees that both of these factors would be good to add to the testing. However, we believe that critics of the current testing would not be satisfied even if these two additional variables were added to the test. The same basic criticism could and, we believe, would be levied at these additional tests. For example, the roofing industry has no test which can accurately predict the aging of shingle products. The most common way that we simulate aging of an asphalt shingle is called the “Dark Oven Aging Test”. Basically, asphalt shingles are placed in a dark oven with the heat run up for a predetermined amount of time. Although this is the most widely used protocol, there is no direct correlation that has ever been shown between the test and actual time aged products. Additionally, current testing for fire and wind are equally unrealistic. For example, the current fire test has a “burning brand” section. This section is intended to simulate burning debris on a roof. However, when was the last time a cube made of kerosene soaked Lincoln logs was set ablaze upon a roof? Because you haven’t seen that in the real world does that mean that the test should be abandoned? We submit not. We support the current testing because it does provide a specific baseline of information that can be used to compare products. We would like to see additional and enhanced impact testing, and would support that. DO IMPACT RESISTANT ROOFS PERFORM? Malarkey has documented success with our products resisting damage from hail impact in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado and Alberta, Canada just to name a few locations. We know that we have saved the insurance industry and homeowners tens of thousands of dollars. While we do not know how our product will perform with repeated impacts over the extended period, we do know that it has been successful in surviving hailstorms, which have damaged the surrounding roofs. INSURANCE AND LIABILITY Another issue raised is, what happens if an impact rated roof does not survive a hailstorm. We cannot, nor do we wish to speak for others. Malarkey does not provide a hail warranty. Hail can come in many sizes, and some large enough to go through roof decking. Clearly our products cannot withstand that type of impact. Comments have been made that if the granules are removed by hail impact it is just cosmetic damage. Which is not correct. The granules are on the shingle to protect the asphalt from the sun’s UV rays. If the granules are removed, the asphalt will fail prematurely, and as such it is not considered to be cosmetic damage, but actual damage. We support the current protocol, and the labeling requirements. We also would support additional efforts to improve the test, but not to ‘gut’ it. We think that the rating based upon the UL 2218 test might not be perfect, but does provide a good indicator as to which roofing products might well stand up better to impact than others. We are pleased and proud to be offering impact resistant roofing. For
additional information, please
call or write: © 2008 Malarkey Roofing Products, All Rights Reserved |
Click
here to request Click
here to contact the
|
P.O. Box 17217