For a specifier or a reviewer, the useful question is not “is it tested” but “which method backs which claim, and who ran it.”
This is that map. The full reference is test data and standards; this article explains why each method is in the programme.
Three families
Mechanical: can it carry the load
Wide-width tensile strength (ASTM and ISO methods). Strength of the fabric across a wide specimen rather than a narrow strip, which better represents how a sheet behaves in service.
Governs: in-place strength under armor-stone placement and cyclic flow loads. This is the method behind the structural capacity of the filled unit during placement and in service.
Static puncture, CBR (ASTM and ISO). Resistance to a point load pushed through the fabric.
Governs: tolerance of angular fill rock bearing from the inside, and irregular bed contact from the outside. A bag filled with sharp quarried stone is being point-loaded from within for its whole life.
Tongue tear strength (ASTM and ISO). Resistance to a tear propagating once started.
Governs: the raschel weave’s resistance to unravelling from a cut strand. This is the method behind the claim that damage stays local. See raschel weave explained.
Durability: how long does it last
EN 12447 — hydrolysis resistance. Breakdown from prolonged contact with water.
Governs: the approximately 100-year service life for units installed in water. See EN 12447 and hydrolysis.
EN 12224 — weathering and UV resistance. Degradation from sunlight before the unit is covered.
Governs: the approximately 50-100 year service life on land, conditional on covering within one month of installation. See EN 12224 and weathering.
BS EN ISO 13438 — oxidation resistance. Thermo-oxidative degradation over the design life.
Governs: the same on-land service life position, alongside EN 12224.
Environmental: what does it release
the laundering method usually cited is deliberately NOT in the programme. It is a textile laundering method and does not measure in-service shedding from a geosynthetic. See microplastics and geosynthetics.
Governs: the choice of virgin polyester over recycled polymer. See microplastics and geosynthetics and virgin vs recycled polymer.
The laboratories
TRI Environmental, SGS, and GTS.
Naming them matters for a submittal. A reviewer assessing a material they do not recognise generally wants to know the testing was done by an independent laboratory rather than in-house, and being able to name which one is part of the answer.
What this page does not contain
No measured values. Not for tensile, not for puncture, not for tear.
The reason is stated on the test data page and it is worth repeating here because it is unusual: this is a product a DOT reviewer may rely on, and a plausible figure published on a web page gets pulled into a submittal and then into a design, detached from the conditions it was measured under.
Reports and certificates of compliance are issued per project on request, from the laboratory, with the conditions attached. That is a slower answer than a number in a table, and it is the one that will not mislead.
If your specification requires a minimum value in stated units, we cannot satisfy it from published material, and that is worth establishing at specification stage. Getting a non-standard product approved and writing a spec that stays open cover the options.
The one numeric exception
Service life. Two figures, both confirmed directly by the client, and both always stated with the condition they depend on:
- Approximately 100 years in submerged service, out of direct UV exposure (EN 12447)
- Approximately 50-100 years on land, installed and covered within one month of installation (EN 12224 with BS EN ISO 13438)
The condition is not a footnote. The second figure does not hold for a unit left exposed, and the two halves are never rendered apart. See service life in water vs on land.
What the programme does not cover
Named explicitly, because the gaps matter more than the coverage on a submittal:
- No physical model test results for wave stability. On a design-wave-governed coastal structure this is a real gap. See rock bags vs tetrapods and dolosse
- No ice abrasion data. See ice damage to bank protection
- No scour-reduction figure
- No costed lifecycle study. See lifecycle cost vs first cost
- No certifications. FES holds none and does not describe itself as certified
When not to use rock bags is the standing statement of these limits, written to be quoted in a submittal.
Where to go next
- Test data and standards for the full reference
- What the mesh is made of
- Service life in water vs on land
- Assembling the submittal package
- The materials hub for the rest