Does it say "F39-9" anywhere on that package? Does AT advertise it as a
9 second delay? If so, then IMO it should have failed the cert since it didn't test out to within +-10% of the advertised delay.That's something I'd like to see changed. If a motor doesn't test out to an H, it shouldn't be called an H.
IMO that's the root cause of all this squabbling over test data. Motor designations should fit the actual performance. It's one thing for a motor that tests as a G78 or something, to be sold as a G80. But when delay that tests out to 6 seconds is sold as a 9 second delay, that's just screwy. Publishing test data isn't going to correct this problem. If someone's buying a motor that they expect will have a 9 second delay, they shouldn't have to read the fine print to find out that it's really a 6 second delay.
Either the motor designation should be changed to fit the actual delay, or the motor should fail the cert. Same with an H that tests out to a G=2E