Sprayed foam insulation

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 39 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 09:00 am:    Does anyone have any experience with Icynene foam insulation? Do you know what material it is? (Their literature doesn't say, other than it's water-based.) G. Wade Bevier, CSI, CCS, LEED-AP Intermediate Member Username: wbevier Post Number: 4 Registered: 07-2004 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 09:19 am:    http://www.icynene.com/assets/documents/PDFs/Spray_and_Pour_Formulas.pdf This is off the Icynene web site. I have used the product for interior applications. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 40 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 09:34 am:    Thanks, we've read the info on their web site -- it doesn't say what product it is. What type of interior applications? In the interior of exterior walls? The literature claims good things about the VOC emissions without any backup, like tests. Also it implies that the VOC level is low after 24 hr dissipation. That's not what the low-VOC regulations are after -- they want low VOC in the first place. Curt Norton, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: curtn Post Number: 103 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 09:39 am:    Susan, Try contacting Jeff Hood, Vice President Business Development at Icynene. He has done presentations for the CSI Convention and he came to Madison and did a presentation for our Chapter. 800-758-7325 or 905-890-7325 ext 207 George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 108 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 11:12 am:    Icynene is spray foam polyurethane insulation. Another option is soy-oil based spray foams, such as Bio-based (link to it at "07 2120 - Plastic Insulation" on 4specs), essentially the same as icynene except with soy used instead of petroleum-based products. We used the soy-based product on our wood frame garage with second floor studio space with excellent results. Since the space above is not used constantly, we keep the thermostat way low. It only takes a few minutes to condition the space, and very little heat or cooling to maintain temperature. Because the product fills the rafter and stud spaces completely, there is little if any air movement, and so there is no need for an air barrier (although we did use house wrap over densglas sheathing, anyway) Another side benefit: it is an excellent sound barrier. Our garage is right on the alley, but the noise of passing cars and delivery trucks is barely noticeable. All in all, after one year, we are very pleased we used the spray foam instead of fiberglass batts, the cheaper and more traditional alternative. Obviously I can’t comment on long term benefits, but I gotta believe that in 20 years the foam is going to be in place. If you ever have opened up a wall and seen fiberglass batts after several decades, you know they aren’t the way they started out. I don’t know about VOC’s but the product applicator wore a fairly heavy duty respirator; he was working in a confined space of course. During the installation, there was a lot of humidity because it is a water-based product. But within a short time after application, later that same day, there was little or no odor, and no residual odor. After my recent experience, I think cost is the only thing keeping the spray foams from being the standard insulation for frame construction. It was about twice fiberglass. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 164 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 12:10 pm:    I rep'ed spray foam insulations. It is a very specialized business. I've sprayed foam myself, and in my opinion it has so many advantages over batt insulation that it is difficult to compare them. The drawback that I struggled with was that it is very difficult to fill the wall cavity without needing to trim the foam; this is extraordinarily messy. Icynene is a good product, and it deserves a wider market, however, Icynene is market-limited to a dealer or two in an area (it's difficult to get these things off the ground - the equipment is $100,000 or more to get started, plus licensing and marketing, etc. Any installer will have $250,000 invested before he sprays a single job.). I prefer isocyanurate-reactive foams using the newer BASF blowing agents. Also, foams are very highly customizable. Some foams have as many as fourteen chemical compounds in two parts (part a and part b). From my information and training, there are only 7 people in the US that design these foams. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 165 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 12:16 pm:    Oh- water based as a characteristic is 'stretched' to it's limit in the marketing of foams. Please kindly ignore the 'water based' marketing language. Similarly Liquid Boot is 'water based' although if you've seen Liquid Boot prior to its being reacted, you'd wonder why that would be a selling point, because it is decidedly unpleasant and 'oily/greasy'. What is happening is that the part b (the 'iso') is so starved for water, that it liberates O2 when it is available, thus the 'foaming' behavior. When the O2 is produced, the 'foam' must have certain cohesive tendencies to maintain a consistent cell wall, thus containing the O2. The reaction(s) are accellerated and controlled by heating the agents, all the way through hoses and the gun. The parts a and b cannot be mixed inside any device, instead, the mixing occurs within the first centimeter of the gun orifices. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 166 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 12:33 pm:    oh - the respirator George describes is very important to keep the 'iso' from crystalizing in the applicator's lungs. This is a 'bad thing'. Once the iso is exposed to the environment about four minutes, it has captured enough ambient moisture, and is no longer a danger. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 41 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 12:55 pm:    Wow! Thanks so much, Doug. BTW it was one of your fellow subscribers who asked about this. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 167 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 12:57 pm:    Susan - you're very welcome. My only regret is having driven 30,000 miles as a product rep to learn that! George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 109 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 01:28 pm:    Doug- Regarding trimming the foam, our guy used a reciprocating saw with a three or four foot long thin blade, about 1 1/2" deep, with tiny teeth. He'd lay it up on the stud face and cut two or three cavities at once, using the stud faces almost as a screed. No fuss, no muss (the scrap was bagged and hauled out) and in less time than it takes to tell, he was done. I remember 30 or so years ago when I first saw sprayed foam, they were using a heated wire. That method was kind of cumbersome and clunky. Thanks for the info, Doug. Now that you mention it, I remember him mentioning the "crystallizing in the lung" thing. Yeah, bad bad bad. Curt Norton, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: curtn Post Number: 104 Registered: 06-2002 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 01:58 pm:    Thanks Doug, great info. In most cases there is no need to fill a cavity with spray foam insulation. At an R-value of 6 per inch, 2-3 inches sprayed in the stud cavity is plenty (with an exterior layer of rigid foam) even for cold climates. If the applicator oversprays, its just wasting materials. Amy C. Kilburn, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: cruise_girl Post Number: 6 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 02:03 pm:    Has anyone ever seen these sprayed foams used as insulation in a cavity wall? I've spoken (briefly) to our local rep. here in New England, and he seems to think this is a great (potential) application. However, the actual installation process could be complicated, i.e. how would you achieve a consistent thickness of the foam since you're spraying onto a flat surface and not into a void? Any thoughts, anyone? G. Wade Bevier, CSI, CCS, LEED-AP Advanced Member Username: wbevier Post Number: 5 Registered: 07-2004 Posted on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 - 02:18 pm:    A few years back we asked the tech person at Icynene about using the product in a cavity wall. Initially they said it would work and that an "experienced" applicator could get the thickness consistently. (This may, or may not, be the case in all instances.) Since then it has pretty much been determined that unless the foam is covered with the facing surface very soon after the foam is installed that the foam is unprotected and in jeopardy of being damaged by general construction activity and weather conditions due to the soft nature of the product. We then determined that we would only use it for interior enclosed wall partitions; i.e., stud walls and interior cavities of CMU walls. Ron Beard CCS Senior Member Username: rm_beard_ccs Post Number: 101 Registered: 10-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 01:42 am:    Susan: I’ve specified Icynene foam insulation on three different projects but each time it was VE’ed out the project for two basic reasons: 1) cost and 2) concern over the vapor permeance. Some believed that a vapor barrier will be needed between the GWB and the foam in spite of what the mfr says, others says not. I haven’t seen or heard of any convincing data that it will not need a vapor barrier [Doug?]. I have a current project where I am considering using it on the inside face of a non-vented crawlspace. Should I be concerned about moisture absorption? Ron Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 168 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, February 02, 2006 - 11:53 am:    Spray foam is tenaciously sticky 1) on substrates with ANY free moisture (studs, sheathing, GWB, etc all tend to have available moisture even on the driest of days) and 2) the air/foam interface (this is because air also contains free moisture). Thus spray foam skins over. I do not have test data in hand that demonstrates vapor permeance in assemblies with aged foam. However, because of the inherent cell wall structure, the tenacious nature at substrates, and the skinning over, I myself would NOT hesitate to use foam on the basis of published vapor permeance values being low, etc. Moisture absorption: The two part polyurethane foams (icynene is one) do not have significant moisture retention problems, because the cell walls must deteriorate before the material is capable of retaining liquid water. The cell walls are polyurethane, and are flexible for a long time after the product is placed. These materials do have a limited life span however, and like any engineered material, 30-50 years later, the material will show deterioration and breakdown of the cell walls. The foams from the 70's were different formulations, and those foams today may crumble, become rigid, etc.