Aged Thermal Resistance (R Value) of Foil-Faced Polyisocyanurate Foam Thermal Insulation Board by Morton Sherman

AGED THERMAL RESISTANCE (R VALUE) OF FOIL-FACED POLYISOCYANURATE FOAM THERMAL INSULATION BOARD BY MORTON SHERMAN

ABSTRACT

AGED THERMAL RESISTANCE (R VALUE) OF FOIL-FACED POLYISOCYANURATE FOAM THERMAL INSULATION BOARD The aged thermal resistance (R value) of gas-barrier quality aluminum foil-faced polyisocyanurate foam thermal insulation board has been determined in ASTM C236 guarded hot box tests conducted in three qualified testing laboratories on full-size boardstock. Common-lot materials were measured in 1976 (15 to.33 months after manufacture) and retested in 1978-9 (47 to 68 months after manu facture). Analysis of results indicates: 1. Essentially no change in.R per inch thickness over this extended (15 through 68 months) period of time after product manufacture with or without glass fiber reinforcement. 2. Demonstrated low order magnitude of change in average R per inch from one month after manufacture (8.34) to time-aged plateau .(7.04): approximately 15%. 3. The linearity of aged R value with product thickness at three mean temperatures: a. 7.81 R/inch at 400F mean temperature. b. 7.04 R/inch at 750F mean temperature. c. 6.39 R/inch at 1100F mean temperature. 4. A linear relationship between R/inch and insulation mean temperature; an increase of 0.021 R/inch with each OF decrease in mean temperature, in the temperature range investigated. 5. Confirmation of the precision capability of the ASTM C236 Guarded Hot Box test method conducted in three NVLAP-accredited testing facilities: individual laboratory averages within 5% of three-laboratory averages; three-laboratory averages with coefficients of variation within 2.5 to 3.6%.

Morton Sherman Senior Research Associate Jim Walter Research Corp. St. Petersburg, Florida 33702

002 Ever since the initial development of halocarbon-blown rigid polymeric foam therma 1 i nsu1 ati on ma teri a 1sin the 1950' s, much has been reported in the techni ca 1 1iterature concerni ng the so-ca 11 ed "aging" effect on the therma 1 insulation characteristics of these materials. Capable of init~a1 manufac ture with k-factors in the range of 0.11 to 0.13 BTU Inch/Hr Ft of, months of storage in ambient air can result in increased k-factors and reduced R values. It is generally accepted that a combination of physical mechanisms, particularly ambient air permeation into, and halocarbon gas diffusion out of the foam cells, result in reduced halocarbon gas concentrations within these cells and correspondingly poorer thermal resistance characteristics. The rate and magnitude of this change is greatest for unfaced low density foams, and least for halocarbon-blown rigid polymeric foams encapsulated by gas-barrier quality metal at the time of manufacture. A major objective of the studies reported here was to confirm the particu larly effective performance of gas-barrier quality aluminum foil facers laminated at the time of manufacture to the two major surfaces of rigid urethane-type foam insulation boardstock, in terms of the small order of magnitude of k-factor and/or R value change with such protective surfaces, and their ability to maintain this protected R value over a significantly long period of aging time. A secondary objective of these studies on common-lot foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam insulation boardstock was to quantify the ability of the ASTM C236 Guarded Hot Box test method to pro vide thermal resistance measurements on full-size product with a satisfactory and reproducible degree of between-laboratory precision. Foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam insulation board products are large-di mension laminated panels composed of gas-barrier quality aluminum foil facers directly bonded in the product manufacturing process to ha1ocarbon blown po1yisocyanurate foam material which may also contain distributed glass fiber reinforcement. Foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam products, when applied in accordance with manufacturer's instructions, can meet the requirements of the major model building codes, many insurance authorities and other regulatory bodies, in a wide variety of applications. Foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam products should only be used in accordance with recommended uses and application instructions. The use of these products, or other thermal insulations, in conjunction with other combustible building components which are exposed, may contribute to rapid spread of fire. Foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam products with distributed glass fiber core reinforcement, or these products used in conjunction with non-combustible building components, may not con tribute to rapid spread of fire. The above conclusions are based upon fire tests conducted on unoccupied structures and upon nationally recognized fire tests. Foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam board with distributed glass fiber core reinforcement is suggested for use as an exposed wall and/or ceiling insu lation in agricultural, commercial and industrial buildings, such as factories, warehouses, agricultural structures, parking garages, mercan tile establishments (stores), aircraft hangers, cold storage structures, tennis courts, skating rinks, riding arenas, etc. Foil-faced po1yisocyanurate foam insulation board is suggested for con cealed use in residential construction having an interior finish (such as gypsum wallboard) acceptable to local building codes. Examples of suggested concealed uses are: 1. High performance insulation sheathing in new frame wall construction. 2. Thin profile cavity wall insulation in new masonry construction. 3. High performance insulating/vapor barrier undercourse behind new interior wall and/or ceiling finish material.

953 4. Thin profile insulating underlayment beneath roof shingles in vaulted ceilings and "A" frame construction. 5. Underslab or perimeter thermal insulation. 6. Retrofit - thin profile insulating underlayment behind new exterior siding. 7. Retrofit - thin profile insulating undercourse behind new interior finish acceptable to local building codes, In this study, the thermal resistance of aged full-dimension Thermax (TF-600) and Technifoam (TF-200 and TF-400) insulation boards produced during 1973 through 1975 and stored in an unregulated but weather-sheltered storage area at our facility in St. Petersburg, Florida, were measured in accordance with ASTM Standard Method of Test C236, "Thermal Conductance and Transmittance of Built-Up Sections by Means of the Guarded Hot Box". Tests were conducted at: Dynatherm Engineering, Lino Lakes, Minn.; Dynatech RID Co., Cambridge, Mass.; Jim Walter Research Corp., St. Petersburg, Fla. All three testing facilities are accredited for technical and professional competence in conducting ASTM C236 tests under the National Voluntary Laboratory Accrediation Program (NVLAP). The Dynatherm test assembly, shown in Figure 1, utilized a 20 square feet metering area measuring 4 feet by 5 feet within a 6 feet by 7 feet guarded hot box opening. The Dynatech test assembly, shown in Figure 2, utilized an 11.41 square feet metering area measuring 3.97 feet by 2.87 feet within a 6 feet by 6 feet guarded hot box opening. The Jim Walter Research test assembly, shown in Figure 3, utilized a 36 square feet metering area measuring 6 feet by 6 feet within an 8 feet by 8 feet guarded hot box opening. All test assemblies utilized wood frame mountings and taped or caulked joints for convenience in test panel installation into the hot box opening and the elimination of uncontrolled air leakage paths as a possible source of error. The results of these guarded hot box tests, conducted in two separate sub missions of common-lot materials to these three testing laboratories are shown in Table lA, lB and le, Summary Tabulation. Initial testing was con ducted in 1976 on boardstock ranging from 15 to 32 months of age; retesting was conducted in 1978 and 1979 on resubmitted boardstock specimens, now ranging from 47 to 68 months of age. Mean temperatures of 40F and 7SF, and also 110F in the retesting series, were selected to provide additional product performance information for design purposes. Because this testing program documented the significant influence of mean temperature on the magnitude of measured R values for these exceptionally efficient thermal insulation materials, it is important to note here that mean temperature specifications of ± 0.5F were requested and achieved with out particu'lar difficulty in the retesting series, as compared to ± 5F requested and achieved in the initial test series. Shown in these tabulations for each product tested at each mean temperature at each testing facility is: product identity and age from time of manufac ture, average product thickness, measured R value and calculated R value per inch of product thickness. Three-laboratory averages, standard deviations and coefficients of variation for each mean temperature condition are summarized at the bottom of these tables. The linearity of aged product R values obtained in both test submissions vs. average product thickness, is shown in Figures 4, 5 and 6. At 40F mean temperature, individual data points are shown together with the line of their average, 7.81 R per inch. The same information is shown for 75F mean temperature with an average R per inch of 7.04, and 1l0F mean tempera ture with an average R per inch of 6.39.

954 The equivalency of aged R values per inch of product thickness obtained in both test submissions (indepe~dent of the specific reporting laboratory) vs. product age in months, is shown in Tables 2, 3 and 4. At 40F mean tempera ture, individual data points are listed, together with the group average R per inch, standard deviation and coefficient of variation values. Recogniz ing that narrower mean temperature test specifications may account for the apparent improvement in average R per inch value after retesting, we must consider the results of the two test series as best represented by the average of both data groups, shown at the bottom of the table. Similarly, at 75F mean temperature, the results of the two test series are again best represented by the average of both data groups. Note also the one month age R per inch product thickness values measured on heat flow meter test apparatus at Jim Walter Research (8.34 R value per inch thickness) corres pond to a core foam k-factor of 0.12 one month after manufacture. Finally, since 110F mean temperature data points were not included in the initial test series, we conclude from the above discussion of test results obtained at lower mean temperatures that this older age-at-test data can represent aged product R value over the entire 15 to 68 months time period. The relatively narY'ow range of coefficient of variation values observed in this interlaboratory study, 2.5 and 3.7%, ind'icates the precision capabil i ties of the guarded hot box test method, properly conducted, and also the uniquely stable aged R value of these gas-barrier protected, foil-faced foam insulation board products. The demonstrated low order of magnitude of change in average R per inch from time of manufacture (8.34) to time-aged plateau (7.04), approximately 15%, is also worthy of note. Further analysis of this interlaboratory data to provide a comparison of rigid foam boardstock with or without glass fiber reinforcement is shown in Table 5. Again, note the generally good agreement of data from the three participating laboratories; in no instance was any laboratory more than 5% away from the three-laboratory average. There does appear to be some degree of correlation between metered area size and measured R value magnitude, with the largest metering area (36 square feet) tending to yield somewhat larger R values than the smallest metering area (11.41 square feet). This may also relate to area sampling differences as discussed in more detail in our paper on this subject presented at the October, 1978 ASTM/DOE Thermal Insulo~ion Conference in Tampa. The three-laboratory average values for aged R per inch thickness were used to develop the tabulation of aged product R values vs. nominal product thick ness of Thermax foil-faced glass-fiber reinforced polyisocyanurate foam thermal insulation board shown in Table 6. Note that actual product thickness specifi cations slightly greater than nominal values (e.g. in the ratio of 8.00 or 102.4% of nominal 1 inch thick product for example) are 7.81 required in order to provide whole number aged thermal resistance values at 40F mean temperature for customer and marketing convenience.

The excellen' 'i :ear correlation between average aged R values per inch thick ness and mean (est temperature, as shown in Figure 7, provides an additional measure of credibility to the results reported in this study. There is approxi mately 8 to 10% decrease in R value for each 35F increase in mean temperature, an order of magnitude consistent with similar values for other thermal insula tion materials derived from information contained in the 1977 ASHRAE "Handbook of Fundamentals". The results of this investigation of the aged therlnal resistance of gas-barrier quality aluminum foil-faced polyisocyanurate foam thermal inSUlation board as determined in ASTM C236 guarded hot box tests conducted in three qualified testing laboratories on common-lot materials, are summarized as follows: 1. The linearity of aged R value with product thickness at each of three mean temperatures:

955 a. 7.81 R per incb at 40F mean. b. 7.04 R per incb at 75F mean. c. 6.39 R per inch at 110F mean. 2. Essentially no change in R per inch thickness over this extended (15 I through 68 months) period of time after product manufacture, with or without glass fiber reinforcement. I a. 40F Mean Temperature 15 to 33 months age: 7.79 R/inch (2.5% Coef. of Var.). 47 to 68 months age: 7.84 R/inch (3.0% Coef. of Var.). b. 75F Mean Temperature 15 to 33 months age: 7.00 R/inch (3.6% Coef. of Var.). 47 to 68 months age: 7.07 R/inch (3.5% Coef. of Var.). c. 110F Mean Temperature 47 to 68 months age: 6.39 R/inch (3.6% Coef. of Var.). 3. Demonstrated low order of magnitude of change in average R per inch from one month after manufacture (8.34) to time-aged plateau (7.04): approximately 15%. 4. Confirmation of the p.reciSion capability of the ASTM C236 Guarded Hot Box test method, properly.conducted in three NVLAP-accredited testing facilities: individual laboratory averages within 5% of three-laboratory averages; three-laboratory averages with coefficients of variation within 2.5 to 3.6%, as shown above. 5. Confirmation of a linear relationship between R per inch thickness and insulation mean temperature: an increase of 0.021 R per inch with eacb degree F decrease in mean temperature in this temperature range, a factor of potentially significant influence upon the magnitude of mea sured R values for highly efficient thermal insulation materials such as these. Subsequent to the completion of this three-laboratory guarded hot box study, a series of ASTM C5l8 heat flow meter tests were conducted on Thermax Sheathing boards 23 to 24 months after manufacture, at the NAHB Research Foundation thermal measurements laboratory in Rockville, Maryland. This testing facility is accredited for technical and professional competence in conducting ASTM C5l8 heat flow meter tests under the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP). The results of this 21 specimen heat flow meter test series are summarized in Table 7. Earlier tests conducted withi1 one month after product manufac tu e and sampling in 1977 yielded an aver,,> '-'~tor of 0.12 BTU inch/Hr Ft 2of, a value identical to the 0.12 k-factor mentioned earlier in this paper for 1973 through 1975 manufactured product. Tests on specimens from time-aged (nominally 2 years old) boardstock yielded an average R per inch of 6.93, in excellent agreement with the 7.04 average R per inch value determined in the three-laboratory study at the same mean temperature, 75F, for 15 through 68 month time-aged boardstock. Aga,in, the high degree of agreement between these two independently conducted aged R value studies, involving boardstock manufactured years apart in time, supports and enhances the credibility of gas-barrier quality foil-faced glass fiber-reinforced polyisocyanurate foam thermal insulation board as exceptionally resistant to R value loss with time after manufacture. In conclusion, we would like to take this opportunity to express our appre ciation to Mr. James Funkhouser of Dynatherm Engineering, Mr. Ron Tye of

956 Dynatech RID, Dr. R. G. Miller of Jim Walter Research Corp., and Mr. Hugh Angleton of NAHB Research Foundation, Inc., in recognition of their indivi dual and corporate cooperation and technical expertise, so vital to the successful completion of studies of this type.

TABLE IA 40· F MEAN TEMPERATURE SUMMARY TABULATION OF GUARDED HOT BOX TEST RESULTS

TEST AGE LAB MEAN AVO MEA SURED CALCULATED OF a TEMPERATURE THICKNESS R R/INCH BOARD PROD UCT 'F INCHES HR FTZoF/BTU THICKNESS TESTED DYNATHERM 0.5"TF200 40.S o .4S 3.49 7.59 S3 MO. 38.S O.4S 3.S0 7.83 32MO. 0.S"TF200 39.8 0.55 4.44 8.07 57MO. 38.1 0.55 4.39 7.98 27MO. o .S"TF400 40.8 0.53 4.27 8.0S 47MO. 40.0 0.53 4.07 7.S8 I SMO. O.S"TFSOO 40.1 0.57 4.47 7.84 4 7MO. 38.9 0.57 4.29 7.53 I SMO. I.O"TFSOO 39.4 1.09 8.52 7.82 4 8MO. 40.S 1.09 8.34 7.S5 17MO. 1.5"TFSOO 40.0 1.48 I 1.67 7.89 47MO. 39.9 1.48 I 1.73 7.93 ISMO. D YNATECH 0.5"TF200 40.5 0.4S 3.45 7.50 S8MO. 39.2 0.4S 3.5S 7.74 32MO. O.S"TFSOO 39.7 0.55 4.2S 7.75 52MO. 40.9 0.55 4.33 7.87 17 MO. 1.0"TF600 40.3 1.10 8.15 7.41 52MO. 41.5 1.10 8.20 7.45 18MO. 1.5"TFSOO 40.1 1.48 I 1.40 7.70 52 MO. 39.8 1.48 I I. 70 7.91 52MO. 37.9 1.48 1 1.9S 8.08 17MO. .JWRC 6.5"TF200 41.0 0.48 3.84 8.00 63MO. 3.7.4 0.48 3.92 8. IS 3 2MO. OJ."TF200 39,6 0.57 4.38 7.S8 57MO. 40.4 0.57 4.39 7.70 27 MO. O:S" TF400 40.0 0.53 4.14 7.81 49MO. 44.2 0.53 4.20 7.92 15MO. 0.S"tFSOO39.9 0.58 4.54 7.83 48MO. 39.0 0.58 4.44 7.S5 I SMO. I.O"TFSOO 40.0 1.09 8.72 8.0 I 48MO. 37.5 1.09 8.55 7.84 17MO. 1.5"TFSOO 40.0 1.49 12.50 8.39 50MO. 42.6 1.49 11.36 7.62 16MO.

3 LAB AVGS. 39.9" 7.81 3 LA B ST. DEV. I. 3 3" 0.215 % OFX 3.33% 2.75 %

957 TABLE is 75°FMEAN TEMPERATURE SUMMARY TABULATION OF GUARDED HOT BOX TEST RESULTS

TEST AGE LA B MEAN AV G MEASURED CALCULATED OF at TEMPERATURE THICKNESS R R II NC H BOARD PRODUCT of INCHES HR FT • FIBTU THICKNESS TESTED DYNATHERM o .5"TF200 75.1 0.46 3.19 6,93 63MO. 73.4 0.46 3.22 7.00 32MO, o .6"TF200 74.7 0.55 3,97 7.22 57MO, 72.4 0,55 :3 .88 1,0 IS 27MO. 0.6"TF400 75: I 0.53 3,83 7.23 47MO. ".:it 75. I 0.53 v 4 6.88 ISMO, 0.6"TF600 76.0 0,57 3 .97 6.96 4 7MO, 74.5 0.57 3,19 6.65 I SMO. 1.0"TF600 75.1 1.09 7.63 1.00 48MO. 74.6 1.09 1.25 6.65 17MO. 1.5"TF600 74.7 1.48 10.61 7.17 47MO. 75.1 1.48 9.86 6.66 16MO. DYNATECH 0.5"TF200 74.7 0.46 :3 .15 6.85 68MO. 0.6"TF600 74.8 0.55 3 .91 7. I I 52MO. I 0"TF600 74.8 1.10 7.31 6.65 52MO. 1.5"TF600 75,4 1.48 9.90 6.69 52MO. 75.3 1.48 10. I 0 6.82 52MO. JWRC O,S"TF200 74.4 0.48 3 .46 7.2 I 63MO. 7 I. 5 0.48 3.60 7.50 32MO. 0,6"TF200 75.1 0.57 4.02 7.05 57MO. 75.1 0,57 4.00 7.02 27MO. 0.6"TF400 75,2 0,53 3,76 7.09 49MO. 76.4 0.53 3.80 7.17 15MO. o .6"TF600 75.0 0,58 4,19 7 .22 48MO. 72,4 0,58 4.10 7.07 16MO. 1,0"TF600 74.9 1.09 7.99 7 .33 48MO. 73.4 1.09 7.81 7.17 17MO. I ,SliT F600 75.2 I, 49 11.38 7.64 50MO. 73.6 1.49 10.54 7.14 ISMO.

:3 LAB AVGS. 74.5· 7.04 3 LAB st DEY. 1.08 0 0.247 "10 OF X 1.44 % 3.5 1%

958 TABLE Ie 110°F MEAN TEMPERATURE SUMMARY TABULATION OF GUARDED HOT BOX TEST RESULTS

TEST AGE LAB MEAN AVG MEASURED CALCULATED OF a TEMPERATURE THICKNESS R R /1 NC H BOARD PRO DUCT OF INCHES HR F T2 'F/BTU THICKNESS T E 5 TED _._--" ... -- DYNATHERM 0.5"TF200 109.7 0.46 2.92 6.35 63MO. 0.6"TF200 109.7 0.55 3 .43 6.24 57MO. 0.6"TF400 109.6 0.53 3.38 6.38 47MO. 0.6" TF600 109.5 0.57 3.51 6.16 47MO. 1.0"TF600 109.7 1.09 6.82 6.26 48MO. 1.5" TF600 110.2 1.48 9.30 6.28 47MO.

DYNATECH 0.5"TF200 109.6 0..46 2.93 6 .37 6 8MO. o .s" TF600 1 10.0 0.55 3.73 6.78 52MO. I .0"" TF600 109.5 I. 10 6.59 5.99 52MO. I .5 TFSOO 110.5 1.48 9.20 6.22 52MO. IIO.S 1.48 9.10 6.15 52MO.

JWRC o .5"TF200 110.2 0.48 3.14 6.54 63MO. o .6"TF200 I 10.2 0.57 3.S6 6.42 57MO. o .S" TF400 I 10.3 0.53 3.42 S .45 49MO. O.S"TFSOO 110.3 0.58 3 .80 6.56 48MO. I.O"TFSOO 110.2 1.09 7.18 S.59 48MO. 1.5u TF600 109.9 1.49 10.29 6.91 50MO.

3 LAB AVGS. 110.0· 6.39 3 LAB ST. DEV. 0.36° 0.233 % OF X 0.33 % 3 .S5·4

959 TABLE 2 R/INCH THICKNESS VS PRODUCT AGE (40· F M.T.) PRODUCT % OF AGE, MO. X 0- X 0.5"TF200 D.6"TF200 0.6"TF400 0.6"TF600 I "TF600 1.5" TF600

15 7.92 16 7.68 7.53, 7.65 7.62, 7.93 17 7.87 7.65, 7.84 8.08 18 7.45 27 7.70,7.98 32 7.83,8.16 33 7.74 15-33MONTHS AGE: 7.79 0.196 2.52% 47 8.06 7.84 7.89 48 7.83 7.82, 8.0 I 49 7.81 7.75 50 8.39 52 7.41 7.70, 7.91 57 7.88, 8.07 63 7.59,8.00 68 7.50 47-68MONTHS AGE: 7.84 0.2353.0 % OVERALL, 15 TO 68 MONTHS AGE: 7.81 0.215 2.75%

T A 8LE 3 R/INCH THICKNESS VS PRODUCT AGE(t) (75·F M.T.) % OF PRODUCT AGE, Mt, 0.5"TF200 0.6"TF200 D.6"TF400 D.6"TF600 I"TF600 I.S"TF8DO 8.54 8.12 B.20 B.77 8.06 ONE MONTH AGE: 8,34 0.3053.65% 15 7.17 16 6.88 6.65,7.07 6.66, 7.14 17 6.65,7.17 18 27 7.02, 7.05 32 7.00,7.50 33 15-33 MONTHS AGE: 7.00 0.2543.63% 47 7.23 6.96 7.17 48 7.22 7.00,7.33 49 7.09 50 7.64 52 7.11 6.65 6.69,6.82 57 7.05,7.22 63 6.93, 7.21 68 6.85 47- 68 MONTHS AGE: 7.07 0.2453.47% OVERALL 15-68 MONTHS AGE 7.04 0.2473.51 % (1) ONE MONTH AGE; R VALUES MEASURED ON HEAT FLOW METER APPARATUS AT JWRC: ALL OTHER AGED R VALUES MEASURED BY GUARDED HOT BOX (ASTM C236) IN THREE LABORATORIES.

960 TABL E 4

RIINCH THICKNESS VS PRODUCT AGE (110· M.T.) PRODUCT % OF AGE, MO. -.It cr- l 0.5"TF200 0.6"TF200 0.6"TF400 0.6"TF600 I"TF600 1.5"TF600

15 16 17 18 27 32 33

47 6.38 6.16 6.28 48 6.56 6.26,6.59 49 6.45 50 6.91 52 6.78 5.99 6.15,6.22 57 6.24,6.42 63 6.35, 6.54 68 6.37 47-68 MONTHS AGE 6,39 0.2333.65 %

TABLE 5

INTERLABORATORY COM PAR ISO N

AGED R/INCH OF FOIL-FACED POLYISOCYANURATE FOAM INSULATION BOARD WITH OR WITHOUT GLASS FIBER REINFORCEMENT (I)

THREE LABORATORY AVG. JWRC DYNATHERM DYNATECH RID GUARDED HOT BOX METERED AREA 22.47 FT. 36 FT2 20 FT2 11.41 FT2 R/INCH, 40· F M. T. WITH GLASS FIBER 7.80 7.89 7.78 7.75 WITHOUT GLASS FIBER 7.83 7.88 7.87 7.72

R/INCH, 75· F M.T. WITH GLASS FIBER 6.99 7.27 6.85 6.82 WITHOUT GLASS FIBER 7.09 7.18 7.06 6.98

R/INCH. 110· F M.T. WITH GLASS FIBER 6.40 6.69 6.23 6.29 WITHOUT GLASS FI BER 6.46 6.47 6.32 6.58

(I) TF600: WITH GLASS FIBER REINFORCEMENT TF200, TF400: WITHOUT GLASS FIBER REINFORCEMENT

961 TABLE 6

AGED R VALUE VS. NOMINAL PRODUCT THICKNESS

THERMAX FOIL-FACED, GLASS FIBER REINFORCED POLY I SOCYANU.RATE£()At,l.INSUL,ATI.oN.. S.oARQ..

NOMINAL AGED R VALUE AGED R VALUE AGED R VALUE THICKNESS, 40"F 75"F II 0 of ---.IN.CJ:Li;JL.. MEAN TEMP. MEAN TEMP. MEAN TEMP.

3/B 3 2.7 2.5 1/2 4 3.6 3.3 5/8 5 4.5 4.1 3/4 6 5.4 4.9 7/8 7 6.3 5.7 I 8 7.2 6.5 1-1/8 9 8.1 7.4 1-1/4 10 9.0 8.2 1-3/8 II 9.9 9.0 1-1/2 12 10.8 9.8 1-5/8 13 11.7 10.6 1-3/4 14 12.6 I 1.5 1-718 15 13.5 12.3 2 16 14.4 13.1 2-1/4 18 16.2 14.7

7.81 R PER INCH AT 40°F MEAN TEMPERATURE 7.04 R PER INCH AT 75° f MEAN TEM PERATURE 6.39 R PER INCH AT 110 0 f MEAN TEMPERATURE

TABLE 7

THERMAL INSULATION CHARACTERISTICS OF FOIL-FACED GLASS FIBER-REINFORCED POLYISOCYANURATE

FOAM THERMAL INSULATION BOARD CI) AS TESTED/REPORTED BY NAHB RESEARCH FOUNDATION (2) BTU INCH UNAGED BOARD K FACTOR, HR-FT2 of MAX. MIN. AVG. STD. DEV, COEFF. OF VAR. 0.129 0.113 0.120 0.004 3.4"'10 2 (3) HR-FT OF AGED BOARD R/INCH, BTU INCH ~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~ MAX. MIN. AVG. STD. DEV. COEFF: OF VAR. 7.24 6.40 6.93 0.232 3.3% (I) CELOTEX THERMA~ SHEATHING BOARD , (2) 21 BOARDS, RANGING IN NOMINAL THICKNESS FROM 112 INCH TO 2 INCHES, SAMPLED INDEPENDENTLY FROM PLANT INVENTORY, OCT. 19-20, 1977, AND SHIPPED TO ROCKVILLE, MD. FOR IMMEDIATE THERMAL TESTING BY ASTM C 51B-16 AT 75 OF MEAN TEMPERATURE. (3) RESIDUAL BOARDSTOCK STORED AT ROCKVILLE FOR SUBSEQUENT THERMAL TESTING OF AGED BOARDS; TESTING CONDUCTED SEPT. 21-24,1979 ON BOARDS 23-24 MONTHS OLD, BY ASTM C-518-76 AT 75 OF MEAN TEMPERATURE.

962 GUARD AREA~

WOOOEN TE~ FRAM~ / I~ 6'· 0" I I 6'· 0" I

4'·0"_ TEST PANEL l.-FILLER PANELS

METERING AREA ~

METERING 80X CONSTRUCTED FRGM f .-' TEST FRAME 15'0" TEST PANEL 7 '. 2" 1/4" PLYWOOD AREA 20,2 v I"0 METERING 4'.0" X 7'· 2" 1 l 1\ \ SEAL ALL PERIMETER FRAME (LUMBER) ," X 4' a I " x 4 " 2" TAPE ALL JOINTS ON BOTH SIDES

pi g. 1 Sketch of test assembly at Dynatherm Engineering

GUARD AREA

II 6 '(APPROX) ,I I 6' (APPROXJ I TEST FRAME FILLER PANELS ,~ '/ ,~ TEST PANEL ¥ ~3.97~ ~..---..------

METERING AREA---H+I- ./ ~·TEST PANEL 4' X 6' T S' (APPR OX,l 2.81' METERING AREA 11.41 FTZ METERING Box---+-++H CONSTRUCTED FROM 2" EXTRUDED 1 POLYSTYRENE FOAM l SEAL ALL PERIMETER '\ TEST FRAME 2" X 4" LUMBER 2" TAPE SEAL ALL JOINTS 80TH SlOES

Fig. 2 Sketch of test assembly at Dynatech RID Co"

METERING AREA 6'X6' ----- 36 F T2 a~o"

APPLY THIN BEAD OF MASTIC TO INTERNAL ANGLE OF RESTRAINT 1 0 '"'.' ~:;,~~'~:~:; -'7

I TEST I -V Fig. 3 Sketch of test SPECIMEN I: I ,: VERTICAL SIDE I"X4"NOM. I assembly at Jim Walter I I Research Corp.

'---__n I--=/',,~~~=- 963 , 13.0 r

• 12.0 ~, j t-- 11.0 / · /' :r• 10.0 ~ Fi g. 4 Thermal resistance (R) vs o • •. 0 avg. board thickness at 40°F mean r• • '.0 temperature .; u z 7.0 r• w '.0 1976019790 DYNATHERM w 1976619790DYNATECH RID •w '.0 1976W 1979'\] JIM WAL TER J • '.0 •w, r 3. g.~4:':0~.~.---'0~.O-~0}.=7-of .•;;--o~.;;-.-JI.oO--,~.~1 -~, .•;:---,11.3;---,11.4:;---,1, .•;--- , 13.0 r AVERAGE BOARD THICKNESS,INCHES • ~ 12.0 J r 11.0 •, ,• 10.0 .: ·rw .,0 r Fig. 5 Thermal resistance (R) vs • .,0 avg. board thickness at 75°F mean ,;• 0 temperature z 7.0 r• 1916019790 DYNATHERM ~ '.0 W 1976019190 DYNATECH RIO W 1916W 191s'\] ~IN WAL lER • '.0 •J •> 4.0 ,W r 0.5 0.6 0.1 0,8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 , 12.0 •" AVERAGE BOARD TH IC KNESS, INCHES ~ 11.0 10,0 ~/ ·•r , •. 0 ".: ~ g '.0 r• Fi g. 6 Thermal resistance (R) vs • 7.0 .; a vg . board thickness at 110°F mean o z '.0 temperature r• '.0 19790 DYNATHERM • 19190 OVNATECH RID • 19799 JIM WALTER • 4.0 J •> 3.0 ,• r 2·~'~4;--'0~.='-;0~.';-~0~.7:-~0.='-:0!.';:-~1~.0:-~1.~1-~1.';:-~1~':-~,.~4-~1.';---

AVERAGE BOARO THICKNESS, INCHES

'"o 9.0 o Fig. 7 Average aged thermal re •~ •o 8.0 sistance (R) ~er inch vB mean • o SLOPE' -0.021 RIINCH of tempera ture, F ,• INCREASE IN MEAN TEMPERATURE

'.0

o 10 20 30 ~ 50 00 10 80 90 100 110 IW I~ t~

MEAN TEMPERATURE, of 964