Dyplast Releases Technical Bulletin 1115 on Thermal Aging of Insulation in Low-Temperature Applications

Technical Bulletin 1115

Thermal Aging of Insulation in Low-Temperature Applications

Dyplast's latest Technical Bulletin addresses "Thermal Aging", which is the gradual reduction of thermal insulation performance over time experienced by some insulants due to latest-generation (highly efficient) blowing agents diffusing out of the closed cells within the insulant. There are many insulants with initially "poor" thermal efficiencies that exhibit no thermal aging (i.e. they remain poor), and alternatively there are insulants with initially "superior" thermal efficiencies that even after aging continue to have superior thermal efficiencies. Thus over the lifetime of the insulation system this latter class of insulants offers energy savings that far exceed those of non-aging insulants!

1)  Insulants manufactured with Hydrocarbons, HFCs, or HFOs generally have better (i.e. lower) thermal conductivities than those blown with air or air-equivalents;

2)  Testing methods such as those used by ASTM strive to predict thermal aging and provide apples-to-apples comparisons between alternative insulants, yet it is incumbent on engineers/specifiers to execute due diligence;

3)  Thermal aging protocols typically age specimens at ambient conditions that vary rarely reflect the conditions present at the actual application;

4)  Thermal aging is mitigated (sometimes dramatically) by a number of factors – particularly low process temperatures and physical impediments to gas diffusion such as insulant layers, vapor barriers and jackets.

Technical Bulletin 1115 

Please contact Dyplast personnel at (800) 433-5551 

or e-mail us at sales@dyplast.us 

or visit our web-site 

www.dyplast.com for complete information.

UPDATED CUSTOMER BULLETIN 05-15 A COMPARISON OF ISO-C1® and HT-300 POLYISOCYANURATE INSULATION

Dyplast Products in it's ongoing effort to provide timely and accurate information about polyisocyanurate rigid foam insulation within the industry has updated it's Customer Bulletin 05-15 "A Comparison of ISO-C1 and HT-300 Polyisocyanurate Insulation".

 

This updated Customer Bulletin is part of a series of white papers aimed at providing our clients, engineers, contractors, fabricators, and friends with objective information on competitive products. Marketing literature on the internet and in printed media address the physical and performance characteristics of competing polyisocyanurate rigid foam insulations fabricated from bunstock. As is often the case, some literature can be misleading and/or in some cases there may not be sufficient information to credibly compare products. This Customer Bulletin provides factual, clarifying information which should allow for an objective comparison of Dyplast's ISO-C1® with HiTherm's HT-300 (each 2 lb/ft3 density).

Customer Bulletin 05-15

 

Please contact Dyplast personnel or visit our web-site www.dyplast.com for complete information.

Dyplast exhibiting at the 2015 IIAR Industrial Refrigeration Conference & Exhibition

 

Dyplast exhibiting at the 2015 IIAR Industrial Refrigeration Conference & Exhibition

The 2015 IIAR Industrial Refrigeration Conference & Exhibition offers an unrivaled opportunity for companies to showcase their latest products, services innovations and technologies and for attendees to meet, network and learn from others who are interested in the same professional opportunities.

 “IIAR provides advocacy, education, and standards for the benefit of the global community in the safe and sustainable design, installation and operation of ammonia and other natural refrigerant systems.” Dyplast exhibits at the IIAR Exhibition because our ISO-C1® family of polyiso insulation mechanical pipe insulation system is an integral part of the design and successful operation of the refrigeration systems. ISO-C1® has been successfully used for many years as mechanical pipe insulation and is a proven economic insulation technology. Exhibiting at IIAR allows Dyplast personnel to discuss first hand with the engineers, designers, and owners attending, the economic value that ISO-C1® imparts to their operations.

Come visit Dyplast at (Booth #607) where our industry experts will be ready to provide more information on full product range of polyisocyanurate insulation and phenolic insulation for both mechanical insulation and architectural panel applications.

We look forward to seeing you there!

                                                           March 22-25, 2015
                                                        Hilton Sand Diego Bayfront
                                                1 Park Blvd San Diego, California 92101

                                                                    

Technical Bulletin 0314 - Phenolic vs. Cellular Glass Insulation in Cold Piping Applications

10 March 2014   Technical Bulletin 0314

Phenolic vs. Cellular Glass Insulation in Cold Piping Applications   A short summary is included below. Click here for the complete Technical Bulletin   Phenolic and cellular glass mechanical insulation have each been demonstrated as viable choices for cold applications when 25/50 (per ASTM E84) is required, particularly in chilled water applications. This Technical Bulletin offers an objective comparison - - with the conclusion that when comparing both side by side, the overall advantages clearly belong to phenolic. The new phenolic is not the old phenolic New catalysts with minimum detectable halogens Low water absorption (the difference between 0.9% for phenolic vs. 0.2 for cellular glass is not material) Phenolic with 60% better insulating value 0.18 versus 0.30 at 50°F 2.5 inches versus 4.5 inches thickness in a typical 50°F scenario Phenolic is roughly 67% lower cost per board foot Plus lower fabrication/installation costs #2 and 3 above when taken together puts phenolic capital costs possibly at one-third that cellular glass - - and that's ignoring fabrication and installation Phenolic is one-third the weight of cellular glass 6 times more weight per linear foot in the 2.5 vs 4.5 inch scenario   In summary, both phenolic and cellular glass have been demonstrated as viable choices as insulation for cold applications when 25/50 is required. However, when comparing both side by side, the overall advantages clearly belong to phenolic.   Below is a link to the full Technical Bulletin   TECHNICAL BULLETIN 0314

For Sales Inquiries For sales call (800) 433-5551 or contact us at sales@dyplast.us or view our website at www.dyplast.com    At Dyplast we stand ready to help provide you with the right answers to your mechanical insulation, sheet insulation, and composite panel needs.    Give us a call today!

TECHNICAL BULLETIN 1128 UPDATES

You may recall our recent email newsletter, blog, and LinkedIn/Facebook postings of our Technical Bulletin 1128 “MECHANICAL INSULATION IN TYPICAL REFRIGERATION APPLICATIONS”.

 

Responses to our Bulletin have been very positive, and our friends have made some good suggestions/clarifications that we thought we should consolidate and send along.

Listed below are comments from a few Followers along with our response to each. Thank you to each and every one who responded. Your questions and comments are appreciated.

·         The Bulletin states that EPS and XPS melt at 165°F and that is not technically correct. We should have rather said they begin to “soften” at 165F. Yet we believe the ultimate conclusion remains the same - -  that the maximum service temperature is generally 165°F for both EPS and XPS.

·         The Bulletin’s data on XPS was based on public data then available on the major manufacturer’s website.  We overlooked data from another XPS manufacturer that more recently entered the XPS billet market. This newer manufacturer creates billets by gluing together sheets of XPS.  These billets have a stated Water Absorption (WA) of 1.0% versus the 0.5% presented in the Bulletin, and the actual range for WA can be from 0.3% to 1%.

·         The new manufacturer of XPS also states R value is 5.0, but the manufacturer does not indicate (on information available to us) whether this is an “aged” value or an “initial”.  The 3.9R value stated in the Bulletin is from the supplier of XPS billets that are a continuously extruded material, and the 3.9R is presented as an aged value per ASTM procedures.

·         Based on some test results just received for Phenolic, we should update its WVT to 3.3 perm-in and its WA to 0.9% by volume.  In the Bulletin’s Table 2 (Water Vapor Transmission for Different Insulants) this would place it after expanded polystyrene and above Trymer 2000XP polyisocyanurate when sorted by WVT. Note that the Phenolic properties still meet the ASTM C1126 standards for both WVT and WA. 

Dyplast’s Technical Bulletin has been updated and is available at:  http://www.dyplastproducts.com/Customer_Bulletins/TECHNICAL_BULLETIN_1128.pdf.

As always, Dyplast welcomes comments and suggestions and strives to present accurate information useful to the industry.