Q&A Forums

Closed Cell VS Open Cell getting out of hand Post New Topic | Post Reply

Author	Comments
Mike Glace Posted: Mar 16, 2008 06:14 PM	Closed Cell VS Open Cell getting out of hand Coming across some crazy info. Had an addition I bid on standard underside of roof deck, no venting, very slight pitch. I didnt see any reason not use open cell I spray both I would have gave a bid for closed cell but customer stated he wanted open cell. Anyways the point I am getting to is 3 other companies came behind me and one company I know the name of but wont state it on here said they will not use open cell on underside because it will still allow condensation and since the roof is pitched in the higher area moisture will build up and the foam will absorb it. Now if all this is true then I am not aware of this and my supplier who trained me never says anything to me when I talk to them on a regular basis. Now for the big point if we keep having this battle of open vs closed and we drag it straight to the customer and say things like this and also they said numerous law suits against open cell foam. We are gonna actually hurt the industry we all learn more things everday nobody is perfect and our product is gaining in usage and popularity. These type of tactics are only gonna kill the industry, people will start saying well open foam sucks water and rots your house, closed cell is too expensive and can only be applied 3 or 4 inches. People and builders will not deal with foam because they will be afraid. If there is something the other contractor is doing wrong then yes we should address it but is he is doing nothing wrong, and you or your company was told something different aqbout open cell by your closed cell supplier should you drag it to the streets what do you guys think. With all the suppliers out there is someone training wrong or mis informed my supplier sells both and markets both and if there was a serious problem with the open cell then I think I would be the first to know.
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Mar 16, 2008 07:37 PM	Either one should work, if applied properly and to sufficient thicknesses. We spray both kinds.
Posted: Mar 24, 2008 07:41 PM	I made about 10 calls to Foam contractors within an hour of my house. I found these companies in my local phone books. I spoke with 5 of them. WOW talk about complete opposite,and confusing info. If you talk to a guy who sprays only open cell you find out that closed cell is to hard and cracks off walls(it won't move with the strucure), it should NEVER be put above sheetrock in an attic, because you house must breathe. Also you only need an inch of closed cell over concrete and NO MORE??? Never put closed cell under roof it ruins shingles, Open cell doesn't though. Also one guy informed me Open cell above sheetrock is the best and you only need 3-3 1/2" inches of it and nothing else above it because you won't gain any more efficiency this is how his house is sprayed??? The closed cell guys informed me that closed cell should be applied in walls ONLY at 4" and would cost about $4-$5sq ft,however one guy said 2" was ALL i would ever need for $1.80 a foot. He said opencell in the attic would absorb moisture and was too Heavy, because you would need 6" instead of 2" of closed cell??? Another said he has sprayed foam for 21yrs and he sprays only cosed cell, because open hasn't proved itself yet, and that "people" are having lots of problems with it. I was told that insulating underside of roof is a waste because your attic is vented and stays SAME TEMP as outdoors. The one guy who sprayed both types kept giving me statistics and ?facts? that he could't even keep straight, and by the end of his call i was convinced He was so smart that he couldnt even keep up with himself. WOW AGAIN, what a MESS, Your industry I mean, how is any average person or contractor supposed to feel confident about using foam??? No offense to people on this website you seem to all agree on most subjects and are objective about both types foam.
Posted: Mar 25, 2008 06:09 AM	justcurious,,,yeppers,,,its a jungle out there...what we need is more rental units and more vendors flooding the market with inadequate equipment provided to uneducated simpletons.... that being said... talked to 5 did ya???caller #2 knew right away you talked to #1 if he has been doin this for about 3 months or longer...lookin for cheap??sounds like you got a whole bunch of offers for cheap...and the poor old turd who tried to "explain it to you" but was even "confuseing himself" god luv him for trying to clear the muddied waters.... HOW DO YOU TELL A SALESMAN IS LIEING? HIS LIPS ARE MOVEING!!! have you tried to buy a car, s****s, tv, clothes, or anything else...its called sales,,,and if you are searching for rainbows you will find a salesperson hawking damn niced rainbows for just what you wanted to pay...imagine that!!!! now olger said it right on up the post aways... both will work,,if applied to adequate depths... and we too apply both!! imagine that... now as i see it here in the cornfield: 1) closed cell does not crack and will "move" the structure...plenty out there to see,,,it is lies,,just lies...follow the money...are their lips moving?? 2)you house needs to breath if it is a ventilated attic,,it does not if it is conditioned attic...depends on what kind of structure you are applying in 3)closed cell can be applied to sheetrock from the attic above,,happens every day (i prefer open cell though for my "artistic creativity" and more importantly for the best economic value for the end user, in my opinion,,,, 4)1" over concrete is just fine..i apply to design spec r values and bid accordingly,,,physics is physics...if you want cheap you will find cheap... 5)CC or OC to the undersurface of a roof deck does not affect shingle damage. this is well documented in the shingle industry,,,it raises the temp 3 degrees or there abouts, and the temp of the shingles are more affected by THEIR color,,foam or no foam.. 5) 3 1/2" OC in an attic enough??? so you say you have been hearin about problems with some foam applications out in the world do ya? 6) the sweet spot last i knew for the consumer for CC is 2 1/2" in the sidewall,,,which is approaching r19 nominal,,and 2" is enough if you want equal performance compared to traditional insulation materials 7)weight a problem,,now thats a new one,,,sheesh...(ya know, i have said some real boners in the past,,and once they roll of the lips you cant shove em back in their,,,i wish i knew then what i knew now,,when i was younger...i think it goes..) cc 2 lbs/ft3 or there abouts,,, oc 0.5 lbs/ft3 so modern math would tell you that the 5-6 inch lift should weigh abouts the same as the 2-3 cc lift.. 8)the only "problems" with open cell are those caused by to little insulation material and/or a poorly applied application...and there will be more is the shoddy applications continue..just as in every industry... 9)the waste of $$ statement "cause the attic is ventilated" again shows the lack of understanding as to how a ventilated vs unventilated structure opperates.. (does anyone remember the mantra of ...build tight..ventilate right,,manage the indoor air quality for the comfort of its occupants???) and yes,,hopefully a ventilated attics roof is the same temp as the air temp around it,,,have you seen any ice dams in your area this winter,,we had scads!!! 11)if you cant dazzle em with your brilliance baffle em with your bull**.... that being said,,,yes indeed there are many claims being made out there,,, may i suggest a contractor who has a history of proper applications,,is maybe a member of your local trade associations, AS WELL AS HIS OWN INDUSTRIES!!,,ask for references,,and check em... you will probably pay a bit more for this companies services, but you most likely will get what you pay for,,,cheap begets cheap... sorry you are confused...so am i most of the time LOL,,,, to the contractors,,find an applicator and stick with him,,each application will become better as foam becomes part of the system...and it has to be part of the system to afford its full value,,dont work as well as an after thought.... remember motivations when hearing differing opinions about like materials....if it walks like a duck,,quacks like a duck,,it usually is a darned duck... and when dealing with a sales person consider this: give em an enema,,and you can bury em in a s**** box!! (sorry ger i had too!!) wingtips baby its all about the wingtips..... now off to spray some foam... dude
Posted: Mar 25, 2008 07:02 AM	JUST TO BE CLEAR... I AM NOT TYPEING A CUSS WORD THAT IS BEING FILTERED IN MY POSTS,,,, IT WOULD APPEAR I AM TYPING THE SLANG FOR FECES,,,BUT I AM NOT,,, I AM TALKING ABOUT THE DEVICES YOU PUT ON YOUR FEET,,FOR SOME REASON THE CUSS FILTER ON THIS BOARD DOES NOT LIKE "THE DEVICES YOU PUT ON YOUR FEET SALESMAN" HUM... QUACK QUACK......
Doug Commette Posted: Mar 25, 2008 09:01 AM	Hey Guys: I agree this is real bad for the industry. Sorry about the bad words filter. I agree there are some strange words the site deos not allow. Sorry, I am not sure how to fix that? Back to the issue at hand. What do we do to fix this? We can wait for the SPFA, Honeywell, and the open cell guys to politically deal with it. Hopefully there will be a foam industry left in the 10 years time this may take. I am listening - if no one else will. This website is visted by most all of the people who ultimately review foam. Can we get some "Generally Accepted Practices" published?? DOUG
Lane Hogstad Posted: Mar 25, 2008 11:20 AM	Who needs spfa or honeywell Dude just did. Dude for president.
quentin Posted: Mar 25, 2008 11:48 AM	Maybe have Mason do up a paper and have it on the main page with a flag for the most questioned issue for consumers?
Robert Webster Posted: Mar 25, 2008 10:43 PM	Carvelli, I agree a list of "Generally Accepted Practices" published by SPFA or a National board of experts would be a great start. Then how about state(or regional)certification and licensing for foam applicators (as required in most other trades). Finally train building inspectors on these practices so they are qualified to inspect our work to assure it's done properly. I'm not a fan of making things harder. Yet something needs to be done to protect the general public, and the foam industry from half aZZ contractors, shotty workmanship, and poor applications that can result in major problems to a customers home, office, etc... Perhaps if everyone was playing on the same field we could eliminate Ridiculously Lowww estimating :)
Posted: Apr 02, 2008 12:12 AM	This idea sounds great to bad your not available now. Any way foamdude just wanted to say that of the foam guys i spoke with i wasn't looking for cheap and I'm very sure they had no idea i had talked to anyone else as i just sat back and listened without input just questions. The conversations were so inconsistant,and some even I know to be complete BS. Curious guys how can pricing vary so much please explain this to me, and all those reading this Thanks very much
Rob Granger Posted: Apr 02, 2008 06:37 PM	Just curious, Pricing varies greatly across the country for many reasons; 1. Supply vs Demand - in some areas there are to many contractors, not enough work and they will play cut throat on their pricing. 2. Overhead/Profit - smaller contractors have less overhead and profit requirements so their markup is less. 3. Why does gasoline cost what it does? and why does the price of gasoline vary so much across the country because it does... The end result is that many contractors will go out of business within a few years because they lack knowledge about the business, the product, and the markup it takes to survive. Many will fail because of their business practices and lack of professional.. Pick a contractor with a proven track record and valid references.... They have been and will be around for years to come.....
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Apr 03, 2008 05:43 PM	Impressive rant, FD. Wingtips all the way... :) Hello friends: I would like to set forth some history that may be useful in understanding the recent rhetoric between open & closed cell foams. For 30-years, closed cell foam was the only kid on the block for roofing & insulation. It was a decent neighborhood, not perfect but decent. And it was growing. Timeline: ------------------ 1940's - Polyurethane Foam was developed by Otto Bayer. 1957 - First foam roof. It was used on a rail car with VERY primitive equipment. 50-60's - It was a machine developing time. `63 - Fred Gusmer built the first dedicated foam machine. 60's - was a time of experimenting with foams & coatings. 70's - was a time of refining fire issues with SPF. The energy crisis made foam more popular during this period. 80's - was a period of growth in the SPF industry. Now, let's talk about open cell. Until the late 80’s, open cell foam was used for packaging only. Closed cell SPF was the product of choice for sprayed insulation. It worked, and worked extremely well. In the late 80’s a Canadian company, began riding a wave of environmentalism that was cresting in North America. They moved into the neighborhood and demanded to be regarded as legitimate. They developed a water-blown insulation foam that was very soft, and only had about half of the R-value of R-11 closed cell foam (which was 7.14 at the time). The sole virtue of this half-pound product was – cost. Mark that. Some claim that the water-blown aspect was an advantage. Perhaps. Perhaps not. I suppose that has a place in an eco-hyper market. But I digress... In the Eighties, another company, Stepan, was experimenting with a water-blown closed-cell foam, which they demonstrated at the SPF Convention in Hollywood Florida - 1989. It was interesting stuff, but it could not be used for roofs. They eventually scrapped the project after investing a lot of years & dollars into it. The water-blown half-pound has several disadvantages which we will discuss here. 1) It forfeits the built-in vapor barrier that closed cell foam possesses at 2”. The means that plastic film must be used to provide a vapor barrier. The new kid raised his voice and shouted that his half-pound didn't need a vapor barrier. Building code officials often think otherwise. 2) It has no strength. People who had already experienced a tornado or hurricane with their closed-cell homes knew firsthand what the silent strength of closed-cell foam could mean. It made a tremendous difference. Half-pound had all the strength of cellulose. 3) It has about 50% of the R-value of closed cell foams. Exceptions do exist, like APex who has a 1.2 water blown with an R-value of 5. (A word about Apex. When they moved into the neighborhood, they did their job quietly and got along with people. That's the proper way to join a community.) 4) With half-pound, the entire wall cavity had to be filled in order to squeeze out as much R-value as possible. Closed-cell foam only needs 2.5 – 3” in a 2x6 studwall to do its job well. 2.5" In 2x4 walls. This leave a dead air space for afterthought wires, and provides a bit of insulation itself (dead air space = 1.01) . To carve a place in the SPF market, this (Canadian) half-pound company adopted a highly aggressive marketing strategy that criticized the other men on the block. This strategy seeks to do what Abraham Lincoln said couldn’t be done: “You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.” Nevertheless, through aggressive marketing, the water-blown half-pound is claimed (by themselves) to be better than closed cell in several unusual ways. This is simply not true. These claims were designed to overwhelm the four advantages of closed-cell foam. But the facts cannot be explained away, or marketed away. Closed-cell foam is inherently superior insulation for the reasons cited above. Shouting louder will not improve the content of our words or product. It only creates disturbances in the neighborhood. This rhetoric began an internal swordfight within the SPF industry, and it continues to this day (in varying degrees). To the discredit of closed cell foam, some (not all) began to stoop to the level of the half-pound company (companies by 1998) and fight back. Meanwhile, fiberglass sat back and chuckled, smug & happy. So where do we go from here? I realize that this sounds like a lamentation. I would like to end with a suggestion. Open-cell foam should be marketed as a lower-cost alternative to closed-cell, for that is its lone virtue. This will keep open-cell foams (Two companies come to mind) from trying to profit off of closed-cell’s long years of success, and allow them to stand upon their own virtues, namely economic. This requires honesty. A place exists for both foams in our world. We like the added flexibility of using open-cell foam for attic envelopes as a lower-cost alternative. We also like the extra sound retention of open-cell (but prefer Ultra-Touch generally). It is good to have options in this industry. It is not good when new kids on the block yell louder just to convince the neighborhood that their poor grammar is proper English. Time will reveal that the best sales strategy is quiet confidence and honesty. This alone will help our neighborhood to flourish. Gerry C. Wagoner
Melvin Chandler Posted: May 11, 2008 07:09 PM	Been a while since I've posted and I've noticed a few changes around here. The one thing I still find the same is that I don't see the foam industry making an effor to promote itself. This story probably doesn't apply here but I think it's just another glowing example of where the foam industry is. We were bidding a roof project that had some foam speced on the roof. We did not meet the minimum requirements as a foam contractor so we looked for one that could meet the 20 year foam roof specs. There were several requirements that the contractor have certain credentials, one of which nobody that I talked to knew what it was. Turns out, the roofing contractor that drives most of the specs in our state was the only contractor in the country that I could find that had this credential but they still couldn't tell me what it was. We got the bid and used the other contractor (never calling the BIG National contractor) and they called to find out why we didn't call them. I'm an old country boy but I realized that my name was on the bidders list and asked why they didn't call me. Then they start threatening to take it as far as they have to to get the job because they wrote the spec, this was their customer and they were doing the work. I hinted around that I was a taxpayer in the local school district and may have a few trump cards to play. The guy sends me a letter that is from a major spray poly foam assoc that is signed by their head cheese stating that the contractor that we have chosen is not a credentialed contractor nor were they a member in good standing. As if they had never heard of the company. I give them a call and fax them the letter and ask what that is all about. They say they've been a paying member of that association for many, many years and have taken the majority of the training and credential classes. He knows the director personally so he gives them a call to see what's up. Turns out the dues were late by a week or so and they were taken off the current list. No call to see why or let them know that their membership had lapsed but they were quick to fire off a letter in behalf of one of the largest foam contractors in teh country at the expense of a smaller, quality contractor. Turns out that our sub had just moved offices and they had not received the forwarded billing information. Within a day or so the oversight was corrected and I requested that they have the head cheese kindly fire off another letter stating that our sub was a current member in good standing with the necessary credentials. That set the foam industry back about 10 years in my mind (not to mention what it did for the credibility of large industry associations) and didn't help with probably the largest specifying a/e firm in our state. It was a joke and made the a/e look like a goof for not paying closer attention to their specs (they deserved it).
Posted: May 12, 2008 07:03 AM	newbee,,,,damn man good to hear from you!!!! so you think there is a good ole boy network out there do ya???
Melvin Chandler Posted: May 12, 2008 09:09 PM	Hey Dude. Thanks for the warm welcome. Yes, I guess there's nothing wrong with the Good old boys network as long as it's somewhat on the up and up or at least in the Private Sector. Here's a quality contractor that is growing his business and rather than trying to help that guy along, he kind of gets thrown under the bus by the very association that needs guys like this. And then there's the fact that this was taxpayer dollars and a proprietary spec. Hope business is well for you. We are slow on the foam side of things but things are so good on the roofing side that we haven't really blinked at that rig sitting at the warehouse. It got to the point that I was tired of spending my $$$ to try to educate consumers so that I could move the manufacturer's products. We'll might catch up with our work load in Sept or Oct so I've got to start knocking on some doors. I'll be keeping an eye on the board to see what's happening in the foam insulation world. It's a crazy industry. Kind of every man for himself. Thank goodness there's a hand full of guys like you and Olger around to share some knowledge without expecting a few sets of material in return.
Michael Flander Posted: May 13, 2008 02:37 PM	Great thread... Newby: Please don't compliment FD like that, wouldn't want it to go to his head or anything :). Just kidding dude, and congrats on the foamzall!
Dena Sosebee Posted: May 14, 2008 09:51 PM	Hey you guys - There are distributors out there that are glad to support and help grow the smaller guys. There is one in particular who does mailers for us AND we pay nothing for it. We are loyal in our purchases from them because they help us.
David Pressler Posted: May 23, 2008 04:04 PM	Building a monolithic concrete dome in Florida I plan to use 2 to 3 inches of closed cell on the exterior. What product is on the market that will not only give an attractive finish but also protect the foam?
Jim Coler Posted: Jun 24, 2008 06:23 PM	Olger, Reading your commentary, even parts of it came across as bashing the open cell guy, when in fact there are a number of open cell guys out there now. In fact, almost all of the closed cell blenders have come out with open cell, so does that mean it's just a cheaper product? As one of those dealers who does spray both OC and CC, I say there are applications for both and if you're using foam you're using a better insulation. (period!). We have customers calling us all the time saying our competitor told them open cell absorbs moisture and will rot your wood, and another said closed cell will rott the underside of your roof. I just ask them if they would believe me if I said it's all made of the same cheese that the moon is made of. Then I ask them if they believe me. Obviously not, and I agree that too many guys out there are bashing the other foams just to sell their product. How about the battle between the new guy(canadian) and the soy based OCs. All they do is put questions in the minds of the consumers and A/Es on what is true and they go back to spec-ing "filter-glass". I especially like it when they say the soy based buys the same barrels and takes out 3 cups of B and adds soy oil to call it soy oil based and that there is really no difference between them. Then they go on to say how inferior the soy based is to the code official or builder. Most of the good code officials see right through it and know it's just a sales slam tactic. What a low level they've stooped to and it just puts them down in the process. We come in and just tell the truth from a building science standpoint and that we can offer both OC and CC foams. There are applications and customers for both. If you can sell the closed cel and customer will pay for it, them good and the job will be easier to spray. If the customer is looking to cut pennies, then they can save a few with OC and still feel perfectly comfortable. The sad part is even the industry "3rd parties" like SPFA are being driven by sales agendas. A conference I was just at made a number of false statements about OC and CC by different people because their company didn't offer both solutions. Another presenter was asked about a question in the class about ignition barriers and if there are some foams that don't require it in attic and crawlspaces. The presenter refused to answer the question - later to understand why - that they are also manufacturing the intumescent coatings for over foam in these applications. If the product has been tested an approved, then state that there are some that are and aren't approved! Another big company who makes blowing agents is also on the sales slump with the false statements and closed cell slants - because only closed cell contains their blowing agent. Ironically, the two companies at this conference that made the biggest slants in statements and false incinuations of other products are highly regarded by the SPFA and sponsored the training/conference. The biggest question to ask is, " Who's pocket is being padded if I regard this statement as true fact?" It's a sign of our times that there is no absolute truth but in fact there is and if we all just state the truth, we will all win.
D. Backes Posted: Jun 25, 2008 12:02 PM	Couldn't have said it better myself.
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Jun 30, 2008 09:14 PM	Hi D: Rest assured, you & I agree on many things. There is a place for open cell foam, and I candidly state that. We spray both. Please see my above post: 3/16/2008 7:37 PM. I also am pressing for truth in the industry in lieu of politics and aggressive (slam) marketing. What I disagree with is the company in question (who is a latecomer in the industry) denigrating closed cell in order to promote their product. This is wrong. Here is an assortment of incredible statements from the Asinine company: "It is much softer than the heavy and stiff polyurethane foam with which it is sometimes confused. One can walk on bats of heavy foam insulation, and the material is too stiff to conform completely to the spaces in which they are placed. Icynene fills the cavity completely but is flexible enough that wires or pipes can be pushed through it for later modifications" "There is little or no harmful offgas from the Icynene foam; most gas is carbon dioxide. Inch for inch, however, the Icynene is not quite as insulative as polyurethane, but the harmful foaming agents used by polyurethane is what makes it more insulative." ""Icynene won't burn." (Eric, Building inspector - Greene County, Ohio). He had been told this by Icynene. I offered him a torch and he grew quiet. He had been lied to, like many others have been. ""Posted by: big_tex (My Page) on Fri, Jan 20, 06 at 18:01 I'm also facing the same decision. The Sealection quote is a good 30% less than Icynene! The Icynene dealer here in Austin is VERY confident about his product. I think I'm going to go with the Sealection 500. The Icynene guy claims "Sealection wicks water (sucks up water)". I sure hope it's not true." (Funny. Icynene does do, since they are basically the same product)." ""As far as the differences between Icynene and Sealection 500, it has been my experience that Icynene has little trouble stretching the truth, making unsupported claims about their product while being critical of their competition. I have not found that to be the case with Demilec, Corbond or Biobased. They seem to stick to the features and benefits of their product which tends to give them more credibility in my book." (Building Consultant)." ""After comparing them all and doing my research, I found then all to be pretty simular products. Icynene and Sealection 500 seem to be the leading products in the area. Like the last post said, all of the contractors pretty much stuck to giving the features of thier product except for the Icynene guy. He mostly just talked about what was wrong with the other products. Maybe its in their training, but it really put me off" (Customer from Austin Texas)." "You probably have seen or used the close-cell type foam. This foam is urethane based and hard to the touch when dry. This product does out-gas. It's R-value per inch is greater than open-cell, but it can trap moisture reducing the R-value and potentially causing other nasty things like rotted wood" (Icynene contractor). These statements indicate a willingness to use untruths. That affects all of us in the industry. Warm regards, oG
D. Backes Posted: Jun 30, 2008 10:45 PM	Hi Olger, Your'e right, I think we agree on most things foam. I have to say I started in this industry as an exclusive "Canadian foam" sprayer almost 10 years ago. I probably despise them more than you. I went to their training seminars and brought a rig home and went to work. The best thing I got out of their training was meeting a couple of other contractors who knew the art of asking the right questions. I think everyone in that group came out of those sessions with a healthy dose of skepticism, yet despite it all we still believed in the overall building theory. I am still a foam cool-aid drinker and that's why I still keep plugging away today. I didn't last with the Canadians more than a couple of years or so. During that time I found that the Canadians probably misrepresented themselves more to their own dealers than even to the public. The same BS they tried to feed us then is still espoused today apparently. When I wised up I moved on to other .5 lb water based foams that sometimes sprayed better, sometimes worse but as far as I know are almost identical chemically. Now I spray it all and consider myself pretty open minded but still skeptical if that's possible. I have seen the other side of this with some of the closed cell reps and sales men but not to the extent of you know who. Both have their benefits and drawbacks. What everyone foam contractor needs to do is get educated on their product. Get educated by verifying through independents like Oak Ridge National Labs and independents like our fellow sprayers here on our site. This is a great place to pick up the tips we need and learn through others experiences. This is a tough racket to get into and we all need an edge to succeed. I'm basically a lurker here but sometimes I have to chime in. I guess what I'm trying to say is verify. Don't trash the 'other foam' - they may open your eyes. Turn a gimlety eye toward not just our neighbors to the north but the other industry heavyweights out there who don't care if It takes 8 or 800 dealers to sell the quota to make the shareholders piss their pants with joy. In this business as in most, and in Life, I think It's important to be a critical thinker, ask questions. And don't always accept the answer you get. There's enough wide eyed suckers out there - Don't Be One of Them
philip mullins Posted: Jul 01, 2008 12:54 AM	what i dont get is if what they say about cc is true, and they dont mind saying it round here, especialy to large contractors, then why are they coming out with thier own cc?
D. Backes Posted: Jul 01, 2008 09:32 AM	I think all the Majors are doing what our politicians are doing - Windsocking. I've been bugged for the last couple of years by our snake oil salesmen to the north, they want me back in the fold. I was told a while back by one of their reps that a new natural oil based .5lb is coming out under the ickynine name. Guess what- it's going to be green colored too! They are all fighting over market share so they flood the market with anything that has a half assed chance of selling.
Jim Coler Posted: Jul 01, 2008 05:44 PM	The sad part is that the customers just get confused with all of the BS being shot their way and they don't know what to believe - so the take the cheap route and use "Filter-Glass". They seem to think that FilterGlass is tried and true and proven to be effective. If it's so effective then why do they keep increasing the R-values needed year after year? As long as we all understand that if you're using foam, you getting a better insulation (regardless of whether it's open or closed cell). So, as installers, we can't be bashing one or the other because we just hurt ourselves because it's still foam. Keep it foamin'
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Jul 04, 2008 04:47 PM	Indeed.
quentin Posted: Jul 05, 2008 11:48 PM	Well put gents. I am working on just getting started still but finally have the last bits going with a partner. I may be knocking in the back door of a fellow board member but what I won't be doing like roofing I have no problems passing them to him as a result. I figure several things, be honest, a fair price for good work and if you can't handle the job but know someone that can, pass it to them! Some can't seem to understand that it is better to get SATISFIED customers of foam to promote it as the best way to grow things for all of us. I know a local home builder I talked to and they won't touch foam after one house with it. They had problems with mold after and had to buy the homeowner dehumidifiers and they were used for two years before the problem went away. So we had some idiot that sprayed and either the general contractor didn't listen or the foamer didn't explain the need to ventilate RIGHT so now a major custom home builder in the area hates foam. He is convinced that you have to allow a house to "breath" with poor insulation methods instead of doing it right. So how many houses has the area lost because of this one case and was it worth it to the guy to get one job and no more after? BTW Olger, you know Coventry? That is who I talked to.
Tim Trott Posted: Jul 06, 2008 03:35 PM	Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse here but I've got another one for you: I sprayed a house last month with CC after serious debate with the contracor and homeowner(mostly homeowner)about whether to use CC or OC on the job. Our presentation convinced the contractor to use the CC and friend of homeowner was pushing him towards the icynene "solution" because it was installed in his house down the street. I educated the homeowner on the differences between the two foams and when he saw the CC installed he said quote: Why would anyone want OC installed in their house? Price and lack of consumer education was the primary response. He then told me his buddy was told by the salesman that one of the selling points for using the "solution" was so that it would be easier to detect a leak in the building envelope with OC installed because the water would wick through it. Can you believe it?
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Jul 07, 2008 08:17 PM	Hi Tim. Icynene has been selling this Kool-aid from an empty wagon for a good while and the sad part is - a lot of their dealers are drinking it and passing it on to consumers. Hi Quentin. I am familiar with Coventry (in Beavercreek) but haven't conducted any business with them. How are you doing? oG
quentin Posted: Jul 09, 2008 04:58 PM	Hey Olger. Yeah, they are the ones that screwed up the ventelation or something and blamed it on the foam. Nice expensive higher end homes and because they screwed up something they blamed it on the foam but that is no surprise. Just waiting to hear from the dang bank now. Went yesterday to get the starup loan since I have a partner that is helping on the financial end. Stupid ^%)(* idiots courts and divorce. Grrrr.
Curtis Bell Posted: Aug 01, 2008 02:32 PM	Riversnrocks said it best,"As long as we all understand that if you're using foam, you getting a better insulation (regardless of whether it's open or closed cell)." Foam is foam no matter what density or cell. We have a big mountain to climb, so lets quit throwing rocks at each other and start throwing ropes.
Steve Shaw Posted: Aug 03, 2008 10:36 AM	Well I will weigh in on this discussion. We spray both open and closed cell foams. First you need to understand the biggest difference between the two foams. "Density" Density is what determins a polyurethane foam systems ability to be an Air and Vapor barrier. An air barrier will stop air movment but not vapor transmission. A vapor barrier will stop vapor transmission but may allow air movement. 2# closed cell foams when applied a thicknesses greater than 2" perform as air and vapor barriers. This means that when the vapor drive is from the inside to the out side "winter" the vapor barrier is in the right place. It also means that when the vapor drive changes to outside to inside the vapor barrier is still in the right place. Open cell foam does not act as a vapor barrier unless it is about 8 feet thick!!!. Therfore if you intend to use open cell foam you still need a vapor barrier, in most cases. If you are having problems with closed cell foam dlaminating from the substrates this is either a poorly designed foam sytem or it was installed improperly. There are certain guidlines that must be followed to properly install any foam system. We have 26 years of experience installing both open and closed cell systems. We have had our share of foam failures and problems. We have since developed a training program that teaches you how to properly process any foam system. I belive anyone is capable of getting the material from the drum to the gun. Where installers lack is in the knowledge of the product they are manufactuering. You must relise you are making a plastic onsite, this means the quality of the product relies solely on the installer. If you would like to learn more contact me to find out what we can offer.I belive the key to this business is building good relationships with new and old contractors. If we are to succeed you must suceed. We may not have alot of fancy brochures but we have the knowledge to make you business perform. You will not win every bid as for the time being anyone can sell sprayfoam. I belive that needs to change. I think you every installer should be trained and certified in order to act as a contractor. The installation of a buidlings insulations system is more important that the plumbing and electrical. There are major concerns for this industry if we do not start making improovements in some of the installations that going on. I have seen and inspected foam failures that were preventable by the installer. If foam continues to get the reputation of an insulation system that is to dificult to installer other products will be used. We can help you to learn how to garuanty your work and the performance of the system as a whole. Steve Shaw sshaw@foam-tech.com www.foam-tech.com
Jim Coler Posted: Aug 11, 2008 03:21 PM	F-T Services: I have to correct you about what you said. You stated, "Open cell foam does not act as a vapor barrier unless it is about 8 feet thick!!!. " - This is incorrect and a gross falsification which many closed cell promoters use all the time. As a mater of fact, there are open cell foams which act as an air barrier at even 2.5-3" thickness. Just check their ICC ESR reports and you'll see that it's completely accepted and approved. On a second note, 95-99% of moisture transfer occurs through air movement. This is plain physics. If you block the air movement, you block 95-99% of the moisture movement. So, your scare tactic about condensation and moisture issues is false! In order to have condensation occur, you have to have a cold surface in warm moist air. Even open cell foam prevents the surface from being cold which prevents condensation. In fact, I've seen bigger issues when closed cell is installed at only 2" thick and condensation occurs on the studs because wood is only R-1/ inch and it's only about an R-2-2.5 along the edge of the insulation. This is now a cold surface in a warm moist enviroment and allows condensation to occur. With open cell, it is typicaly installed thicker (3.5" min) which minimizes the thermal bridging and condensation issues along the studs. On a thrid note, open cell can help manage the moisture by absorbing it slightly into the cell structure like wood does. This can minimze condensation because there would be less air suspended moisture to condense (lower RH). You do have to be cautious not to use it in high vapor drive applications like hot tubs, saunas, pool enclosures, and even refrigerated applications where the vapor drive is very high. Condensation can occur within the foam in some of these circumstances and lower the r-value. If you look back at the history of vapor barriers, they didn't exist until fiberglass started having an issue with condensation. This is because "filter-glass" allows the air and moisture to filter right through it and condense on the colder surfaces. This is where they mandated vapor barriers and what they really needed was an air barrier - but that wouldn't be good marketing for the fiberglass industry now would it? The issue with closed cell cracking is not the foam, but the flexing of the wood and disimilar materials. Wood expands and contracts at a different rate than closed cell foam and this movement may cause cracking if it is multiplied over many wood pieces over a wall or ceiling surface. So, what do you say to the customer who says they hey "cracks and pops" after it's been drywalled? Sorry? Stick to the facts F-T Services - and don't exaggerate them because you might have been sold a line of goods!
Dan Beecher Posted: Aug 12, 2008 09:37 AM	Rivers you just contradicted yourself. Yes both open and closed are an air barrier but you state that open cell is a vapor barrier. Big difference to code officials. The perm rating on open cell is no where near the 1.0 perm to be considered a vapor retarder. Most closed cell are a vapor retarder at 2 to 2.5". Thats why F-T stated open cell is not a vapor retarder.It makes a huge difference depending on what part of the country you are talking about the application too.
Jim Coler Posted: Aug 12, 2008 10:12 AM	I didn't see where there where I directly contradicted myself or a statement of open cell being a vapor barrier! Technically, nothing is a complete moisture vapor barrier and they've changed the 2006 ICC code which eliminates the term vapor barrier and used 3 different classifications of vapor retarders. Some open cell foams fall within the Class III which is 1.0-10 perms at even 3-4 inches. So, many open cell foam do qualify as a vapor retarders and not as a vapor barriers. It comes down to the definitions of vapor retarders and vapor barriers. The older definition of vapor barrier in use with fiberglass was meant to be more of an air barrier. Now they're use "Smart-membranes" which supposedly let moisture pass through in one direction only. The fact is that open cell is an air barrier which in many cases and common thicknesses is an approved vapor retarder. there are closed cell guys which refuse to admit this despite the facts. So, F-T's statement about it not being a vapor retarder even at 8' is false and misleading of the facts.
JohnPeters Posted: Aug 12, 2008 02:38 PM	Just when i thought ya'll were getting somewhere, you digressed back to this, bickering...(shakes his head in shame)... "VAPOR RETARDER. A vapor-resistant material, membrane or covering such as foil, plastic sheeting or insulation facing having a permeance rating of 1 perm (5.7 10-11 kg/Pa s m2) or less, when tested in accordance with the dessicant method using Procedure A of ASTM E 96. Vapor retarders limit the amount of moisture vapor that passes through a material or wall assembly. (ICC)" I see no mention of vapor retarder "classes" in ICC code, nor do I see mention of an ICC approved vapor retarder that performs from 1 - 10 perm. For the North East, it is 1.0 perm of less and it has to be installed on the inside of the wall assembly. The only open cell I know of that can reach 1.0 perm is 1- 1.2 lb density (APEX foam), and you need about 5" to reach 1.0 perm. Is there a supplement to 2006 ICC that i am not aware of? I find it hard to believe that the code officials decided to change vapor retarder requirements all of the sudden. All foam densities and material compositions have their features and benefits (and limitations). My business philosophy is to provide the "FACTS" to my customers on each foam type and let them make a decision on which density to opt for.
Jim Coler Posted: Aug 13, 2008 04:17 PM	OK, It depends on your HDD (heating degree day) region. You are correct that in many areas of the NorthEast, a class II vapor retarder of 1.0 perms or less is required. But in most zones across the US, a class III vapor retarder is allowed. Here is an excerpt from the ICC 2006-2007 code language:(Reprinted below) *** IECC Language Approved in the 2006/2007 Code Development Cycle: VAPOR RETARDER CLASS. A measure of a material or assembly’s ability to limit the amount of moisture that passes through that material or assembly. Vapor retarder class shall be defined using the desiccant method with Procedure A of ASTM E-96 as follows: Class I: 0.1 perm or less Class II: 0.1 < perm < or = 1.0 perm Class III: 1.0 < perm < or = 10 perm 402.5 Vapor Retarders. Class I or II vapor retarders are required on the interior side of frame walls in zones 5, 6, 7, 8 and Marine 4. 402.5.1 Class III vapor retarders.Class III vapor retarders shall be permitted where any one of the conditions in Table 402.5.1 is met. ***** One of the conditions in the table mentioned is that moisture will not degrade the building material. Foam is not degraded with moisture - it will dry out and remain the same as before it was wet. in addition to this, another product that qualifies for a class III vapor retarder is in many cases latex paint which is on the drywall. One of the main people who got this into the code is Joe Lstibruk who is highly recognized in the building science community. In a personal discussion with Joe about this topic, he mentioned that while attempting to get this approved, only about 1/4 of what he wanted was approved and it took 6 years to get that. He also mentioned that the current 2006-2007 revisions were better, but not perfect. there are many other building scientists who support designing without a vapor barrier! They reference the "Weatherization program" efforts where cellulose was injected in walls without any vapor retarder at all. The theory was that there would be long term moisture damage as a result of no vapor retarder/barrier. A study was conducted where homes insulated in this program had the walls opened up with a surprise of no moisture damage at all. They found if moisture got in, it also got out and didn't damage the construction materials. So, I happen to be one building science guy who believes in no vapor barrier/retarder other than a continuous air barrier - which some open cells will meet within a reasonable thickness. Any other comments are welcomed.
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Aug 18, 2008 04:55 PM	Right on John P. oG
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Aug 18, 2008 04:58 PM	According to WUFI, there are many scenarios that will allow substrate condensation with open cell foams. Roger Morrison P.E. has identified and traced many of these incidents while he was on the SPFA committee. Be wise, and be good. oG
Jim Coler Posted: Aug 20, 2008 09:06 PM	Agreed - there are circumstances which can cause any system to fail. Many of these circumstances should have been addressed by design/build - like a leaky basement or a house with no gutters. WUFI is a very useful tool, but it is still a computerized model which is "theory" - just like REScheck, REM Rate, or other modelling programs. They don't guarantee their results and are only indicators based on a certain level of assumptions. I've seen many instances where open cell was used without a "vapor barrier" per code - including one instance where the RH inside the house was at least 90% and there was moisture on the walls and almost everything in the building. This was an interesting experience because the homeowner previously had open and closed cell installed in different areas of the house. Both foams had moisture on the surfaces, even at very acceptable thicknesses of 4" closed cell in the ceiling and 5-6" of open cell in the ceiling. after asking the homeowner's permission, I pulled samples out of each of the foams to see how deep the moisture went and it was only on the surface of both foams. The open cell foam was dry just below the surface - even on this cold winter morning of teen temperatures. By the way, the moisture was coming from unvented propane and kerosene heaters, a damp basement and attempting to dry sweaters inside the house on a sweater rack. The basement was the most significant contributor, but he didn't want to do anything about it. Needless to say, I ran from this job where he wanted me to spray more foam on a yet different section of the house roof which had fiberglass. I didn't want to have anything to do with the growing science experiment that was behid that ceiling as you could see thick black furry stuff on the underside of the roof above the fiberglass.
Posted: Aug 21, 2008 07:37 PM	Is there an proven answer to address the example of conflicting information posed earlier? "open cell absorbs moisture and will rot your wood, and another said closed cell will rot the underside of your roof" I have been trying to find an adequate explanation so I can best choose the insulation type for my home in a NE zone 5 climate. Situation: 1885 cross gable slate roof on old growth tongue-in-grooved boards. The attic is unventilated but not tight. No existing insulation. Old slates do fail occasionally and I replace with a sound slate. When the a slate fails rain leaks into the attic, if it rains heavily before slate is replaced. I am sure I am on the right track looking at spray foam of some sort under the roof boards to make the attic a conditioned poart of the house. There is no equipment or storage there. Only a 2 ft square access hatch. With an open mind I seek advice.
Jim Coler Posted: Aug 21, 2008 09:42 PM	Foamalot, Either foam would work in your application and their are slam tactics out there from both open and closed cell advocates. Keep in mind that if your roof leaks - regardless of what you put on the underside or not, you run the risk of it being structurally compromised. So, my suggestion would be to do whatever you can to prevent roof leaks before insulating and potentially covering up the tell-tale signs. Open cell will allow the moisture from a roof leak to "pass through" it. It means it will absorb it and dry to both sides if the adjoining materials and the Temp/RH permit. As moisture "wets" the open cell foam, it can be observed by touch or infrared scan to see where the moisture appears to be originating from. The wetter areas will appear much colder than the surrounding areas and show a water type of pattern. This makes it easier to identfy where the leak is and possibly fix it. Closed cell will block the moisture which keeps it at the underside of the roof deck. Some open cell guys state this will rot your roof but to my knowledge this has never been seen or observed. Closed cell also prevents the use of an infrared camera to see where a leak is originating - because it blocks the moisture. Closed cell is going to be more expensive but can provide more structural rigidity to some older structures if the wood doesn't have a tendency to expand and contract too much. Most older homes have had a chance to let the wood dry out and settle into place, unless you have other moisture sources in the house - like the basement or crawlspaces. So, either would appear to work in you application, and it will likely come down to cost.
Posted: Aug 22, 2008 11:08 AM	Riversnrocks, Thanks for sharing your insights with me. I try to research the building codes, building science articles and studies as well as each manufacturers' technical data when I need to act on something like this. Insulation is not my area of expertise. I've just been in this house for a year now. Being the 3rd owner since 1885, I don't want to screw up the roof boards that have been working well and still sound for all those years. I need to make improvements, especially energy efficiency, without messing with the character of the architecture. In your opinion, would I do better putting a closed cell foam on the attic floor? The attic floor is just open 2x6 beams above the 3rd floor plaster and wood lathe ceiling. The closed cell might protect the plaster and lathe below, short term, from any minor dripping leaks and still seal off the conditioned living areas from the unconditioned attic. Or is foaming on the underside of the roof boards just a superior application to seal off the top envelope? In any case I am in the routine of doing a quick visual inspection the exterior roof slates almost on a daily basis as I walk around the property. If I see a slate slide, drop, crack or just look too tired for peace of mind I'll replace. So a leak, when one occurs, is fixed in short order. Thanks again for your thoughts,
Bryan Kwater Posted: Aug 22, 2008 12:48 PM	If it was my house, I would probably spray closed cell on top of the plaster ceiling. Chances are you are going to have continuous minor roof issues in the future, so you don't want a problem to compound by not knowing about it.
Jim Coler Posted: Sep 04, 2008 09:11 PM	Is this a walk up attic? If it is, the attic doorway, the stairs, and the stair walls, tend to difficult to insulate and air seal well and typiclaly allow a lot of heat loss into the attic. This heat loss could lead to ice damming, and additional leaks depending on your climate conditions. As far as Open or closed cell, you could use either in the floor of your attic if that's the direction you choose. Considering that it's an older house which allowed the wood to acclimate well over many years, the closed cell is not likely to crack as it may with wet or green lumber. The closed cell will likely be more expensive than the open cell but can be accomplished in less thickness. The most important part is to attempt to make a continuous thermal break. Just remember, if you have wood rafters or studs, wood is only R-1/inch and it can make up 15-25% of your wall or roof surface depending on the framing technique. Even 1" of continuous foam will potentially double the R-value of the weakest link in the system. If it's not a walk up attic, I think I would use the open cell on the floor for cost and there would be little to no need to go up there again. Just make sure you seal and insulate the attic hatch. They're "leakers"!
Greg Pruitt Posted: Sep 25, 2008 11:18 AM	I spray both kinds, nearly never use closed cell, because of several articles in reference to rof decks rotting out. Never had a problem you heard of one with open cell inthe attic. If there is one, it would be because the A/C guy did not do what he was told, and he put too much tonnage in the attic. This is not a new product guys, there are thousands of homes done with this and no problems. Do not be defensive. If you sprayed it right with 5.5" or more of 1/2 lb foam and sealed everything. The problem would be mechanical. They come accross more professional thatn many of you sprayers, and have often been in business longer than you, but the problem is still mechanical. Every quote we do states in there that the tonnage should be reduced approx. 40%, and a qualified person should figure this. This takes you off of the hook!