Icynene question | Ask Mason Knowles - SPF Consultant | Spray Foam Technical Questions and Answers | SprayFoam Magazine Q&A Forums

Q&A Forums

Author	Comments
Bryan Kwater Posted: Jul 30, 2009 04:31 PM	Icynene question I am reading the information brochure that the local Icynene dealer gives when they quote a job. One of the paragraphs states: "Where Icynene insulation is installed to a minimum depth of 3.5" and where roof/ceiling insulation is installed to a minimum depth of 6" in accordance with manufacturer's installation instructions and the code, the Bureau of Construction Codes and Fire Safety will approve as an equivalent to an R-19 and R-30 value, respectively, where specified in the Michigan Uniform Energy Code." When they quote jobs, they spell out R-19 in a 3 1/2" cavity. Icynene's website literature says that it is R-3.6 per inch. If they can sell open cell foam based on this "equivalent" number, why aren't all foam companies using this number? In Michigan the new codes call for R-20 for exterior wall assemblies. I was under the understanding that closed cell foam would be one of the only ways to accomplish this in a 3 1/2" wall that does not have additional insulated sheeting. I was also under the understanding that in Michigan there needs to be a vapor barrier on one side too. Their literature states that computer testing shows that it is not needed unless installed in climates that are as cold or colder than Madison, Wisconsin.
mason Posted: Jul 30, 2009 05:00 PM	It appears that Icynene has done some very successful lobbying in Michigan in order to obtain those specific exemptions. If other companies provide similar data that the code department used to approve the Icynene exemptions, they should be approved also. If not, that would be a clear case of selective inforcement of the code and could be challenged.
Bryan Kwater Posted: Jul 31, 2009 10:18 AM	Thank you for the quick response. Is this type of code exception common in other states?
mason Posted: Jul 31, 2009 01:07 PM	I have not heard of it in other states. Anyone else aware of states that have this exception?
jimcoler I have over 10 years of experience specifying and installing open and closed cell spray foam. I've sold my business but I'm still selling for the new owners and consulting on large and custom specific jobs. I've expanded my knowledge into t Posted: Jul 31, 2009 11:24 PM	It should be common in all states, but the FG industry has a larger lobby group at the fed level and has more influence with the FTC and DOE! So, we're stuck with what the FG industry will allow us to say - based on a laboratory test which only measures conductive heat transfer. If they tested MPG of cars in a downhill-neutral test, would that be a valid standard for posting MPG? So then, how can we base the performance of foam and fiberglass on conduction only when real life has conduction, convection, and radiant heat transfers with varying degrees of each depending on many real life variables. Until the foam industry over powers the lobby groups of the FilterGlass industry, we're stuck with it! Jim Coler
Michael Fusco Posted: Aug 01, 2009 11:13 AM	Actually, in Michigan, most code officials will allow all spray foam the exception.... However, this is a result of both the Icynene marketing group and the continuing education presentations made by others as well. Michigan requires ce of their code officials and there are at least two of us who are certified to give those who are foam friendly. Arizona is close....Florida is very close, except Miami Dade.....

Author

Comments

Bryan Kwater

Posted: Jul 30, 2009 04:31 PM

Icynene question

I am reading the information brochure that the local Icynene dealer gives when they quote a job. One of the paragraphs states:

"Where Icynene insulation is installed to a minimum depth of 3.5" and where roof/ceiling insulation is installed to a minimum depth of 6" in accordance with manufacturer's installation instructions and the code, the Bureau of Construction Codes and Fire Safety will approve as an equivalent to an R-19 and R-30 value, respectively, where specified in the Michigan Uniform Energy Code."

When they quote jobs, they spell out R-19 in a 3 1/2" cavity. Icynene's website literature says that it is R-3.6 per inch.

If they can sell open cell foam based on this "equivalent" number, why aren't all foam companies using this number?

In Michigan the new codes call for R-20 for exterior wall assemblies. I was under the understanding that closed cell foam would be one of the only ways to accomplish this in a 3 1/2" wall that does not have additional insulated sheeting.

I was also under the understanding that in Michigan there needs to be a vapor barrier on one side too. Their literature states that computer testing shows that it is not needed unless installed in climates that are as cold or colder than Madison, Wisconsin.

mason

Posted: Jul 30, 2009 05:00 PM

It appears that Icynene has done some very successful lobbying in Michigan in order to obtain those specific exemptions. If other companies provide similar data that the code department used to approve the Icynene exemptions, they should be approved also. If not, that would be a clear case of selective inforcement of the code and could be challenged.

Bryan Kwater

Posted: Jul 31, 2009 10:18 AM

Thank you for the quick response. Is this type of code exception common in other states?

mason

Posted: Jul 31, 2009 01:07 PM

I have not heard of it in other states.

Anyone else aware of states that have this exception?

jimcoler

I have over 10 years of experience specifying and installing open and closed cell spray foam. I've sold my business but I'm still selling for the new owners and consulting on large and custom specific jobs.

I've expanded my knowledge into t

Posted: Jul 31, 2009 11:24 PM

It should be common in all states, but the FG industry has a larger lobby group at the fed level and has more influence with the FTC and DOE! So, we're stuck with what the FG industry will allow us to say - based on a laboratory test which only measures conductive heat transfer.

If they tested MPG of cars in a downhill-neutral test, would that be a valid standard for posting MPG?

So then, how can we base the performance of foam and fiberglass on conduction only when real life has conduction, convection, and radiant heat transfers with varying degrees of each depending on many real life variables. Until the foam industry over powers the lobby groups of the FilterGlass industry, we're stuck with it!
Jim Coler

Michael Fusco

Posted: Aug 01, 2009 11:13 AM

Actually, in Michigan, most code officials will allow all spray foam the exception....

However, this is a result of both the Icynene marketing group and the continuing education presentations made by others as well.

Michigan requires ce of their code officials and there are at least two of us who are certified to give those who are foam friendly.

Arizona is close....Florida is very close, except Miami Dade.....

You need to login to reply to this topic. Please click here to login.