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

Q&A Forums

Author	Comments
William Gibson Posted: Jul 29, 2009 07:29 AM	Wands Stupid questions but I've got to ask. Is any contractors, whatsoever, familiar with any type of wand that can be installed onto the tip of a gun for reach into the tight crawlspaces and/or hard to reach areas? Obviously all of your customers believe there is one out there but I have never seen or heard of one other than the type that are used for the propane cylinders. Anyone? And I probably should make note, my question is for use with 2lb Closed Cell foam only...
mason Posted: Jul 29, 2009 07:51 AM	This is one of the problems that I do not believe the industry has found a good solution to. When I was Manager of Gusmer's Technical Department and Sales Department in the late 90s we worked on this issue. One solution we had was to develop a gun that could shoot a straight line of foam at a distance of 10 to 20 feet. This was used by a SPF manufacturer that used SPF as an adhesive in manufactured housing. The idea was that the applicator could stand on the ground and hit a precise shot of foam exactly where he aimed, eliminating the need for scaffolds or ladders. We never could figure out a way to put a wand on the gun that would be able to flush out the reacted material before it set up. The only way you could do it was with a slow rising foam, which would not be practical in a spray operation. But, you might ask the equipment manufacturers is any advances have been made recently in this regard. Note of Caution: When installing foam in a tight cavity be sure not to spray it too thick (less than 2 inches) and to let it sit for 10 to 15 minutes between lifts. I have seen too many applications where thick lifts of foam have led to problems (shrinking, cracked foam with elongated cells, low compressive strength, scorched or burnt foam, even fires). Ask your supplier for their written recommendations and then be a little conservative in your applications. check your foam periodically for signs of high exothermic heat within the foam. (discoloration, poor cell structure, elongated cells, poor adhesion, fissures, cracks, blow holes, scorched foam, excessive odor, and more.)
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 29, 2009 08:07 AM	So, with the new ICC-ES attic and crawlspace requirements passed with AC 377 which take place June 1, 2010, How do you plan to coat this foam with an intumescent paint? This was one of my arguements that in tight crawlsapces or attics, it's unrealistic and unreasonable to get not just one, but two coats of an intumescent paint on the foam consistently. How are we expected to apply paint when we are having trouble applying foam in these areas? This is just another reason you all need to be members of SPFA and get involved in the Attic and Crawlspaces task force! Jim Coler
William Gibson Posted: Jul 29, 2009 12:19 PM	Some foam manufacturers have put their foam to the test and I know of one manufacturer that in unhabitable attics and crawlspaces you do not have to cover with an intumescent paint on 2 lb. Closed Cell Foam installed less than 6 inches. If you were to install at 6+ inches you'd have to cover it.
Michael Fusco Posted: Jul 29, 2009 04:02 PM	WRONG......you will have to cover it all...ne requirements...Jim is very right
William Gibson Posted: Jul 30, 2009 06:46 AM	Know-it-all, I mean urethaneman... This comes straight off an ICC-ES report... and if there was a new requirement passed for June 1, 2010 then this would at least be good up until then. However, this ICC-ES report is dated February 1, 2009. By all means if an ICC-ES report states this but there is a new requirement overriding what it states then please call me out.
Michael Fusco Posted: Jul 30, 2009 08:47 AM	ok newman....time to learn, or just close your mind and watch what happens....... At the last ICC-ES meeting (June, Birmingham Alabama), the AC-377 criteria (which is where the ESR's come from) was changed. When the change goes into effect, which is either December of this year (which is what SPFA has published), or June of 2010, which is the effective date ICC-ES put on the change. The change requires a new test for shooting foam uncovered in attic and crawl spaces. NO ONE WILL PASS THE TEST UNCOVERED. Of course, between then and now that could also change...technology and all. That's how the test was designed...that's what was passed. No Newman...I don't know everything. I learn everyday in this industry....but I guess you are one of thiose guys who just believes what his current salesman tells him....Get Involved! Know whats comnming...your livlihood depends on it. I would caution that knowing the change is comming may put the requirement upon you to not spray open now. That discussion was had, but dismissed as a personal requirement to seek advice from your insurance company or attorney. Some archetects I have sopken with are already making the change. At the end of the day, it is the decision of the code official, who is not personally liable. (see section one of IRC) Yet, negligence can not be presupposed. According to my attorney, if you know, you are negligent not to disclose....but I also have another lawyer who says different. So...is it good until then? Someone, God willing not me, is going to get the answer to that in the future. Well done SPFA!
William Gibson Posted: Jul 30, 2009 09:34 AM	You say "I would caution that knowing the change is comming may put the requirement upon you to not spray open now.." - is this for open and closed cell foam or just open cell? Also - this has nothing to do what a salesman tells me. This is based off my own research. Currently - with codes approval we are spraying in attics and crawlspaces without a intumescent coating because thats what our ICC-ES report approves for Closed Cell spf. I am sorry I was not abreast to the latest changes that shall go into effect in June 2010. If you look back in the posts I was saying what is CURRENTLY being allowed by codes not what is GOING to be allowed. I fully support SPFA's efforts and it shows as our company is a member of the SPFA.

Author

Comments

William Gibson

Posted: Jul 29, 2009 07:29 AM

Wands

Stupid questions but I've got to ask. Is any contractors, whatsoever, familiar with any type of wand that can be installed onto the tip of a gun for reach into the tight crawlspaces and/or hard to reach areas?

Obviously all of your customers believe there is one out there but I have never seen or heard of one other than the type that are used for the propane cylinders. Anyone?

And I probably should make note, my question is for use with 2lb Closed Cell foam only...

mason

Posted: Jul 29, 2009 07:51 AM

This is one of the problems that I do not believe the industry has found a good solution to. When I was Manager of Gusmer's Technical Department and Sales Department in the late 90s we worked on this issue. One solution we had was to develop a gun that could shoot a straight line of foam at a distance of 10 to 20 feet. This was used by a SPF manufacturer that used SPF as an adhesive in manufactured housing. The idea was that the applicator could stand on the ground and hit a precise shot of foam exactly where he aimed, eliminating the need for scaffolds or ladders.

We never could figure out a way to put a wand on the gun that would be able to flush out the reacted material before it set up. The only way you could do it was with a slow rising foam, which would not be practical in a spray operation.

But, you might ask the equipment manufacturers is any advances have been made recently in this regard.

Note of Caution: When installing foam in a tight cavity be sure not to spray it too thick (less than 2 inches) and to let it sit for 10 to 15 minutes between lifts. I have seen too many applications where thick lifts of foam have led to problems (shrinking, cracked foam with elongated cells, low compressive strength, scorched or burnt foam, even fires). Ask your supplier for their written recommendations and then be a little conservative in your applications. check your foam periodically for signs of high exothermic heat within the foam. (discoloration, poor cell structure, elongated cells, poor adhesion, fissures, cracks, blow holes, scorched foam, excessive odor, and more.)

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 29, 2009 08:07 AM

So, with the new ICC-ES attic and crawlspace requirements passed with AC 377 which take place June 1, 2010, How do you plan to coat this foam with an intumescent paint?

This was one of my arguements that in tight crawlsapces or attics, it's unrealistic and unreasonable to get not just one, but two coats of an intumescent paint on the foam consistently. How are we expected to apply paint when we are having trouble applying foam in these areas?

This is just another reason you all need to be members of SPFA and get involved in the Attic and Crawlspaces task force!
Jim Coler

William Gibson

Posted: Jul 29, 2009 12:19 PM

Some foam manufacturers have put their foam to the test and I know of one manufacturer that in unhabitable attics and crawlspaces you do not have to cover with an intumescent paint on 2 lb. Closed Cell Foam installed less than 6 inches.

If you were to install at 6+ inches you'd have to cover it.

Michael Fusco

Posted: Jul 29, 2009 04:02 PM

WRONG......you will have to cover it all...ne requirements...Jim is very right

William Gibson

Posted: Jul 30, 2009 06:46 AM

Know-it-all, I mean urethaneman...
This comes straight off an ICC-ES report... and if there was a new requirement passed for June 1, 2010 then this would at least be good up until then. However, this ICC-ES report is dated February 1, 2009.

By all means if an ICC-ES report states this but there is a new requirement overriding what it states then please call me out.

Michael Fusco

Posted: Jul 30, 2009 08:47 AM

ok newman....time to learn, or just close your mind and watch what happens.......

At the last ICC-ES meeting (June, Birmingham Alabama), the AC-377 criteria (which is where the ESR's come from) was changed. When the change goes into effect, which is either December of this year (which is what SPFA has published), or June of 2010, which is the effective date ICC-ES put on the change. The change requires a new test for shooting foam uncovered in attic and crawl spaces.

NO ONE WILL PASS THE TEST UNCOVERED.

Of course, between then and now that could also change...technology and all.

That's how the test was designed...that's what was passed.

No Newman...I don't know everything. I learn everyday in this industry....but I guess you are one of thiose guys who just believes what his current salesman tells him....Get Involved!
Know whats comnming...your livlihood depends on it.

I would caution that knowing the change is comming may put the requirement upon you to not spray open now. That discussion was had, but dismissed as a personal requirement to seek advice from your insurance company or attorney.

Some archetects I have sopken with are already making the change. At the end of the day, it is the decision of the code official, who is not personally liable. (see section one of IRC)

Yet, negligence can not be presupposed. According to my attorney, if you know, you are negligent not to disclose....but I also have another lawyer who says different.

So...is it good until then? Someone, God willing not me, is going to get the answer to that in the future. Well done SPFA!

William Gibson

Posted: Jul 30, 2009 09:34 AM

You say "I would caution that knowing the change is comming may put the requirement upon you to not spray open now.." - is this for open and closed cell foam or just open cell?

Also - this has nothing to do what a salesman tells me. This is based off my own research. Currently - with codes approval we are spraying in attics and crawlspaces without a intumescent coating because thats what our ICC-ES report approves for Closed Cell spf. I am sorry I was not abreast to the latest changes that shall go into effect in June 2010.

If you look back in the posts I was saying what is CURRENTLY being allowed by codes not what is GOING to be allowed.

I fully support SPFA's efforts and it shows as our company is a member of the SPFA.

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