Q&A Forums

What's up with these guys? Post New Topic | Post Reply

Author	Comments
Bill Larkie Posted: Jun 22, 2011 11:34 PM	What's up with these guys? Last week I posted an inquiry on the Demilec USA site stating I was looking for a closed cell contractor. I didn't hear back. So today I call them to followup stating again I was looking for a closed cell contractor. The sales person asked why I wanted closed cell. I advised I had done research (from this site too) and determined that closed cell was the better path to go, that it had better r-value and vapor barrier qualities over open cell. Well, go figure. The sales person starts to sell me on open cell. I reminded her I had done my homework and wanted closed cell. Her response was to "just to let me know" that closed cell "increases noise transmission"......like WTF??? When they sell both products, why would they try to push me off on their open cell product when I already stated I wanted CLOSED CELL?? And then to heap on, they give me the name of a contractor in "my town" who turns out to be 2hrs away. And he wants to sell me on open cell in spite of having just told him I had done my homework and wanted CLOSED CELL. Do they not believe in their own product or is the profit margin for open cell so great that they are dissuaded from selling their own closed cell product?? What gives??
Posted: Jun 23, 2011 09:42 AM	increases noise transmission?? brilliant,,,send this bimbo back to school...or back to the warehouse,,, now if she wanted to say open cell is more effective at sound reduction when compared to closed cell foam due to its reduction in vibrational transmission of sound when compared to cc foam,,she may have been on the right track,,,kinda,,,but then we have the whole wall system thingy dingy,,,you know,, all the wall systems components and their overall integration into the total sound reduction system... hey,,,if they dont want to talk to you,,there are plenty of other suppliers with good applictors of cc foam who apply icc-es report holding foams,,,,many advertise right here on spf.com(your welcome doogles) (idiots sidebar...many newbee spf applicators hate cc foam cause they aint learned/been properly trained how to spray it,,it is a biatch to trim and cut,,,sprays slower,,,more fickle to the newbee all the way around,,but they luv oc foam,,,fast app..easy to work with on the walls and studs,,easy to get off their oversprayed bodies lol,,,may be why you were being pushed to the oc camp,,,they aint got no cc dude worth a damn in your area...lol)
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: Jun 23, 2011 07:40 PM	Well, were do I begin? I personally do recommend open cell over closed cell in a wood built structure and spray both products. There are a couple of reasons for this. The first one is wood is an open cell material and installing closed cell can drive the moisture to the wod causing it to expand and contract more drastically than using Open cell foam. pen cel foma acts as a moisture management system, not a moisture containment system. The second reason is the moisture containment system doesn't allow the moisture through the foam which can cause problems with the roof if your roof leaks. It can rot above the foam and yo won't know it until it's to late. Thene there's the risk of putting it on too thick and causin a fire! If it's put on too thick in one pass, there is a risk of starting a fire. Then there's the total cost of the product which is typically about 30-40% more than open cell for the same R-value. The cost per R-value is actually less on open cell than the closed cell. So, other than these, I would give you a price for both open and closed cell, try to educate you as much as possible and let you decide. Jim
Posted: Jun 23, 2011 11:46 PM	and,, once again...bs,,,pure unadulterated hiberbable i cant believe what i just read,,, respectfully,,maybe,, and what rectum did you pull that out of jim,,, drives moisture into the wood,,, brilliant,,,show me the study,,, show me the modeling,,show me somethin,,substantiate your statement with something more than what you think you think,,, now i can show you moisture drive into 15" of open cell foam,,,on an unconditioned lid,,as the sun comes up and drives it into the timbers and into the foam,,and i can show the curve of it drying back out to the outside,,as it should,,, physics,,not bs,,,cripes,,,and subsequently i can show you moisture drive into lessor depths of open cell foam,,physics,,the way of the world,,, fire risk is an application error,,pure and simpled,,stuck a probe in a 12" hogged bun of oc foam,,,well the temps are up there baby,,, but yes indeed,,,open cell foam is less expensive when r value alone is considered,,, plenty of posts on the merits of both formulations out here,,, this otta be good,,,(donning flak jacket)
steven argus Posted: Jun 24, 2011 01:02 PM	Yup, this otta be good! Lazy boy reclined, Jiffy pop popped and ice cold beer cracked. Let er go boys! Hee Hee.
Bill Larkie Posted: Jun 24, 2011 02:10 PM	yeah, I gotta agree. I've done a fair amount of research over the last week churning through multiple different sites and have seen many a comment on either side of the fence but the fire comments seem like gratuitous fear mongering. From other postings I've seen, it's clear the guy is not a fan of closed cell foam. Maybe he got burned in one of those fires he's talking about (in which case, he needs to get out of the business). Anyway, question for ya'll (assuming it's allowed and there's no rate police out there)...... I just got a verbal quote from a guy of $2.98-4.08 per board foot for a 2lb closed cell roof and wall installation (Dallas area). Is that the normal ballpark rate? It seems a bit high to me. Thoughts?
Grady Littlehale Posted: Jun 24, 2011 05:09 PM	Did you mean square ft?
Bill Larkie Posted: Jun 24, 2011 05:14 PM	hmmmm....I pretty sure he said board foot. We talked about the size of my place which is roughly about 5700 board feet with 2" in the wall and 3" in the ceiling. I could have misconstrued what he was saying. I was thinking it would be lower based on things I had been reading in other blogs and sources. At his rate, it would be 15,000-20,000 for my little 1256sq ft house. I was thinking it should be down in the 5,000 range. No?
Bill Larkie Posted: Jun 24, 2011 05:34 PM	Phew!! Called the guy back. He was talking SqFt. That puts it back down in my expected range of cost. He's going to check my blog and then make a trip out here next week to look at the house personally.
John Shockney Posted: Jun 25, 2011 12:54 PM	The big “D” has always pushed open cell as being a better choice because they try to compete with the fiberglass guys. And there air higher profits for the contractor by spraying it to the marketing model that they give their contractors When I met with one of their reps several years ago he was pushing the fact that they had an ICC ES report that approved the application of only 3.5 inches of open cell in the walls and 5.5 on the underside of the roof deck for up to zone 5 or 6 as “ADEQUATE”, I think this is why we are seeing open cell foam sprayed too thin to give customers the energy savings that they expect even though it may perform as well as the fiber glass that would normally be used. Also the rep form “D” was the first person to tell me “that you don’t want to spray closed cell under a roof because you won’t be able to tell if the roof is leaking until it’s too late and the sheeting rots out and someone could fall through” what a load of @##@^$#@^ you could take all the sheeting off and walk across the 2# foam!!!! Also bidfw, I looked at your blog last week and found it very interesting and really enjoyed your take on home inspectors and I may post a link to it on another thread here. But what I want to say is I personally spray both open and closed cell foam and I would recommend closed cell for you project as long as you could fit it into your budget, closed cell is the better product but you do get more R-value per dollar with open cell but you do have to have enough room to get enough of it in place to get the R-value that you need. And don’t let anyone tell you that R-value doesn’t matter, it does along with air sealing and other concerns like thermo bridging that could be reduced by adding furring strip to separate the drywall from the framing. Airpro
steven argus Posted: Jun 25, 2011 02:46 PM	foamdude: 1 Cooler: 0
Posted: Jun 25, 2011 06:44 PM	no stop that,,,, you sound like sirrichardll....
John Shockney Posted: Jun 26, 2011 12:01 AM	haven't we been down this road before. and Didn't Richard push Closed cell Airpro
Posted: Jun 26, 2011 04:24 AM	..indeed we have,, but when they become current posts,, its what the "info surfers" see who dont spend the time to find the truth... "...you want the truth,,,you can't handle the truth")... so you it is in MY best intrest to ask questions right away,,,even if it aint nicey nice,,, cause the person reading could be MY customer... and if they read this TRIPE they could be mislead,,,much like the author,,, oh yeah,, and did ya know that if its a bio foam the moisture in the wood will scream,,,nematoads,,neamatoads or sumpin like that,,and turn into to dennies waffles??? think about it,,,yeah,,thats the ticket,,, :)~
John Shockney Posted: Jun 26, 2011 09:08 AM	dude It's always fun when you get involved. Mulder "the truth is out there" The bottom line is use the right foam in the right place, get the R-value needed to save money, and we recommend advanced framing to reduce thermal bridging but few builders will frame a house that way. Airpro
steven argus Posted: Jun 26, 2011 10:00 PM	Jim must be busy blending up soybeans.
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: Jun 29, 2011 09:11 AM	OK Guys, sprry about that. I've been busy for a change- unfortunately with maintenance activities! Yes, our products are soybean oil based and I stil promote open cell - regardless of what foamdude or airpro say! Modeling is only that -a theory of how the moisture will migrate and be handlesd in the substrates. It's only as good as the information put into it and there are a lot of assumptions (ASS-U-ME)that are incorrect. So, I agree wit your comment about back to basics and back to physics and that's what I'm basing in on. I'm sprayed 6" in ceilings with no problems with moisture migration and even with over 85% RH in the attic. I was in a house just a couple of weeks ago that the customer called and said they noticed moisture in the attic. I showed up and found the 6" of open cell doing its job, protecting the attic from over heating, providing an air barrier and moisture protection. This is the attic that was 85F and over 85% RH. An there was no moisture drive into the foam itself. There was no water build up within the foam or through the foam. So, where was the moisture coming from??? I went into the basement - which we also did the crawlspaces, and noticed three racks of clothes drying in the basement with wet clothes on them. The I mentioned to the customer and she said they had the basement flood in the last two weeks until they got the drain line snaked out! So, that's where the moisture was coming from! It's not always the foam as the root cause of the problem but we are easy to get blamed! This is a real lief case study where the roof should have been saturated with moisture from the inside due to the basement flooding and the drying clothes. Not, just a theory based model that someone predicts how it will act! So, foamdude and Airpro, you can drink your CC coolade, but the truth is no vapor drive into the open cell at over 6" thick. And Guiness, put down your beer, get out of your lazyboy chair and get back in the ring. You're just having too much fun watching us banter back and forth!
angus mcdougald Posted: Jun 29, 2011 11:32 AM	Where's the independent evidence for cc rotting the roof? I like em both don't get me wrong, and I think the profit is easier with oc but I personally prefer CC Oc adds no structural benefit for eg. I also think the promoted downsides of cc outside of price are the result of scumbag sales tactics from people like icynene who do not have both products to sell.... imho
John Shockney Posted: Jun 29, 2011 01:52 PM	I spray alot of open cell foam but I just don't think that only 6inches is enough insulation for the underside of the roof. And like 8-10 inches here in Indiana. I do think closed cell is a better product but you do get more R-value per dollar with open cell so both have a place in this business. I also believe in giving the customer the options and let them make the choice, it's their money. Airpro
steven argus Posted: Jun 29, 2011 02:20 PM	Yes, I do enjoy the banter. Not quite sure how to score this one? As I've said in the past, All foams have their place. Get the SF of the building, give the customer info, Give them options. Guide them in the right direction of course. But whatever you do, don't give them fiberjunk or old newspaper! LOL P.S. We to have sprayed 6 inches of OC, unvented, with great success. I have a long term project that I have been watching. No problems so far for 4 years. Not picking sides, I'm just sayin.
Posted: Jun 29, 2011 06:31 PM	...im still changin my pants,,,
Posted: Jun 30, 2011 04:13 AM	now that i double wiped,,, nice,,science indeed,,,i stuck my head in the schittter flushed and said look momma we gots us a whirlpool modeling is done by computer generated software from places like,,lets say,,oak ridge national labs,,,and AIA sanctioned software who pull the crap out their butt indeed,,, but much better than i stuck my head up in there,,,sheesh,,, now then jim,,,since it appears you the have the agenda here,,,not with me personally,,but you want to maintain this devicive camp type of point of view,,,, for the record,,my company sprays equal amounts of open and closed cell foam,,,we spray the appropriate product for the appropriate application,,,or we wont apply,,, now zunnie boy,,i told you be4,,,we have 15" of oc hung on a girder truss vaulted cathedral,,,east/west exposure,,,moisture transdurer at the peak @ 2" in foam,,,another about 6" in foam,,another @ 12" in foam,, another in free air space below foam in conditioned airspace assembly,,we had a university of iowa engineering senior monitor the structure for a year for her thesis or some big fancy schmancy thingy,,,the data was predictable(basics physics and fluid hygrodynamics)but fascinatiing none the less,,, jim,,,as the sun comes up the moisture drive thru the roof assembly and into the foam was very appapent,,,you could see it as the heat of the day heated the roof and drove it into the the roof assembly,,,and likewise,,you could see it dry to the outside,,(again physics and good building science/construction practices)as the sun crossed to the west,,,it was a fascinating curve to see...much like the young lady doing the monitering,,opps my bad,,, the TRUTH is NOT no vapor drive into 6" oc... what is the perm rateing of the foam you apply @6"???lol... every picture tells a story dont it???
SprayFoamSupply.com Posted: Jun 30, 2011 07:47 AM	The moisture drive in the summer is from out to in. What would happen in that attic if you went up there in the winter? George
dan pruglo Posted: Jun 30, 2011 11:23 PM	Jim Jim Jim ........ Open cell is ONLY better for 4 r value IF you have the room, 2# is way better if you don't have 15" to spray onto something ( which usually you don't!)
Doug Commette Posted: Jul 01, 2011 12:01 AM	you guys are awesome. where else can you kick each other's tail with a smile on your face and still come out knowing that spray foam insulation is the absolute best. thank god for oc AND cc. thanks for being here!! DC
Posted: Jul 01, 2011 04:13 AM	..and the smiles are free!!! re: 15" lots of room in a conditioned lid assembly,,,12" x r4.2= r50,,,energy star app...performance down the road,,,cant put in half as much and promise twice as much,, we shoot "long" to get the additional perm number to satisfy the 806.3 bs in irc 2009,,,so how are you oc fellas dealin with that issue...opps..he launched it,,,jim???lol??
Bill Larkie Posted: Jul 01, 2011 08:12 AM	Thanks guys. I've been reading with interest. It's good to know both sides of the debate are well represented. I'm still going with closed cell! ;-) I have only 5.25" of space in the ceiling which starts at 16"OC at the walls and then narrows to about 3.5" on center at the highest point of the roofline below the cupola that sits up top. Do I have to be concerned at all with thermal bridging up at the top where the joists are in some cases, less than an inch apart? I would think likely an installer would just fill those areas until it gets down to the 4-6" apart, no? It's all good info! Keep it coming! I got a guy from over Tyler, TX way coming out this morning to look at the house and generate an estimate.
John Shockney Posted: Jul 01, 2011 09:20 AM	The lack of room to install adequate open cell foam is the main reason I recommended that you use closed cell foam, this was after looking at your blog and the pictures there. If you are concerned about thermal bridging you can add 1x3 furring strips crossways to the ceiling to separate the drywall from the roof joists but that may be difficult because of the way this house is built. Airpro
Bill Larkie Posted: Jul 01, 2011 01:28 PM	Thanks for the info. Your comment about adding furring strips got me thinking. I Just had a metal roof installed on my house which has furring strips to allow air to circulate underneath. I can already feel the difference inside even though there is no insulation in the roof. The radiant heat is considerably less than before the roof was installed so I think I'll be good! ANOTHER QUESTION..... The company that came out this morning to check the house and measure is a contractor/distributor for Biobased Insulation out of Arkansas. I thought I saw a negative comment, or so it seemed, somewhere in the archives about a spray foam company out of "AR" and figured it might be the same one. Anyone have any experience with or insights on their product? Airpro, was that you that made the comment?
steven argus Posted: Jul 02, 2011 10:35 AM	Jeezz, I don't ANYONE who sprays Biobased foam. HMMMM, I wonder...
Bill Larkie Posted: Jul 02, 2011 12:29 PM	Meaning? You know something the rest of us don't? Do tell.
angus mcdougald Posted: Jul 02, 2011 02:47 PM	I had a major problem with shrinkage on a job before they went bankrupt.... It was weird because it started to shrink 3 weeks after install.... Might have been my fault (never did moisture tests in new addition.... and we used propane heaters), but I never had time delayed shrinkage before or since.....
John Shockney Posted: Jul 03, 2011 12:12 PM	For the most part I think the Bio Based foam is a marketing gimmick the manufacture substitutes less than 10% of the poly with soy base poly to get tax breaks for being green, when the greenest thing about foam is the reduction of energy use in the building that it is installed. The only experience that I personally have with any bio foam is when I first started spraying 7+ years ago and the small manufacture was underfunded and could not deliver foam on time and that was why I switched suppliers at that time but I did find the bio based foam harder to work with the non-bio foams that I am using now. There has been some discussion here in the past about a contractor having to remove foam supplied by a small manufacture that had not passed the fire rating tests though the supplier had told the contractor that the testing had been done and the foam was approved for the application. So the one thing I recommend is make sure the product that is being installed has been tested by someone like UL and you can look up or get copies of the test report. All the big manufactures like Demalac, BASF, Bay Systems (Bayer Chem), and so on… have these just make sure you are getting quality product. Airpro
John Shockney Posted: Jul 03, 2011 12:40 PM	I forgot to say that all foam has some bio or renewable content because some form of sugar is needed to form the carbon chain required to create the plastic. Airpro
brandon obrien Posted: Jul 06, 2011 11:47 AM	Hey bldfw. My name is Brandon O'Brien and I work in house at Demilec USA. First let me apologize that no one responded to your initial inquiry through our webpage. We are in the process of revamping the entire thing and it should be up and ready to rock within the next month. First off, the reason we usually recommend OC in this part of the USA is due to cost effectiveness. The open cell will generally be a cheaper, quicker alternative that will provide you with excellent insulation as well as giving you superior noise dampening qualities over closed cell. CC will not amplify sound but its NRC (Noise Reduction Coefficient) is not competitive with that offered by Open Cell foams. Our closed cell foam is an absolutely excellent product and we have plenty of contractors locally (Texas is our homebase) that have years of experience applying it. If you email me @ brandon.obrien@demilecusa.com I would be happy to put you in touch with some that are closer to your area to give you a quote for your job. Some of the points made in this thread about CC are true, but can be avoided by an experienced contractor. If the foam is sprayed too thick in one pass (contractor is in a hurry) it can cause heat to build up inside the foam and possibly lead to a fire (due to the heat generated by the exothermic reaction which causes the foam to rise). Also, because CC foam is a water barrier, if it is sprayed to the roof deck and the roof begins to leak, it will hold the water and by the time you realize there is a leak, you may have more damage than with OC where the water will pass through the foam. If you were to put the CC foam on the attic floor, you would avoid this problem, however your HVAC would be in an unconditioned space, exposing it to the elements (150 degrees in summer here in Texas!). On the other hand, our CC products can be applied in the attic without an ignition barrier which is not the case with most OC foams which saves material and installation costs. Ultimately the decision on what you want in your home is yours as the customer is always right! Hope I was able to answer some of your questions and help make up for the initial negative impression you got from us at Demilec. Let me know if you have any other questions.
quentin Posted: Jul 06, 2011 12:41 PM	Both products are good and have their places. I will keep it simple, limited space then go CC, limited budget, go OC. I refused to spray anything below grade with OC due to risks of moisture but OC is great in walls and an attic. As for the comments about leaks going unnoticed, as I point out to people asking me, that is part of owning a home, you maintain your roof! If you don't maintain and check things now and then, you pay more later because problems get worse before you deal with them. No different than owning and maintaining a car or etc too. Yes both OC and CC are good in an attic so it is the choice of the CLIENT with me! I point out the advantages and disadvantages of both, educate the customer and THEY decide unless it is a situation like I mentioned below grade or places like a crawlspace!
John Shockney Posted: Jul 06, 2011 02:12 PM	It’s obvious that Brandon never looked at the customer’s blog before giving advice and there is the standard open cell marketing bs about roof leaks again!! And this customer doesn’t even have an attic to spray foam on the attic floor!! Airpro
Bill Larkie Posted: Jul 06, 2011 04:29 PM	Give the guy a break. At least he responded....and with a lot more info than the last person(s) and for that I'm pleased. As mentioned, I decided to go with closed cell because of it's better R values in tight spaces. In case you didn't see it clearly in the under deck roof pics on my blog, there's only about 1" spacing between the ceiling joists at the center ring so I figure I'll get more R coverage in those tight areas. I'm also looking for the best method to seal the envelope and it seems like CC is the best. As for leaking roofs, I had that problem with the existing composition roof and had a metal roof properly installed over the one layer of composition. I watched them install nearly all of it including the flashing and am satisfied that there can be no leaks (he says with his fingers crossed) so I'm not worried about future leaks. I'll follow up with Brandon and see where we go from there.
Terry Adams Posted: Jul 09, 2011 01:55 AM	Here we go with icy's talking points again. Who on this planet has the documented proof of a leak in a CC sprayed roof causing damage. Who on this planet has the documented proof of a leak in a OC sprayed roof of it running right thru the foam and showing up right away under the leak. The only way I see either one of these scenarios working is if the roof is flat or a cathedral ceiling with the OC’s skin shaved off.
mason Posted: Jul 11, 2011 01:03 PM	Coincidentally, I wrote an article a few years ago titled Sprayfoam Myths. One of the myths was of closed cell foam causing wood decks to deteriorate due to roof leaks. Here is a portion of the article. It was first published in RSI magazine and later in Modern Materials and Construction Specifier. "Are you getting reliable information about spray polyurethane foam? Mason Knowles Surveys suggest that spray polyurethane foam (SPF) usage in residential applications is growing up to 30 percent per year. Builders and architects are discovering it can be used to address many construction challenges, such as minimizing air leakage, providing reliable insulation, and controlling moisture and indoor air quality. It is important that the spray foam community provides the best technical information in order for the consumer to make informed choices and not contribute to exaggerated marketing hype to sell a product. In the many years I have worked in the spray foam industry, I have read mountains of building science articles, coordinated dozens of research projects, wrote numerous articles, made dozens of presentations, visited hundreds of job sites, and answered thousands of technical questions. A significant percentage of my work has involved addressing the similarities and differences between low-density open-cell SPF and closed-cell medium-density SPF. I have tried to be objective about my opinions and the facts so the construction industry could make an informed decision on when, what, and where to use spray foam. In this article, I would like to address a few of the claims that I would consider misleading, exaggerated or just plain false. As is often the case, there is a little bit of truth in each claim, so it becomes important to filter through negative marketing and true performance information. A few examples: • Closed-cell foam installed to the underside of wood roof decks will rot the deck because roof leaks go undetected due to the water resistance of the foam. Closed-cell spray foam has been installed to the underside of wood roof decks for more than 40 years with great results. There is no historical record of SPF installed to the underside of wood decking causing deterioration from roof leaks. To the contrary, closed-cell foam is water resistant and will repel liquid water. It seals cracks and crevices in the wood deck so any water that gets past the roofing system stays on top of the wood deck and gravity takes it down to the edge of the building and off the roof. In colder climates, the SPF keeps the roof deck cold, so that ice damming is less likely to occur, further reducing the chance of water damage to the building. • Closed-cell foam is a vapor retarder and cannot be used in warm, humid climates because it does not allow water vapor to go into and out of an assembly. Closed-cell foam has a perm rating of approximately 1.5 per inch to 3 per inch and an R value of approximately 6 per inch. This combination allows a controlled moisture vapor flow while separating the inside and outside temperature. The result is better control of condensation within the building envelope, so long as there is sufficient SPF insulation to prevent condensation. In most applications a half-inch to 1 inch of SPF will suffice in warm and mixed climates and 1 inches to 21/2 inches in colder climates. (Note: hygrothermal modeling calculations are recommended when non-typical conditions occur such as extreme environments and unusual construction or design). " After the article a few folks pointed out that sprayfoam would prevent water from coming in from the sheathing but would not prevent leaks that could come in from flashing details, roof penetrations such as soil pipes and vents, and where the foam doesn't reach. But, if water comes in from those spots, and the foam doesn't stop the water intrusion into the building it is the same as if the foam was not there with one major exception. Any deterioration would be limited to a very small area of the deck surrounding the leak. I have inspected quite a lot of shingle roofs during my hurricane investigations with RICOWI and during my earlier career as a roofing contractor. If you have a leaky roof, the wood decking warps fairly soon (typically within a few weeks). It shows up as a very noticeable wavy spot in the roof line. So, again I still do not see closed cell foam causing additional damage, in fact due to its closed cell quality, it limits the amount of water intrusion into a building that would cause damage such as damaged drywall, carpets, electrical wiring, etc. This particular myth was started by the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturer's Association and PIMA. I first encountered it during building code hearings in 2005. It was soon picked up by a couple of open cell foam companies. We have thousands of projects with foam installed to the underside of wood roof decks going back to the 60s (mostly freezer and coolers). The track record is very good. I am not aware of any documented cases of wood deck deterioration. Just some theories that don't hold water (pun intended)
angus mcdougald Posted: Jul 11, 2011 11:30 PM	You da man..... In your face oc..... Its good to keep the price Down closer to fiber. How much does it cost to get your articles for my site and as handouts? Also for the record do you have a financial interest in sprayfoammagazine.com other then self promotion?
mason Posted: Jul 12, 2011 01:33 PM	I can send you the articles, just email me at masonknowles.com Also, some of these are on my website. masonknowles.com I do not have any financial interest in sprayfoammagazine.com I was asked by Doug to host my forum, but I do not get paid for it. I used to perform this service while with SPFA for years and like to provide information. I also learn what is going on in the industry and many times get helpful information from contributors. I look at my contributions as mostly a public service, although it doesn't hurt to get my name out there as an expert. I do get paid by Doug for some of the articles that I contribute. I am completely independent. My clients include home and building owners, chemical companies, contractors, manufacturers, distributors, general contractors, magazines, insurance companies, trade groups, building code organizations, government agencies and more. So my views are based on experience, research, observations, educational courses, participation in the many industry groups and of course the experience of our many contributors.
Gerry Wagoner Posted: Aug 17, 2011 06:06 PM	Olger weighing in... There is a place for both types of foam, open and closed cell. Closed cell foam has several advantages that are surrendered in open cell foam. R-value per inch. Built-in vapor barrier. Strength. It has closed cells. And no need to fill the stud cavity. For 35-years, closed cell foam was the only kid-on-the-block. Open-cell foam is relatively young in this industry, and it was developed with one premiere virtue in mind. It costs less. In order to drive the cost down, it was necessary to surrender the aforementioned virtues. That said, open cell foam does have a few advantages. It requires more mass of material to achieve similar R-values so it can be used to encapsulate the top chord of trusses and it fills type B metal decking easier than closed cell. It has somewhat better NRC rating - thus is better at restricting sound. Both foams will help prevent unwanted sound from intruding a wall - due to their air sealing abilities. Open cell just does it somewhat better. Open cell foam makes a better cavity fill, but you better hope that water doesn't have access to the material or it will become a sponge trapped in the wall assembly. Other than that, both are good products. Know their limitations and have fun. `og
Caleb DeFord Posted: Aug 19, 2011 12:47 PM	Mason, thanks for good, solid data. I'm glad you give your time and knowledge to help make this industry better. You are succeeding. I also had to chime in on a falsehood about open cell r-values. There is no oc foam that has an R-value of 4.2 inches at 12" thick. Gaco has the highest R-value at 4.2 per inch when tested at a 1 inch thickness but after the first inch it drops to 3.9 per inch. All the other oc foams experience the same drop in r-value after the first inch but Gaco has the highest final r-value. Threads like this one make me smile. Discussions like this are why we all keep on eye on this forum. Hey 'dude, thanks for relating the attic experience with the 15 inches of oc foam. Can I get a copy of the results on that test?
Posted: Aug 19, 2011 06:40 PM	...i'll ask don,,,
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: Aug 20, 2011 01:55 PM	Where do I start?? I've missed a couple of posting on this for a while and see I've gotten behind! For one, I currently SUCCESSFULLY spray BioBased Insulation and spray their Open Cell and Closed cell systems. I can also spray them in the winter time! 7+ years ago was a long time ago and the company has changed both inside and out! Yes, the did go bankrupt and that was to restructure the company financially! Yes, they are still in business and still have good product and can supply anyone with BioBased product. Now, the soy content has always been in question but according to their website, they have certified testing showing 3% to 16% of the final foam content! This is much more than just a marketing ploy, it's a change in the product! So, when you take into consideration that they can only affect the B side (50%) of the components, then you get 6%-32% based on soy content! I know there are a lot of other companies out there claiming sugar or sucrose based polyols and they're typically talking about 5-10% of the polyol is made from sugar or sucrose. BioBased uses Agrol which is 97% pure soybean oil polyol! So, when you start adding up the percentages, you're talking less than 1% of most other products is soy or renewable! So, airpro -you'd better check your facts before you start throwing darts! Yes, BioBased can be different to spray and it takes different settings to achieve good performance but it will perform equally to a competitors product! And yes, I know there have been studies with moisture migration through the open cell foam, but how many studies are you aware of showing the same moisture migration through the wood structural members? Our BioBased 501 has 9.2 perms at 3.5" thick and less than 6.1 perms at 5.5" thick! How many perms does a wood stud have???? About 10-15! So, I think you'll lose that argument when you follow the facts!
Posted: Aug 21, 2011 04:33 AM	...yawn,,,