R-VALUE MYTH
Article courtesy of SprayFoam.com
"R" Fairy Tale: The Myth of Insulation
Values
One of the fairy tales of our time is the "R-value." The "R-value" is
touted to the American consumer to the point where it has
taken a "chiseled in stone" status. The saddest
part of the fairy tale is the R-value by itself is almost
a worthless number.
It is impossible to define an insulation with a single number.
It is imperative we know more than a single "R" number.
So why do we allow the R-value fairy tale to be perpetuated?
I don't know. I don't know if anybody knows. It obviously
favors fiber insulation. Consider the R-value of an insulation
after it has been submersed in water or with a 20 mile per
hour wind blowing through it. Obviously the R-value of fiber
insulations would go to zero. Under the same conditions,
the solid insulations would be largely unaffected. Again
R-value numbers are "funny" numbers. They are meaningless
unless we know other characteristics.
None of us would ever buy a piece of property if we knew
only one dimension. Suppose someone offered a property for
$10,000 and told you it was a seven. You would instantly
wonder if that meant seven acres, seven square feet, seven
miles square, or what. You would want to know where it was
-- in a swamp, on a mountain, in downtown Dallas. In other
words, one number cannot accurately describe anything. The
use of an R-value alone is absolutely ridiculous. Yet we
have Code bodies mandating R-values of 20's or 30's or 40's.
A fiber insulation having an R-value of 25 placed in a house
not properly sealed will allow the wind to blow through it
as if there were no insulation. Maybe the R-value is accurate
in the tested material in the lab, but it is not even remotely
part of the real world. We must start asking for some additional
dimensions to our insulation. We need to know its resistance
to air penetration, to free water, and to vapor drive. What
is the R-value after it is subjected to real world conditions?
The R-value is a fictitious number supposed to indicate
a material's ability to resist heat loss. It is derived by
taking the "k" value of a product and dividing
it into the number one. The "k" value is the actual
measurement of heat transferred through a specific material.
Test to Determine the R-Value
The test used to produce the "k" value is an ASTM
test. This ASTM test was designed by a committee to give
us measurement values that hopefully would be meaningful.
A major part of the problem lies in the design of the test.
The test favors the fiber insulations -- fiberglass, rock
wool, and cellulose fiber. Very little input went into the
test for the solid insulations, such as foam glass, cork,
expanded polystyrene or urethane foam.
The test does not account for air movement (wind) or any
amount of moisture (water vapor). In other words, the test
used to create the R-value is a test in non-real-world conditions.
For instance, fiberglass is generally assigned an R-value
of approximately 3.5. It will only achieve that R-value if
tested in an absolute zero wind and zero moisture environment.
Zero wind and zero moisture are not real-world. Our houses
leak air, all our buildings leak air, and they often leak
water. Water vapor from the atmosphere, showers, cooking,
breathing, etc. constantly moves back and forth through the
walls and ceilings. If an attic is not properly ventilated,
the water vapor from inside a house will very quickly semi-saturate
the insulation above the ceiling. Even small amounts of moisture
will cause a dramatic drop in fiber insulation's R-value
-- as much as 50 percent or more.
Vapor Barriers
We are told, with very good reason, that insulation should
have a vapor barrier on the warm side. Which is the warm
side of the wall of a house? Obviously, it changes from summer
to winter -- even from day to night. If it is 20 F below
zero outside, the inside of an occupied house is certainly
the warm side. During the summer months, when the sun is
shining, very obviously the warm side is the outside. Sometimes
the novice will try to put vapor barriers on both sides of
the insulation. Vapor barriers on both sides of fiber insulation
generally prove to be disastrous. It seems the vapor barriers
will stop most of the moisture but not all. Small amounts
of moisture will move into the fiber insulation between the
two vapor barriers and be trapped. It will accumulate as
the temperature swings back and forth. This accumulation
can become a huge problem. We have re-insulated a number
of potato storage's which originally were insulated with
fiberglass having a vapor barrier on both sides. Within a
year or two the insulation would completely fail to insulate.
The moisture would get trapped between the vapor barriers
and saturate the fiberglass insulation to the point of holding
buckets of water. Fiber insulation needs ventilation on one
side; therefore, the vapor barrier should go on the side
where it will do the most good.
We understand air penetration through the wall of the house.
In some homes when the wind blows, we often can feel it.
But what most people, including many engineers, do not realize
is that there are very serious convection currents that occur
within the fiber insulations. These convection currents rotate
vast amounts of air. The air currents are not fast enough
to feel or even measure with any but the most sensitive instruments.
Nevertheless, the air is constantly carrying heat from the
underside of the pile of fibers to the top side, letting
it escape. If we seal off the air movement, we generally
seal in water vapor. The additional water often will condense
(this now becomes a source of water for rotting of the structure).
The water, as a vapor or condensation, will seriously decrease
the insulation value -- the R-value. The only way to deal
with a fiber insulation is to ventilate. But to ventilate
means moving air which also decreases the R-value.
Air Penetration
The filter medium for most furnace filters is fiberglass
-- the same spun fiberglass used as insulation. Fiberglass
is used for an air filter because it has less impedance to
the air flow, and it is cheap. In other words, the air flows
through it very readily. It is ironic how we wrap our house
in a furnace filter that will strain the bugs out of the
wind as it blows through the house. There are tremendous
air currents that blow through the walls of a typical home.
As a demonstration, hold a lit candle near an electrical
outlet on an outside wall when the wind is blowing. The average
home with all its doors and windows closed has a combination
of air leaks equal to the size of an open door. Even if we
do a perfect job of installing the fiber insulation in our
house and bring the air infiltration very close to zero from
one side of the wall to the other, we still do not stop the
air from moving through the insulation itself vertically
both in the ceiling and the walls.
The best known solid insulation is expanded polystyrene.
Other solid insulations include cork, foam glass and polyisocyanate
or polyisocyanurate board stock. The latter two being variations
of urethane foam. Each of these insulations are ideally suited
for many uses. Foam glass has been used for years on hot
and cold tanks, especially in places where vapor drive is
a problem. Cork is of course a very old standby often used
in freezer applications. EPS or expanded polystyrene is seemingly
used everywhere from throw away drinking cups and food containers
to perimeter foundation insulation, masonry insulations,
and more. Urethane board stock is becoming the standard for
roof insulation, especially for hot mopped roofs. It is also
widely used for exterior sheathing on many of the new houses.
The R-value of the urethane board stock is of course better
than any of the other solid insulations. All of the solid
insulations will perform far better than fiber insulations
whenever there is wind or moisture involved.
Most of the solid insulations are placed as sheets or board
stock. They suffer from one very common problem. They generally
don’t fit tight enough to prevent air infiltration. It does
not matters how thick these board stocks are if the wind
gets behind it. We see this often in masonry construction
where board stock is used between a brick and a block wall.
Unless the board stock is actually physically glued to the
block wall air will infiltrate behind it. In this case as
the air flows through the weep holes in the brick and around
the insulation it is rendered virtually useless. Great care
must be exercised in placing the solid insulations. The brick
ties need to be fitted at the joints and then sealed to prevent
air flow behind the insulation.
The only commonly used solid insulation that absolutely
protects itself from air infiltration is the spray-in-place
polyurethane. When it is properly placed between two studs
or against the concrete block wall or wherever, the bonding
of the spray plus the expansion of the material in place
will effect a total seal. This total seal is almost impossible
to overestimate. In my opinion most of the heat loss in the
walls of the home have to do with the seal rather than the
insulation.
For physical reasons, heat does not conduct horizontally
nearly as well as it does vertically. Therefore, if there
were no insulation in the walls of the homes, but an absolute
airtight seal, there would not necessarily be a huge difference
in the heat loss. This would not be the case if the insulation
was missing from the ceiling. Air infiltration can most effectively
be stopped with spray-in-place polyurethane. It is the only
material (properly applied) that will fill in the corners,
the cripples, the double studs, bottom plates, top plates,
etc. The R-value of a material is of no interest or consequence
if air can get past it.
Anecdotes
During the 1970s my firm insulated a bunch of new homes
in the Snake River Valley of Idaho with 1.25 inches of spray-in-place
polyurethane foam in the walls. In 1970 the popular number
for the R-value of one inch of urethane foam was 9.09 per
inch. Using this value, we were putting an R of 1.25 x 9.09
= 11.36 in the walls. This was much less than the R = 16
claimed by the fiberglass insulators. Today, using the charts
from an ASHRAE book, we would only be able to claim an R-value
for the 1.25 inches of 7.5 to 9. Neither of these numbers
make for a very big R-value. The reality is that the people
for whom we insulated their homes invariably would thank
us for the savings in their heat bills. They would tell us
their heating bill was half of their neighbor's. They felt
as if they saved the cost of the polyurethane in one, or
at most two, years. This is anecdotal evidence, I know, but
anecdotal evidence is also compelling and very real in our
world. Most of these customers were savvy people. They would
not have paid the extra to get the urethane insulation if
it had not been better.
About mid 1975 I received a call from a division manager
of one of the major fiberglass insulation manufacturers.
The caller asked, "I understand that you are spraying
polyurethane in the walls of homes?" I told him that
was true. He was calling because we were cutting into the
fiberglass insulation sales in our area. He asked, "How
can you do it?"
I knew what he meant. He wanted to know how I could look
somebody in the eye and sell them a more expensive insulation
than the cheap old fiberglass. I told him the way I did it
is with a spray gun. Of course, that wasn't the answer he
wanted. He wanted to know how I could not feel guilty. I
told him of insulating one of two nearly identical houses
built side by side. We insulated the walls of one with 1.25
inches of urethane. The other house was insulated with full
thick fiberglass batts put in place by a reputable installer.
Not only did we use only 1.25 inches of urethane as the total
wall insulation, but we had the builder leave off the insulated
sheathing. At the end of the first winter, the urethane insulated
home had a heating bill half of their neighbor's. I know
that is not terribly scientific, but it is very real. I am
not sure he was convinced, but it should be noted that same
company jumped into the urethane foam supply business the
next year.
One and a quarter inch of polyurethane sprayed properly
in the wall of a house will prevent more heat loss than all
the fiber insulation that can be crammed in the walls --
even up to an eight inch thickness. Not only does it provide
better insulation, but it provides significant additional
strength to the house.
One of my early clients was Brent. I had insulated several
potato storages for Brent. He knew what spray-in-place urethane
insulation could do. When he decided to build his new, very
large, very fancy new home, he asked me to come insulate
it. I told him I would be delighted. The builder pitched
a fit. He "didn't need any of that spray-in-place urethane
in his buildings. He made his buildings tight, and fiberglass
was just as good."
Brent explained to the builder, "I know who is going
to insulate the building. It is not as definite as to who
is going to be the contractor. You can make up your mind.
We are going to have the urethane insulation and you build
the building, or we are going to have the urethane insulation,
and I will have someone else build the building." It
didn't take the contractor long to decide he wanted to use
urethane insulation.
It was amazing to me how it worked out. We sprayed a lot
of foam in Brent's house, and it cost him quite a bit of
money because it was such a large home. Always after when
I would meet him, he would tell me his heat bill was less
than any of his rent houses or homes of anybody else he knew.
And his home was two or three times larger. Also, the builder
started having me insulate most of his new custom built houses.
He told me he would explain to his clients the best insulation
was the spray-in-place urethane. It would cost a little more,
but it was by far the best. Most of the owners opted for
the urethane. Never have I had a customer tell me that he
did not save money by using the urethane spray-in-place insulation.
You can spend all the time you want with R-values and "k" factors,
and "prove" on paper there is no way the urethane
can do the insulation job that the fiberglass will. In the
real world, I can assure anyone there is no way fiber insulation
can be as effective as spray-in-place urethane -- not even
close.
R-value tables are truly part of the "Fairy Tale." They
show the solid and the fiber insulations side by side, implying
they can be compared. The fact is, without taking installation
conditions into account, comparisons are meaningless. Spray-in-place
urethane foam provides its own vapor barrier, water barrier,
and wind barrier. None of the other insulations are as effective
without special care taken at installation. The fiber insulations
must be protected from wind, water and water vapor. Again
the tables need a second table to state installation conditions.
Consider the following anecdotes:
Meadow Gold Company was going to build a freezer in Idaho
Falls, Idaho. Chet, the plant manager was a good friend of
the local Butler dealer. The local Butler dealer and I had
become good friends. A Butler building does not lend itself
very well to a freezer if you are going to insulate the freezer
with expanded polystyrene. So the three of us got together
and planned a freezer that would accommodate the needs of
Meadow Gold yet be built of a Butler building and be properly
insulated. This was in my first year of spraying polyurethane
foam, and at that time I believed all the literature and
knew what we were doing was going to be just right. It turned
out even better. The then current R-value table showed one
inch of urethane equal to 2.5 inches of expanded polystyrene.
So, I suggested we spray the metal building with four inches
of urethane to replace the 10 inches of expanded polystyrene
normally used by Meadow Gold for freezers.
Meadow Gold Company was going to build a freezer in Idaho
Falls, Idaho. Chet, the plant manager was a good friend of
the local Butler dealer. The local Butler dealer and I had
become good friends. A Butler building does not lend itself
very well to a freezer if you are going to insulate the freezer
with expanded polystyrene. So the three of us got together
and planned a freezer that would accommodate the needs of
Meadow Gold yet be built of a Butler building and be properly
insulated. This was in my first year of spraying polyurethane
foam, and at that time I believed all the literature and
knew what we were doing was going to be just right. It turned
out even better. The then current R-value table showed one
inch of urethane equal to 2.5 inches of expanded polystyrene.
So, I suggested we spray the metal building with four inches
of urethane to replace the 10 inches of expanded polystyrene
normally used by Meadow Gold for freezers.
Chet considered one alternative to his predicament was to
turn one of the older freezers that had been used as a cooler
back into a freezer. Then maybe he could make a cooler out
of the new building with the just the one compressor. It
was not a satisfactory arrangement, but it maybe could work.
The other thing Chet kept telling us was that he would know
as soon as he turned on the freezer equipment whether or
not the building would work. When I pressed him, he said
that normally it takes five days to bring a freezer down
to 10 F below zero -- needed for ice cream. When he turned
on the new freezer, with only the one compressor, the temperature
dropped to 18F degrees below zero by the second morning.
They had their freezer. It ran the entire summer using only
the single compressor.
A few weeks after start up of the freezer, I was visited
by a Meadow Gold engineer from Chicago. He wanted to know
exactly what we had done to insulate the freezer. One compressor
should not be able to hold the temperature as it was doing.
I explained to him exactly what we had done. He seemed satisfied
and he left. A few weeks later he showed up again with his
boss. We went to the plant and verified with an ice pick
the thickness of the foam. It was indeed four inches in the
walls and five inches in the ceiling. Here again they reiterated
that the building should not be operating as it was. What
they were telling me was that even though I had used one
inch of urethane to replace 2.5 inches of expanded polystyrene,
the building was still requiring only 50 percent of the normal
compressor power for cooling. As you can imagine, the experience
made me a lot more bold, and I used the information to sell
more freezer insulation jobs.
One of our largest freezer insulation projects was a sixty
thousand square foot freezer at Clearfield, Utah. I was able
to talk the general contractor into letting us insulate with
spray-in-place polyurethane foam the brand-new all-concrete
freezer he was building. This building was the 12th in a
chain of freezers. My friend Bob, the contractor, had taken
it upon himself to make the switch from the ten inches of
expanded polystyrene to four inches of urethane with a fifth
inch on the roof. The building was built with tilt up concrete
insulated on the interior side of the concrete with spray-in-place
urethane. We then sprayed on a three-fourths of an inch thick
layer of plaster as the thermal barrier. Over the pre-stressed
concrete roof panels, we put five inches of spray-in-place
urethane and then covered it with hot tar and rock. (This
is an old CPR-specification).
I was on the job the last day. As we finished up the owner
showed up. He had expected to see ten inches of expanded
polystyrene, and here was four inches of urethane. I told
him he would like the four inches of urethane as it would
be even better than the expanded polystyrene, based on my
previous experience. He told me he was sicker than a dog
because he felt like there was no way that could be true.
It was too late for him to do anything about it. If he could
have, he would have changed the contract instantly, but he
was stuck and felt stuck.
They had 12 other similar size freezers, except the others
were insulated with expanded polystyrene. The normal way
of operating them was to use three large compressor assemblies.
Two of the compressors would be needed all summer to keep
the building cold, and the third one would be a standby unit,
in case one of the other two had problems.
About a year later, I received a phone call from one of
the managers. He asked me if I had time to insulate another
sixty thousand square foot freezer in Clearfield, Utah. I
assured him we had the time, the inclination, and the excitement
to do it, but I thought the owner wanted nothing to do with
urethane foam insulation. The manager explained to me that
not only had the Clearfield freezer operated better than
any other freezer in their line, it had operated for less
than half the costs of any others. They were adding another
sixty thousand square feet without adding more compressors.
The compressor power available to them because of the urethane
insulation efficiency allowed them to do it. The building
had run very nicely through the hot part of the summer with
just one compressor. Now they would be able to run two buildings
off of two compressors and still have a spare.
Again, this is anecdotal evidence, but let me assure you
that you will get the same results if you do the same thing
as we have. I have insulated too many buildings now to know
that this will happen in every case. Never can you use an
R-value from a fiber insulation and compare it to the R-value
of a foam insulation. Nor can you use the R-value of a foam
insulation if it is in sheet form and compare it to the R-value
of the foam insulation if it is spray-in-place. Spray-in-place
polyurethane is an absolute minimum of three to ten times
as effective as any other insulation available today.
During the late 1970s, the FTC went after the urethane foam
suppliers for misleading advertising especially with regard
to fire claims. A consent decree followed. It destroyed a
tremendous amount of confidence in the use of urethane. Up
to that point, Commonwealth Edison would give Gold Medallion
approval for homes insulated with 1.25 inches of spray-in-place
urethane in the side walls of masonry constructed homes.
True, that was anecdotal evidence, but also true, it worked.
Much work was done in the early 1970s using a 1.25 inches
urethane as a replacement for wall insulation in a home.
Not only did it replace the wall insulation, it also replaced
the exterior sheathing. The buildings are stronger and better
insulated when sprayed with the 1.25 inches of urethane.
Understanding the two purposes of insulation gives a standard
to measure the insulations:
I. Heat loss
There is a little understood part about insulation that
needs to be covered. There is a substantial difference between
insulation for temperature control and insulation for heat
loss control. For instance, the graph (below) shows the heat
loss control of the spray-in-place urethane foam insulation.
Any insulation will have a similar graph but with thicker
amounts of insulation. This graph points out that more insulation
is not necessarily cost effective. There is a point where
more insulation is pointless from a total heat loss perspective.
The graph shows that 70% of heat loss from conductance is
stopped by a one inch thickness of spray-in-place urethane
foam. Remember we are going to stop nearly 100% of the heat
loss from air infiltration with the first one-fourth of an
inch of urethane foam. The second inch of spray-in-place
urethane stops about 90% of the heat loss and the third inch
95% and so forth.
Thermal Diffusivity and Heat Sinks
It should be noted that when the urethane is used on the
exterior of a heat sink, such as concrete, the actual effective
R-value is approximately doubled. This is why with the Monolithic
Dome, we are able to calculate effective R-values in excess
of 60. A heat sink is any substance capable of storing large
amounts of heat. Most commonly we think of concrete, brick,
water, adobe and earth as heat sink materials used in building.
The property of a heat sink to act as an insulation is called
thermal diffusivity.
The simple explanation for the way it works is: As the temperature
of the atmosphere cycles from cold to hot to cold to hot
the heat sink absorbs or gives up heat. But because the heat
sink can absorb so much heat it never catches up with the
full range of the cycle. Therefore, the temperature of the
heat sink tends to average. Large heat sinks will average
over many days, weeks or even months.
An example is the adobe hacienda with its 2 to 6 foot thick
walls. By the time the adobe walls begin to absorb the daytime
heat it is night time and the same heat then escapes into
the cooler night. Therefore the temperature would average.
Because the mass of the adobe is so large the temperature
averages over periods of months. Adobe acts as an insulation
even though adobe has a minimal “R” value.
You can see from the graph that urethane thicknesses beyond
four or five inches is practically immaterial. We use three
inches for most of our construction. Two inches will do a
very superior job. We have insulated many metal buildings
with one inch of urethane and the drop in heat loss is absolutely
dramatic. Obviously the first quarter inch takes care of
the wind blowing through the cracks. (It usually takes an
inch to be sure the cracks are all filled.) The balance of
the inch adds the thermal protection.
II. Surface temperature control
Surface temperature control is the second reason for insulation.
In many cases it is the most important reason for the insulation.
I noticed this phenomena first while insulating potato storages.
We had various customers ask us to insulate the buildings
anywhere from two to five inches of urethane. The buildings
insulated with two inches would hold the temperatures of
the potatoes properly, just as well as the buildings insulated
with five inches. The difference came in the condensation.
Potato storages are kept up at very high humidity levels.
The buildings with the two inches of urethane would have
far more condensation than those with An engineer from the
Upjohn company explained this to me. He stated that thicker
insulation is absolutely necessary to maintain higher interior
surface temperatures. One and a half inches of urethane on
the walls and ceiling of a potato storage would control the
heat loss from the building, but it took a minimum of three
inches of urethane to control the interior surface temperature.
Four inches was even better. With five inches the difference
is practically negligible. The only place where we have felt
the need for five inches of urethane was insulating the roof
or ceiling of a sub-zero freezer.
Underground housing — surface temperature control vs. heat
loss control.
Most underground housing is in trouble from mold and mildew
growth. The cause is not enough insulation to control interior
surface temperatures. Rarely is there a problem with total
heat loss. Water vapor condenses on the surface allowing
mold to grow. Mold makes people sick. The only solution is
lots of insulation for temperature control and ignore total
heat loss.
My experience is that R-value tables can be used as indicators.
They need modifications to make them equal to real world
conditions. There needs to be allowances made. They must
show equivalents. These equivalents will be more like one
inch of spray-in-place urethane equal to four inches of fiberglass
in a normal installation. Footnotes to the table will need
to define degradation of insulations in real world conditions.
Only then will the "R-value" Fairy Tale become
a real world success story.
top |