RE: [papercreters] Re: Closed cell spray foam

 

 

Hi Dave, I have heard of closed cell urethanes, but at roughly 4 times the density of open cell urethanes it becomes cost prohibitive for a tight budget.  As it is, open cell urethane foam is about the most expensive foam available.  It is certainly useful for compound shapes, and about the highest insulation value.  The draw backs are toxicity and cost.  Open cell will absorb moisture and become nearly useless as demonstrated in colder climates like Fairbanks.  This might be a good solution on the outside of  a concrete buried dome if one can afford it, but I wouldn’t use it anyplace there was a possibility of fire or breathable out gassing.

Janosh

---

From: papercreters@yahoogroups.com [mailto:papercreters@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 10:38 AM
To: papercreters@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [papercreters] Re: Closed cell spray foam

 

Google is your friend, Janosh...
a good explanation:
http://www.sprayfoam.com/spps/ahpg.cfm?spgid=6

"The advantages of closed-cell foam compared to open-cell foam include
its strength, higher R-value, and its greater resistance to the
leakage of air or water vapor. The disadvantage of the closed-cell
foam is that it is denser, requires more material, and therefore, is
more expensive."

Cheers,
Dave

--- In papercreters@yahoogroups.com, "Janoahsh" <janoahsh@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> I�m not familiar with closed cell spray foam. This would be very
useful.
> Please explain.
>
> Janosh

__._,_.___

Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___