Hi

I want to insulate CH 22mm pipes. The standard ''round'' pipe insulation
will not
fit because of all four pipes being to close together.
I am thinking of covering the lot in expandable foam, maybe loosely wrapping
something
around them and spraying inside to contain the foam.
I do not want to use any fibreglass/rockwool wraps as I am allergic to that
stuff.

Are the foam insulating properties as good as the pipe insulation tubes?
Are there any other alternatives?

Any advice greatly appreciated

Peter

peter wrote:

Hi

I want to insulate CH 22mm pipes. The standard ''round'' pipe insulation
will not
fit because of all four pipes being to close together.
I am thinking of covering the lot in expandable foam, maybe loosely wrapping
something
around them and spraying inside to contain the foam.
I do not want to use any fibreglass/rockwool wraps as I am allergic to that
stuff.

Are the foam insulating properties as good as the pipe insulation tubes?
Are there any other alternatives?

Any advice greatly appreciated

Peter

Sounds messy and expensive. Why not use the old fashioned felt lagging?
Just wind it round all 4 instead of one.


NT

or use this spiral wrap from screwfix. It is silver bubble wrap and is
designed exactly for your purpose.

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...62194&ts=16185

"jks" wrote in message
ups.com...
or use this spiral wrap from screwfix. It is silver bubble wrap and is
designed exactly for your purpose.

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...62194&ts=16185


Equivalent to 33mm polystyrene!!!?!!?
That'll be UNexpanded polystyrene then.

--
Mike W

peter wrote:
Hi

I want to insulate CH 22mm pipes. The standard ''round'' pipe insulation
will not
fit because of all four pipes being to close together.
I am thinking of covering the lot in expandable foam, maybe loosely wrapping
something
around them and spraying inside to contain the foam.
I do not want to use any fibreglass/rockwool wraps as I am allergic to that
stuff.

Are the foam insulating properties as good as the pipe insulation tubes?
Are there any other alternatives?

Any advice greatly appreciated

Peter


Sounds a very sound way to proceed to me.

I'd say that its probably BETTER than foam sleeves.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

I am thinking of covering the lot in expandable foam

Sounds a very sound way to proceed to me.
I'd say that its probably BETTER than foam sleeves.

I can just picture your shed or wherever you keep stuff.

'We saw Foam, lots of foam, lots of foam...'
http://www.weebls-stuff.com/toons/magical+trevor/

Do you use anything else ;-)

--
Mike W

Thanks for all suggestions.
Just curious if the expanding foam gas same insulating properties per volume
as pipe insulatoin?
peter

"peter" wrote in message
...
Thanks for all suggestions.
Just curious if the expanding foam gas same insulating properties per
volume
as pipe insulatoin?
peter


Products typically have a rating in watts per hour of energy transmission.
But PU foam-in-a-tin can not because it depends how it is used. The user
affects how aereated the foam is. However it will be roughly comparable to
any PU foam product such as kingspan, look on there web site. Err on the
lower side since their facilities obviously allow the best possible values
to be achieved.

--
Mike W

Thanks Mike

Do you think that the claim that spiral wrap from screwfix
is an equivalent to 33mm polystyrene not possible?

rafal


"VisionSet" wrote in message
...

"peter" wrote in message
...
Thanks for all suggestions.
Just curious if the expanding foam gas same insulating properties per
volume
as pipe insulatoin?
peter


Products typically have a rating in watts per hour of energy transmission.
But PU foam-in-a-tin can not because it depends how it is used. The user
affects how aereated the foam is. However it will be roughly comparable
to
any PU foam product such as kingspan, look on there web site. Err on the
lower side since their facilities obviously allow the best possible values
to be achieved.

--
Mike W

"peter" wrote in message
...
Thanks Mike

Do you think that the claim that spiral wrap from screwfix
is an equivalent to 33mm polystyrene not possible?


I think whatever dimension that 33mm is supposed to apply to it is unlikely.
If it refers to the usual wall thickness then it is extremely unbelievable.
B.Reg for climaflex insulation rating works out to be 25mm. Expanded
Polystyrene is going to be very similar if not better thermal efficiency.
Foil backing may be effective but I don't believe it beats depth of
something decent.

--
Mike W

In article , VisionSet
writes

"peter" wrote in message
...
Thanks Mike

Do you think that the claim that spiral wrap from screwfix
is an equivalent to 33mm polystyrene not possible?


I think whatever dimension that 33mm is supposed to apply to it is unlikely.
If it refers to the usual wall thickness then it is extremely unbelievable.
B.Reg for climaflex insulation rating works out to be 25mm. Expanded
Polystyrene is going to be very similar if not better thermal efficiency.
Foil backing may be effective but I don't believe it beats depth of
something decent.

Agreed, the claims are complete pish.
--
fred
Plusnet - I hope you like vanilla

On Sun, 24 Sep 2006 22:01:16 GMT, a particular chimpanzee named
"VisionSet" randomly hit the keyboard and
produced:

"jks" wrote in message
oups.com...

or use this spiral wrap from screwfix. It is silver bubble wrap and is
designed exactly for your purpose.

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...62194&ts=16185

Equivalent to 33mm polystyrene!!!?!!?
That'll be UNexpanded polystyrene then.

I was sceptical too, but it appears to be correct. The R-value of
Alreflex (the nearest equivalent I could think of) with no cavity
either side is 0.15m2K/W; the R-value with cavity both sides is 1.56,
so the R-value with one side exposed must be 0.93. Multiply that
figure by the conductivity of polystyrene (0.037W/mK) and the
equivalent thickness is 34mm so they're not far off.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed?"

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:38:05 +0100 Hugo Nebula wrote :
or use this spiral wrap from screwfix. It is silver bubble wrap and is
designed exactly for your purpose.

http://www.screwfix.com/app/sfd/cat/...62194&ts=16185

Equivalent to 33mm polystyrene!!!?!!?
That'll be UNexpanded polystyrene then.

I was sceptical too, but it appears to be correct. The R-value of
Alreflex (the nearest equivalent I could think of) with no cavity
either side is 0.15m2K/W; the R-value with cavity both sides is 1.56,
so the R-value with one side exposed must be 0.93. Multiply that
figure by the conductivity of polystyrene (0.037W/mK) and the
equivalent thickness is 34mm so they're not far off.

Note that the following BRE document casts doubt on the TRADA figures
being quoted for this sort of insulation

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/PpW...n_july2005.pdf

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 23:29:09 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named Tony
Bryer randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:38:05 +0100 Hugo Nebula wrote :

I was sceptical too, but it appears to be correct. The R-value of
Alreflex (the nearest equivalent I could think of) with no cavity
either side is 0.15m2K/W; the R-value with cavity both sides is 1.56,
so the R-value with one side exposed must be 0.93. Multiply that
figure by the conductivity of polystyrene (0.037W/mK) and the
equivalent thickness is 34mm so they're not far off.

Note that the following BRE document casts doubt on the TRADA figures
being quoted for this sort of insulation

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/upl...n_july2005.pdf

That's for multi-foil insulation which tries to claim R-values
equivalent to 200mm of rockwool. Alreflex is bubble-wrap sprayed
silver. The R-value includes a value for the material as well as
increased resistances of the air either side as it has a higher
emissivity (or is it lower?, it's late & I can't remember). The
values I quoted were taken from the BBA certificate for it, so if you
can't believe them, who can you believe?!
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed?"

In article , Hugo
Nebula abuse@localhost.? writes
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 23:29:09 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named Tony
Bryer randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 22:38:05 +0100 Hugo Nebula wrote :

I was sceptical too, but it appears to be correct. The R-value of
Alreflex (the nearest equivalent I could think of) with no cavity
either side is 0.15m2K/W; the R-value with cavity both sides is 1.56,
so the R-value with one side exposed must be 0.93. Multiply that
figure by the conductivity of polystyrene (0.037W/mK) and the
equivalent thickness is 34mm so they're not far off.

Note that the following BRE document casts doubt on the TRADA figures
being quoted for this sort of insulation

http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/upl...n_july2005.pdf

That's for multi-foil insulation which tries to claim R-values
equivalent to 200mm of rockwool. Alreflex is bubble-wrap sprayed
silver. The R-value includes a value for the material as well as
increased resistances of the air either side as it has a higher
emissivity (or is it lower?, it's late & I can't remember). The
values I quoted were taken from the BBA certificate for it, so if you
can't believe them, who can you believe?!

Although the BRE report refers to multilayer I believe that the failings
pointed out apply to all products that (over) rely on reduction in radiation for
their 'enhanced' properties.

The easy flaws to spot a

1. They rely on a carefully controlled air gap to meet their stated
performance.
2. The gap must be still air or heat will lost by conduction to the moving air
(forced convection if you like), so no draughts and no ventilated roof or
cavity.
3. The gap has an optimum width, too great and there is room to create a
convection loop giving more heat loss.
4. The reduced radiation relies on clean reflective outer surface, get it dirty
or dusty and there goes the radiation benefit resulting in more heat loss.
5. The reflective surface may lose its shine with age resulting in more heat
loss.

To stand a chance of this product getting close to its design claims you
have to install it in an unrealistically perfect environment. In contrast,
trapped air systems (foams, rockwool or whatever) can achieve high
performance with a lot less attention to detail.
--
fred
Plusnet - I hope you like vanilla

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 00:50:22 +0100 Hugo Nebula wrote :
The values I quoted
were taken from the BBA certificate for it, so if you
can't believe them, who can you believe?!

The document I cited relates back to results produced by TRADA:
"if you can't believe them, who can you believe?!"

--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:10:14 +0100, a particular chimpanzee named Tony
Bryer randomly hit the keyboard and produced:

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 00:50:22 +0100 Hugo Nebula wrote :
The values I quoted
were taken from the BBA certificate for it, so if you
can't believe them, who can you believe?!

The document I cited relates back to results produced by TRADA:
"if you can't believe them, who can you believe?!"

The problem with the TRADA document is that they don't have the
accreditation to test for insulation values; so one couldn't believe
them WRT insulation.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have you strayed?"