"News" wrote in message
reenews.net...
"News" wrote in message
reenews.net...
wrote in message
...
Here's one way to estimate the R-value
of a radiant barrier based on the air
gap and the emissivities and surface
temps and the direction of heatflow from
It is?
The British Advertising Standards Authority got Actis, a French company,
claiming their reflective foil insulation is 'Equivalent to 200mm of
traditional Rockwoool insulation'. A complaint has been upheld after ASA
went to independent technical experts.
The judgement can be seen at:
http://tinyurl.com/s6c2p
Think hard before you buy.
The link above does not work. Here is the ruling:
Actis Insulation Ltd
Unit 1
Cornbrash Park
Bumpers Farm Industrial Estate
Chippenham
Wiltshire
SN14 6RA
Date: 31st May 2006
Media: Brochure
Sector: Household
Public Complaint From: Gloucestershire
Complaint:
Objection to a brochure for roof insulation. The brochure stated "TRI-ISO
SUPER 9 Insulation for roofs ... Thermally equivalent to 200 mm of mineral
wool when installed in a roof situation, as certified by the European
certifying body, BM TRADA CERTIFICATION (following real building trials,
certification n°0101) ... THERMAL EFFICIENCY equivalent to 200 mm of
mineral wood RT = 5* ... *in situ measured values." The complainant
challenged:
1. the claim "Thermally equivalent to 200 mm of mineral wool" and
2. the quoted thermal resistance "RT = 5".
Codes Section: 3.1, 7.1 (Ed 11)
Adjudication:
Actis Insulation Ltd (Actis) said they had stopped advertising TRI-ISO
SUPER 9 because it had been replaced with their new product TRI-ISO SUPER
10. They said the efficiency of their products was demonstrated by their
track record in the market. Actis said they had commissioned BM TRADA
Certification Ltd (BM TRADA) to test, assess and report on the TRI-ISO
Super 9 product. They provided us with a copy of the BM TRADA
Certification and Report dated August 1997 and said that it substantiated
their claims. Actis explained that TRI-ISO Super 9 was different from
traditional bulk insulation because it was a multi-foil product that used
layers of reflective foils spaced with synthetic wadding and foams. They
said the product required less space than traditional bulk insulation and,
therefore, internal insulation cavities could be made smaller and internal
useable spaces could be enlarged without compromising efficiency of
insulation. Actis argued that traditional methods of testing were not
appropriate for their product because traditional methods measured thermal
efficiency mainly by conduction and did not take into account the
influences of convection, radiation and change of phase. They said their
product combined various energy transfers of radiation, conduction,
convection and change of state rather than just conduction. Actis also
argued that traditional methods of testing did not allow representation of
the real behaviour of building materials once used on site. They pointed
out that BM TRADA had used "in situ" testing involving a real external
environment with variations in temperature, humidity, etc. rather than the
traditional methods of laboratory testing. Actis maintained that the BM
TRADA Certification demonstrated the thermal efficiency of their product
and provided proof of their claims.
1. Complaint upheld
The ASA obtained expert advice. We understood that BM TRADA had tested
TRI-ISO SUPER 9 and the mineral wool in two separate roof installations.
However, we noted that BM TRADA had not used the standard industry methods
of testing and that the report provided by Actis did not include
sufficient detail to support their own methods of testing.
We acknowledged that BM TRADA Certification was a leading multi-sector
certification body accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service.
We considered that the BM TRADA report did not provide enough detail to
support their methodology instead of the methodology employed by the
internationally recognised ISO industry standards. We concluded Actis had
not substantiated the claim. We noted the ad was no longer appearing but
told Actis not to repeat the claim in future advertising until they were
able to provide sufficient substantiation.
2. Complaint upheld
We understood that RT was a symbol of total thermal resistance and
typically had the standard unit of measurement of mēK/W. We noted that the
claim "RT=5" was not qualified by any recognised units of measurement e.g.
mēK/W and a small footnote stated only "in situ measured values" without
further explanation. Because the value of 5 was not qualified by any
recognised units of measurement, we considered the claim "RT=5" was
ambiguous and should be qualified in future. However, we noted that the BM
TRADA report did specify an overall resistance (RT) of 5.0mēK/W derived
from the in situ testing. We understood that the in situ measured values
did not meet with ISO recognised international standards for determining
declared and design thermal values for building materials and products.
We considered that the BM TRADA report did not include sufficient detail
to demonstrate the validity or robustness of their testing methodology
instead of the methodology employed by ISO standards. We concluded that
the report did not substantiate the claim " RT=5". We told Actis to remove
the claim until they were able to provide sufficient substantiation.
The brochure breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1
(Truthfulness).
Further to the above:
The UK authorities have pulled the plug on multifoils, when used on their
own. The Multifoil Council) made pleaded to the Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister when the last round of Part L (energy aspect) of the building regs
was being assessed and had a reprieve to 01/01/2007 to give them time to
show that multifoils worked as claimed. This repreive has been recinded
early because of convincing evidence
that the multifoil claims are exagerated. Multifoils will only be
permissable if they can pass hot box tests, which they have never have. All
the local authorities and the NHBC and such bodies have all been told to no
longer accept multifoils.
Action may be taken against the 3rd party certifiers, principally BM Trada,
who gave their stamp of approval to Actis and others.