Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Factors contributing to k-factor optimization with ecomate ® blown foams CPI Orlando 2007.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Factors contributing to k-factor optimization with ecomate ® blown foams CPI Orlando 2007."— Presentation transcript:

1 Factors contributing to k-factor optimization with ecomate ® blown foams CPI Orlando 2007

2 2 How does ecomate compare? ecomate 141b245fa365mfc 365/ / 7 n-C5cC5 Mol wt ,67270 Bpt, C 31,53215,340, Sp Gr 0,9821,241,321,251,280,620,75 Lambda 10,71012,210,610,714*11* LEL/UEL 5,0 – 23,0 7,6 – 17,7 n/a3,5 – 9,03,8 – 13,31,4 – 17,81,4 – 8,0

3 3 How does ecomate compare in Foams ? Handmix Pours Comparison Molar Substitution - in same formulation Same Index Same Surfactant amount Same Catalyst amount Same molar BA content

4 4 BA Molar Substitution 2 thick sample, 75 ºF Handmix Data ONLY Results are Relative ECOMATE ~ same as 245fa k NOT SOLELY dependant on MW

5 5 Thermal Conductivity Not dependant solely on: Molecular Wt Gas λ K-Factor at standard conditions Depends on many additional factors, including: Temperature Processing Formulation Configuration Protection

6 6 Temperature / k-factor Dependence

7 7 Examine Processing Effects Hand Mix Factorial Design Examine Mix Time Mix Speed Pour Size Surfactant Concentration

8 8 PROCESSING EFFECTS: HAND MIX FACTORIAL DESIGN MIX TIME, sec Low5 Mid7.5 High10

9 9 PROCESSING EFFECTS: HAND MIX FACTORIAL DESIGN MIX TIME, sec MIX SPEED, rpm Low51000 Mid High103000

10 10 PROCESSING EFFECTS: HAND MIX FACTORIAL DESIGN MIX TIME, sec MIX SPEED, rpm POUR SIZE, gm Low Mid High

11 11 PROCESSING EFFECTS: HAND MIX FACTORIAL DESIGN MIX TIME, sec MIX SPEED, rpm POUR SIZE, gm SURF CONC, pct Low Mid High

12 12 PROCESSING EFFECTS: Handmix Results Summary Mix Time Mix Speed Pour Size Surf. Concentration Not significant Faster = lower λ ( less BA loss ) Larger = lower λ ( less surface area ) More = lower λ ( less BA loss )

13 13 Handmix v Machine Same ecomate Formulations Machine ALWAYS Superior !

14 14 Examine Formulation Effects Polyol Type and Amount Catalyst Surfactant Type and Amount Blowing agent Temp Effect Loss / Diffusion Blends

15 15 Examine Polyol Effects In a Hand Mix Factorial Design Vary POLYOL BLEND Hold Constant Catalyst Surfactant Blowing Agent INDEX = 120

16 16 POLYOL BLEND Design DESIGNFunc.Eq. Wt.Visc. LO – HI LEVELS Sucrose Glycerin K EDA 47017K 0-25 Ester K 0-50

17 17 Polyol Effect: DENSITY EDA faster, - Captures more BA - Thus Lower Density 25 – 75% 0 – 50% 0 – 25%

18 18 Polyol Effect: THERMAL Props EDA worse ! Strong affinity for BA Less in vapor space

19 19 Polyol Results Choice of Polyol Critical - Not only affects Physicals Faster reactivity captures more BA Polyol Type can also affect k-factor, λ

20 20 Examine Catalyst Effects Speed of reaction Cell Orientation Blow v Gel Cats Gel / Rise Ratio

21 21 Gel Time Effects Faster = Lower k PU Expo2002, pg 459, fig 12

22 22 Cat Effects: STRETCHED SMALL, _|_ RISE BEST

23 23 Catalyst Effects Results Speed of reaction Cell Orientation Gel / Rise Ratio Faster is better Smaller, rounder better Gel at Rise best

24 24 Surfactant Effects AFFECTS Cell formation Polyol / ISO compatibility Strut / window thickness Cell Windows open / closed Fineness of Cells Density TYPE – Critical ! Mol Wt Siloxane content Degree of modification See Degussa Paper [ ref 4 ] AMOUNT – very important Optimize for each formulation

25 25 Examine BA Effects Molecular Weight Influential, not critical

26 26 Examine BA Effects Molecular Weight Gas λ Value Influential, not critical

27 27 Examine BA Effects Molecular Weight Gas λ Value Solubility = Viscosity Influential, not critical Very Important on Flow

28 28 Examine BA Effects Molecular Weight Gas λ Value Solubility = Viscosity Flow = Cell Orientation Influential, not critical Very Important on Flow Critical to Thermal Properties

29 29 Examine BA Effects Molecular Weight Gas λ Value Solubility = Viscosity Flow = Cell Orientation Vapor pressure Influential, not critical Very Important on Flow Critical to Thermal Properties Very Important

30 30 Examine BA Effects Molecular Weight Gas λ Value Solubility = Viscosity Flow = Cell Orientation Vapor pressure Liquid v Gas Influential, not critical Very Important on Flow Critical to Thermal Properties Very Important Measure k at Use Temp

31 31 Liquid v Gaseous BA Condensation Effect

32 32 Liquid v Gaseous BA GAS Advantage of potential lower thermal properties Lost because of higher Vapor Pressure More Gas escapes during foaming

33 33 Caveat Moisture Very poor insulator Very small molecule [ MW= 18 ], Smaller than N 2 [ MW= 28, 78%], Smaller than O 2 [MW= 32, 21%] Ubiquitous Penetrates foams readily Plays havoc with K-factor

34 34 Diffusion Gases want to reach equilibrium

35 35 Diffusion IF POROUS Grahams Law Rate 1 Rate 2 M2M2 M1M1 = M2M Gas245faH2O Rate1 / Rate2 =2.73 Rigid Foams NOT Porous ! Ficks Law: Solubility Factors Water 3X greater Diffusion !

36 36 Blowing Agent Loss AHAM Study Negligible! Amount of CFC-11 Blowing Agent in Sampled Refrigerators SampleWhen Produced, Pre-1993 At End of Life, Prior to Shredding, 2004 A %15.4 % A %13.0 % B %16.0 % B %15.2 % C %*16.0 % C – 14.0 % *13.8 % D – 16.0 % *15.7 % D – 16.0 % *14.3 %

37 37 REAL LIFE EXAMPLES BEST EVALUATIONS Run side-by-side Use Actual CABINETS Use Actual Conditions Measure Energy used Ice melt over time Compressor cycles, or Temperature change w time

38 38 Ice Melt Tests

39 39 CONTROL 18% more energy 20% more energy BTU LOAD TEST – Refrigerated Display case, Maintain 40F ecomate, 245fa nearly same

40 40 40 F CHILLER %Time ON for 95 F: DUTY CYCLE – 39 VENDOR CABINETS watt bulbs to keep 95F 36.8% 37.4% ecomate, 245fa nearly same !

41 41 BLENDING BAs Ecomate very compatible Why spend extra money? Ecomate / 245fa Blends PAT APP Exp-1Exp-2Exp-3Exp-4 Ecomate, mol% HFC 245fa, mol% K-factor, init CS//, psi Dim Stab Cold, [28d,-29C, V%] 2359

42 42 Handmix v Machine Same ecomate Formulations Machine ALWAYS Superior ! Ecomate machine k values respectable

43 43 Thermal Conductivity Not dependant solely on: MW Gas λ K-Factor at standard conditions Depends on many additional factors, including: Formulation Processing Configuration Protection

44 44 Conclusions Thermal Improvements available Thru formulation Thru processing Protect foams from Moisture Ecomate nearly equals 245fa in Hand mix data in Side-by-side Performance Tests Compare for Yourself!

45


Download ppt "Factors contributing to k-factor optimization with ecomate ® blown foams CPI Orlando 2007."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google