Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:
Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider. Pour communiquer directement avec un auteur, consultez la première page de la revue dans laquelle son article a été publié afin de trouver ses coordonnées. Si vous n’arrivez pas à les repérer, communiquez avec nous à [email protected].
Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at
[email protected]. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information.
https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits
L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB.
Building Research Note, 1979-05
READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE. https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright
NRC Publications Archive Record / Notice des Archives des publications du CNRC :
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=ffd14d17-ff6f-42e1-8890-5555935219b7 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=ffd14d17-ff6f-42e1-8890-5555935219b7
NRC Publications Archive
Archives des publications du CNRC
This publication could be one of several versions: author’s original, accepted manuscript or the publisher’s version. / La version de cette publication peut être l’une des suivantes : la version prépublication de l’auteur, la version acceptée du manuscrit ou la version de l’éditeur.
For the publisher’s version, please access the DOI link below./ Pour consulter la version de l’éditeur, utilisez le lien DOI ci-dessous.
https://doi.org/10.4224/40000565
Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at
Comments on standardization of density and thermal resistance testing
of cellulose fibre insulation for horizontal applications
J 4 7
8 ISSN 0701 -52.; 2
COMMENTS ON
STANDARDIZATION
OF
DENSITY
AND THERM4L FESI STANCETESTING OF CELLULOSE FIBRE
INSULATION FQR
HORIZONTAL
APPLICATIONSby
M, Bomberg and
C.J.
S h i r t l i f f eA standardized method f o r producing specimens and d e t e r m i n i n g t h e settlement of ccLlulose fibre i n s u l a t i o n [CF I) when a p p l i e d in horizontal layers h a s been described by Bomberg and S h i r t l i f f e . ' The method h a s been incorporated in some of t h e s t a n d a r d s and s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r C F I in
Canada and t h e U.S . A . , and has a l s o been used f o r q u a l i t y assurance testing. T h i s Note summarizes r e c e n t r e s u l t s of testing of
CFI at
D B R / M C . Based on these s e s u l t s it proposes two simplified and less time consuming methods for determining t h e d e n s i t y after s e t t l e m e n t , which i s
termed t h e d e s i g n d e n s i t y . It also discusses methods s u i t a b l e for q u a l i t y c o n t r o l of design d e n s i t y and thermal resistance.
D e s i ~ n densitv f o r aualitv assurance
Inexperienced applicators have attempted to appLy CFI at the settled d e n s i t y to avoid s e t t l e m e n t , This i l l u s t r a t e s t h e confusion that exists
concerning the term "settled d e n s i t y , " The settled density ~ e f e r r e d t o
i n S p e c i f i c a t i o n ~ I - G P - ~ O P ~ o f t h e Canadian Government Specifications
Board
(CGSB)
is really a density calculated from the blown density andfrom the setrlement resulting from dropping t e s t s and c l i m a t i c c y c l i n g .
T h i s d e n s i t y may b e d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e actual d e n s i t y of t h e i n s u l a t i o n when i t i s in p l a c e . To reduce the confusion in terminology t h e
National Mineral Wool A s s o c i a t i o n suggested that, when used in
discussing blowing insulation, t h e calculated density s h o u l d b e c a l l e d t h e "design d e n s i t y . " This t e r m h a s already been introduced in the- r e v i s e d version of t h e s t a n d a r d 3 f o r CFT
.
Tl~e t e r n should b e c o n s i d e r e d far use in other standards for loose-fill materials.T h e "as-blownl"ensity, "design" density, and thermal resistivity of 82 samples of 56 cellulose fibre i n s u l a t i o n s have been measured a t DBRJNRC. The r e s u l t s a r e given in Table 1. The l e t t e r s a f t e r the
numbers i d e n t i f y d i f f e r e n t samples from t h e same p l a n t b u t with d i f f e r e n t chemical composition o r percentage of chemicals, and samples that have t h e same composition but were manufactured in a d i f f e r e n t manufacturing plant. Usually no a t t e m p t is made to ensure that the grind of t h e paper is t h e same i n the two p l a n t s . Almost all p r o d u c t s c o n t a i n e d 3 t o 1 7 % borax and 2 to 7% b o r i c a c i d . Some products contained aluminum sulphate, aluminum t r i h y d r a t e o r calcium s u l p h a t e as a t h i r d add-on o r i n s t e a d of the borax. A few formulations contained other chemicals such as clay or
portland cement. Total chemical add-on ranged from 18 t o 38%. The m a j o r i t y had
from
15 to 24% w i t h t h e average estimated at 22%. All b u t two of t h e materials were produced usingdry
processes; these two CFI were produced by weto r
damp processes.The r e s u l t s were checked t o see if t h e amount os t y p e of chemicals affected the s e t t l e m e n t . No correlation between t h e kind of chemicals used and the t o t a l settlement w a s e v i d e n t . Some chemicals d i d increase the m o i s t u r e absorption o f the materials. The higher moisture
a b s o r p t i o n had some e f f e c t on t h e settlement during t h e c l i m a t i c cycling test. The percentage of s e t t l e m e n t seemed to be a f f e c t e d more by o t h e r
p r o d u c t i o n variables, such as t h e degree of g r i n d i n g or type of paper,
t h a n by t h e t y p e of chemicals u s e d .
The results suggested that the materials were sufficiently similar t o assign standard v a l u e s e i t h e r t o t h e t o t a l settlement or to t h e
settlement due to climatic cycling.
The average value of t h e sum of t h e two settlements listed in
column 5 of T a b l e 1 was 21.5%. The standard d e v i a t i o n was o n l y 1.9% fndicating t h a t most products behave as the h y p o t h e t i c a l average product.
Ninety-three per
cent
of the measurements of t o t a l settlement in Table 1falls between 18 and 25% i . e . , ?3.5% spread, over fifty p e r c e n t of data falls between 20.5 and 22.5%, i . e . , '1% spread.
The formulations and amounts of chemicals used in CFI are becoming
more similar as standards e s t a b l i s h minima f o r the material's performance
with respect of flame spread, fungus growth, corrosiveness, thermal
p r o p e r t i e s , e t c . The requirements far smouldering r e s i s t a n c e of CFI recent1 y i n t r o d u c e d in t h e Canadian CFI specification will Likely
increase t h e amount of chemicals by 4 t o 6%; t h i s should increase t h e
average settlement by less than I%*, A standard percentage of settlement
o f s = 21.5% should b e used f o r determining t h e design d e n s i t y until
f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e on changes in formulations. Equation ( A l ) in Appendix A can b e used t o r e l a t e percentage of settlement to increase in d e n s i t y ; the design d e n s i t y o f the average CFI should be 27% higher than the blown d e n s i t y .
The average value of settlement due to climatic cycling listed in Column 4 of Table 1 was 10.5%. The standard d e v i a t i o n w a s 1.7%
indicating again t h a t most products behave as the h y p o t h e t i c a l average product. T h i s average v a l u e could b e used t o c a l c u l a t e t h e design density
from xhe d e n s i t y after dropping. Using E q . ( A l ) to a g a i n r e l a t e percentage
of s e t t l e m e n t to increase in d e n s i t y , the design d e n s i t y would be about 1 2 % h i g h e r than the d e n s i t y measured a f t e r the dropping test.
The data in Table 1 pertains only t o newsprint-based CFI for the most p a r t w i t h borax and b o r i c a c i d or w i t h borax, boric a c i d and
aluminum s u l p h a t e based chemical compositions. Few d a t a aye a v a i l a b l e
f o r CFH made from d i f f e r e n t paper stock, wood p u l p , e t c . The average percentage of settlements due t o e i t h e r t h e climatic c y c l i n g and to t h e
dropping t e s t cannot be determined.
Effect of formulation a n d amount o f chemical on d e s i g n d e n s i t y
Two additional series of t e s t s were conducted t o examine t h e e f f e c t a change in chemical composition
o r
t h eamount
ofchemicals
would haveon
density and thermal p r o p e r t i e s . Tho s e t s of C E I samples were produced S n d i f f e r e n x p l a n t s .In
each case the complete set was produced on t h e sameday and from a 100% newsprint based paper stock to decrease t h e e f f e c t s of production v a r i a b l e s .
The first s e t contained the b a s i c material w i t h no chemicals, and
two d i f f e r e n t chernicrrl formulations :
(1) borax and b o r i c a c i d in t h e r a t i o 2 : 1 ,
(23 borax, b o r i c a c i d and aluminum s u l p h a t e in the ratio 2 : 1 : 1 ,
where percentage of chemicals changed f r o m 0 to 25% by weight in four s t e p s for each o f the chemical f o m u l a t i o n s . T a b l e s 2 and 3 show t h e results of measurements o f blown d e n s i t y , d e s i g n d e n s i t y and thermal resistivity for formulations 1 and 2, respectively.
The t o t a l percentage of setzlement f o ~ the two formulations varied
less t h a n 2 - 7 and 4% respectively while the chemical add-on v a r i e d f r o m
0 to 25%. The as-blown d e n s i t y increased b y 56% w i t h i n c r e a s e d chemical add-on for formulation 1 and 42% f o r formulation 2 . The d e s i g n
densities increased b y 41 or 44% rsspectively
.
The second set a l s o contained nine samples. These materials were
produced f r o m 1 0 0 % newsprint i n a n o t h e r p l a n t d u r i n g a single p r o d u c t i o n s h i f t . The g r i n d i n g o-E t h e paper w a s nor as f i n e as i n t h e f i r s t s e t .
The percentage of chemicals added to the paper was c o n s t a n t at 20% b y w e i g h t . Each sample had a d i f f e r e n t chemical formulation. The blown
density and thermal r e s i s t i v i t y were determined for the materials. The r e s u l t s of t e s t s a r e shown in Table 4 . The variation i n blown density
of materials does n o t correlate well with t h e chemical formulation. The variation appears t o he random and r e s u l t from product variability even though the materials were produced in the s p e c i a l production r u n from
the same paper stock. Two of t h e materials in the first s e r i e s of tests had t h e same chemical formulations and almost i d e n t i c a l percentage o f chemicals as two m a t e r i a l s in t h e second series. Sample number 4 in Table 2 is similar to number 5 in Table 4; sample number 4 in Table 3 is
similar t o number 9 in T a b l e 4 , T h e difference in as-blown d e n s i t i e s between l i k e materials ranged from 10 t o 12%. The coarser ground samples
in t h e second series have about 7.2% lmver apparent thermal resistivities. The specimen thickness f o r T a b l e 4 was 150 mm w h i l e t h e specimen t h i c k -
ness f o r Tables 2 and 3 was 75 mrn. The d i f f e r e n c e i n specimen t h i c k n e s s would account f o r 3.0% and the variability in the remaining p r o d u c r i o n t h e remaining 4.28.
As-blown d e n s i t y for the samples l i s t e d in Tables 2 , 3 and 4 axe
follow the same trend. T h e r e is less scatter
in
t h e r e s u l t sf o r
formulations 1 and 2 t h a n in t h e results for t h e formulations tested i n t h e second series. The v a r i a t i o n of as-blown d e n s i t y in the l a t e r tests was a b o u t 8 kg/m3 or k13%.
Because t h e chemical content and formulation have l i t t l e e f f e c t on
d e s i g n density, the use of the standardized values f o r e i t h e r combined
cycling and dropping or c y c l i n g alone appear f u r t h e r j u s t i f i e d .
Quality c o n t r o l of design density
Q u a l i t y assurance (QA) t e s t s must be performed an a large enough volume of material so t h a t an average value f o r the t e s t e d p r o p e r t y is
assured, Twenty t o thirty kilogram samples were found sufficiently l a r g e t o produce spectmens f o r a quality assurance t e s t . On t h e o t h e r hand, qua 1 i t y c o n t r o 1 (QC] t e s t s are usually performed on small specimens to o b t a i n a f r e q u e n t check on the design density of the product.
The o l d e s t and probably most developed method for measuring settled density w a s discussed by iIerbyshire4 at the ASTM C16 Thermal Insulation
Conference, Oct. 23-25, 1978. It is termed the CS204 method; a small sample of m a t e r i a l is t e s t e d . The apparatus c o n s i s t s of two b a s i c p a r t s :
a b l o w e r a n d a shaker. The material to be tested is sucked into a hose
then passed through a series o f t u b e s that have naiis p r o t r u d i n g through t h e walls t o break up the l q s of t h e m a t e r i a l . The material then f l o w s t h r o u g h a cyclone where t h e i n s u l a t i o n is separated from t h e a i r and f a l l s
into
a g l a s s container, Material i s removed from or added tot h e c o n t a i n e r until t h e mass is 100 g. The container is placed on a T y l e r RX-8 Model shaker and shaken for five minutes. The settled volume is then measured and the settled density computed.
T h e NRC and the C5204 methods were compared
in September
1977 b y t e s t i n g 12 samples b o t h at DBR/NRC and at T h e m t r o n Inc. Design d e n s i t y was calculated using t h e measured percentage of s e t t l e m e n t s and E q . ( A l ) .The results for the 12 materials are shown in Table 5.
The agreement between the two methods was good. The average
d i f f e r e n c e in s e t t l e d d e n s i t y measured by the two methods was 2 . 4 % . The CS204 method had good reproducibility and r e p e a t a b i l i t y f o r a l l tested m a t e r i a l s . The worst cor~elation was observed f o r product 10
(cardboard-based CFI] b u t in this case the settlement due to climatic cycling in t h e NRC t e s t method was much higher than
for
newsprint-basedmaterial.
T e s t s were c a r r i e d out to examine t h e e f f e c t of changes in the CS204 t e s t i n g equipment c o n f i g u r a t i o n
on
t h e d e s i g n d e n s i t y . Specimen number2C
in T a b l e 1, with a design d e n s i t y 49 - 7 kg/m3, was used i n these t e s t s . Containers o f t w o different shapes were used: a c y l i n d r i c a l c o n t a i n e r anda c u b i c c o n t a i n e r about 10% l a r g e r i n area. T h r e e t e s t s were run u s i n g each c o n t a i n e r and the results averaged. The d i f f e r e n c e in t h e averaged s e t t l e d d e n s i t i e s was less than 45%. Shaking time was shortened from f i v e minutes to one minute and t h e d e n s i t y measured. The d e n s i t y changed
by a b o u t 10%. Samples were prepared b y filling the c o n t a i n e r w i t h m a t e r i a l blown t h r o u g h a commercial blower then using the CS204 shaker.
The d e n s i t y changed about 10% from t h e value obtained b y the CS204 n e t h o d . Measurements made w i t h t h e CS204 method a r e s e n s i t i v e ta the d e t a i l e d d e s i g n o f t e s t equipment. The equipment m u s t be c o n s t r u c t e d carefully
and t h e t e s t procedure followed carefully,
The NRC method, which is primarily a quality assurance method, could
b e simplified and used as a QC method. One container of dimensions 900 x 350 x 150 mm could b e used instead of t h r e e . The dropping t e s t
would h e run on t h i s c o n t a i n e r . A v a l u e of 10.5% settlement would b e
added to account f o r the o f f s e t o f climatic cycling. The test method i s as fast as the CS204 method, The apparatus is simple and i n e x p e n s i v e .
Sing1 e t h i c k n e s s test f o r thermal resistance
The average design density o f t h e materials listed in T a b l e I is a b o u t 44 kg/m3. The r a t i o between t h e resistance of 150 mm specimen to a 75 rnm specimen using Equation A - 2 of Appendix I1 would be 1 . 9 4 . The assumption t h a t t h e thermal resistance i s proportional to thickness would y i e l d a r a t i o in r e s i s t a n c e o f 150/75 = 2.00. The thermal resistance of
the average 150 mm thick specimen would b e approximately 3.0% t o o h i g h . S i m i l a r l y , the thermal r e s i s t a n c e of a 225 rnm t h i c k specimen would b e
4.2% t o o high. The percentage of error obtained
if
t h e thermal resistance of 7 5 or 1 5 0 mm t h i c k samples were used to determine the v a l u e s at o t h e r thicknesses is as f o l l o w s : 75 mm 150 mm f o r 75 mm 0.0% - 2 -9% f o r 1 5 0 m 3 . 0 % 0.O%
f o r 225 mm 4.2% 1.1%for
300mm
4 . 8 % 1 . 6 %The commonly used thicknesses when a d d i n g i n s u l a t i o n to o l d e r houses
axe 100 t o 150 m. Thicknesses o f 150 to 300
mm
a r e usually usedi n
new c o n s t r u c t i o n . It i s thus recommended that if a s i n g l e measurement is used to e s t a b l i s h t h e thermal resistance of CFI, 150 mm t h i c k samples s h o u l d be used f o r t e s t i n g thermal p r o p e r t i e s . The errors ine s t a b l i s h i n g the thermal resistance of 1SQ to 300 mm t h i c k l a y e r s o f insulation will still b e as large as 3 % .
When the thermal resistance in a standard is s p e c i f i e d at 75 mm, as in t h e current v e r s i o n o f CGSB S p e c i f i c a t i o n 51-GB-60P, t h e v a l u e
specified can b e converted i n t o an equivalent v a l u e at 150 mm. According to E q . ( 0 - 2 ) of Appendix I3 t h e thermal r e s i s t a n c e at 1 5 0 rmn can be
c a l c u l a t e d b y adding an additional thermal resistance of 1. 7 5 m 2 -
KIN.
CGSB S p e c i f i c a t i o n 5l-GP-60M r e q u i r e s a minimum thermal r e s i s t a n c e2 5 . 3 m K / W (3.65 f t 2 h r * ~ / ~ t u in.))
.
Changing the sample thickness to 150 mm would require changing the acceptance level to 3.65 r n 2 * ~ / w or an average of 24.3 m * K / W .The results in column 7 o f Table 1 suggest t h a t t h e r e might well b e
two levels of thermal performance f o r CFI and two classes o f material established
in
the s p e c i f i c a t i o n . The l i m i t s shown in Table 6 are suggested. About 50% of materials listedin
Table 1 would qualify as Class I . Introduction of two classes must be accompanied b y improved quality c o n t r o lin
the p l a n t s . One of the methods discussed above f a rd e s i g n d e n s i t y would have to be adopted as a standard requirement and checks made at least once per 8 h s h i f t .
\\%ere the thermal resistance must b e determined at several
t h i c k n e s s e s f o r p r o d u c t l a b e l i n g ax where a specification also requires
a specimen 150 to 200 mm t h i c k ta be t e s t e d , a linear equation should be
fit to the data at 75 m and the second thickness and the equation used t o determine t h e thermal resistance for thicknesses over 75 m -
This research was performed in the Thermal Properties Laboratory of
the Energy and S e r v i c e s Section, Division of Building Research, National
Research Council of Canada. The a u t h o r s wish to express t h e i r gratitude
to Gerry Theriault for h i s contribution to the development of the testing
methods, and to Nicole Normandin and Roger Marchand for making many o f
t h e measurements.
References
1. Bornberg, M. and Shirtliffe,
C.J.
'%Blown C e l l u l o s e F i b e r ThermalI n s u l a t i o n s : P a r t I - Density
of
Cellulose Fiber Thermal Insulationin Horizontal Applications,'"maE! T ~ r a r r d s s i o n
Measmemelzts
afInsuZation, ASTM
S W
660, R.P. Tye, Ed., American Society f o r Testing and Materials, 1978, pp. 82-103.2. Canadian Government S p e c i f i c a t i o n s Board,
CGSB
S p e c i f i c a t i o n 51-GP-60P, "Thermal insulation, celluldse fiber, loose fill." July 1977.3 . Canadian Government Specifications Board, CGSB S p e c i f i c a t i o n 51-GP-60M, "Thermal i n s u l a t i o n , cellulose f i b e r , loose f i l l
.''
1979.4. n e r b y s h i r e , B., S e t t l e d density of wood fiber [cellulose based) loose f i l l t h e r m a l i n s u l a t i o n u s i n g t h e CS-204 methad, Thermal Insulation
Conference ASTM C 16, October 23-25, 1978.
(To
be published by ASTM.] 5 . Shirtliffe, C.J., and Bomberg,M.
'lBlawn C e l l u l o s e F i b e r ThermalInsulations : P a r t 2
-
Thermal Resistance,"Thermal
T~msrnisswn
Measwements of InsuZatwvl, ASTN STP 660, R.P. Tye, Ed., American S o c i e t y f o r Testing and Materials, 1978, pp. 104-129-APPENDIX A
CALCULATING THE DESIGN DENSITY
The design density is calculated from the following formula:
D = (100/(100
-
S))*Di
d where Dd = design d e n s i t y , kg/m 3 D. = i n i t i a l d e n s i t y as blown or poured, kg/m 3 1sd = settlement measured in the d r o p p i n g test, %
[The percentage is based on the i n i t i a l t h i c k n e s s ) s = settlement measured in the climatic c y c l i n g test, %
C
A P P E N D I X B
THERMAL
PROPERTIES
OF CELLULOSE FPBRE
THERMAL, INSULATION AT MEAN TEMPERATUREOF
24 k2OCT h e thermal resistance measurements on the 55 specimens of CFI wizh
t h i c k n e s s 50 nun to 3 0 0 mn presented in Table 1A of P a r t I1 of a paper b y Shirtliffe and I3ornberg5 were analyzed u s i n g a multiple linear regression
computer program.
me
following e q u a t i o n was obtained:where
R = thermal r e s i s t a n c e , r n Z - ~ / h ' L = t h i c k n e s s , m
P = d e n s i t y of t h e tested specimen, kg/m 3 The multiple correlation c o e f f i c i e n t o b t a i n e d was 0.999%.
The standard e r r o r of estimate 0.078 r n 2 . ~ / w indicated t h a t i f one sample is considered, the thermal resistance w i t h i n 95% probability wi ll
n o t d i f f e r by more than 0 . 1 5 m2= K/W from the value calculated by E q . (B1]
.
T h i s would i n d i c a t e a reasonable fit to the data.Shirt l i f f
e
and E!omberg5 produced t h e following e q u a t i o n :A s t e p w i s e procedure w a s used w i t h the data d i v i d e d according t o the t h i c k n e s s of the specimens. The equation produced b y multiple regression does not f i t t h e data nearly as well as the second equation.
Correlation coefficients obtained from a linear multiple regression
a n a l y s i s are s t r o n g l y dependent on the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the data
over
t h e range of each v a r i a b l e . IVhen the data a r e clusteredin
part of the rangeas is the case with t h e d e n s i t i e s in t h e data i n Table 1 t h e r e s u l t s of
t h e regression can b e questionable. The e f f e c t o f d e n s i t y an thermal r e s i s t a n c e cannot be r e a d i l y e s t a b l i s h e d f r o m t h e given data b y
simultaneous regression techniques. The relationship between thickness
Using Eq.
(11 to c a l c u l a t e the thermal resistance of a 40kg/m3
d e n s i t y 7 5 mm t h i c k , specimen o f CFI an R of 1.93~ * - K / w
is obtained.F o r a 150 mm thickness
specimen
a t t h e same density t h eR
i s 3 . 7 5 m2-#/w. The r a t i o betweenRlsO
and RT5 is 1.94. The r a t i o obtained from E q . (2) f o r Rl5o/RT5 i s the same. F o r h i g h e r density CFI materials t h e r a t i o s a r e different; for instance, E q . (1) y i e l d s 1.93for
50kg/m3
while E q . 12) yields 1 . 9 4 .E q u a t i o n (2) w a s therefore used in this paper to estimate t h e
m i n i m u m thermal r e s i s t a n c e of a 150 mm thick specimen of 50 kg/m3 d e n s i t y C F I corresponding to t h e minimum thermal resistance of a 75 mrn specimen o f C F I having t h e same average density.
L I 1 Blown and Ilesign D e n s i t y o f Newsprint-based* C F 1 'J'cstcd at NKU i n
Accordance w i t 1 1 CGSB Specification 51-GP-60P and Thermal Resistivity Determined on Specimens 75-73 mm t h i c k
S p e c i m e n Number B l o w n D e n s i t y k g / m 3 50.3 3 8 . 4 39.9 49.7 S e t t lernent 17.9 21.7 22.1 22.7 1 2 A** 2 8 2 C 25.77 2 6 . 6 5 2 6 . 7 8 D e s i g n D e n s i t y kg/m3 P r o p p i n g %
6s
7 : 8 9 A 3 8 , 9 2 5 . 8 6 5 3 . 6-
40.0 25.9144.7
26,20 4 3 . 5-
4 3 . 4 2 6 . 0 6 54.3 2 5 . 6 8 47.4 2 5 " 6 6 T h e r m a l Resisttvity mK/W 3 A 3 B 3C 3D 4 5 A 5 B 6 A C y c l i n g % 41.3 30.1 3 9 . 6 37.5 38.1 28.8 T o t a l . % 8 , 7 9 . 8 11.8 12.8 31.1 3 8 . 4 3 0 . 6 42.1 31.6 3 4 . 3 3 4 . 3 3 5 . 7 42.8 3 7 , 3 9 . 2 11.9 10.3 9 . 9 , 9 . 9 10.2 9 . 2 1 1 . 2 9B 9.5 8 . 9 9.7 11.2 10.4 g m 3 10.7 10.1 3 9 . 4 8 , l 8 . 0 8 . 4 1 3 . 7 9 . 8 10.9 11.3 10,O 1 2 . 8 10.2 13.0 11.9 12.5 11.4 * 12.1 10.7 8 . 5 10.5 11.2 1 O A 10B : II 1 2 A 1 2 B 1 3 A 13B 1 3 C 1 4 A 1 4 B 15 16 1 7 12.7 21.4 21.4 21.1 2 3 . 3 21.1 17.8 21 2 21.3 18.0 18.2 17.6 2 4 . 9 3 3 . 3 4 5 . 8 30.1 33.2 3 3 . 2 33.5 3 1 . 4 3 2 . 2 41.1 5 3 . 8 3 3 . 8 30.8 4 0 . 5 I 46.7 2 5 . 7 6 4 5 . 8 25.25 4 6 . 2 2 6 . 4 4 38.3 25.75 1 9 . 8 2 3 . 7 21,5 2 5 . 7 1 2 - 0 12.6 9.1 1 2 . 5 12.3 11.4 9 . 3 11.4 10.2 11.6 39.2-
4 3 . 6 26.21 5 8 . 3 - 4 0 . 5 2 6 . 9 0 2L.5 21.5 17.8 19.9 19.9 2 2 . 9 2 2 . 4 19.4 2 4 . 9 21.4 9 . 5 8.9 8 . 7 7.4 7.6 11.5 13.1 8.0 14.7 9 . 8 4 2 . 3 26.68 4 2 . 3 2 6 . 8 9 4 0 . 8 25.73 3 9 . 2 2 6 . 5 2 40.2 26.54 61.1-
6 9 . 3 2 5 . 8 0 41.9 2 5 . 5 2 41.0 26.28 5 1 . 5 2 5 . 4 3TABLE 1 (Cont'd)
S e t t l e m e n t
*CFI b a s e d on c e l l u l o s e f i b e r s o r i g i n a t i n g from sources o t h e r than n e w s p r i n t , e
.
g.
, carclboard, are n o t included in Table 1 . They would require separate testing sincc t h e i r t o t a l s e t t l e m e n t may exceed 30%.**The letters of the alphabet i n d i c a t e different samples of the same p r o d u c t . ';prclmen N w m b c r 4 2 4 3 4 4 45 4 6 4 7 4 8 4 9 5 0 5 I 5 2 5 3 5 4 5 5 56 ' l i v e r a g e Blown D e n s i t y k 6 / m 3 3 . 8 2 9 . 5 30.9 2 9 . 2 4 4 . 7 3 5 . 4 35.9 39.9 41.6 32.5 3 6 , R 41.8 3 3 . 0 32.5
'
34.8 3 4 - 8 S t a n d a r t 1 4 . 7 21
1.34 I D e v i a t i o n ' D r o p p i n g Z 11.4 11.7 11.8 13.3 10.6 13.1 I 11.7 1 1 2 . 3 12.1 12.0 1 . 6 9 1 . 9 2 I D e s i g n D e n s i t y k ~ . , / m ~ 4 2 . 1 . 39.2 41.1 39.1 5 6 . 9 2 6 . 2 T h e r m a l R e s i s t l v i t y m K / W 2 6 - 0 0 2 6 - 6 7 2 6 . 2 2 2 6 . 3 7 1 26.18-
1l.G 12.8 10.8 11.8 12.01
11.0 S e t t l e m e n t C y c l i n g % 8.4 13.1 13.1 12.1 10.9 10.2 9 . 8 1 1 . 3 8 . 8 7 . 9 6 . 6 1 T o t a l X 19,8 2 4 . 8 2 4 . 9 2 5 . 4 21.5 23.3 21.5 2 3 . 6 20.9 1 3 . 3 0 . 4 1 10.7 11.3 10.5 8 . 7 10.3 10.5 4 5 . 2'
5 2 . 2 52.6 1 1 0 . 6 2 5 . 9 5 2 5 . 6 4 26.19 26,23 2 6 . 1 8 25.94 2 6 . 0 4 26.16 2 6 - 2 1 2 2 . 3 2 4 . 1 21.3 2 0 . 5 2 2 . 3 4 5 . 2 55.1 4 1 . 9 4 0 . 9 4 4 . 8 21.5 4 4 . 4 26.10Table 4
Blown and Design Density o f S p e c i a l Mixes and Thermal
Resistivity Determined on Specimens with 150 mm
Nominal Thickness versus t h e i r Chemical Composition ( A l l Samples have 20% of Chemicals b y Weight)
"Assumed 21.5% settlement S a m p l e N u m b e r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 9 T h e r m a l t e s i s t i v i t y a t 1 5 0 m m m.K/W 2 3 . 1 2 4 - 5 2 4 . 1 2 4 . 3 2 3 . 7 23.5 2 4 . 2 2 1 . 5 2 3 . 6 23.83 C h e m i c a l c o m p o s i t i o n i n % a v e r a g e o f a l l m i x e s
I
3 2 - 8 B l o w n D e n s i t y k g / m 3 4 1 . 8 E s t i m a t e * o f D e s i g n D e n s i t y k g / m 3 A l u m i n u m S u l p h a r e 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 2 5 2 5 Borax 0 2 5 B o r i c A c i d I I 100 7 5 3 0 . 1 29 - 8 3 8 . 3 38.0 3 3 5 0 6 7 7 5 100 2 5 5 0 6 7 S O 3 3 25 0 5 0 2 5 3 3 . 6 2 9 . 5 3 3 . 3 3 4 . 4 3 4 . 0 3 7 . 5 3 3 . 0 4 2 . 8 3 7 . 5 4 2 . 4 4 3 . 9 4 3 . 2 4 7 . 7 4 2 . 0Table 6
Alternative methods of specifying the required thermal resistance o f cellulose f i b e r
insulation
Criterium of acceptance Comparative at 7 5 mm
at 150 mm thickness t h i c k n e s s
1 Class o n l y
