Superquilt R-values

[ifd66]

I'm considering getting YBS Superquilt (40mm or 1.5inches) for a house
build and see R-values quotes around 2.7 or R-value of 1.8 per inch.

Is this right? That this high-tech, high-spec insulation option has
lower R-value rating that wool and many other lower tech and cheaper
insulation options?

I think I must be missing something.

Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.




--
ifd66

[harry]

You're missing the thickness factor. To compare like with like, they
need to be the same thickness.

You only want to be using these hi-tech insulations when there is a
lack of space. Where there is plenty of room the traditional
insulators work out cheaper.

[Robin]

> I'm considering getting YBS Superquilt (40mm or 1.5inches) for a house
> build and see R-values quotes around 2.7 or R-value of 1.8 per inch.
>
> Is this right? That this high-tech, high-spec insulation option has
> lower R-value rating that wool and many other lower tech and cheaper
> insulation options?
>
> I think I must be missing something.
>

I stopped reading after doing our roof in 2009 but at that time it
seemed to me there was still room to doubt the claims by manufacturers
of some multifoil insulation to achieve the same results as much thicker
layers of other material on the basis that the lab. results were not the
same as "real world" results. There was certainly a long-running war of
words and research between the manufacturers of multi-foils and of
boards (Kingspan, Celotex etc) or wools. I especially liked the German
thoroughness of using 2 identical houses with traditional insulation in
one and the new stuff in t'other:
http://www.ibp.fraunhofer.de/en/Images/495e_tcm1021-85212.pdf. Of
course that experiment did not use YBS Superquit so (before their
lawyers contact me) I must stress it may be that that might give
different results.

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

[Tim Watts]

Thanks for that - very interesting.

Yes - I was dubious when some contractor asked me if I was interested in
10mm thick foiled quilt.
--
Tim Watts

[John Rumm]

On 11/06/2012 07:05, harry wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2:07 am, ifd66<ifd66.a1b0...@diybanter.com> wrote:
>> I'm considering getting YBS Superquilt (40mm or 1.5inches) for a house
>> build and see R-values quotes around 2.7 or R-value of 1.8 per inch.
>>
>> Is this right? That this high-tech, high-spec insulation option has
>> lower R-value rating that wool and many other lower tech and cheaper
>> insulation options?
>>
>> I think I must be missing something.
>>
>> Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> --
>> ifd66
>
>
> You're missing the thickness factor. To compare like with like, they
> need to be the same thickness.

R values incorporate thickness... its K values that don't.

> You only want to be using these hi-tech insulations when there is a
> lack of space. Where there is plenty of room the traditional
> insulators work out cheaper.

There seems to be much doubt that the multifoil products actually do
outperform traditional insulation products.

The claim for the product is 2.71 m^2K/W which gives a U value of 0.36

http://www.roofingsuperstore.co.uk/product/insulation-2/insulation/multi-foil-insulation/ybs-superquilt-multi-layer-foil-insulation-1500mm-x-10m.html?gclid=CNSJ0fyMxrACFVMetAod6SUxXA

That would in theory be the equal of around 70mm of PIR foam or 110mm of
rockwool. However it is more expensive than either - but easier to fit.



--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[Hugo Nebula]

[Default] On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 01:07:20 +0000, a certain chimpanzee,
ifd66 <ifd66....@diybanter.com>, randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

>
>I'm considering getting YBS Superquilt (40mm or 1.5inches) for a house
>build and see R-values quotes around 2.7 or R-value of 1.8 per inch.
>
>Is this right? That this high-tech, high-spec insulation option has
>lower R-value rating that wool and many other lower tech and cheaper
>insulation options?
>
>I think I must be missing something.

You're missing the history behind it:

Many years ago a product called Tri-Iso Super 9 by a French company
called Actis came along. They claimed that it was the equivalent of
200mm mineral fibre, by way of a comparative test overseen by TRADA.
Much debate followed, but recently it has emerged that TRADA aren't
accredited to carry out these tests, and the methodology was suspect
to say the least, so they are now meaningless.

Meanwhile conventional British Standard tests failed to replicate the
resistance value claimed. When challenged, Actis claim that the
conventional tests don't take into account the special properties of
multi-foil insulation. A series of real-life thermographic analyses of
buildings with this product and those with others gave readings
broadly in line with what would be expected by the conventional tests,
in other words, a lot worse than their claims.

There is also an Advertising Standards judgement against Actis for
their claims.

Tri-Iso Super 9 (and its successor, Super 10) have been shown on
several occasions to be nowhere near as good as its claims.

You may be saying, what's all the above got to do with YBS Superquilt?
Read on...

While all the above has been going on, YBS have been making a product
that looks similar, but has gone through none of the testing of Actis.

In short YBS make a rip-off version of a useless product*.

*There is a similar product called Thinsulex, which HAS been tested
and the company don't make exaggerated claims for it.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have I strayed"?