Ecomate as Blowing Agent for PU Foam System

1. A Cost Effective Alternative
for Polyurethane Foams

2. Overview
• Ecomate Product Review
• Usage & Market Applications
• India Trials
• Considerations
• Ecomate’s Success & Availability
• Conclusions

3. What is ecomate®?
• A liquid blowing agent or a foam expansion agent
• An alternative blowing agent for rigid and flexible applications
• Cost competitive & economical
• Been in Commercial use for more than 10 years
• Meets regulatory standards as an alternative in PU foams

4. Regulatory
• US EPA SNAP Approved
• RoHS and WEEE Compliant
• GRAS Approved
• Non-Toxic
• VOC-Exempt
• Montreal & Kyoto Protocol Compliant

5. Properties & Comparison
 Well-suited blowing agent for
PUR & PIR foams
 Similar to HCFC-141b
 Liquid at room temperature
 No special equipment needed when
handling
 Non-ozone depleting and
virtually zero GWP
Properties ecomate® 141b
Boiling Point °C 31.5 32
Gas Lambda Value @ 25°C 10.7 10
Molecular Weight 60 117
Specific Gravity 0.982 1.24
Flash Point -19°C ND
LEL (ppm) 50,000 72,000
Ozone Depletion Potential 0 0.11
Global Warming Potential ~1 725

6. UNDP Validation Report

7. ecomate® Sector Usage
Rigid Foams
Flexible
Integral Skin
XPS

8. ecomate® Applications
• Rigid Foams
‣ Pour-In-Place Rigid Insulating Foams
‣ Commercial Foodservice Equipment/ Commercial Refrigeration
‣ Discontinuous Panels
- Cold Stores
- Houses – Modular
- Transport
‣ Continuous Panels
- Flex Faced
- Metal Faced
‣ Block Foams
- Sheets
- Pipe Sections
‣ Spray Foams
‣ Industrial
‣ Dwellings

9. ecomate® Applications
• Flexible Foams
‣ Integral Skin Foams
- Automotive
- Furniture
- Leisure/ Toys
- Medical Applications
‣ Flexible Molded Foams
- Hypersoft Foams
- HR Foams
- Viscoelastic Foams
‣ Slabstock Foams
- Continuous process
- Box foaming process

10. Ecomate Trials- India
• FSI partnered with independent system houses
• January 2014 agreed to trial ecomate
• FSI supply base formulation(s)
• Must be present during trials
• Provided technical support

11. Qualification Testing
• 4 Base Formulations
• Modified formulations to achieve target reactivity
and density
• Cream: 25-30 sec
• Gel: 150-180 sec
• Free Rise Density: 25-30 kg/m3
• Lab Testing
• Viscosity
• Compressive Strength
• Dimensional Stability (Heat, Humid, and Freezer)
• Closed Cell
• K-factor
• Shelf-Life Stability

12. Formula 1 Formula 2 Formula 3 Formula 4
Viscosity (cps) 340
Cream 26
Gel 156
Tack 258
Density (kg/m3
) 28
C.C 96%
// Comp (kPa) 28.03
Perp Comp (kPa) 14.3
K-Factor
10C 23.24
24C 24.84
Heat Age 90°C
ΔV -0.57
ΔM -0.48
Humid Age 70°C
ΔV -1.7
ΔM -0.59
Freezer Age -62°C
ΔV 1.1
ΔM -0.21
Cream 25
Gel 149
Tack 273
Density (kg/m3
) 31.7
Shelf-Life Stability
Viscosity (cps) 465
Cream 35
Gel 181
Tack 320
Density (kg/m3
) 29
C.C 99%
// Comp (kPa) 27.18
Perp Comp (kPa) 15.68
K-Factor
10C 23.52
24C 25.55
Heat Age 90°C
ΔV -1.52
ΔM -2.68
Humid Age 70°C
ΔV -2.42
ΔM -2.76
Freezer Age -62°C
ΔV 0.51
ΔM -0.28
Cream 40
Gel 207
Tack 401
Density (kg/m3
) 35.5
Shelf-Life Stability
Viscosity (cps) 520
Cream 26
Gel 150
Tack 292
Density (kg/m3
) 27
C.C 98%
// Comp (kPa) 28.11
Perp Comp (kPa) 16.58
K-Factor
10C 22.21
24C 23.86
Heat Age 90°C
ΔV -4.04
ΔM -2.97
Humid Age 70°C
ΔV -3.67
ΔM -2.67
Freezer Age -62°C
ΔV -1.33
ΔM 0
Cream 26
Gel 145
Tack 280
Density (kg/m3
) 28.3
Shelf-Life Stability
Viscosity (cps) 560
Cream 32
Gel 155
Tack 222
Density (kg/m3
) 27.4
C.C 97%
// Comp (kPa) 28.71
Perp Comp (kPa) 13.8
K-Factor
10C 23.22
24C 24.81
Heat Age 90°C
ΔV -2.56
ΔM -1.23
Humid Age 70°C
ΔV -13.09
ΔM -1.35
Freezer Age -62°C
ΔV -0.18
ΔM -0.57
Cream 30
Gel 139
Tack 222
Density (kg/m3
) 30.2
Shelf-Life Stability

13. FSI In House Testing
• Formula 1 & Formula 4 were tested using high pressure equipment
• 1.22m x 2.44m
• Thickness: 50mm and 100 mm
Equipment Settings
Parameter Setting
Press Temperature 35°C
Polyol Temperature 23°C
MDI Temperature 23°C
Polyol Pressure 120-130 bar
MDI Pressure 120-130 bar
Ratio (Polyol/MDI) 100/132

15. High Pressure Testing Results
2'' Panel 4'' Panel
Cream -- --
Gel 120 120
Tack 171 171
FR Density (kg/m3
) 27.4 27.4
Core Density (kg/m3
) 36.5 36.7
Molded Density (kg/m3
) 38.3 41
C.C 99% 99%
// Comp (kPa) -- 214
Perp Comp (kPa) 142 213
K-Factor
10 C -- 22.46
24 C -- 23.91
Heat Age (7 days)
ΔV -3.33 -0.38
ΔM -2.91 -1.75
Humid Age (7 days)
ΔV -5.48 -1.45
ΔM -3.34 -2.5
Formula 1
2'' Panel 4'' Panel
Cream -- --
Gel 140 140
Tack 321 321
FR Density (kg/m3
) 25.8 25.8
Core Density (kg/m3
) 37 37.8
Molded Density (kg/m3
) 41 41.3
C.C 95% 99%
// Comp (kPa) -- 163
Perp Comp (kPa) 142 157
K-Factor
10 C -- 22.93
24 C -- 24.68
Heat Age (7 days)
ΔV -4.8 -2.75
ΔM -2.42 -2.92
Humid Age (7 days)
ΔV -6.04 -3.12
ΔM -3.35 -3.2
Formula 4

16. India Demo
• Both Formula 1 and Formula 4 were given to 3 system houses
• Systems were made with locally available polyols
• Substitutions were made to the guideline formula
• Systems were optimized for reactions speed etc.
• Respective System houses chose - one or both formulas to trial
at their end-users (panel foamers)

17. India Demo – continued
• 5 panel producers were chosen by the Independent systems
houses
• Panels were shot though HP equipment
• Panels of various lengths and thickness were used
• Density was maintained as per the current (141b) system in use
• Equipment parameters were kept the same
• Equipment was calibrated based on the new system ratio

18. Royal Industries (Delhi)
• Formula 4 was tested in the lab Only
• No equipment was available to run the trial
• Lab Mold was used to simulate a panel production
• Reactivity and density was recorded.
• The lab made sample carried to FSI labs for
evaluation

19. Royal Industries (Delhi)
Foam Supplies Testing Results
Test Results
Density (kg/m3
) 40.7
Closed Cell (%) 97
Compressive Strength (kPa) 148
Dimensional Stability (% ΔV)
Heat Age @ 90°C -2.05
Humid Age @ 50°C, ≥90% RH -2.41
Humid Age @ 70°C, ≥90% RH -4.55
Freezer Age @ -62°C -0.53

20. Industrial Foams (Delhi)
• Trialed Formula 1 & Formula 4
‣ Want to trial both formulas
• Reaction profile was faster – end user preference
• A few block molds were filled – used for flooring applications
• Blocks molds were filled at 36kg/m3, 38kg/m3 & 40kg/m3
• Metal faced and PE film panels
‣ 5 panels total
‣ 50mm & 60mm thicknesses

21. Equipment Settings Foam Supplies Testing Results
Industrial Foams (Delhi)
Test Results
Density (kg/m3
) 40.1
Closed Cell (%) 97
Compressive Strength (kPa) 130
Dimensional Stability (% ΔV)
Heat Age @ 90°C -2.33
Humid Age @ 50°C, ≥90% RH -2.49
Humid Age @ 70°C, ≥90% RH -4.46
Freezer Age @ -62°C -0.23
Parameter Setting
Press Temperature 41°C
Polyol Temperature 21-24°C
MDI Temperature 22-23°C
Polyol Pressure 92-96 bar
MDI Pressure 117-118 bar
Ratio (Polyol/MDI) 100/136

22. Industrial Foams (Delhi)
Industrial Foams Testing Results
• Measured thickness at various
locations on the panel
• After 3 weeks, remeasaured the
thickness at the same locations.
• No apparent shrinkage!!!

23. Jindal Mectec (Delhi)
• System House A tested Formula 1 and
Formula 4
‣ Formula 4 chosen to trial
• No changes made to guideline
formula
• Metal faced and PE film panels made
‣ 6 Panels total
‣ Thicknesses of 40mm, 60mm, 80mm,
100mm, 120mm
‣ Various lengths and widths

24. Jindal Mectec (Delhi)
Equipment Settings Foam Supplies Testing Results
Test Results
Density (kg/m3
) 40.2
Closed Cell (%) 97
Compressive Strength (kPa) 183
Dimensional Stability (% ΔV)
Heat Age @ 90°C -1.61
Humid Age @ 50°C, ≥90% RH -1.92
Humid Age @ 70°C, ≥90% RH -3.25
Freezer Age @ -62°C -0.74
Parameter Setting
Press Temperature 35°C
Polyol Temperature 24°C
MDI Temperature 25°C
Polyol Pressure 196 bar
MDI Pressure 147 bar
Ratio (Polyol/MDI) 100/133

25. Modern Prefab Systems (Delhi)
• System House A also provided them with
Formula 4
‣ Exact same batch that was sent to Enterprise 3
• Panels with various types of facers
‣ Metal, Aluminum Foil, PE film, Plywood/Metal,
Gypsum/Cement
‣ 10 panels total of various lengths, widths, and
thicknesses
• True Test ̶ 10m long panel!!

26. Modern Prefab Systems (Delhi)
Equipment Settings Foam Supplies Testing Results
Test Results
Density (kg/m3
) 39.5
Closed Cell (%) 99
Compressive Strength (kPa) 171
Dimensional Stability (% ΔV)
Heat Age @ 90°C -3.78
Humid Age @ 50°C, ≥90% RH -2.71
Humid Age @ 70°C, ≥90% RH -4.19
Freezer Age @ -62°C -0.31
Thermal Conductivity (mW/m/K)
@24°C 23.41
@10°C 21.75
Parameter Setting
Press Temperature 45°C
Polyol Temperature 22°C
MDI Temperature 22°C
Polyol Pressure 110 bar
MDI Pressure 110 bar
Ratio (Polyol/MDI) 100/132

27. Blessed Stars (Chennai)
• System House B tested Formula 1 and Formula 4
‣ Made changes to guideline formula
- Used their own polyols
- Changed ratio to 100/142
• Formula 4 chosen to trial
• 2 metal faced panels
‣ Underfilled panel
- 36 kg/m3
‣ Too overpacked panel
- 57.5 kg/m3

28. Blessed Stars (Chennai)
Equipment Settings Foam Supplies Testing Results
Test Results
Density (kg/m3
) 36
Closed Cell (%) 98
Compressive Strength (kPa) 150-200
Dimensional Stability (% ΔV)
Heat Age @ 90°C -3.00
Humid Age @ 50°C, ≥90% RH -2.60
Humid Age @ 70°C, ≥90% RH -4.50
Freezer Age @ -62°C -0.50
Parameter Setting
Press Temperature 40°C
Polyol Temperature 30°C
MDI Temperature 30°C
Polyol Pressure 36 bar
MDI Pressure 43 bar
Ratio (Polyol/MDI) 100/141

29. India Trial Results Summary
Royal
Industrial
Foams
Jindal
Modern
Prefab
Systems
Density (kg/m3
) 40.7 40.1 40.2 39.5
Closed Cell (%) 97 97 97 99
Compressive Strength (kPa) 148 130 183 171
Dimensional Stability (% ΔV)
Heat Age @ 90°C -2.05 -2.33 -1.61 -3.78
Humid Age @ 50°C, ≥90% RH -2.41 -2.49 -1.92 -2.71
Humid Age @ 70°C, ≥90% RH -4.55 -4.46 -3.25 -4.19
Freezer Age @ -62°C -0.53 -0.23 -0.74 -0.31
Thermal Conductivity (mW/m/K)
@24°C N/A N/A N/A 23.41
@10°C N/A N/A N/A 21.75

30. India Trials Summary
• Formula 4 was the preferred system by all parties
• No changes were made to equipment, operation, or
production
• Adhesion to all facings (steel, PE film, etc.) was
excellent
• Foam Supplies addressed all concerns during trials
‣ Will give assistance where needed
• Successful trials!!!!

31. Considerations
• Not a Drop-in replacement for all systems
• Optimization is REQUIRED!
• Minimal Capital Expense
• Fractional compared to hydrocarbon technology
• Cost Efficient
• Environmentally Benign
• Meets Montreal Protocol
• Meets Kyoto Protocol
• Thermally Efficient
• Flash Point
ecomate – pure form flammable -19⁰C flash point
ecomate – polyol blend nonflammable >35⁰C flash point
ecomate – mdi blend nonflammable >35⁰C flash point

32.  ecomate stored and shipped in metal containers
 Potential issues arise from:
 Unoptimized system
 Improper use of equipment
 Plastic seal compatibility must be checked!
 PTFE & Kalrez seals recommended
ecomate is not a corrosive species
Considerations

33. Why is ecomate successful?
 Compatible with most PU raw materials
 Meets or exceeds energy standards
 Can process through standard and/or
existing equipment
 No additional capital investment necessary
 Available worldwide

35. Why is ecomate successful?
 Compatible with most PU raw materials
 Meets or exceeds energy standards
 Can process through standard and/or
existing equipment
 No additional capital investment necessary
 Available worldwide

36. ecomate® Availability – Worldwide

37. Conclusions
• Environmentally safe
• More compatibilizing than other blowing agents
• Minimal to no change in equipment
• Successful in various applications
• Not a Drop-in replacement for all systems
• Optimization is recommended for success
• Increasing the functionality of polyol blend
• Changing the surfactant type and amount
• Not all polyols OR surfactants are created
equal

38. www.foamsupplies.com
Thank you for your time.
www.ecomatesystems.com