has anyone use INSULTARP???????

Mad Dog!!!!!!!!

Thanks HR

Mad Dog

ScottMP

You got it Matt

By the way, when doing my walkway, I had the same thoughts .... I am NOT GOING to look at this three years from now and say " I should have put tubing in !! "

Can't wait to here how it works.

Scott

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

hot_rod

1-1/2\" DowBoard is about the same $$

as the 3/8" bubble products, in my area.

The r-value, and just as importantly the weight carrying rating is listed and well documanted in the foam board products.

High Load Dow Board is used under airport runways and under cooler floors.

I worry about r value if,and when,the air bubbles break! You can hear the pop as you walk across some of that stuff.

I will say InsulTarp does have some additional closed cell foam layers. And a tough protective jacket.

Gets heavier when wet, so something inside absorbs water.

DowFoam floats, always and is used in dock construction.

Just to muddy the waters some more

hot rod

Unknown

MPF, just because insultarp adds a couple of very thin layers of PE doesn't mean it's appreciably different than ALL of the BFB products being referenced in those links.

Note the following though:

-contrary to american LAW, they do not label their product with the R-value. You have to wonder why they risk the inevitable lawsuit.

-As figured by all these studies, there IS NO RADIANT HEAT LOSS under a slab. it's conductive. aluminum does not block conductive loss.. period.

But what can I say? If you want to take the word of a salesman over ALL of those referenced in that post I linked to and beyond... go for it. You say you have had "success". I have to ask; by what measure are you gauging your "success"? You don't have callbacks? Your customers don't yell at you about their heating bills (not that they would have a clue either)? Do you, or they, have any idea how much heat they are sending into the ground? Would that change your idea of "success", if you did know?

I work with people every day that pay huge heating bills and think it's ok and normal. Is that "success", because they don't know any better? I'm not saying your clients all have huge heating bills.. but they are larger than they need to be.

Unknown

Mad Dog, chill out. What you do in your driveway is your business. This was a side conversation occurring in your post. No need to take it personally. I hate snowmelt, I wasn't saying anything about you. I do look forward to hearing about how much heat you pull out of the driveway (flow meters and thermometers would be awesome so we can get BTU readings!).

But please understand I spend a lot of time having to answer the BS claims of these reflective MFGs. Their performance under slabs is well known at this point; you aren't learning anything new here. All you're going to do is find out whether an R1.65 is "good enough" for you in this particular application. That might be neat to know, and it very well may be good enough for this... but unless you're loading this ground up with sensors (like mark eatherton already has) you aren't providing us with any data on the insultarp we don't already know.

It certainly isn't going to say a darn thing about whether or not insultarp is good insulation, unless you have a system failure, which I doubt you'll have in this case. Why do I doubt it? Because I know a driveway solar collector already out there with this stuff under it that pulls lots of heat on a summer day. It's good enough for that. Maybe unless you're over wet ground or something. I guess we'll see.

But this driveway is not going to prove insultarp's case one way or the other.

Finally though.. in all seriousness.. best of luck and I do sincerely look forward to your experience pulling heat out of this driveway. I'm personally very intrigued by the possibilities of driveway collection from what I've seen so far.

Dave_4

Info from phone call to Insultarp...

They (Chad) STILL claim an "effective R value" of 10. They are sending me an email with the data which I will post when it comes in. They said they used the ASTM C518 test which is considered to be as real world as it gets and they achieved a 10.1. They agree, bubble foil bubble and the like WILL only give you a 1.2 or so but insultarp IS NOT the same type of product. It's like comparing apples to oranges and saying the apples are bad becasue the oranges are. Now, again, if anyone has factual data to offer rather than opinions, I'm all "ears".

here's the # call them yourselves, it's toll free:

866-698-6562

Dave_4

see if this works...

It's in PDF so I can't copy and paste, hopefully it'll wotk as an attachment

Unknown

wow, they use the same test all the BFB manufacturers use and got the same results all the BFB people got until very recently.

Seriously.. if this is real, then it should be stamped on their product, as required by the FTC for all products marketed as insulation. It is not stamped on their product, and it will never be stamped on their product, because the claim does not hold water.

This product is no different than any other BFB product in terms of thermal conductivity, space available for reflection or what have you. It's a nicer product for durability perhaps, but ultimately it's the same kind of product. It's not just coincidence that they made these identical claims for other BFB type products for years, using the same ASTM test, and got debunked, and nothing makes this particular variant of the product any better than the rest.

But if everyone except people selling this stuff can't convince you, then I'm done trying to help your clients. It doesn't sound much like you're willing to listen to reason though. But hey... other manufacturers of various tarp/roll products have been sued already and had to change their tune, and this one is inevitable. Go ahead and keep installing until they are forced by law to tell you the truth.

Dave_4

I count...

5 separate layers in my Insultarp swatch, not a couple of layers of foil with some foam or bubble wrap sandwiched between. The Insultarp I have is a full 1/2" thick when compressed slightly, BFB products are 1/8" at best. Stop trying to portray them as the same or similar products, it's not true. If what you claim is true, wouldn't Insultarp be aware of these past problems and hesitate to make the R-10 claim for fear of possible litigation? Wouldn't they try to hedge around the question and baffle me with BS? STILL you provide us with no data to support your argument just a "wait till the sky falls" mentality. Like I said, call them yourself, see what they have to say about your claims. After you do, let me know and I'll call them back to confirm how you've outed these fraudulent claims. As far as my clients, they're doing just fine without you, so you can relax.

Unknown

best of luck to you then. check out slab shield sometime though, it's practically the same product, but a bit more realistic about the output. regardless, whether they throw a few extra layers of PE in there or not makes no difference... but you keep telling yourself it does.

You say I have provided no data, because ALL THE STUDIES DONE don't use this particular product. Even though this particular product is not significantly different in function than slab shield or the BFB products. Take slab shield, add another thin layer or two of PE, and poof, you suddently shoot up R8? Really? Wow. We should be fully insulating all our houses with this stuff then, if we can get R20 an inch!

I have no interest in talking to this company. Why would I care what they have to say? I can see the product. It's not magic. There is nothing unknown about this. No sales pitch or marketing lit is going to change that.

But just to make you happy, here is a test some people did:

http://www.naturalspacesdomes.com/bear_creek_dome/test_results.htm

Now go ahead and tell me that the insultarp they used is equal to 2" of rigid foam.

Uni R_3

Only the air spaces are insulating...

For an under slab application only the air spaces do anything because heat is moving strictly through conduction. All those layers just help isolate the air spaces.

A ½" of air space is R2.5 at best... still it's better than nothing. It's good to note that marginal savings of every additional R value become less and less so it's better to have some than none - the diminishing returns of every additional R factor. That said, the first R is the most important and even R2 helps...

The test results you posted may very well compare to R10 worth of what was probably fibreglass in that test scenario, but under the ground you have maybe the equiv of ½" styrofoam provided the air spaces don't absorb water.

Dave_4

You realize...

The best way to dress for cold weather is several thin layers as opposed to one thick one, right? Why? Because of the air trapped between the layers. BFB has no such air trapped between no such layers. Insultarp does. While it may NOT perform quite as well as 2" of foam it sure does perform a whole lot better than any BFB product out there. From what I see in the dome house charts, even though Insultarp is not represented, there really isn't THAT much of a difference between the bubble wrap and the 2" of foam. A few degrees at best. Remember too, how nuch of a delta T do we have between an ~ 85* concrete slab and the ~ 52* ground? 33*? Not much of a difference. How much R value do we really need with a small difference like that? Anyhoo, like I've said, the places where I used Insultarp under concrete are performing very well, they are dry and comfortable and use very little in the way of energy to stay that way. Maybe foam board does perform better but I think the difference is negligible so given the greater ease of installation I choose to remain with the Insultarp. Until, of course, someone provides me with data to the otherwise.

Dave_4

Well,,,

I just talked to the guy who designs my floors for me and asked HIM about all this. His most telling remark was the one where he said he has hundreds of jobs out there right now where the slab loads were figured with R-10 underneath them because that's what Insultarp says it is and they all seem to work just fine, that includes all mine. Good enough for me...

Unknown

what they are calling "bubble wrap" is insultarp.

http://www.naturalspacesdomes.com/bear_creek_domeinstalling_probes.htm

you think I would post data for any other product after your refusal to listen thus far? You refused multiple studies because they used other practically identical products.

It will NOT perform much better than BFB, which has the air spaces right in the bubbles, and it will be dead air space because the heated layer is on top.. no convection. The air is "trapped" just as effectively in that case. Not so for walls or clothes, but in a vertical plane like this, dead air is trapped air.

You can argue what r value you need under a slab.. that's a valid debate, and I've pointed that out myself. If you have wet ground, rock, clay, or other conductive situations, use the R10. If not, maybe you can play around. I'd stick with an R10 around the edges and perimeter at least though, because there, you do not have 52 degree ground. And once you've done the perimeters, it's just as easy to keep going, so I would. But you could make the case that the center of the slab could use the tarp product.

All I'm saying, all I'm desparately, pleading trying to get you to understand, is that insultarp is NOT AN R10. that's it. It's an R1.65. It's not equivalent.

Is it good enough? that depends.

But it IS NOT EQUIVALENT and when they tell you it is an R10, they ARE LYING. period. You are deciding that LESS R value is adequate, NOT choosing an equivalent product.

That's it. If you make that choice, great. But do it with open eyes, PLEASE.

Unknown

so his fudge factors cover the excess.

This isn't a "system won't work" problem. The system will work. The whole question is what is it costing the homeowner. They will never know the difference.

But a pro will, in rough terms at least. It may not be a huge amount, even. But what's in the best interest of the client?

You can't know that if you're using bogus numbers.

Dave_4

Fudge Factors?

What fudge factors? If you look at the dome picture and read carefully you'll see that Insultarp is NOT used in that test. Ah well, it sounds like your heart is in the right place, so I guess we should agree to disagree and leave it at that. Just fyi as I'm not sure how familiar you are with the product. They take a layer of bubble wrap, two 3/16 layers of foam and sandwich that between single layers of reflective water resistant ripstop fabric. These layers are loose, they are not bonded to each other like you see in the BFB type products. It is NOT the same product as the BFB stuff, it's design is totally different. And, when I present the product, I make it VERY clear to the client that if it's the least bit wet under the slab, it won't work and I won't put it in. They have to guarantee me a dry underslab or any warrantees are void.

hot_rod

if I'm not mistaken InsulTarp was originally designed

for concrete insulation blankets when pouring in freezing weather. We used those blankets 15 years ago in Utah when pouring year 'round.

Every now and then large concrete contractors try to sell me their old tattered blankets for under slab insulation

The product works great for blankets. And there must be millions of square feet out there in service. Hense the tough rip stop jacketing. No need for such a tough cover when used underslab, really.

It is what it is a 1/2" of trapped air space. R-values are known for that much trapped air space.

When the bubbles break in typical bubble foil products you end up with ZIP. Possibly a void under the slab

InsulTarp does offer the additional layers of foam to protect the bubbles and add some r.

I know my dogs love it for bedding!

hot rod

Dave_4

Interestingly enough...

The outer layers of the stuff I have are much more tightly woven. The camera's in the truck but I'll try to post a pic of my sample tomorrow. Besides, if the dogs are happy, I'm happy...

Glenn Sossin_2

Its the testing

All the questions raised regarding these types of products revolve around claims made from tests. The problem is, there are a multitude of different test methods and there is no standard such as the IBR rating with boilers. Once there is a standard testing method, that reflects the real world application of these products, then the we will get to the bottom line.

By the way Mad Dog, insultarp - we do sell it if someone wants to buy it and I have used it on several jobs. It does work, its easy to use provided you don't have to cut it. I still like the barrier better for snow melts provided there is no idling demand involved. Its a lot less money per sqft.

Solar aside, if you have a continual heat differential, you are going to want the highest R-Value you can get to prevent heat conduction to the ground below to optimize the performance of your system.

Like everyone else, I will be awaiting your results.

P.S. your dog looks very friendly

Glenn

Mad Dog!!!!!!!!

Whatever YOU say

Mad Dog

Mad Dog!!!!!!!!

Mad Dog!!!!!!!!

uhhhh huhhhhhh

Unknown

another queston(s)

Intresting tread here... Question with the insul-tarp.. Saying its the air inside helping with the 'r' rating... What's the fating if the air spaces get full of water and don't drain?
Last radiant heat job, I used the slab shield due to the height requirement and recommended by my supply house for this radiant slab over exisiting slab. ( was a screened porch made into year 'round room and too many windows, doors, installed cibb as supplemetal heat) I know it will works as it will never be wet... However I'm looking at the comapny spec sheet.. Nowhere it says the r-factors but showed the company is a member of..RIMA, systems builders asocc, RPA,NAHB, NFBA, MRA.... It doesn't means s**t to me as there's no datas!

Dave_4

Well,,,

I invited the Insultarp rep here, let's see what happens.

ScottMP

I hope he shows

I have been following this thread with alot of interest as we use Insultarp on a lot of jobs. I have to say that I can't imagine Insultarp and Bubble foil being the same. Just Looking at the two products shows me there has to be a difference. Is it possible that Rob is confusing this with something else ??

Scott



To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Unknown

No Scott, I've seen the stuff. again, a couple of skinny layers of PE don't impress me. Maybe it won't "pop".. it's still not providing much insulation to begin with. the basic way it's trying to insulate is the same as BFB, it's just more durable. But unpopped BFB still isn't very good under a slab. and neither is this stuff.

much better than nothing, one more time, so I'm not misquoted or misunderstood. Just not anything near an R10.

I agree with others that if you're going to use a tarp (which I normally would not), use "The Barrier". at least you know for sure what you're getting there.

heatboy

If it sounds too good............

.....to be true, it probably is just that. Just look for the wagon with the bottles of magic elixer and smooth talker. It's undoubtedly in there.

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

hot_rod

The \"Barrier\" product

is now available in a 3/4" thickness. Makes for a large diameter roll, but it does have some define-able R- value.

They have also added a HD outer covering, although not as job tough as the InsulTarp

The Barrier also has a peel and stick fold to seal the whole assembly for a tight vapor barrier.

hot rod

hot_rod

More opinions on \"bubble\" products

http://www.healthyheating.com/Page 55/Page_55_o_bldg_sys.htm

At Robert Bean's site.

I also had a statement from Dow regarding bubble insulation. I just need to find where I stored it

hot rod

Dave_4

Answer from Insultarp to me...

Thanks for getting back with me on this. Hopefully I can help out a little bit. I am hesitant to get involved in the discussion, however, I can send you a packet of information beyond the test data that shows a little bit more about what Insul-Tarp is and does. As far as rebutting a few of the remarks in the discussion...RJBPHD made a comment about having used "slab shield" before due to a height requirement. We do not make slab shield, so that tells me right away that he's confusing our product with something else. He goes on to say that ours or slab shield's website doesn't mean s**t to him since there is no data available. I cannot speak on slab shield's behalf, but we do not publish those numbers simply due to the way the product was tested and we do not want to confuse people. The product achieves different R-values in different applications. We would rather take the time to talk with the contractor or architect about the product and application so there is no confusion. Also, a comment was made concerning concrete curing blankets. Though Insul-Tarp looks like a concrete blanket, it is completely different. Ours are specifically made for underslab applications. I think the last point I would like to make is that we, Insulation Solutions, make a bubble-foil product (Space Age) much, if not exactly, like the ones these guys are referring to. We only claim an R-1.1 in an underslab application in accordance with the RIMA guidelines. Space Age is not even in the same radiant ball park with Insul-Tarp. Hopefully the guys you're dealing with will realize that since we make both of them, it's obvious that one is much better than the other. I think that's all I have for now. Like I said before, I have no problem helping you out and sending you info. I would rather not get involved in the discussion. If you want to shoot me your address I'll get the literature sent out to you right away. Thanks again.

ScottMP

MPF

Listen, I'm on oyur side on this but ... Do you think this guy will be happy you juts posted his perssonal e-mail to you on a website ???

I'm not sure that was his intention. Just a thought.

Scott

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"

Dave_4

I don't see why.

This is his reply to the questions raised here. I view it as more of an official response from Insultarp than a trading of personal info between two private individuals. If he doesn't want to get involved here, I can understand that but I don't want to put what he says into my own words and then feed it to you. I will get the info he's talking about. I suggest all those interested do the same, I was going to post his address here but maybe I'll let you do your own homework. Just type in Insultarp.

Unknown

More marketing mealy mouth. Funny, I don't see an R10 claim in there. I still don't see it printed on the insultarp, as required by law.

This is all really strange! They make all kinds of claims, but they won't come out and make any legally definable R-value claims. I *wonder why*?

But, A little birdie just sent me a new piece of info; see attached evaluation from the state of wisconsin.

My favorite part? "Insul-Tarp under-slab reflective insulation can be installed but, no credit will be given as under-slab insulation."

I think that about sums it up. But, I'm sure Mr, Marketing guy will have plenty of things to say in his defense, just not in public or in anything legally binding, only on the phone, or in emails with privacy disclaimers on them. And if you want to believe, you will. Just like you believe that because this LOOKS different than BFB, that it really, really does perform very differently.

ALH_4

BTU Readings!!!!

(flow meters and thermometers would be awesome so we can get BTU readings!)

Yes! Let's get some btu readings. Otherwise no quantifiable data will be gained from this. Temperature readings of the slab and/or soil tell us very little about what kind of solar collector this is.

Dave_4

Hey,,,

It looks like you have finally backed up your claims. I'd LOVE to see the data collected by these tests. Now I hafta call Wisconsin?

Dave_4

I have to say...

The silence from out Insulation soultions/Insultarp way has been a bit deafening. I emailed for specifics on the test and I emailed the Wisconsin Paper and nada has returned. You'd think, if they were on the up and up, that they'd be falling all over each other trying to defend their product. I'm actually too dang busy right now to mess with this much more but my interest NOW lies in why two different organizations can use the same test on the same product and come out with widely differing results. I DID talk to a radiant floor product mfr in the meantime and asked, "Which does YOUR COMPANY prefer under it's product?" the answer was "minimum 2" rigid foam." I asked, "Would you considered a job with insultarp under it to be botched?" Answer, "No, just not as good." or words to that effect. We agreed a call to ATSM might not be a bad idea either, I don't have time right now. Lastly, they figure their heat loss calcs figuring insultarp at R-2.3. Another guy on the talk to list is my favorite distributor. My main concern is one of my clients coming back to me saying, "You misrepresented this product to me!" cause then the lawyers start making money. Another is not setting myself up with even MORE clients in the same manner.

hot_rod

It's not the heat loss numbers that homeowners

communicate it! It the monthly fuel cost that they understand and make insulation decisions based on. Operating cost is the language homeowners want to speak. BTIU/ square foot and ACH per hour cause most HO to glaze over on you

Do a calc showing the operating cost over the life of the home with R-1.65 and R-10 used. Now you have their undivided attention.

It's not a lot different from insulating the walls in your home. I don't know of ANY homeowner that would take R-1.65 over R-11 or 19.

Heat travels to cold, period. The rate of transfer is driven by the delta T. If it is zero degrees F outside and the slab is running 85F then you have an 85 degree delta T. at that exposed edge. Which R value would you use on your own home to slow that transfer? It's basic heat transfer really. No NASA science involved.

hot rod

Unknown

Well, sorry I got kind of heated with you there MPF... please just understand, I've had to go through this more times than I care to count.

If the lawyers get rich on anyone, it should be on the people who are knowingly continuing to BS about this material's capabilities. and eventually, they will.

I will note whenever I see a product relying on that ASTM test, I ignore the results. results are all over the board and that is the same test that the BFB crowd was using to claim R10s and R40s for years. I don't know the details, but apparently there is plenty of room for variance in that one.

Dave_4

Not a problem...

and ditto on the apologies. I just needed a little more than the word of some stranger I met on the internet. No disrespect intended. As long as we arrive at the correct resolution a little heat never hurt anybody.

Mad Dog_2

Sorry I haven't been responding

Getting SWAMPED this week AND trying to get this grid done...worked till 9:30 last night...gettin dark. I will respond this weekend when I get a minute. Yes it has gotten heated but that is ok, and I won't hold any grudges. Many good points are being made. I'll be BACK!!!!! Mad Dog

To Learn More About This Professional, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Professional"