Jelly,

Before I would spend that much money I would have to see some product testing done by an independent lab paid for by someone other than the manufacturer.  Where is Consumer Reports when you need them?

Who pays for the testing is not as important as who does the testing.  It is not uncommon in fact it is normal practice for a manufacturer to pay for a series of tests to establish and support performance claims.  Who else do you think is going to pay for this? 

It is more important that it is conducted independently by a (third party) certified testing lab.  More importantly the actual test selected that acurately reflects real conditions.  Unfortunately the R value formula is outdated 1930s technology and does not account for new technologies such as the ability of ceramics to control heat transfer.

Having an " R " rating means the material absorbs heat and is a measure of how long it can absorb and hold heat before it can migrate through it. This test measures CONDUCTION only and does not account for RADIATION or CONVECTION. It MUST be conducted in a ZERO moisture \ ZERO air movement environment. 

If you look at the literature on Super Therm the selected ceramics do not absorb heat therefore you cannot apply the same testing methods.  In the effort to answer the question of how does this product measure up to an " R " rated material as in fiberglass, the best known test availlable was applied such as the ASTM C-236 ((C236-89(1993)e1 Standard Test Method for Steady-State Thermal Performance of Building Assemblies by Means of a Guarded Hot Box)) testing for measuring R-values. Since the industry relies so heavily on ASTM certifications a known and accepted ASTM test was required to compare the ability of the combined ceramics to control heat transfer to the accepted " R " values.

In this respect to simply say a ceramic insulation coating is R30 is somewhat misleading.  An R Equivalence (or RE) has been created (unofficially) by the industry to reflect this.  Again, most important, always look for the documentation which supports any such claims.

With regards to the FGI 4440 and FGI International, the fellow who is behind this is or was a distributor of Super Therm and other Superior Products for the past 15 years and still has websites that reflect this.  This appears to be product relabelling in attempts to reach a larger market share due to distributor boundary rules with Superior Products Int II which is the manufacturer of Super Therm.  Previously he was not permitted to promote outside his given territory.  I see he now markest virtually everywhere.  The product itself or at least the name is relatively new perhaps 2 years old.  I have not heard of anyone useing this product and would certainly be looking for their testing and certifications to support their claims.

Jelly,

I looked at that product recently and I determined it does not work as advertized. Mostly "reflective". A perfect vacuum yields R-200 per inch, with 32/1000" of vacuum you'd get R-6.5. The paint has all sorts of thermal bridging so, far from perfect. Does not add up. Physics, not just fun, it's the law

Patrick T

James

Again I feel compelled to comment about making such blanket statements about a technology that clearly exists.  You know the saying, "don't throw the baby out with the bath water"

You do no one a favour by doing this if indeed we are here to talk about green buildings.

The reference to an FTC ruling is legitimate so why don't you provide ALL of the information about this instead of part of it and then cloaking the whole industry with it?  Here is the link from the FTC website (not FCC)
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2002/06/krytoncmp.htm
The two companies are clearly identified here.  The results are well deserved and long over due.  Many of the knock off companies like them suddenly made dramatic changes to their marketting and websites as a result.  The bulk of these companies were just new product names but the same product/manufacturer.

In Canada similar results took place against a company called Para Inc through the Competition Bureau.  There used to be a direct link but the website has changed so I was unable to find it. 
http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/epic/site/cb-bc.nsf/Intro?Open


So is Energy Design the ultimate guru?  If they say so it must be so?

Let me guess, this is yet another internet blog by someone who also does not know or understand the technology therefore it must not be.  What this really demonstrates is that these people are just lazy and don't know how to research anything properly.  Does this mean all designers are just as lazy?  Of course not!  No more than are all ceramic coating products "bunk" or "snake oil"

If you are going to make a point why not provide ALL of the facts instead of regurgitating another armchair speculator.

Why are some people such sheep?

You are partially right about insulating the space shuttles however like the chicken and the egg you have it backwards..

The ceramic tiles or at least the technology is what drew the attention of the manufacturer, Superior Products Int II. who later consulted with NASA ceramic engineers at the Technology Utilization Office in 1990 (long before people jumped on the green wagon)  There are hundreds of different ceramic types on this planet so they had already researched the best types to utilize with heat transfer projects.  The concept of develloping a sprayable coating was discussed and the products that were later develloped are a direct result of these discussions.  Those who didn't do this research are the ones you hear about which is all negative.

Keep that mind open!

tsims...,

I spent several hours looking at all the web sites I could relating to this type of product. I was looking for a product to stop thermal bridging where my Hambro joists rest on my ICF wall. I'm a test engineer in the ceramics field. I guess we have diff approches, you are looking for proof facts from me to prove it does not work, where I was looking for proof it does work. I did not find any hard data, mostly hype. I would like to see some product testing. ORNL would be a good place to start. My point about thermal bridging was that the ceramic is imbeded in paint, not a soild layer of vacuum. Paint does not offer much if any insulation. But if you reasearch insulation in vacuum, you you see the stated R-value can't be achived with that thickness, even if it was a perfect layer.

It's been several months but I recall some examples of the application was trailer roof painting. Old black roofs were painted with White ceramic paint. Homer owner was seeing cooling conditions inside.

Don't you think if this really worked, you'd see it being used instead of convential insulation?

Patrick T