4387 Rider Trail N. | Earth City, MO 63045 | 1.800.325.4875 | +1.314.344.3330www.foamsupplies.com | www.ecomatesystems.com

TITLE:ecomate® -The Revolutionary New Blowing Agent for Europe

AuThoR(S):John Murphy, Foam Supplies, Inc.Dennis Jones, BOC Ltd.

ABSTRACT:Ecomate® is a patented Blowing Agent useful for rigid and semi-rigid urethane foams. It will allow the formulator to produce foams which are very nearly like those obtained with HCFC-141b.

In order for any potential blowing agent to make a niche in the market it must offer the good physicals properties, be superior in some ways, and be economically priced. As you read further, you will see this is the case for ecomate®.

ABSTRACT

Ecomate -The Revolutionary New Blowing Agent for Europe John Murphy – Foam Supplies, Inc; Dennis Jones, BOC Ltd. Ecomate is a patented Blowing Agent useful for rigid and semi-rigid urethane foams. It will allow the formulator to produce foams which are very nearly like those obtained with HCFC-141b. In order for any potential blowing agent to make a niche in the market it must offer the good physicals properties, be superior in some ways, and be economically priced. As you read further, you will see this is the case for ecomate.

1. Physical Properties Ecomate is a true liquid blowing agent designed to replace HCFCs, HFCs, and HCs, which has many similar properties to HCFC-141b. As one can see from Table 1, ecomate is quite similar to HCFC-141b in many critical physical properties, such as boiling point, solubility and gas lambda value. This means that it will have similar foaming characteristics [initiation speed or CT [crème time], density potential, and thermal resistance]. Its upper and lower explosion limits [UEL/LEL] are slightly broader than those for 141b, which is understandable since ecomate has no halogen content. Table 1 ecomate 141b

HFC 245fa

HFC 365mfc

365/227 93/7

n- pentane

Cyclo- pentane

Molecular Wt 60 117 134 148 149,6 72 70 Boiling Point, °C 31,5 32 15,3 40,2 30 36 49 Sp Gr 0,982 1,24 1,32 1,25 1,28** 0,62 0,75 Lambda, gas @ 25C 10,7 10 12,2 10,6 10.7 14* 11* LEL/UEL,% 5 - 23 7,6-17,7 n/a n/a n/a 1,4-17,8 1,4-8,0 *gas@20C ** liquid @20C The fact that ecomate has a molecular weight about half that of 141b means that it is nearly twice as effective at blowing the same density foam, which is an obvious economic advantage. Thus it has the right balance of boiling point and molecular weight to make it very enticing to the formulator. What one doesn’t see from this table is its superior solubility in all rigid foam raw materials [Table 4].

2. Environmental Properties Ecomate is the only physical blowing agent on the market today which is zero ODP, zero GWP and a VOC exempt compound [Table 2]:

Table 2 ODP GWP VOC ecomate 0 0 NO

HCFC 141b 0.1 700 NO HCFC 22 0.05 1700 NO

HCFC 124 0.02 480 NO HCFC 142b 0.06 2000 NO HFC 134a 0 1300 NO HFC 245fa 0 820 NO

HFC 365/227 (93/7) 0 1049 NO Cyclo-pentane 0 11 YES

3. Thermal Efficiency ECOMATE has the potential for very good foam lambda values based on its relatively low gas lambda values [Figure 1]. It is nearly the same as HCFC-141b and HFC-365mfc, and much better than the other perspective blowing agents available today. It is nearly one third better than pentane.

Figure 1: BA Lambda values @ 25 °C In addition to having a low molecular weight, a liquid boiling point almost identical to HCFC 141b, excellent gas thermal insulation values, and no environmental penalties, what else does ecomate bring to the table? Cost efficiency and solubility!

10.1 10.6 10.7 12.213.7 15.0 16.3

0.05.0

10.015.020.0

Lam

bda

@

25C

[mW

/m.k

]

HCFC-141b

HFC-365m

fc

ecom

ate

HFC-245fa

HFC-134a

n-pentan

eCO2

4. Economic Efficiency

What we mean by economic (or cost) efficiency is what it costs to blow foam to a given target density. In general, it takes the same molar concentration of any blowing agent to blow the same density of foam. This of course ignores two potential mitigating factors of the blowing agent: high volatility [low boiling point temperature] and poor solubility. Both will cause more of the blowing agent to escape before doing what it was intended to do – blow and insulate. Thus they become less cost efficient because of those two factors. However, let us look at current BA candidates on just a molar cost basis [Table 3]. In this table we derive a factor for equivalent molar concentration of each material by dividing each individual molecular weight by the molecular weight of 141b. That factor is then multiplied by its cost per kilo to obtain a relative cost per mole of the blowing agent. The table illustrates that ecomate is very cost efficient in blowing foam.

Table 3: Cost efficiency of BAs Blowing Agent €/kg Mol Wt Wt Factor €/moleHCFC-141b ** 117 1.00 Ref HFC-245fa ****** 134 1.15 +380% HFC-365/227 **** 149 1.27 +280% cC5 * 70 0.60 -70% nC5 * 72 0.60 -75% Ecomate ** 60 0.51 -60%

5. Solvency The two mitigating factors mentioned earlier, low boiling point and solubility are NOT relevant for ecomate. It boils just below 32 °C, so there are no boil-off issues; and it is very soluble in all urethane raw materials [Table 4]. Table 4: ecomate Solubility

INGREDIENT Aspect with 20% ecomate POLYESTER Polyol CLEAR SUCROSE GLYCERINE Polyol CLEAR AMINE Polyol CLEAR MANNICH Polyol CLEAR ISOCYANATE CLEAR DEG CLEAR TCPP CLEAR Br FRA CLEAR PROPYLENE CARBONATE CLEAR WATER CLEAR

This solubility includes water and ester polyols, as well as the isocyanate, fire retardants, and plasticizers one may use. This means that the formulator can freely use any polyester, especially DMT- and PET- derived esters without having to resort to an emulsion step. This means less work, less hassle, and in the long run, more consistent densities.

6. Other Benefits The improved solubility one obtains with ecomate affords three other benefits:

1) very low system vapor pressures [both in the polyol-component and in the iso-component, Figures 2 & 3]; 2) excellent low system viscosities [allowing higher functionality polyols and isocyanates to be utilized]; and 3) very low emissions of ecomate [Figure 4].

Figure 2: Vapor pressure in Polyol Component

02468

1012141618

75 120 140

psi

Temp (°F)

Vapor Pressure (ASTM D2879, typical data)Blowing Agent/Polyol System

eco3-95-1.7

15 psi UN 1A1 minimum standard

“B”Polyol Blend with

ecomate® Blowing Agent

Vapor Pressure of Stored Vapor Pressure of Stored ecoecomatemate®®

BlendsBlends

Figure 3: Vapor pressure in Isocyanate Blend

02468

1012141618

75 120 140

psi

Temp (°F)

Vapor Pressure (ASTM D2879, typical data)Blowing Agent/Isocyanate System

eco3-95-1.7

15 psi UN 1A1 minimum standard

“A”ISO Blend with

ecomate® Blowing Agent

Vapor Pressure of Stored Vapor Pressure of Stored ecoecomatemate®®

BlendsBlends

Low emissions of ecomate are critical for two reasons: 1) it allows one to safely use ecomate at substantial concentrations without exceeding the LEL. Our testing shows that ecomate levels were only 22% of the LEL ( less than 1% by volume) within 2.5 cm of the liquid level in a closed drum; and less than 22% of the LEL zero to 5 cm above the bung of an open drum at 29 – 32 °C.; and 2) it allows one to ship drum or larger quantities of ecomate systems without exceeding Transportation flammability

regulations. The safe levels of ecomate usage in foam formulations depend on the foam raw materials and their proportions used. We recommend that any new formulation using ecomate be checked for flashpoint using a SETA closed cup testing apparatus prior to use or shipping.

Figure 4: ecomate System Emissions

ecoecomatemate®® System Emissions System Emissions ––Stored Systems in Drums/TotesStored Systems in Drums/Totes

“A”Isocyanate

(ecomate® Blowing Agent)

“B”Polyol Blend

(ecomate® Blowing Agent)

< 22% LEL0-2” above bung@ 85-90°F

22% LELwithin drum headspace

7. Ecomate in Pour Systems Ecomate has been successfully used commercially for the past 4 years as a blowing agent in many pour-in-place systems because of the good physical properties it imparts to the finished foam. For example, Table 5 highlights some of the excellent physical properties obtainable with this blowing agent in two such systems: a non-rated foam and a UL-94 HF1 listed product. Note the excellent thermal properties obtained with ecomate. Table 5: Ecomate Systems Physical Properties Eco3-95-1.7 Eco2-90-1.7 Density, kg/m3 36.8 33.6 Comp Strength //, kPa 317 283 Comp Strength _|_, kPa 214 186 Dim Stability Cold, 7d -0.06 % -0.06 % Humid, 7d 2.0 % -0.21 % Lambda, mW/mK 20.9 20.1

8. Ecomate in PIR Formulations Ecomate is useful in many different types of foam. It can be used not only in rigid foams, but also in integral skinned elastomers, and flexible foams as well. It has been used successfully in pour-in-place, spray, and isocyanurate foams. Let us focus on the latter to demonstrate its usefulness, and some application pitfalls you may want to avoid. In our PIR studies we looked at high and low index [I=375 vs 225], with and without fire retardant [TCPP @ 0, 2.7%], and with the three different types of esters on the market [DMT, PET, and PA based]. Our target density range was 29 to 36 kg/m3. Our reaction profile was Crème Time = 6-8 sec; Gel 18-22 sec; and Tack Free 20-30 sec. Ecomate was completely compatible in all formulations trialed. All mixtures were crystal clear and without haze. There was no need to emulsify the blowing agent into the polyester mix. Viscosities were all very low, ranging from 300 cps to as low as 70 cps with all ecomate blown formulations.

9. The Study Our typical formulations are built on the entire system being 100% – polyol and isocyanate included [Table 6]. In this manner we can keep select ingredients [such as surfactant, catalysts, and especially fire retardants] constant in the formulation during resin or index changes.

The study began with several 375 Index formulations blown solely with ecomate, using a DMT based polyol, with and without fire retardant [Table 7]. Our fire testing is done on a modified Monsanto tunnel equipped for monitoring smoke; in addition we monitor the weight loss of the panels during burning. The tunnel is calibrated with a commercial PIR board with consistent FS and smoke. Smoke values >16 here will be >450 smoke in the full tunnel. Without FRA, naturally the flame spread, smoke, and weight loss are much worse. Both panels showed some shrinkage when fabricated to fit the tunnel. Flame Spread readings are from small scale tests that may indicate what happens in full scale tesing.

Table 6 FORMULA WT ESTER 1 10.2 FRA 2.7 CAT BLEND 2.6 SURFACTANT 0.7 WATER 0.8 ECOMATE 2.0 ISOCYANATE 81.0

100.0

Table 7: Effect of FRA I=375 39-4 39-10

ESTER 1 21.35 22.11 FRA 2.67 0 Water 0 0 Ecomate 7.56 7.56 RATIO / 100 A 54 49 FLAME SPREAD 15 50 SMOKE 1 29.2 % WT LOSS 3 14 SHRINK YES YES

A second trial run at the same index, again without FRA, demonstrates that a slightly higher density [33.6 vs. 28.8 kg/m3] via a slightly lower level of ecomate eliminates shrinkage and has little effect on flame spread, smoke or weight loss. [Table 8].

Another experiment was completed at the same Index, but with FRA and with replacement of some of the ecomate with some water [Table 9]. One can see that the inclusion of some water in the formulation has little effect on flame spread, but the smoke and the burned weight loss is

increased. In addition, the ratio becomes more severe with the inclusion of water, but this level of water eliminates shrinkage.

A fourth set of experiments at the same index, again without FRA, was run to determine an ideal loading of ecomate/water to maintain density and to minimize both shrinkage and the effect on fire properties [Table 10]. As water increases, the A/B weight ratio becomes more skewed. However, flame spread, weight loss and shrinkage improve with the addition. From this data there seems an optimal level at about 0.6% water /

4.4% ecomate in the entire system. Beyond this level properties begin to degrade. A 375 Index is quite high for many applications, so a comparison of 375 vs. 225 Indices were made, again without FRA, but with the new ecomate / water levels [Table 11]. As expected, the weight ratio improves at the lower index; but the FS, smoke, and weight loss all get worse. NO shrinkage indicates minimal effect of index on shrinkage. One of the reasons to examine systems without FRA is to discern the best polyol for the task without masking its deficiencies. It is well known that many a system has passed small screening fire tests only to fail in full scale testing. While there may be many causes for this, at least one may be a marginal polyol masked by FRA. In [Table 12] three esters

Table 8: Effect of Density I=375 39-12 39-10

ESTER 1 22.61 22.11 FRA 0 0 Water 0 0 Ecomate 5.67 7.56 RATIO / 100 A 46 49 Density 2.1 1.8 FS 50 50 Smoke 26.5 29.2 %Wt Loss 16 14 Shrink NO YES

Table 9: Results of FRA I=375 39-3 39-4

ESTER 1 10.2 21.35FRA 2.67 2.67 Water 0.8 0 Ecomate 2.0 7.56 RATIO / 100 A 23.7 54 FS 15 15 Smoke 10.2 1 %Wt Loss 5.4 3.3 Shrink NO YES

Table 10: Effect of H2O /Ecomate Levels I=375 39-14 39-13 39-8 39-9 ESTER 1 16.0 13.3 10.74 10.96FRA 0 0 0 0 Water 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Ecomate 7.0 5.6 4.4 2.0 RATIO / 100 A 36.6 29.8 24.0 20.6 FS 40 40 30 25 Smoke 26 28 10 22 %Wt Loss 11 11 7 8 Shrink YES SLT NO NO

Table 11: Index Effects INDEX VARIABLE 39-8 44-1ESTER 1 10.74 25.7FRA 0 0 WATER 0.6 0.6 ECOMATE 4.4 4.4 RATIO / 100 A 24.0 51.6INDEX 375 225 FS 30 35 SMOKE 10 23 % WT LOSS 7 18 SHRINK NO NO

are investigated without FRA, at a 225 Index and with 0.6% water. Again there was no shrinkage, indicating that ester changes do not exacerbate shrinkage. The esters vary markedly in properties, with Ester 3 having substantially worse FS and weight loss than the other two. Ester 2 seems marginally better than Ester 1. In [Table 13], the effects are more subtle using the same three esters under the same conditions with the addition of FRA. Here Ester 3 seems equivalent to Ester 1. Ester 2 still seems marginally better than the other two in fire resistance properties.

It is very possible that Ester 3 might fail a full scale fire test, and highly probable that Ester 2 would pass, perhaps even with a FRA cut-back saving additional expense. What is unique about ecomate in these formulations is its ability to be readily soluble in esters which is very difficult for hydrocarbons. This allows the formulator to continue to use those esters previously used with HCFC-141b, and at the lower levels of fire retardant previously used. They can be very cost advantageous.

We examined another ester, Ester 4, based on PA [phthalic anhydride], for its solubility in ecomate and its resistance to fire. We discovered that it was highly soluble in ecomate and produced an excellent piece of foam [Table 14]. But when we tested it for fire properties, at the above index w/o any FRA, it exhibited a horrific FS and smoke scenario. Both FS and smoke were nearly beyond the capacity of our equipment. The flame burned out the end of the tunnel within 10sec of ignition, and the smoke reached 100% obscurity shortly thereafter. All esters are not created equal.

Table 12: Ester Effects I=225 44-1 44-4 44-2ESTER 1 25.8 ESTER 2 23.2 ESTER 3 29.2 FRA 0 0 0 Water 0.6 0.6 0.6 Ecomate 4.4 4.4 4.4 Ratio / 100 A 51.6 45.9 59.9 FS 35 30 >75 Smoke 23 25 34 % Wt Loss 18 17 27

Shrink NO NO NO

Table 14: Ester effects 55-2 44-4 55-7 I=250 I=225 I=250 ESTER 4 23.0 25.1 ESTER 2 29.2 FRA 0 0 5 Water 0.6 0.6 0.6 Ecomate 4.4 4.4 4.4 Ratio / 100 A 46.9 45.9 65.5 FS >75 30 25 Smoke 54 25 5 % Wt Loss 28 17 4

Shrink NO NO NO

Table 13: Ester Effects I=225 44-5 44-6 44-7 ESTER 1 24.9 ESTER 2 22.4 ESTER 3 28.2 FRA 2.25 2.25 2.25 Water 0.6 0.6 0.6 Ecomate 4.4 4.4 4.4 Ratio / 100 A 54.9 49.1 63.3 FS 30 25 30 Smoke 10 8 10 % Wt Loss 7.8 6.2 7.7

Shrink NO NO NO

Finally, we produced a boardstock formula [Table 14, Formula 55-7] at a 250 index with 5% fire retardant with Ester 4 to replicate what may be generic in the US today using hydrocarbon BAs and to demonstrate that good foam can be made even with inferior polyols if one adds sufficient FRA and raises the index sufficiently. It is left to the reader to compare costs of the Ester 2 formulation in Table 13 to the ester 4 formulation in this table, with its higher index and more than double the amount of FRA.

10. Conclusions In conclusion, we believe that ecomate is an excellent alternative BA for rigid PIR foams, especially where excellent solubility of raw materials is an issue. There is no need to emulsify blowing agents into systems when using ecomate. With ecomate the formulator has the broadest range of polyols from which to choose without any viscosity or solubility constraints. One can obtain good physical properties, perhaps superior properties, with the right choice of polyols. As we have demonstrated, the choice of esters severely affects burn and other physical properties. Ecomate offers the following advantages:

• It is a true Liquid Blowing Agent • It is SNAP approved, Monreal and Kyoto protocol compliant; • It is zero ODP, zero GWP, and VOC exempt • It has superior solubility • Low volatility • Produces foams with good properties, including thermal resistance, • Is available world-wide • Compatible with isocyanate and polyol blends • Is compatible with all other Blowing Agents, • And is cost competitive [i.e. advantageous]! • Try it . . . . . . . . . You’ll like it!

Acknowledgements / Contacts: For licensing information, availability, or pricing please contact: NORTH AMERICA /ROW SOUTH AMERICA EUROPE FOAM SUPPLIES INC PURCOM Quimica Ltda BOC Specialty Gases Todd Keske Guiseppe Santache Zoë Sturdy 4387 North Rider Trail Rua Aeroporto n° 83/115 10 Priestly Rd Earth City, MO 63045 USA

06419 260 Barueri, SP, BRAZIL

Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XY ENGLAND

TEL: 314-344-3330 TEL:(+55 11) 4168 2829 TEL: +44(0)1483 244088

A Revolutionary, Yet Economical

New Blowing Agent

A Revolutionary, Yet Economical

New Blowing Agent

ecomate® advantages A True LIQUID Blowing Agent Patented: US 6,753,357 w others Pending To Replace HCFC’s, HFC’s, HC’s SNAP Approved ZERO ODP, ZERO GWP, VOC Exempt Economically Advantageous Good Solubility Low Volatility Good Foam Properties Good Foam Flammability Resistance

ecomate® Blowing AgentProperties

Clear, Colorless, Flammable Liquid

Boiling Pt Flash Point LEL \ UEL LAMBDA, gas ( 25 °C)

Vapor Pressure ( 25 °C)

Auto Ignition Temp Specific Gravity Molecular Weight

88,7 F 31,5 C-26 F -32 C

5 - 23% 5 - 23%0,074 10,7

11,4 psig 586 mm

>840 F >450 C

0,982 0,98260 60

BA COMPARISONecomate 141b 245fa 365mfc 365/227

93 / 7n-C5 cC5

Mol wt 60 117 134 148 149,6 72 70

Bpt, C 31,5 32 15,3 40,2 30 36 49

Sp Gr 0,982 1,24 1,32 1,25 1,28 0,62 0,75

Lambda 10,7 10 12,2 10,6 10,7 14* 11*

LEL/UEL 5,0 – 23,0 7,6 – 17,7 n/a 3,5 – 9,0 3,8 – 13,3 1,4 – 17,8 1,4 – 8,0

GAS LAMBDA VALUES

10.1 10.6 10.7 12.213.7 15.0 16.3

0.05.0

10.015.020.0

Lam

bda

@

25C

[mW

/m.k

]

HCFC-141b

HFC-365m

fc

ecom

ate

HFC-245fa

HFC-134a

n-pentan

eCO2

ecomate® Blowing Agent- Environmental Characteristics

ecomate blowing agent is an attractive long term environmental option

ODP GWP VOC

CFC 11 1 4000 NO

CFC 12 1 8500 NO

HCFC 141b 0,1 630 NO

HCFC 22 0,05 1700 NO

HCFC 124 0,02 480 NO

HCFC 142b 0,06 2000 NO

HFC 134a 0 1300 NO

HFC 245fa 0 790 -1040 NO

Cyclopentane 0 11 YES

ecomate 0 0 NO

Cost Efficiency

Blowing Agent €/kg Mol Wt Factor €/mole

HCFC-141b ** 117 1,00 RefHFC-245fa ****** 134 1,15 +380%HFC-365/227 **** 149 1,27 +280%cC5 * 70 0,60 -70%nC5 * 72 0,62 -75%

ecomate® ** 60 0,51 -60%

Key Cost Points ecomate® has resulted in reduced foam density

as low as 22,4 kg/m3 Free Rise Density. Commercial experience shows ecomate

requires less molar equivalents than HC’s. ecomate requires less flame retardant to

achieve rated foam than HC’s. ecomate is a small part of overall demand for

the molecule and there are multiple plants in the world.

ecomate® Solubility

Excellent solubilityin all foam ingredients

CHEMICAL ASPECT w 20% ECOMATE

POLYESTER polyol CLEAR

SUCROSE GLYCERIN polyol

CLEAR

AMINE polyol CLEAR

MANNICH polyol CLEAR

ISOCYANATE CLEAR

DEG CLEAR

TCPP CLEAR

Br FRA CLEAR

PROP CARBONATE CLEAR

WATER CLEAR

ecomate® System Emissions –Stored Systems in Drums/Totes

“B”Isocyanate

(ecomate® Blowing Agent)

“A”Polyol Blend

(ecomate® Blowing Agent)

< 22% LEL0-5cm above bung@ 30-32°C

22% LELwithin drum headspace

Vapor Pressure (ASTM D2879, typical data)Blowing Agent/Polyol System

eco3-95-1.7

“A”Polyol Blend with

ecomate® Blowing Agent

Vapor Pressure of Stored ecomate®

Blends

0

200

400

600

800

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

TEMP, C

UN 1A1 Max pressure

mm

HG

Vapor Pressure (ASTM D2879, typical data)Blowing Agent / Isocyanate System

eco3-95-1.7

“B”ISO Blend with

ecomate® Blowing Agent

Vapor Pressure of Stored ecomate®

Blends

0

200

400

600

800

20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65

TEMP, C

UN 1A1 Max pressure

mm

HG

Physical Properties

Very Good Properties

PROPERTYecomate3-95-1.7

ecomate2-90-1.7

Dens, Kg/m3 36,8 33,6

CS//, kPa 317 283

CS_|_, kPa 214 186

DIM STABS

COLD, 7d -0,06 % -0,06 %HUMID, 7d 2,0 % -0,2%

Lambda, mW/mK 20,9 20,1

ecomate® Density PotentialIngredient System 1

04B73System 2

04B77

H2O 1,3 1,4134a 3,5 10,8ecomate 1,8 0

Density 23,5 26,2

Blowing Agent

ecomate® Density PotentialIngredient System 1

04B73System 2

04B77Blowing Agent moles moles

H2O 0,140 0,150134a 0,034 0,106ecomate 0,029 0,000

0,203 0,256Density 23,5 26,2

ecomate® Fire ResistanceIngredient System 1

04B73System 2

04B77

Blowing Agent moles moles

H2O 0,140 0,150

134a 0,034 0,106

ecomate 0,029 0,000

0,203 0,256

FS 25 25SMOKE 250 250

Integral Skin

Integral Skin Ability to solvate ALL polyols Good skin formation Perfectly suited Boiling Point

Economical Half the MWt of HCFC 141b

Patents Pending US EPA SNAP Approved

Flexible Foams Good Solubility Fine Cells Safer than

Hydrocarbons Non-VOC

Rigid Applications Moulded Roof Panels Pipe-in-Pipe

Insulation

ISOCYANURATE FOAMS HIGH vs LOW INDEX WITH / W-OUT FRA ESTER EFFECTS DENSITY TARGET RXN RATES

I = 375, 225 TCCP @ 0, 2,7% ESTERS 1 thru 6 28 - 32 kg/m3

CT 6 – 8 sec GEL 18 – 22 sec TF 20 – 30 sec

OBSERVATIONS – PIR FOAMS ecomate compatible in

ALL FORMULATIONS NO HAZE – CRYSTAL CLEAR NO NEED TO EMULSIFY

VISCOSITIES : ~ 300 cps with HIGH WATER ~ 70 cps with ALL ECOMATE

TYPICAL FORMULATIONSFORMULA

ESTER 10,2

FR Additive 2,7

Cat Blend 2,6

Surfactant 0,7

Water 0,8

ecomate 2,0

ISOCYANATE 81

RESULTS w FRA [w/wo H20]

HI ECO Level IMPROVES RATIO FS UNCHANGED SMOKE LESS Promotes Shrinkage

I = 375 39-3 39-4

ESTER 1 10,2 21,35Water 0,8 0ecomate 2,0 7,56RATIO / 100 A 23,7 54,0FLM SPREAD 15 15SMOKE 10,2 1% WT LOSS 5,4 3,3SHRINK NO YES

RESULTS w/wo FRA w/o FRA FS - Much WORSE SMK - Much WORSE WT LOSS HIGHER

I = 375 39-4 39-10

ESTER 1 21,35 22,11FRA 2,67 0Water 0 0ecomate 7,56 7,56RATIO / 100 A 54 49FLM SPREAD 15 50SMOKE 1 29% WT LOSS 3 14SHRINK YES YES

RESULTS w/o FRA HIGHER DENSITY LESS ECO Used ELIMINATE SHRINK

NEARLY SAME FS = SMOKE - WT LOSS +

I = 375 39-12 39-10ESTER 1 22,61 22,11FRA 0 0Water 0 0ecomate 5,67 7,56RATIO / 100 A 46 49DENSITY 34 29FLM SPREAD 50 50SMOKE 27 29% WT LOSS 16 14SHRINK NO YES

RESULTS w/o FRA INCR. ECOMATE

RATIO IMPROVES FS WORSENS SMOKE VARIES WT LOSS ↑ SHRINKAGE ↑

BEST SCENARIO ~ 0.6% H20

I = 375 39-9 39-8 39-13 39-14

ESTER 1 10,96 10,74 13,3 16,0

FRA 0 0 0 0

Water 0,8 0,6 0.4 0,2ecomate 2 4,4 5,6 7,0RATIO / 100 A 20,6 24,0 29,8 36,6FLM SPREAD 25 30 40 40SMOKE 22 10 28 26% WT LOSS 8 7 11 11SHRINK NO NO SLT YES

RESULTS w/o FRA [0.6% H20]

DECR. INDEX RATIO

IMPROVES FS WORSENS SMOKE ↑ WT LOSS ↑ NO SHRINKAGE

I = VARIABLE 39-8 44-1INDEX 375 225ESTER 1 10,74 25,7FRA 0 0Water 0,6 0,6ecomate 4,4 4,4RATIO / 100 A 24,0 51,6FLM SPREAD 30 35SMOKE 10 23% WT LOSS 7 18SHRINK NO NO

RESULTS w/o FRA [0.6% H20]

ESTER AFFECTS: FLAME SPREAD SMOKE WT LOSS

SHRINKAGE OK!

I = 225 44-1 44-2 44-4ESTER 1 25,8

ESTER 3 29,2

ESTER 2 23,2

FRA 0 0 0

Water 0,6 0,6 0,6ecomate 4,4 4,4 4,4

RATIO / 100 A 51,6 59,9 45,9

FLM SPREAD 35 >75 30

SMOKE 23 34 25% WT LOSS 18 27 17SHRINK NO NO NO

RESULTS w FRA [0.6% H20]

EFFECTS ARE more SUBTILE

ESTER AFFECTS: FLAME

SPREAD SMOKE WT LOSS

SHRINKAGE OK!

I = 225 44-5 44-6 44-7ESTER 1 24,9

ESTER 3 28,2

ESTER 2 22,4

FRA 2,25 2,25 2,25Water 0,6 0,6 0,6

ecomate 4,4 4,4 4,4

RATIO / 100 A 54,9 63,3 49,1

FLM SPREAD 30 30 25SMOKE 10 10 8% WT LOSS 8 8 6

SHRINK NO NO NO

IMPROVED PROPERTIES CO-BLOW w H2O USE RIGHT SURFACTANT PROPER CATALYSIS < Strong Blow ……………Strong Gel >

CONCLUSIONS No Need to EMULSIFY BA ESTER Choice CRITICAL Some FRA Suggested CO-BLOWN ECO/H20 Suggested ~ 0,6% H20 Optimal Right Surfactant & Catalyst Pkg

ecomate® advantages A True LIQUID Blowing Agent SNAP Approved Good Solubility Low Volatility Good Foam Properties Good Flammability Resistance Cost Competitive TRY IT….YOU’LL LIKE IT !

Contacts - EUROPE BOC Specialty Gases Zoë Sturdy 10 Priestly Rd Guildford, Surrey GU2 7XY ENGLAND TEL: +44 (0)1483 244 088

Contacts – S/C America PURCOM Quimica Ltda Guiseppe Santache Rua Aeroporto n° 83/115 06419 260 Barueri, SP, BRAZIL TEL:(+55 11) 4168 2829

Contacts - ROW FOAM SUPPLIES INC Todd Keske 4387 North Rider Trail Earth City, MO 63045 USA TEL: 314-344-3330

The Next Generation Blowing Agent