Scribd Logo
Importer

Bienvenue sur Scribd !

  • Comparison Between Two Types of Duct Insulation

    Transféré par

    sp su
    68 vues2 pages
    The document compares three proposals for duct insulation: Proposal 1 uses FIBERTEX mineral wool board with Melinex facing, Proposal 2 uses AP Coilflex, and Proposal 3 uses ArmaSound RD 120. It provides a table that compares the key features of each proposal, including thermal insulation, service temperature range, density, noise reduction, flame/smoke rating, health impacts, installation requirements, and total cost. Overall, Proposal 1 has slightly better thermal insulation and noise reduction, while Proposal 3 may be easiest to install but is more expensive.

    Description originale:

    compare duct liner and rockwool internal

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formats disponibles

    PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

    Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

    Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

    Signaler ce document
    The document compares three proposals for duct insulation: Proposal 1 uses FIBERTEX mineral wool board with Melinex facing, Proposal 2 uses AP Coilflex, and Proposal 3 uses ArmaSound RD 120. It provides a table that compares the key features of each proposal, including thermal insulation, service temperature range, density, noise reduction, flame/smoke rating, health impacts, installation requirements, and total cost. Overall, Proposal 1 has slightly better thermal insulation and noise reduction, while Proposal 3 may be easiest to install but is more expensive.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Téléchargez comme PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    68 vues2 pages

    Comparison Between Two Types of Duct Insulation

    Transféré par

    sp su
    The document compares three proposals for duct insulation: Proposal 1 uses FIBERTEX mineral wool board with Melinex facing, Proposal 2 uses AP Coilflex, and Proposal 3 uses ArmaSound RD 120. It provides a table that compares the key features of each proposal, including thermal insulation, service temperature range, density, noise reduction, flame/smoke rating, health impacts, installation requirements, and total cost. Overall, Proposal 1 has slightly better thermal insulation and noise reduction, while Proposal 3 may be easiest to install but is more expensive.

    Droits d'auteur :

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Téléchargez comme PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd
    Signaler comme contenu inapproprié
    sur 2

    TableofComparisonforductinsulation Features Proposal1 Internallylined FIBERTEXmineral woolboardwith Melinexfacing coveredwith perforatedsteel sheet 25mm 50mm 0.

    .034 Proposal2 Internallylined APCoilflex coveredwith perforatedsteel sheet Proposal3 InternallylinedArmaSound RD120coveredwith perforatedsteelsheet Remarks

    1.

    2.

    Thermal insulationat 20C(W/mK) Service temperature

    25mm 0.036

    50mm

    25mm 0.046

    50mm Comparable. Thoughslightlyin favoroffiberwool Generallynotan issueforcool insulation

    Max850C

    Max85C Min20C

    Max85C Min20C

    3.

    Density (kg/m3) Noise reduction Coefficient (seeproduct catalog attached) NRCatlow frequency(500 Hz)(seegraph below)

    80

    4.

    0.60

    0.80

    Min 50 Max100 0.60 0.70

    Min100

    0.55

    0.70

    NRCtoASTMC423

    5.

    Generallyless than0.6

    Generally0.70.8

    Generally0.70.8

    6.

    Moisture absorption

    Doesnotabsorb moisture

    Low(0.2%by volume)&non wicking Negligible

    7.

    Watervapor permeability

    Negligible

    Low(0.2%byvolume)&non wicking Negligible

    Foamperformance peaksat500Hz, arguablythemost criticalfrequency inaductsystem. Fibrousinsulation performancepeaks athigher frequency,i.e. ~2000Hz. Noissue

    Noissue

    I:Mechnical/HVAC/RequisitionEquipment

    3/9/2012

    8.

    Flame/smoke rating(ASTM E84)

    9.

    Health

    10. Surface erosion resistance

    11. Fungi& bacteria resistance 12. Installation

    13. Costratio Material Installation Total

    Resistant.Tested withnobreak away,flakeoff orpeelingat500 m/s Doesnotsupport Fungi&bacteria fungiandbacteria resistancetested growth toASTMG21& G22 Healthconcern Flexibleand duetodustand lightweight. fibergeneration. Easyinstallation Needtowear (pinningto breathing SMACNA respiratorwhile requirement) working. 9 1 1 2.5 3.5 10

    ClassO Flame/smoke index5/0 Produceairborne dustduring installation. Handlingcan resultin temporaryitching anddiscomfort. Resistant.

    ClassO Flame/smoke 25/50

    ClassO Flame/smoke25/50

    Infavoroffibre wool

    Fiberfreeand nondusting

    Fiberfreeandnondusting

    Infavorfor elastomericfoam

    Resistant.Testedwithno breakaway,flakeoffor peelingat500m/s

    Noproblemfor either.Maxdesign airflowvelocityis lessthan20m/s Noissue

    Fungi&bacteriaresistance testedtoASTMG21&G22

    Flexibleandlightweight. Easyinstallation(pinningto SMACNArequirement)

    Installationfor foamiseasier

    9 1 10

    InputfromKorea vendor

    I:Mechnical/HVAC/RequisitionEquipment

    3/9/2012

    Vous aimerez peut-être aussi