Insulation nano-paints

[BigInch]

Has anybody used nano-insulation paints?
Claims as to its effectiveness are impressive, quoting reductions in heat lost of around 40%.
Does it really work?

 

[Compositepro]

Nano is just marketing BS. Could it reduce heat loss by 40%? That is quite possible when comparing to a really poor alternative. Post a link if you want some real feedback.

 

[BigInch]

Thanks. Here's two,
Seems too good to be true, so it probably isn't.

http://www.industrial-nanotech.com/

http://www.nansulate.com/nansulate_translucent_HH.htm

 

[Latexman]

I have not tried these products.

I spent 10-15 minutes looking around on the first link. My initial impression is they are long on marketing and short on technology. The clincher for me was in their FAQ on "Do the coatings have an R-value?". They say:

"Nansulate® coatings, as well as other thin film insulators, do not have an R-value. This is because the R-value relies on a material’s thickness for at least 1/2 of the final number value, so attempting to use it for any material less than an inch will give an inaccurate result of the enegy saving value of that material. It’s a case where the measurement standard has not progressed as fast as the technological innovations."

Isn't this just so very convenient for them? Since their coating does not have an R-value, it cannot be compared to competitive products!

After looking for 10-15 minutes, my question is - where's the data? I didn't see much of any.

BigInch, sorry for the skeptical view, but I calls them as I sees them, especially if I think they are drowning us in snake oil.

Btw, the second link is the same company as the first link.

Good luck,
Latexman

To a ChE, the glass is always full - 1/2 air and 1/2 water.

 

[BigInch]

Thanks. Don't be sorry. I haven't bought any yet.

I also feel that they are a bit short on published data and testing cases, which is exactly why I am asking you all if anyone has any experience with this. It used to be that you could generally presume stuff worked almost as well as they said, but not any more. I didn't see any guarantee either.

 

[Latexman]

Yeah, in God we trust, all others bring data, guarantees, and LOCs!

Good luck,
Latexman

To a ChE, the glass is always full - 1/2 air and 1/2 water.

 

[dvd]

Seems like it depends on dominant heat transfer mode. If a ceiling is painted with this and transmits to the right radiative surface it might provide the results stated, since the natural convection off of the ceiling could be secondary. The devil is in the details. Screen shot below shows a range of emissivity of painted surfaces which could produce 20%-40% reduction.

 

[dvd]

Plus a little bit of dirt doesn't realize that it just screwed up a really expensive, high-tech paint job.

 

[MisterE2]

Yeah, they seem to be really big on including the color "green" and mentioning the environment at every turn available on their page... They don't even mention the word Nano attached to anything, Nano just means 10^-9. So the question is Nano, what? If they said they had a ultra low density mirrored molecule or lattice, sure... but they don't

 

[BigInch]

So there are a number of paints which could conceivably produce similar results ... and I imagine at a lower cost. This is pretty expensive.

Very good point about dirt. I wonder how resistant it might be towards weathering, or cleaning as well. Downside face of a ceiling might be a good place to use it, but that's not where it would be going.

Not a lot of manufacturers. It would seem that, if it was as good as they say, there would be come competition out there. Are they the only ones making it? No mention of having patented it.

So far .. long on buzz words. Not much history they want to share. Short on data.
Makes me skeptical.

 

[IRstuff]

They do show data, for what it's worth:
from

http://www.nansulate.com/thermal_insulation_data.htm.

However, key values seem to be missing from the data displays, making it difficult to compare against, say polyurethane or polystyrene

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[BigInch]

Maybe it's worth a test on a small area.
(I was hoping somebody had already done that.)

 

[John2025]

Isn't 1/U the same as R? They show 1/U with and without their coating and the difference is 0.1791. Isn't that the increase in R for the wall? Might look OK as a percentage, but not very impressive as an absolute increase.

 

[Latexman]

The three methods average 28.8% reduction for 3 coats, or less than 10% reduction in energy transfer per coat. 1-3 coats are not uncommon for a paint/coating application.

Are you looking at this for buildings or piping or what?







Good luck,
Latexman

To a ChE, the glass is always full - 1/2 air and 1/2 water.

 

[IRstuff]

200 mil of coating on a two inch thick glass with a 30% reduction would be impressive; on 1/4 inch thick glass, meh.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[BigInch]

Possibly for both a building wall and piping.