1. A Cost Effective Alternative for Polyurethane Foams

2. Overview Ecomate Product Review Usage & Market Applications
India Trials
Considerations
Ecomate’s Success & Availability
Conclusions

3. What is ecomate®? A liquid blowing agent or a foam expansion agent
An alternative blowing agent for rigid and flexible applications
Cost competitive & economical
Been in Commercial use for more than 10 years
Meets regulatory standards as an alternative in PU foams

4. Regulatory US EPA SNAP Approved RoHS and WEEE Compliant GRAS Approved
Non-Toxic
VOC-Exempt
Montreal & Kyoto Protocol Compliant
2004- EPA SNAP Approval: Granted VOC-Exempt status
2009-GRAS Approval

5. Properties & Comparison
Well-suited blowing agent for PUR & PIR foams
Similar to HCFC-141b
Liquid at room temperature
No special equipment needed when handling
Non-ozone depleting and virtually zero GWP
Properties
ecomate®
141b
Boiling Point °C
31.5 32
Gas Lambda 25°C
10.7 10
Molecular Weight 60
117
Specific Gravity
0.982
1.24
Flash Point
-19°C ND
LEL (ppm)
50,000
72,000
Ozone Depletion Potential
0.11
Global Warming Potential ~1
725
In one year alone, FSI customers reduced CO2 emissions by 549,817 mt. 3 times greater than the closest competitor.

6. UNDP Validation Report

7. ecomate® Sector Usage

8. ecomate® Applications
Rigid Foams
Pour-In-Place Rigid Insulating Foams
Commercial Foodservice Equipment/ Commercial Refrigeration
Discontinuous Panels
Cold Stores
Houses – Modular
Transport
Continuous Panels
Flex Faced
Metal Faced
Block Foams
Sheets
Pipe Sections
Spray Foams
Industrial
Dwellings

9. ecomate® Applications
Flexible Foams
Integral Skin Foams
Automotive
Furniture
Leisure/ Toys
Medical Applications
Flexible Molded Foams
Hypersoft Foams
HR Foams
Viscoelastic Foams
Slabstock Foams
Continuous process
Box foaming process

10. Ecomate Trials- India FSI partnered with independent system houses
January 2014 agreed to trial ecomate
FSI supply base formulation(s)
Must be present during trials
Provided technical support

11. Qualification Testing
4 Base Formulations
Modified formulations to achieve target reactivity and density
Cream: sec
Gel: sec
Free Rise Density: kg/m3
Lab Testing
Viscosity
Compressive Strength
Dimensional Stability (Heat, Humid, and Freezer)
Closed Cell
K-factor
Shelf-Life Stability

12. Formula 1
Formula 2
Formula 3
Formula 4

13. FSI In House Testing
Formula 1 & Formula 4 were tested using high pressure equipment
1.22m x 2.44m
Thickness: 50mm and 100 mm
Equipment Settings

15. High Pressure Testing Results

16. India Demo Both Formula 1 and Formula 4 were given to 3 system houses
Systems were made with locally available polyols
Substitutions were made to the guideline formula
Systems were optimized for reactions speed etc.
Respective System houses chose - one or both formulas to trial at their end-users (panel foamers)

17. India Demo – continued
5 panel producers were chosen by the Independent systems houses
Panels were shot though HP equipment
Panels of various lengths and thickness were used
Density was maintained as per the current (141b) system in use
Equipment parameters were kept the same
Equipment was calibrated based on the new system ratio

18. Royal Industries (Delhi)
Formula 4 was tested in the lab Only
No equipment was available to run the trial
Lab Mold was used to simulate a panel production
Reactivity and density was recorded.
The lab made sample carried to FSI labs for evaluation

19. Royal Industries (Delhi)
Foam Supplies Testing Results

20. Industrial Foams (Delhi)
Trialed Formula 1 & Formula 4
Want to trial both formulas
Reaction profile was faster – end user preference
A few block molds were filled – used for flooring applications
Blocks molds were filled at 36kg/m3, 38kg/m3 & 40kg/m3
Metal faced and PE film panels
5 panels total
50mm & 60mm thicknesses

21. Industrial Foams (Delhi)
Equipment Settings
Foam Supplies Testing Results

22. Industrial Foams (Delhi)
Industrial Foams Testing Results
Measured thickness at various locations on the panel
After 3 weeks, remeasaured the thickness at the same locations.
No apparent shrinkage!!!

23. Jindal Mectec (Delhi) System House A tested Formula 1 and Formula 4
Formula 4 chosen to trial
No changes made to guideline formula
Metal faced and PE film panels made
6 Panels total
Thicknesses of 40mm, 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm
Various lengths and widths

24. Jindal Mectec (Delhi)
Equipment Settings
Foam Supplies Testing Results

25. Modern Prefab Systems (Delhi)
System House A also provided them with Formula 4
Exact same batch that was sent to Enterprise 3
Panels with various types of facers
Metal, Aluminum Foil, PE film, Plywood/Metal, Gypsum/Cement
10 panels total of various lengths, widths, and thicknesses
True Test ̶ 10m long panel!!

26. Modern Prefab Systems (Delhi)
Equipment Settings
Foam Supplies Testing Results

27. Blessed Stars (Chennai)
System House B tested Formula 1 and Formula 4
Made changes to guideline formula
Used their own polyols
Changed ratio to 100/142
Formula 4 chosen to trial
2 metal faced panels
Underfilled panel
36 kg/m3
Too overpacked panel
57.5 kg/m3

28. Blessed Stars (Chennai)
Equipment Settings
Foam Supplies Testing Results

29. India Trial Results Summary

30. India Trials Summary Formula 4 was the preferred system by all parties
No changes were made to equipment, operation, or production
Adhesion to all facings (steel, PE film, etc.) was excellent
Foam Supplies addressed all concerns during trials
Will give assistance where needed
Successful trials!!!!

31. Considerations Not a Drop-in replacement for all systems
Optimization is REQUIRED!
Minimal Capital Expense
Fractional compared to hydrocarbon technology
Cost Efficient
Environmentally Benign
Meets Montreal Protocol
Meets Kyoto Protocol
Thermally Efficient
Flash Point
ecomate – pure form flammable -19⁰C flash point
ecomate – polyol blend nonflammable >35⁰C flash point
ecomate – mdi blend nonflammable >35⁰C flash point

32. Considerations ecomate is not a corrosive species
ecomate stored and shipped in metal containers
Potential issues arise from:
Unoptimized system
Improper use of equipment
Plastic seal compatibility must be checked!
PTFE & Kalrez seals recommended

33. Why is ecomate successful?
Compatible with most PU raw materials
Meets or exceeds energy standards
Can process through standard and/or existing equipment
No additional capital investment necessary
Available worldwide

35. Why is ecomate successful?
Compatible with most PU raw materials
Meets or exceeds energy standards
Can process through standard and/or existing equipment
No additional capital investment necessary
Available worldwide
FSI customer exceeded Energy Star standards by 23.7% utilizing ecomate technology.

36. ecomate® Availability – Worldwide

37. Conclusions Environmentally safe
More compatibilizing than other blowing agents
Minimal to no change in equipment
Successful in various applications
Not a Drop-in replacement for all systems
Optimization is recommended for success
Increasing the functionality of polyol blend
Changing the surfactant type and amount
Not all polyols OR surfactants are created equal

38. Thank you for your time.