In Situ Polyurethane Foam European Standards: 3 rd Formal Vote

1. 11/238 In Situ Polyurethane Foam European Standards:3rd Formal Vote September 2011

2. Past – Present – Future • PUR In Situ Standards failed 2nd FV

3. Past – Present – Future • 1st FV  2nd FV voting evolution • Italy, UK, Spain, Czech Republic, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Luxemburg • Maintaining positive • Greece, Bulgaria, Estonia, Slovenia • From positive-abstentionto positive • Austria, Switzerland • From negative to positive • Finland, Netherlands • From negative to abstention • Lithuania • From positive to abstention • Iceland, Romania • From positive to different votes (positive-abstention) for Part 1 and Part 2 • Cyprus, Malta, Portugal, Slovakia • Maintaining abstention • Sweden, Norway • Different votes (positive-negative) for Part 1 and Part 2 • Germany • From positive to negative • France, Poland, Belgium, Denmark • Maintaining negative

4. Past – Present – Future • Working:

5. Past – Present – Future

6. Past – Present – Future • Why is important to vote positive: • To let the in situ PU industry label their products with the CE Marking. • To standardize all the products present in the European market. • To achieve the same factory control requirements as manufactured insulation products.

7. Improvements in prEN’s • These are only the main improvements. See the “Template for Comments and Secretariat Observations” files and the Draft Standard texts to see all comments received and all the changes done.

8. Improvements in building standards(prEN 14315 and prEN 14318) • Part 1: • New method to declare the lambda value, using performance charts (Annex J). • Stronger conditions to use the fix increment procedure (only for foams with Closed Cell Content >90%). • Improved and more complete designation code. • New ITT and FPC frequencies, following the other approved In Situ Standards. • All “recommended” conditions are mandatory now. • New method to measure the thickness of test specimen. • PUR/PIR confusion fully clarify. • Clearer CE markexample. • Pentane has been removed as blowingagent • Many other changes derived from the comments received, from the WG15 and WG1, from the TG4 participants, or sent to TG4 later. • Part 2: • Improved method to measure the installed thickness, more restrictive than the methods approved for the other In Situ Standards. • Part 1 is fully applicable without Part 2. • Installation Guidelines are now normative. • Part 2 will complement National Standards, National Regulations or any Local Rules.

9. Improvements in industrial standards(prEN 14319 and prEN 14320) • Part 1: • New method to determine the thermalconductivityvalues, following the WG10 procedures. • Stronger conditions to use the fix increment procedure (only for foams with Closed Cell Content >90%). • Improved and more complete designation code. • New ITT and FPC frequencies, following the other approved In Situ Standards. • All “recommended” conditions are mandatory now. • New method to measure the thickness of test specimen. • PUR/PIR confusion fully clarify. • Clearer CE markexample. • Pentane has been removed as blowingagent • Many other changes derived from the comments received, from the WG15 and WG1, from the TG4 participants, or sent to TG4 later. • Part 2: • Improved method to measure the installed thickness, more restrictive than the methods approved for the other In Situ Standards. • New way to declare the installed thermal resistance, based on the lambda curve. • Part 1 is fully applicable without Part 2. • Installation Guidelines are now normative. • Part 2 will complement National Standards, National Regulations or any Local Rules.