Weather-resistive barriers from self collapsing polyurethane foams

Abstract

The present invention provides a self-collapsing, moisture curable one component polyurethane foam (1K PU) composition from moisture curable polyurethane prepolymers and to methods of making weather resistant barriers and formed in place gaskets therefrom. The foam compositions are packed under pressure with a blowing agent. In the methods, the foams are applied to gaps in the exterior (sheathing) of a building under construction and collapse on cure to enable application an aqueous weather barrier coating thereover within an hour. The foams also cure when applied on or adjacent a structure to form a foam gasket that enables installation of additional structural elements over or adjacent the foam gasket without bowing or damage to the structure treated.

Claims

1. A method for making a flexible, weather-resistive barrier for use in the construction of a building having a structural frame with adjacent sheets of wood, cement or gypsum exterior sheathing on the structural frame, the adjacent sheets having a gap formed between them, the method comprising: applying a self-collapsing, one component polyurethane foam composition to the gap formed between adjacent sheets of sheathing, including the margin of the sheathing adjacent the gap to hold the foam composition; applying an aqueous polymeric coating having a density when dried of greater than 0.7 g/ml over the sheathing, wherein the one component polyurethane foam composition comprises: a) one or more blowing agents; b) one or more isocyanate prepolymers from the reaction of one or more polyisocyanate and one or more polyol in the presence of a catalyst, wherein the isocyanate prepolymers have free isocyanate groups in the amount of from 2 to 10 wt. %, based on total isocyanate prepolymer weight; and c) 0.1 wt % or less of a cell opener based on polyol weight; and wherein the self-collapsing, one component polyurethane foam composition collapses in a controlled way to a thickness less than the thickness of the originally applied foam.

2. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the aqueous polymeric coating is an acrylic emulsion polymer coating.

3. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the catalyst in the one component polyurethane foam composition is an amine catalyst.

4. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one component polyurethane foam composition further comprises one or more surfactant chosen from a silicon containing surfactant and a nonionic surfactant.

5. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one component polyurethane foam composition further comprises one or more diluent, flame retardent or plasticizer.

6. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein in the one component polyurethane foam composition, the polyurethane prepolymer has a free isocyanate group content of from 4 to 9 wt. %, based on total isocyanate prepolymer weight.

7. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one component polyurethane foam composition further comprises a cell opener to ease the collapse of the foam during curing.

8. A method for making a flexible, foamed in place gasket for use in the construction of a building having a wood, aluminum or composite structural element comprising: applying a foamed composition of one or more self-collapsing, one component polyurethane to the structural element as a substrate; drying the applied foamed composition to form a dry foam layer having a thickness less than the original thickness of the applied foam; installing an additional element chosen from a structural element or drywall adjacent the dry foam layer on the structural element; wherein the one component polyurethane foam composition contains: a) one or more blowing agents; b) one or more isocyanate prepolymers from the reaction of one or more polyisocyanate and one or more polyol in the presence of a catalyst, wherein the isocyanate prepolymers have free isocyanate groups in the amount of from 2 to 10 wt. %, based on total isocyanate prepolymer weight; and c) 0.1 wt % or less of a cell opener based on polyol weight.

9. The method as claimed in claim 8, wherein the structural element is a subfloor and the additional element is a tilt up wall.

10. The method as claimed in claim 9, wherein the structural element is chosen from studs, sill plates, top plates, joists and the additional element is drywall.

Description

EXAMPLES

(1) The following examples serve to better illustrate the invention, which is not intended to be limited by the examples.

(2) The one component polyurethane foams of the present invention were formed by combining the polyols indicated in Table 2, below. The polyol blends were then formulated into 3 prepolymers by combining polyol blend and pMDI in an aerosol can and sealing the valve on. If the can is intended to make a straw foam a small amount of cell opener, i.e. silicone fluid, was also included; for gun foams this was omitted. Finally, the cans of prepolymer were charged with the blowing agent gas blends. The formula of each can is summarized in Table 3, below, which includes the % free isocyanate (% FI or % Free NCO), calculated by the equation:
% FI=(100Mw(NCO)(EqISOEqpoly))/(WISO+Wpoly)

(3) wherein EqISO is the equivalents of isocyanate, Eqpoly is the equivalents of polyol, Mw(NCO) is the molecular weight of isocyanate (NCO) groups (42 grams per mole), WISO is the weight of isocyanate and Wpoly is the weight of polyol.

(4) Gun cans were screwed onto a GREAT STUFF PRO gun (Dow), and foam dispensed by pulling the trigger. Straw cans had a straw attached directly to the valve, and this valve was deflected to dispense foam through the straw. In all cases, foam was dispensed into a 120 cc paper cup until level, then weighed, to calculate the fresh foam density in g/cc.

(5) The following test methods were used to evaluate the foams of the present invention:

(6) Fresh foam density: Foam density was measured by dispensing foam into a tared 120 cc paper cup until just level with the rim of the cup, and then weighing. The foam density was calculated as
Grams of foam/120 cc cup volume=density (units of g/cc)

(7) Acceptable foam density is 0.02 to 0.15 g/cc, preferably from 0.02 to 0.10 g/cc, or, more preferably, from 0.02 to 0.08/cc.

(8) Foam Cure speed: An approximately 2.5 m3.5 m environmental room was equilibrated to 27 C. and 80% relative humidity. Plywood boards of 150150 mm were kept in the room overnight. Foam was applied through a PRO gun or straw in touching, parallel beads to make bands of 50 mm width. Specimens of both 12 mm and 6 mm approximate thickness were prepared, with fresh foam thickness measured by inserting a 1 mm diameter stick into the foam in several locations to probe its fresh thickness. After some hold time, an aqueous coating composition was sprayed onto the 6 mm thick bands of foam with a Graco ProShot cordless airless sprayer (Graco Inc., Minneapolis, Minn.), which operates at up to 137 bar of pressure The coating was sprayed from 300 mm away in 5-6 passes to a wet coating thickness of 0.6 to 0.75 mm over the plywood boards standing vertically. Specimens were examined for immediate damage or mixing of the foam and coating layers. Foam was deemed to have cured in the hold time if the coating formed a continuous layer over the board and foam, without visually damaging the foam. An acceptable foam cure speed is less than 2 hours at 4 C. to 40 C. and at 20% relative humidity (RH) to 90% RH. The cure speed is, preferably, 1 hour or less.

(9) Degree and Rate of Foam Shrinkage Upon Cure:

(10) A plywood board was laid flat with a ruler vertically aligned approx. 50 mm back from the edge. A camera was laid on the bench 300 mm away from the plywood board. A bead of the tested one component polyurethane foam composition was gunned along the board about 25 mm back of the front edge, and photos were periodically taken. Zoom images allowed measurement of the bead height as a function of time. An acceptable degree of shrinkage is at least 25% (e.g. 12 mm thick fresh foam shrinks to 9 mm thickness); a preferred shrinkage is 50% or more (e.g. 12 mm shrinks to 6 mm); and a more preferred shrinkage is at least 67% shrinkage (e.g. 12 mm goes to 4 mm). An acceptable rate of shrinkage is 3 hours, preferably 1 hour, to reach the final foam thickness.

(11) Weather Resistive Barrier (WRB) Function: A specimen was made by attaching two 15075 mm rectangles of Oriented Strand Board (OSB) to a wooden frame, to define a gap 150 mm long and 3 mm wide between the edges of the two OSB boards. The tested one component polyurethane foam composition was applied over the gap in a band 50 mm wide and 6 mm thick. After some cure time, an aqueous coating was applied by spraying as above in the cure speed of foam test. After allowing the aqueous coating to dry for 7 days, a cylinder of 100 mm diameter and 600 mm height was fixed with silicone sealant to the aqueous coated surface such that the treated gap in the OSB spanned the diameter of the cylinder. This cylinder was filled to 550 mm deep with water, and the back of the specimen was periodically inspected for leaks for 24 hours.

(12) Foam Compressibility: Compressibility is measured by applying the indicated load to a cured one component polyurethane foam composition. An acceptable cured foam compresses to 25% its fresh applied thickness when 0.035 MPa pressure is applied (e.g. a 12 mm of fresh foam can be compressed after cure to 3 mm thick when 0.035 MPa pressure is applied). Preferably, the cured foam compresses to 15% of its freshly applied thickness under 0.035 MPa pressure.

(13) Foam Compressibility Test (method adapted from U.S. Pat. No. 8,151,538): One component polyurethane foam composition bands about 50 mm wide and 12 mm in initial thickness were applied on plywood and cured for 7 days. A stiff aluminum plate 75 mm long25 mm wide3.3 mm thick was laid across the dried foam band as closely as possible to parallel to the plywood surface, to span the width of the band completely and have a contact area between the plate and foam of 25 mm50 mm. Weights were placed onto the plate to give a total weight of 225 g, creating a pressure of about 0.0035 MPa, and the height of the foam under the plate was measured after 1 minute. To measure compressed height of the foam, a feeler gauge was slipped under each protruding edge of the aluminum plate, and the average of two sides recorded. Weight was increased to 2.2 kg creating a pressure of about 0.035 MPa. The height of the foam was measured after 1 minute

(14) Gasket function: The air barrier function of a cured one component polyurethane foam gasket having a thickness of 6 mm was measured as described immediately below under application of a 25 Pa air pressure differential between the two sides of the foam gasket. Acceptable results are any in which the air flow is reduced to 50% what it is with no gasket, preferably, 25%, or, more preferably 10%.

(15) Formed in Place Gasket Test: A 1121121.27 cm frame was constructed from a single sheet of plywood. A 48.348.3 cm square was cut though the center of the frame. A stud square of nominal 24 studs (actual board cross section=3.88.9 cm) was constructed to have external dimension of 48.2 cm, and internal dimension of 40.6 cm. This stud square was mounted through the square hole in the plywood frame to protrude at least 3 cm above the plane of each face of the plywood frame, leaving a square, raised rim above each face of the test specimen, the exposed faces of the rim being formed from the 3.8 cm side of the studs. The exterior sides of the stud square were sealed to the plywood frame with silicone sealant. Two pieces of 1.27 cm plywood were mounted with screws onto the back raised rim, leaving a 0.3 cm gap between them. The result was a 40.640.68.9 cm cavity backed with the two pieces of plywood. The assembly was laid flat with the cavity facing upward, and eight 0.75 mm paperclips were laid on the 3.8 cm faces of the front raised rim of the stud square, 2 paperclips per side of the square. The paperclips would cause an air leakage gap to form between the stud face and drywall to be installed later. Foam was applied in a continuous band 10 to 20 mm wide and 4 to 6 mm thick around the entirety of the front raised rim including over the paperclips. After curing under ambient conditions for 7 days, a 48.2 cm square of drywall was attached to the stud face with 12 drywall screws, compressing the foam band between the drywall and the stud.

(16) The assembly was then stood upright and the plywood side of the cavity was covered from the outside with a 0.076 mm (3 mil) polyethylene film, attached to the plywood with construction tape. The assembly was then mounted in an air flow apparatus with the film facing outwards away from the vacuum, and the drywall side facing inwards towards the vacuum. The pressure inside the air flow apparatus was reduced to 25 Pa below atmospheric pressure, and air flow was measured to obtain baseline air flow rates. The polyethylene film prevents air from flowing through the gaps in the plywood and through the cavity, and so allows the air flow due to other leaks in the system to be measured and subtracted from subsequent measurements.

(17) After the baseline testing, the polyethylene film was removed while the assembly remained mounted in the air flow apparatus, and airflow was measured again. Air flow due to system leakage was removed from the result to calculate air flow through the cavity.

(18) As an unsealed control, another assembly was prepared with the paperclip spacers but no sealant before attaching drywall. As comparative non-foamed examples, the face of the stud frame was treated with a continuous bead of acrylic latex caulk (DAP Alex plus from DAP Products Inc., Baltimore, Md.), and a second specimen with Liquid Nails DWP-24 Drywall Adhesive (Akzo Nobel Paints Strongsville, Ohio) immediately before attaching the dry wall squares. As a comparative foam example, a bead of GS W&D was applied to the face of a stud frame, allowed to cure for 7 days, then the drywall was attached to complete the control assembly.

(19) Unless otherwise indicated, all foams in Examples A, B, and C were applied in conditions 27 C./80% RH.

(20) Materials: A comparative commercial vinyl acetate/ethylene aqueous emulsion copolymer foam was DAP Tex Plus foam sealant by DAP Products Inc. (Baltimore, Md.) an acrylic latex containing foam designed for air sealing gaps.

(21) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Raw Materials Used COMPONENT CAS # Description PAPI.sup., 1 580N 9016-87-9 PMDI, Polymethylene polyphenyl polyisocyanate f = 3, Mw = 375, IE = 136.5, NCO = 30.8 PAPI.sup., 127 9016-87-9 PMDI , f = 2.7, Mw = 340 , IE = 134, NCO = 31.4 VORANOL.sup., 2 220-110N 25322-69-4 Polypropylene Glycol f = 2, Mw = 1010, OH# = 110 VORANOL.sup., 2 8000 25322-69-4 Polypropylene Glycol f = 2, Mw = 8000, OH# = 14 VORALUX.sup., 2 HF 505 0056449-05-9 Sorbitol, propylene oxide, ethylene oxide polymer f = 6, Mw = 12000, OH# = 28 STEPANOL.sup., 3 PS3152 32472-85-8 Diethylene Glycol-phthalic Anhydride Polymer f = 2, Mw = 350, OH# = 315 Propylene Carbonate 108-32-7 propylene carbonate TCPP 13674-84-5 trichlorpropyl phosphate - Fire retardant DMDEE 06425-39-4 2,2-dimorpholinodiethylether - moisture cure catalyst DABCO.sup., 4 DC198 silicone glycol copolymer surfactant BAYSILON.sup., 5 M100 0063148-62-9 di-methyl siloxanes and silcone fluid (defoamer) A60/DME 80/20 74-98-6/75-28- blend of 28% propane/51% isobutane/20% Dimethyl 5/115-10-6 ether (<1% n-butane contaminant) Blowing agent A60/DME 65/35 74-98-6/75-28- blend by weight of 22.8% propane/41.2% isobutane 5/115-10-6 20% Dimethyl ether (<1% n-butane contaminant) Blowing agent A45/DME 80/20 74-98-6/75-28- blend by weight of 11% propane/68% isobutane/ 5/115-10-6 20% Dimethyl ether (<1% n-butane contaminant) Blowing agent .sup.1 and .sup.2 The Dow Chemical Co., Midland, MI; .sup.3 Stepan Company, Elwood, IL; .sup.4 Air Products, Inc., Allentown, PA; .sup.5 Bayer GmbH (Leverkusen, DE).

(22) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 1A Comparative Latex Aerosol Foam Raw Material Prefoam amout RHOPLEXTM, 1 EC-1791 (acrylic emulsion) 81.95 STANFAXTM, 2 320 (ammonium stearate) 3.28 AQUACERTM, 3 539 (wax emulsion) 3.40 STANFAXTM, 2 1 (potassium oleate) 1.58 Sodium Xylene Sulfonate (40% solids) 0.40 ACRYSOLTM, 1 DR-72 (rheology modifier) 0.34 ROCIMATM, 1 BT2S (biocide) 0.08 Water 8.97 Total 100 1 The Dow Chemical Co., Midland, MI; 2 Para-Chem, Dalton, GA 3 BYK-Chemie GMBH, Wesel, Germany.

(23) All materials in Table 1A, above, were combined in the indicated proportions in a 2L plastic pail and were blended with propeller driven by an overhear stirrer. A stir rate was adjusted to approximately 200-300 rpm, to maintain a shallow vortex on the liquid surface for 15 minutes. The comparative aqueous latex prefoam (624 g) was charged into a 975 cc aluminum bullet can, and the valve was crimped. A blend of 68 wt. % iso-butane/12 wt. % propane/20 wt. % dimethyl ether (DME) (26 g total) was charged through the valve, and the cans were shaken by hand 40 times. Can pressures were measured at 3.1 to 3.8 bar.

(24) Comparative commercial 1K PU foam: Great Stuff Window and Door foam sealant (GS W&D), a low expansion pressurized polyurethane prepolymer foam (Dow, Midland, Mich.).

(25) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 2 Polyol intermediate Blend Compositions For PU Foams A Through C Polyol blend A (=B) C COMPONENT wt. % w % VORANOL 220-110N 46.47 36.47 STEPANOL PS3152 3.23 3.23 VORALUX HF 505 xx 10.00 Propylene Carbonate 7.00 7.00 TCPP 40.00 40.00 DMDEE 0.30 0.30 DABCO DC198 3.00 3.00

(26) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 2 Formulations Of Prepolymer And Blowing Agent. A A B B C C COMPONENT, wt. % gun straw gun straw gun straw PAPI 580N 21.78 21.78 22.86 22.86 21.75 21.75 Polyol blend A 62.20 62.20 60.10 60.10 Polyol blend C 61.25 61.20 BAYSILON M100 0.05 0.05 0.05 A60/DME 80/20 16.00 16.00 A60/DME 65/35 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 % Free NCO in total 4.51 5.08 5.06 formulation (minus BA) % Free NCO based on 7.20 8.00 8.06 weight of active polyol + polyisocyanate

(27) To test the foam cure in high humidity, a weather resistive barrier (WRB) aqueous coating was prepared as in U.S. Pat. No. 8,151,538, Example 16.

(28) Inventive and comparative foams were evaluated for fresh foam density and foam cure speed by the methods disclosed above. The first coating time was less than an hour, and damage assessment along with fresh foam density are listed in Table 4, below.

(29) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 4 Setting of 6 mm Thick PU Foams vs. Comparative Foams, In 27 C./80% RH Hold Foam height at time of coating, and Example g/cc time coating result *GS Window and 0.079 46 Foam expanded to >12 mm, Door Sealant.sup.1 min not damaged *Latex aerosol 0.128 44 Foam 8-10 mm, disrupted by sprayer A straw 0.108 41 Foam ~3 mm, not damaged by spray B straw 0.087 39 Foam ~3 mm, not damaged by spray C straw 0.095 36 Foam ~3 mm, not damaged by spray A gun 0.047 31 Foam 1-2 mm, not damaged by spray B gun 0.054 26 Foam 1-2 mm, not damaged by spray C gun 0.042 21 Foam 1-2 mm, not damaged by spray *Denotes Comparative Example; .sup.1Dow Chemical, Midland, MI.

(30) Comparative GREAT STUFF Window and Door (GS W&D) foam accepted a coating without damage, but left a bump thicker than the original 6 mm application. The comparative latex aerosol foam was damaged by the force of the sprayer. Inventive foams A, B, C, dispensed either through a straw or gun, accepted coatings without damage and left a bump thinner than the height of the foam in its original application.

(31) A similar experiment was run on the lab bench at 20 C.(68 F.)/28% humidity. In this case, WRB coatings could be applied to all the inventive one component polyurethane foams by sprayer or brush in <1 hour without any damage to the foam. Even though one component polyurethane foams cure more slowly at low humidity, the inventive foams still cured enough in <1 h to accept a top coating.

(32) After fully curing for 7 days, the 50 mm wide and 12 mm thick foam bands which had been applied on plywood were subject to the compressibility of foam test method from above. Because the bands were not exactly 50 mm wide, their actual width, and the test results are recorded in Table 5, below.

(33) As shown in Table 5, below, all of the inventive one component polyurethane foams shrank by at least 25% of their original height under compression, even more so when applied with a gun. The Comparative foams either did not compress or cured very slowly, as shown in Table 4, above.

(34) While as shown in Table 5, below, the tested one component polyurethane foams A, B and C all shrunk and could be compressed from their original dispensed height, other variations of collapsing or easily compressed foam were made, including those in which there was no polyol of functionality above 2.0; the polyol had a higher MW; the polyisocyanate (p-MDI) had a slightly lower average functionality, 3.0 reduced to 2.7; a defoamer was omitted from the straw foam, to check that effect; propylene carbonate was omitted from all; and there were 2 different blowing agent mixtures.

(35) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 5 Compressed Height (mm) of Foam Bands Under Increasing Weight. Fresh Foam Was Approx. 12 mm Thick Applied weight 25 g 225 g 2.2 kg Foam Band width, mm Foam band height, mm A straw 60 9 8 5 B straw 65 9 8 6 C straw 60 8.5 7.5 5.5 A gun 50 6.5 5.5 3 B gun 60 6.5 5.5 3 C gun 70 5 4 2.5 *Latex 60 1.5 1 0.5 *GS W & D 70 22 21 16 *Denotes Comparative Example

(36) Some polyol intermediate variants are shown in Table 6, below; and the one component polyurethane foam compositions from them are shown in Table 7, below.

(37) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 6 Polyol Blend Intermediates for Foams D and E Polyol Intermediate D E COMPONENT % % VORANOL 220-110N 56.70 10.00 VORANOL 8000 0.00 46.70 TCPP 40.00 40.00 DMDEE 0.30 0.30 DABCO DC198 3.00 3.00 Total 100.00 100.00

(38) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 7 Foam Recipes (Each filled into both straw and gun cans, labeled F-straw and F-gun etc.). COMPONENT, wt. % F-foam G-foam H-foam I-foam PAPI 27 23.13 23.13 19.38 19.38 polyol int D 60.87 60.87 polyol int E 64.62 64.62 A60/DME 80/20 16.00 16.00 A45/DME 80/20 16.00 16.00 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Straw can: F-straw G-straw H-straw I-straw Gun can: F-gun G-gun H-gun I-gun

(39) TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 8 Calculated Composition of Each Recipe In Cans Example F-foam G-foam H-foam I-foam COMPONENT Target % Target % Target % Target % PAPI 27 23.13 23.13 19.38 19.38 Voranol 220-110N 34.51 34.51 6.46 6.46 (1010 L) Voranol 8000 30.18 30.18 PCF/TCCP 24.35 24.35 25.85 25.85 DMDEE 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 DABCO DC 198 1.83 1.83 1.94 1.94 Propane 4.48 1.76 4.48 1.76 Isobutane 8.16 10.88 8.16 10.88 N-butane 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 DME 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20 TOTAL % 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Calculated % NCO: in prepolymer: 5.15 5.88 based on weight of total 7.51 8.81 polyol + polyisocyanate:

(40) Inventive foams F through I, dispensed both from gun cans and straw cans, were tested by the Foam Cure Speed, as described above. The test was modified to set the environmental room at 10 C./80% humidity. Curing at lower temperature is known to slow the cure reaction. As shown in Table 9 below, in the environmental room even at 10 C./80% humidity, the inventive PU foam cured in <1 hour and was not damaged by the spray of coating. GREAT STUFF W&D foam accepted coating without damage, but left a bump thicker than the original 6 mm application. The comparative latex aerosol foam from table 1A, above, and the commercially available DAPTex foam, were both damaged by the force of the sprayer even if allowed to cure up to 4 hours in the environmental room. Inventive foams F, G, H and I, and repeat tests of foams B and C, accepted coating without damage and left a bump thinner than the originally applied foam with gun or straw foam, and with either blowing agent blend.

(41) TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 9 Foam Density And Overspraying Summary at 1 hour, at 10 C./80% Relative Humidity Density Result of spraying WRB coating Example g/cc at 1 hour F-gun 0.034 OK. Foam was grainy, 0.1-1 mm cells. G-gun 0.033 Tops of cells had clear foam, coating covered H-gun 0.024 OK. Bead shrank most of all, and I-gun 0.025 band had self-flattened to <3 mm. Smoothest transition at coated F-straw 0.064 OK. Denser and tougher G-straw 0.062 G-straw 0.065 OK. Denser. Individual bead lines I-straw 0.065 in band flowed together. On board, large 5-10 mm bubbles. *Latex Table 1A-gun 0.11 Overcoat also failed at 4 hours, foam damaged *DAP commercial- 0.11 Overcoat also failed at 4 hours, foam damaged *GS W&D-gun 0.039 OK. B-gun 0.047 OK. C-gun 0.030 OK. *Denotes Comparative Example.

(42) The Foam Cure Speed test, described above, was also repeated on an open lab bench measured at 20 C./28% humidity. Moisture cured one component polyurethane foam is known to cure more slowly in a low humidity atmosphere. In this case, the inventive foam B-gun was tested, and after 2 hours of cure, an WRB aqueous coating was applied by brush. The force of brushing is potentially more damaging to uncured foam. Nonetheless, this coating application did not disrupt nor visibly damage the inventive foams.

(43) WRB Function: Specimens for the WRB Function test, described above, were prepared. To one specimen, inventive foam B-gun was applied over the OSB gap at 20 C./28% humidity. After 1 hour cure, WRB aqueous coating was applied as in the foam cure speed test. To a second specimen in the environmental room at 10 C./80% humidity, foam H-gun was applied over the OSB gap. After 1 h cure, a WRB aqueous coating was applied as in the foam cure speed test. After drying for 7 days on the bench and attaching the test cylinders, both specimens were filled to 550 mm with water. No leaks were detected for 24 h, when the test was stopped.

(44) Selected foams were subjected to the Degree and Rate of Foam Shrinkage Upon Cure test method, described above. The actual temperature and % relative humidity during cure are reported in Table 10, below, along with test results. Inventive foams H-gun and C-gun each collapsed by over 50% within 45 min, and H-gun even faster. By comparison, commercially available GS W&D, and also GREAT STUFF PRO Wall and Floor adhesive (GS-Wall) underwent an initial small contraction, then slight expansion over time. The comparative foams do not self collapse, whereas the inventive foams do and thereby enable installation and application coating of materials over them, leaving a much smaller bump.

(45) TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 10 Cure Shrinkage, Height Of 1K PU Foams On Plywood Foam H-gun H-gun C-gun *GSW&D *GS-Wall Cure 25 C./ 24 C./ 24 C./ 24 C./ 24 C./ Time 26% 45% 45% 45% 69% min Foam height in mm 0.25 14.5 14 13.5 0.5 14 13.5 13 16 1 12 12 18 13 16 1.5 11 10.5 17 13 2 9.5 9 17 12.5 15 2.5 8.5 8 16 12.5 3 7.5 7 15.5 12.5 15 4 6 5.5 15 12.5 5 5 5 14 12.5 14.5 7.5 3.5 3.5 13 13 14 10 3 2.5 12.5 13.5 14 15 2.5 2.5 12 14 14.5 20 2.5 2 11 14 15 30 2.5 2 10 14 15.5 45 9 16 60 8 16.5 120 6 17 *Denotes Comparative Example

(46) Selected foams had been cured in a cooler and more humid environmental room at 10 C./80% for 4 hours, then on the lab bench for 7 days. These were subject to the Foam Compressibility test method. Results are reported in Table 11, below.

(47) TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 11 Foam Compressibility of 12 mm Initial Thickness 25 g 225 g 2.2 kg Example Band, cm Foam band height, mm *GSW&D 5.5 17.3 17.3 14.9 G-straw 6.0 6.5 6.0 4.0 I-straw 8.0 9.0 8.5 8.0 B-gun 5.5 6.0 5.0 3.0 C-gun 5.0 6.5 5.5 3.5 F-gun 6.0 5.5 5.0 3.0 G-gun 5.5 6.5 5.5 3.5 H-gun 5.5 4.0 3.5 2.5 I-gun 5.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 *Denotes Comparative Example

(48) As shown in Table 11, above, all of the inventive one component polyurethane foams compress under a small load; however, the Comparative foam does not.

(49) Air leakage results from the foamed in place gasket test are summarized in Table 12, below. Acrylic caulk or drywall adhesive both block>98% of air leaks, but require the drywall to be installed before these materials have started to cure, usually within 2 hours. Cured GREAT STUFF W&D foam sealant is not readily compressible and the drywall could not be attached closely to the stud, leaving some air leaks. Both inventive foams C-gun and H-gun cured to a readily compressible gasket and both blocked >99% of air leakage between the drywall and stud.

(50) TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 12 Air sealing of drywall to studs by various gaskets. Stud face sealant Air leakage No sealant, just spacers 100% *Acrylic caulk, dry wall applied while wet <0.2% *Drywall adhesive, drywall applied while wet 1.9% *GS Window and Door 32% Inventive foam C-gun 0.7% Inventive foam H-gun <0.2% *Denotes Comparative Example