Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Vacuum
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/vacuum

Low cost composites for vacuum insulation core material

Boyce Chang, Landi Zhong, Mufit Akinc*
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Vacuum insulation technology provides unprecedented performance and its applications have expanded,
Received 12 January 2016 particularly in the form of vacuum insulation panels (VIP). One of the challenges of using VIP include
Received in revised form greater cost compared to traditional insulation because fumed silica is commonly used as the core
25 May 2016
material. The demand for low cost material with comparable service life to fumed silica constantly grows.
Accepted 27 May 2016
Diatomaceous earth (DE) and glass bubbles (GB) represent alternative materials that have potential for
Available online 28 May 2016
cost effective VIP applications. The pore size distribution of the DE was determined quantitatively by
mercury porosimetry and nitrogen sorption. The majority of pores in DE are ranged around 1 mm. The
Keywords:
Vacuum insulation
average pore size of GB was estimated to be 50 mm via scanning electron microscopy. Subsequently, the
Fumed silica relationship between pore size and gaseous thermal conductivity was established using the Kaganer
VIP relation. Thermal conductivity measurements were made using the transient plane source technique,
Diatomaceous earth which produces higher values compared to steady state methods such as guarded hot plate. Therein,
fumed silica was used as a baseline for all measurements performed in this study. DE composites showed
very promising results, with its thermal conductivity only 26% higher than pure fumed silica below
104 Pa.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction introduction of a core material permits the application of thin

The advent of vacuum insulation occurred more than a 100
years ago and it was then widely used in cryogenic containers
known as Dewars, named after the founder of this technology [1].
Dewars utilized steel and glass barriers to enclose a hollow evac-
uated region because of the structural strength required to with-
stand pressure difference. Vacuum insulation has since made
significant progress, its applications expanded to various sectors
including building, transportation and appliances in the form of
vacuum insulation panels (VIP). Thermal conductivity as low as
4 mW/m.K at the center of the panel have been reported, approx-
imately 10 times lower compared to traditional insulation materials
such as expanded polystyrene, which have thermal conductivity
values ranging from 30 to 40 mW/m.K [2,3]. VIPs consist of a porous
core material that withstands compression due to pressure differ-
ence and a barrier laminate, which provides the vacuum seal for the
underlying core material. At high vacuum, heat flow is limited to
the porous solid, which entails very large interfacial thermal
resistance and hence, resulting in a low thermal conductivity. The
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: makinc@iastate.edu (M. Akinc).
metallized polymer foils for barrier laminate. However, VIPs have a
limited service life because vacuum is lost over a period of time as
air permeates through the thin metallized polymer foil. The rate of
vacuum degradation in the panel dictates its lifetime and this is
especially critical for building applications, which typically require
efficient insulation for an extended period of time (30e50 years).
Rate of vacuum degradation can be reduced by changing the type of
barrier laminate used [4], however the sensitivity of thermal con-
ductivity to air intake depends on the core material.
Silica aerogels are by far the best materials for vacuum insu-
lation [5]. However the cost of production of aerogels are far too
high and they lack the mechanical strength for VIPs applications
[6]. Fumed silica (FS) instead became a popular core material used
for VIPs because it is similar to silica aerogel in terms of insulating
ability. Although less expensive than silica aerogel, fumed silica is
still a costly material (at z$4/kg) [7]. This creates a challenge for
the widespread application of VIPs in appliance and large scale
structures due to its cost relative to traditional insulation materials.
Thus, alternative core materials were introduced into the market.
Glass fiber, for example, are now commonly used for VIPs because
of its lower cost compared to fumed silica [8]. Glass fibers have low
thermal conductivity (~30 mW/m.K) even at atmospheric pressure
and have been reported to show slight improvement in terms of

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vacuum.2016.05.027
0042-207X/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 B. Chang et al. / Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126
insulating ability compared to fumed silica at very low gas pres-
sures (<10 Pa). However, its effectiveness quickly deteriorates
when gas pressure in the panel increases above 100 Pa [1]. This
behavior is highly unfavorable for VIP applications that require long
service life e.g. building insulation. Polyurethane and polystyrene
foams have similar shortcoming at gas pressures above 100 Pa
[9,10]. Polymeric materials are further complicated by outgassing
issues when placed under a vacuum [11]. To the best of our
knowledge, there are two other naturally occurring materials that
have been studied as potential VIP core material. Pumice is a highly
porous volcanic rock that contain pores averaging at 3.4e40 mm
[8,12]. Similarly, perlite is also a type of highly porous volcanic rock
but it has a wider range of pores from 0.01 to 100 mm [7,13]. Both
powders were mixed with other constituents to form composites
and tested for their thermal conduction properties under varying
gas pressures. Since these powders are both naturally occurring and
require very little processing, they serve to be low cost alternatives.
Caps et al. pioneered the use of composite core materials with the
use of opacifiers to reduce radiation contribution of heat transfer
[14,15]. In the present study, composites containing diatomaceous
earth (DE) and glass bubbles (GB) are considered for VIP core ma-
terials. DE comprises of skeletal remains (frustules) of microscopic
plants that are closely related to the brown algae [16]. GB are
sodadlimedborosilicate glass that is processed into hollow
spheres by 3 M [17].
The aim of the present work is to introduce DE and GB for VIP
applications in comparison with glass fibers and fumed silica. The
thermal conductivity of DE and GB in vacuum were investigated by
Fricke et al. and Allen et al., however, composites of these materials
have not been investigated [1,18]. Thus, mixtures of these materials
will be characterized for their vacuum insulating performance in
relation to pore structure. Specific processing requirements, addi-
tion of opacifying agents and getters for these composites are
important considerations for large scale VIP manufacturing. How-
ever, these subjects are beyond the scope of this paper. The present
study focuses on the potential of these composites as long life-time
VIP core materials relative to fumed silica and glass fiber.
2. Experimental
Thermal conductivity measurements were made using a Ther-
mal Constants Analyzer (Hot Disk TPS 1500) coupled with a 6.4 mm
Kapton sensor (C5501). This instrument employs the transient
plane source (TPS) technique, which as its name implies measure
Fig. 1. Schematic of experimental setup for measuring thermal conductivity under controlled gas pressure conditions.
121
temperature as a function of time. By contrast, standard methods
such as the guarded hot plate typically require steady state condi-
tions whereby temperature distribution in the sample is indepen-
dent of time. The relationship between temperature change (DT),
time, and thermal conductivity (L) for the transient plane source
technique is given by Eq. (1) [19].

1
DTðtÞ ¼ P0 p3=2 aL Ds ðtÞ (1)
P0 represents the heating power supplied into the sensor, a is the
sensor radius, t is a dimensionless time variable and Ds (t) is a time
dependent function. Thermal conductivity is extrapolated from the
slope when DT is plotted with Ds (t). The sample compartment of
the instrument was incorporated with a bell jar vacuum chamber,
which enabled measurements in controlled atmospheres and gas
pressures. A schematic of the setup is shown in Fig. 1.
Micromeritics ASAP 2010 was used for nitrogen gas adsorption
measurements. Specific surface area was calculated using the BET
method while pore size distributions were calculated by BJH and t-
plot methods. However, the BJH and t-plot methods are limited to
meso- and micro-pores. Therefore, larger pores were evaluated
quantitatively by mercury porosimetry (Poremaster-60). In addi-
tion, pore size was also assessed qualitatively using transmission
electron microscopy (FEI Technai G2 F20) and scanning electron
microscopy (JEOL JSM-6060LV). Perkin Elmer Frontier FT-MIR
spectrometer was used to determine the IR transparency of the
samples in the attenuated total reflectance (ATR) mode.
3. Materials
3.1. Characterization
Diatomaceous earth (DE), also known as Diatomite, consist of
skeletal remains (frustules) of diatoms, a common algae that is
found in both salt and fresh water. The frustules are mainly
comprised of amorphous silica and typically contain small amounts
of lime, alumina, iron and structural water [20]. The exact
composition of the frustules vary depending on the source. How-
ever, amorphous silica remains as the main constituent in all cases.
The range of values for the composition of DE is given in Table 1. The
DE used in this study is supplied by Perma-Guard™ (PG) and Ames
flower shop (EMO).
The structure of DE as shown in Fig. 2(aec) is evidently very
porous, which explains its low bulk density of 0.38 g/cm3. The light
122 B. Chang et al. / Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126

Table 1 Table 2
Range of compositions of DE [20]. Nitrogen sorption summary. A significant fraction of pores in FS are within the
meso- and micro-pore range in agreement with the TEM observations in Fig. 2.
Compound Mass %
Material BET surface Mesopore volume Micropore volume
SiO2 77e88
area (m2/g) (cm3/g)a (cm3/g)b
Al2O3 1e8
Fe2O3 0e3 DE e PG 39 0.098 0.004
CaO 0e2 FS 165 0.54 0.013
MgO 0e2 a
2e50 nm by BJH.
K2O 0e3 b
<2 nm by t-plot.
Na2O 0e2
H2O & organics 5e15

spots present around the cross-section of the frustules seen in
Fig. 2(c) depicts the nanostructure of diatom frustules. This obser-
vation is also supported by nitrogen sorption data (see Table 2).
Glass bubbles (GB) are hollow spheres that are made of soda-
lime-borosilicate glass, procured from 3M™ (Glass bubbles K15).
GB have a large distribution of sizes as shown in Fig. 2(d) and it is
specified by the supplier that 80% of the spheres are within
30e105 mm. GB has a lower bulk density (0.13e0.17 g/cm3)
compared to DE, translating to a porosity of approximately 96%. It
should be noted that the gas trapped within the GB will not be
evacuated as it is completely encapsulated. The composition of GB
is mainly comprised of SiO2 (60e80%), but it also contains consid-
erable amounts of Na2O (5e16%), CaO (5e25%), K2O and Li2O
(0e10%) [18]. The surface area of GB was not measured by nitrogen
sorption because of its low surface area. Since GBs are known to
have smooth, nonporous surface, their surface area is estimated
using the following equation [21]:
3 formed by the network of primary particles viewed in Fig. 2(f).
A¼
rr
where by A is the specific area, r is bulk density and r is the average
particle radius. By assuming the bulk density to be 0.15 g/cm3 and
the average particle radius to be 30 mm, the estimated surface area
was calculated to be 0.6 m2/g.
Fumed silica (FS) is widely used in VIPs because of its superior
insulating ability at elevated gas pressures. FS is also known as
pyrogenic silica because it is typically synthesized by flame hy-
drolysis of silicon tetrachloride [22]. As a result, the product be-
comes slightly contaminated with hydrochloric acid. The FS used in
this study, which has a density of 0.037 g/cm3 was sourced from
Sigma-Aldrich (S5505). The BET surface area specified by the vendor
ranges from 175 to 225 m2/g, however our measurements showed a
slightly lower value (Table 2). From Fig. 2(e), FS exhibits submicron
features indicating that it is highly porous and contain mostly
meso- and micro-pores. In fact, from Fig. 2(f) the pores are esti-
mated to be in the range of 10e50 nm whereas the primary particles
that make up the network are 10e20 nm in size. Based on specific
surface area, pore diameter and density, FS used in this study is
commensurate to other reports on VIP research in literature [7,23].
DE and FS samples were analyzed for pore size distribution by
mercury porosimetry (Material Characterization Lab, Quantach-
rome). GB was not analyzed here because they would crush under
pressure. The pore size distribution for DE and FS are presented in
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3 suggests that most of the pores in DE are located in the
0.1e5 mm range with a smaller portion in the 5e200 mm range. Note
that below 0.01 mm (10 nm), a short peak representing nanodpores
supports the TEM observation in Fig. 2(c). The highest peak found in
FS ranges from 0.01 to 0.03 mm (10e30 nm) corresponds to pores
(2)
However, porosimetry data also show that pores exist between
0.1e50 mm and 90e800 mm in FS. The pores corresponding to
0.1e50 mm are thought to be inter-agglomerate pores while the
largest pores are aberrations that stem from sample preparation.
Radiation contributes to a fraction of the total heat transfer
across a porous material. The radiative heat transfer becomes more
pronounced under vacuum as gaseous conduction diminishes. We
qualitatively assessed the IR transmission of the materials by FTIR
spectroscopy.
The IR transmission spectra was obtained between 650 and
4000 cm1 but plotted only up to 2650 cm1 (see Fig. 4). All three

Fig. 2. Electron micrographs of diatomaceous earth (DE), glass bubbles (GB) and fumed silica (FS). (a) Scanning electron micrograph (SEM) of DE. (bec) Transmission electron
micrograph (TEM) of DE. Nanoporous structure can be observed on the DE frustules. (d) SEM of GB, showing relatively large particles. (e) SEM of FS agglomerate. (f) TEM image of FS
showing 5e10 nm primary particles that form a network of pores ranging from 10 to 50 nm in size.
 B. Chang et al. / Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126 123

Table 3
1.00 DE (PG) Compact density and porosity of DE/FS composite compacts for atmospheric pres-
Normalized dV/d(log D), cm3/g

sure measurements.
FS
0.80 DE (PG) FS Applied load, MPa Density, r(g/cm3) Porosity, vp

100 0 5.49 0.61 0.72

0.60 90 10 5.27 0.54 0.75
80 20 5.05 0.51 0.77
0.40 70 30 4.83 0.49 0.78
60 40 4.61 0.45 0.8
50 50 3.29 0.43 0.81
0.20 40 60 1.76 0.30 0.86
30 70 1.31 0.26 0.88
0.00 20 80 3.29 0.34 0.85
10 90 3.29 0.30 0.87
1E+4 1E+3 1E+2 1E+1 1E+0 1E-1 1E-2 1E-3
0 100 3.08 0.27 0.88
Pore diameter D, μm

Fig. 3. Mercury porosimetry of DE and FS. dV/d(log D) represents pore volume for a
given pore diameter. density of the material. r0 was assumed to be the same for both DE
and FS at 2.2 g/cm3, which is the density of silica [25].
For the second set of DE/FS composites, a constant applied load
of 1.76 MPa was used. This resulted in a lower density compared to
the first set. The characteristics of this set of samples are given in
Table 4. Comparing the level of applied loads, it can be inferred that
DE is capable of resisting mechanical constraints incurred during
fabrication similar to FS. GB on the other hand will require more
attention during manufacturing if it is to be implemented as a VIP
core material. However, higher strength glass bubbles are available
from the manufacturer.

4. Theory

The mixtures presented in this work are assumed to be homo-

geneous. Furthermore, the characterization data confirms that
amorphous silica is the main constituent for DE, GB and FS. Thus,
the composites of these materials were assumed to be a binary
Fig. 4. FTIR spectra of DE, GB and FS. All three types of materials displayed similar peak
mixture consisting of amorphous silica (ks ¼ 1.3 W/m.K) and air
positions due to their similarity in composition as indicated before. (kp ¼ 0.026 W/m.K) [25]. This simplification permits the application
of the Landauer relation to model effective thermal conductivity of
the composites. Although it was originally developed to model
materials used mainly consist silica, and as a result, SieO stretching electrical conductivity of a homogeneous binary phase, Smith et al.
peaks are prevalent around 1050 cm1. The smaller peak around showed that it was applicable for modeling thermal conductivity
800 cm1 corresponds to SieOeSi symmetrical bond stretching [26,27]. Given the nature of the model, the effective thermal con-
[24]. GB produced a broader peak compared to the rest. This is ductivity can be obtained irrespective of the shape and size of the
attributed to variation in the environment of SieO bonds due to the two phases, it is a suitable model for highly irregular materials. On
larger amounts of alkaline and alkaline earth metals in the material. the other hand, materials with closed pores, hence, having a
DE and FS have very similar transmission spectra. All three mate- continuous solid phase, are well captured by the Maxwell-Eucken
rials have high IR transmission above 1150 cm1. Thus, an opacifier relation [26,28]. The Landauer relation for thermal conductivity
with high absorption above 1150 cm1 is generally added to reduce and porosity is given in Eq. (4).
radiative heat transfer.
1h    
keff ¼ kp 3vp  1 þ ks 2  3vp
3.2. Sample preparation 4
n    2 o0:5 i
þ kp 3vp  1 þ ks 2  3vp þ 8ks kp (4)
Composites of DE and GB with FS were produced at varying
fractions (by weight). Samples of DE/FS mixtures were prepared by
pressing the powder mixtures into cylindrical compacts. The den- where keff is the effective thermal conductivity of the composite, kp
sity of the compact is dependent on the applied force. All GB/FS is the thermal conductivity of the air, ks is the thermal conductivity
mixtures were only lightly compressed by placing a measured of the solid phase and vp is the volume fraction of pores.
weight, which resulted in 0.2 kPa. Larger loads such as applied on
DE/FS composites lead to the fracture of glass bubbles (Confirmed Table 4
by SEM). Table 3 shows the sample compact density and estimated DE/FS samples for thermal conductivity measurements under varying gas pressure.
porosity for DE/FS mixtures according to:
DE (PG) FS Density, r (g/cm3) Porosity
r 70 30 0.29 0.87
yP ¼ 1  (3)
r0 60 40 0.23 0.89
50 50 0.26 0.88
0 100 0.12 0.95
vp represents porosity, r is the compact density and r0 is the true
124
Gas conduction plays a dominant role in the effective thermal
conductivity of porous solids. The effective thermal conductivity
falls sharply as gas pressure is reduced. The gaseous thermal con-
ductivity as a function of gas pressure is modelled by the Kaganer
relation as shown in Eq. (5) [29].
k0
k¼  (5)
P0 lp
1 þ 2b PD
k is the effective gaseous thermal conductivity, k0 is the gaseous
thermal conductivity at standard pressure and b is a constant that is
approximately 1.5e2. This constant represents the efficiency of
energy transfer from gas molecules to solid surface [30]. lp is the
mean free path of gas particles at standard pressure, P represents
actual pressure, P0 represents standard pressure (1 atm) and D is
the effective pore diameter. Fig. 5 illustrates the Kaganer relation
plotted using several pore diameters. Materials with smaller pore
size will retain thermal resistance (lower thermal conductivity) to
higher gas pressures, a preferred morphology for the design of
robust VIP.
5. Results and discussion
Previous studies have shown that moisture adsorption plays a
notable role in increasing the thermal conductivity of the core
material in VIPs [31,32]. Thus, the effect of humidity on the thermal
conductivity of DE and GB was compared to FS. Specifically to
investigate the effect of humidity on thermal conductivity, mea-
surements for all three powders were made under dry (<1% RH,
synthetic dry air) and humid (60% RH, standard laboratory atmo-
sphere) conditions. The increase in thermal conductivity in humid
air was insignificant for GB (3.1%) whereas DE and FS corresponded
to 21, and 24%. The remaining thermal conductivity measurements
in this work was performed in standard laboratory atmosphere
(60% RH).
The thermal conductivity as a function of pressure of FS, GB, DE
and glass fiber (GF, obtained from VIP vendor) is plotted in Fig. 6(a),
to compare current VIP core materials, such as GF and FS with DE
and GB. Below 200 Pa, the thermal conductivity values converge to
approximately 10 mW/m.K independent of composition. The
dependence of thermal conductivity to gas pressure for the samples
obeys the Kaganer relation, whereby the pore size of the samples
dictate the level of pressure at which gaseous thermal conductivity
is suppressed. This finding is consistent with literature although the
exact values reported here are higher in comparison due to the
0.03
Gaseous thermal conductivity, W/m.K
0.025
0.02
D = 100 μm
0.015
D = 10 μm
0.01
0.005
0 composites at the moment are not ideal for building applications
1E+1 1E+2 1E+3
Pressure, Pa
Fig. 5. Kaganer relation at various pore sizes.
B. Chang et al. / Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126
difference in measurement technique [1,8,23,33].
The TPS technique has been reported to measure values that are
higher by up to 20% for polymer foams when compared to the heat-
flow method. However, that study also showed that the both
techniques are capable of producing identical trends [34]. Karami
et al. also reached the same conclusion in a study involving both
TPS and hot plate method [35]. Furthermore, Johansson et al.
measured actual VIP samples (core and envelope) using the TPS
technique and found that thermal conductivities were three to six
times higher than data found in literature [36]. Thus, although the
absolute accuracy of the conductivity values may be questioned,
relative values and trends are perfectly valid and appropriate.
Therefore, we compared thermal conductivity of all composites
with respect to pure FS, which then allows us to relate our values
with those found in literature.
Composites made using different sources of DE showed similar
results as expected due to their similarity in composition and
morphology as shown in Fig. 6(b). Hence, it can be deduced that
regardless of the source, DE would show consistent insulating
properties. Although it can be inferred that larger amounts of FS
results in lower thermal conductivity, the relationship between
composition and thermal conductivity does not fully explain the
step-like behavior in Fig. 6(b). Instead, a more explicit trend was
obtained when thermal conductivity was plotted against compact
density (Fig. 6(c)). Compact density can be converted into porosity
by applying Eq. (3) and this allows the usage of thermal conduc-
tivity mixture models such as the Landauer relation. There was no
appreciable difference between the thermal conductivity of GB/FS
composites at atmospheric pressure and therefore the data was not
plotted. (Thermal conductivity fluctuated around 0.039 W/m.K).
The Landauer relation correlated very well with the data in Fig. 6(d)
suggesting that regardless of composition, as long as the porosity of
the material is high we will achieve lower thermal conductivity at
atmospheric pressure.
Fig. 7 illustrates the variation of thermal conductivity as a
function of gas pressure for GB/FS composites. The plots show that
GB/FS composites are less sensitive to compositional variation
within the range investigated. Furthermore, it seems the thermal
conductivity is less susceptible to gas pressure. This is not sur-
prising as the significant volume fraction of the composite is
“encapsulated” within the glass bubbles and independent of the gas
pressure. In agreement with the Kaganer relation, larger fractions
of GB, which lead to a larger average pore size results in higher
vacuum required for the suppression of gaseous thermal transport.
Although Fig. 7 shows some potential in GB/FS composites, these
results were collected for loose powders as mentioned before and
might not be representative of an actual compact.
DE/FS composites closely resemble FS as shown in Fig. 8. In
agreement with the Kaganer relation (Fig. 5), larger amounts of DE,
which contain larger pores compared to FS shifts the curve to the
left. However, this shift is comparatively insignificant when up to
60% DE was added. Samples containing 50% and 60% DE are very
promising composites for long term vacuum insulation applications
as their thermal conductivities remain merely 26% higher than pure
FS below 104 Pa. Assuming a multilayer metallized polymer is used
as the barrier laminate, the pressure intake per year can be
D = 1 μm approximated to be 200 Pa (50  50  2 cm3 panel) [37], a duration
of 50 years is required to reach 104 Pa. Therefore, thermal con-
D = 0.1 μm
ductivity up until this range of pressure should be given most
attention when designing core materials. Nevertheless, DE/FS
1E+4 1E+5 due to strict service life requirements. In comparison to glass fiber
sample (Fig. 6(a)), however, DE/FS composites would evidently
have substantially lower thermal conductivity below 104 Pa.
Furthermore, significant cost reduction can be achieved with DE/FS
 B. Chang et al. / Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126 125

Fig. 6. (a) Thermal conductivity of several materials as a function of gas pressure. The numbers on the right side of each plot represent the relative volume fraction of the porosity.
(DE and GB were measured in loose powder while the remaining two in compact) (b) Thermal conductivity of DE/FS composites at atmospheric pressure. (ced) Thermal con-
ductivity as a function of compact density and porosity of the DE/FS composites at atmospheric pressure. (Numbers next to each data point represents the composition of the
sample as mass percent FS).

0.06

0.05 70 GB
Thermal Conductivity, W/m.K

60 GB

0.04 50 GB
0 GB

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
1E+1 1E+2 1E+3 1E+4 1E+5
Pressure, Pa
Fig. 8. Thermal conductivity of DE/FS composites as a function of gas pressure.
Fig. 7. Thermal conductivity of GB/FS composites as a function of gas pressure.
Numbers in the legends represent mass percent of DE in the composite, and the
Numbers in the legends represent mass percent of GB in the composite mixture.
numbers on the right side of each plot represents the porosity of each compact.

composites because the commodity price of DE is $0.5/kg
(approximately 10 times lower than FS) [38].
6. Conclusion
Diatomaceous earth (DE) and glass bubbles (GB) were charac-
terized for their pore size distribution and composition in
comparison to fumed silica (FS). It was found that DE consists of a
wide range of pore sizes (0.01e10 mm) from the mercury poros-
imetry data. Although GBs have much larger pore sizes
(30e100 mm), its desirable porosity (96%) and low density (0.15 g/
cm3). The relationship between thermal conductivity and porosity
of DE composites was also successfully modeled using the Landauer
relation. The produced trend suggests that the thermal
126 B. Chang et al. / Vacuum 131 (2016) 120e126
conductivity in DE/FS composites at ambient pressure is dictated by
the porosity rather than composition. Thermal conductivity re-
ported in this study is higher compared to literature due to the
transient plane source technique (TPS) used for this study.
Although the TPS technique is known to produce higher values of
thermal conductivity compared to steady-state techniques, there is
substantial evidence found in literature shows that results from the
former technique have identical trends with the latter. DE/FS
composites show very promising results, as its thermal conduc-
tivity closely resembled (26%) pure FS at pressures below 104 Pa.
Future work include further assessment of GB/FS composites under
compacted conditions, which would require thicker walled GB
samples.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank H. Zhang & S. Oyola-Reynoso for their
help in taking the TEM and SEM images used in this article. We
would also like to acknowledge B. Erickson and B. Halterman for
their services in modifying the Thermal Constants Analyzer. This
project was supported by Iowa Energy Center, Grant #13-04.
References
[1] J. Fricke, U. Heinemann, H.P. Ebert, Vacuum insulation panelsdFrom research
to market, Vacuum 82 (2008) 680e690.
[2] K. Ghazi Wakili, R. Bundi, B. Binder, Effective thermal conductivity of vacuum
insulation panels, Build. Res. Inf. 32 (2004) 293e299.
[3] S.S. Alotaibi, S. Riffat, Vacuum insulated panels for sustainable buildings: a
review of research and applications, Int. J. Energy Res. 38 (2014) 1e19.
[4] H. Simmler, S. Brunner, Vacuum insulation panels for building application:
basic properties, aging mechanisms and service life, Energy Build. 37 (2005)
1122e1131.
[5] G. Reichenauer, U. Heinemann, H.P. Ebert, Relationship between pore size and
the gas pressure dependence of the gaseous thermal conductivity, Colloids
Surfaces A Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 300 (2007) 204e210.
[6] M.A. Aegerter, N. Leventis, M.M. Koebel, Aerogels Handbook, Springer, Lon-
don, 2011.
[7] M. Alam, H. Singh, S. Brunner, C. Naziris, Experimental characterisation and
evaluation of the thermo-physical properties of expanded perlite-Fumed silica
composite for effective vacuum insulation panel (VIP) core, Energy Build. 69
(2014) 442e450.
[8] P. Mukhopadhyaya, K. Kumaran, N. Normandin, Reenen Dv, J. Lackey, High-
performance vacuum insulation panel: development of alternative core ma-
terials, J. Cold Regions Eng. 22 (2008) 103e123.
[9] C.G. Yang, L. Xu, J. Wang, F.L. Shi, Outgassing of rigid open-celled polyurethane
foam used in vacuum insulation panels under vacuum condition, J. Cell.
Plastics 43 (2007) 17e30.
[10] C.-M. Wong, M.-L. Hung, Polystyrene foams as core materials used in vacuum
insulation panel, J. Cell. Plastics 44 (2008) 239e259.
[11] J. Kwon, H. Jung, I.S. Yeo, T. Song, Outgassing characteristics of a polycarbonate
core material for vacuum insulation panels, Vacuum 85 (2011) 839e846.
[12] G.A. Borchardt, A.A. Theisen, M.E. Harward, Vesicular pores of pumice by
mercury intrusion, Am. Soc. Agron. 32 (1968) 735e737.
[13] T. Nomura, N. Okinaka, T. Akiyama, Impregnation of porous material with
phase change material for thermal energy storage, Mater. Chem. Phys. 115
(2009) 846e850.
[14] R. Caps, J. Fricke, H. Reiss. Improving the extinction properties of an evacuated
high-temperature powder insulation. European Conference on Thermophys-
ical Properties 81984. p. 225e32.
[15] R. Caps, J. Fricke, Thermal conductivity of opacified powder filler materials for
vacuum Insulations1, Int. J. Thermophys. 21 (2000) 445e452.
[16] R. Calvert, Diatomaceous Earth, The Chemical Catalog Company, New York,
1930.
[17] W.R. Beck, D.L. O’Brien, in: Glass Bubbles Prepared by Reheating Solid Glass
Particles, Company MM, Manufacturing, U.S., 1968.
[18] M.S. Allen, R.G. Baumgartner, J.E. Fesmire, S.D. Augustynowicz, Advances in
microsphere insulation systems, in: Cryogenic Engineering Conference, 2003,
pp. 619e626.
[19] S.E. Gustafsson, Transient plane source techniques for thermal conductivity
and thermal diffusivity measurements of solid materials, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 62
(1991) 797e804.
[20] V.L. Eardley-Wilmot, Diatomite: its Occurrence, Preparation and Uses, 1928.
Ottawa: F. A. Acland.
[21] S.F. Lowell, Introduction to Powder Surface Area, John Wiley & Sons, New
York, 1979.
[22] R. Garrett, Defoaming: Theory and Industrial Applications, CRC Press, USA,
1992.
[23] J. Kim, T. Song, Vacuum insulation properties of glass wool and opacified
fumed silica under variable pressing load and vacuum level, Int. J. Heat Mass
Transf. 64 (2013) 783e791.
[24] E.R. Lippincott, A.V. Valkenburg, C.E. Weir, E.N. Bunting, Infrared studies on
polymorphs of silicon dioxide and germanium dioxide, J. Res. Natl. Bureau
Stand. 61 (1958) 61e70.
[25] R.C. Weast, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 68 ed, CRC Press, 1987.
[26] D.S. Smith, A. Alzina, J. Bourret, B. Nait-Ali, F. Pennec, N. Tessier-Doyen, et al.,
Thermal conductivity of porous materials, J. Mater. Res. 28 (2013) 2260e2272.
[27] R. Landauer, The electrical resistance of binary metallic mixtures, J. Appl. Phys.
23 (1952) 779e784.
[28] J.C. Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, Clarendon Press, 1892.
[29] M.G. Kaganer, Thermal insulation in Cryogenic Engineering: Israel Program
for Scientific Translations, 1969.
[30] J. Zhao, Y. Duan, B. Wang, Effects of solidegas coupling and pore and particle
microstructures on the effective gaseous thermal conductivity in aerogels,
J. Nanoparticle Res. 14 (2012) 1e15.
[31] U. Heinemann, Influence of water on the total heat transfer in ‘evacuated’
insulations, Int. J. Thermophys. 29 (2008) 735e749.
[32] S. Brunner, K. Wakili, Hints for an additional aging factor regarding the
thermal performance of vacuum insulation panels with pyrogenic silica core,
Vacuum 100 (2014) 4e6.
[33] X. Di, Y. Gao, C. Bao, Y. Hu, Z. Xie, Optimization of glass fiber based core
materials for vacuum insulation panels with laminated aluminum foils as
envelopes, Vacuum 97 (2013) 55e59.
[34] O. Almanza, M.A. Rodriguez-Perez, J.A. De Saja, Applicability of the transient
plane source method to measure the thermal conductivity of low-density
polyethylene foams, J. Polym. Sci. Part B Polym. Phys. 42 (2004) 1226e1234.
[35] P. Karami, E.T. Afriyie, P. Norberg, K. Gudmundsson, A study of the thermal
conductivity of granular silica materials for VIPs at different levels of gaseous
pressure and external loads, Energy Build. 85 (2014) 199e211.
[36] P. Johansson, C.-E. Hagentoft, B. Adl-Zarrabi, Measurements of thermal
properties of vacuum insulation panels by using transient plane source
sensor, in: 10th International Vacuum Insulation Symposium. Ottawa, Canada,
2011.
[37] S. Brunner, H. Simmler, In situ performance assessment of vacuum insulation
panels in a flat roof construction, Vacuum 82 (2008) 700e707.
[38] R.D. Crangle Jr., Mineral comodity Summaries 2014, Online, U. S. Geological
Survey, 2014, pp. 52e53.