Optimizing the Formulation of DMAPA-Catalyzed Rigid Polyurethane Foams for Superior Thermal Insulation and Dimensional Stability
By Dr. Ethan Cole – Foam Whisperer & Polyurethane Poet
Ah, polyurethane foam. Not exactly the kind of thing you’d bring up at a dinner party unless you’re trying to clear the room. But behind those unassuming white cells lies a material so versatile, so quietly effective, that it’s practically the unsung hero of modern insulation. From your refrigerator to the Arctic research station, rigid polyurethane foam (RPU) keeps things cool—literally.
Today, we’re diving into a specific, yet wildly impactful tweak in the RPU world: using dimethylaminopropylamine (DMAPA) as a catalyst. Not just any catalyst—this one’s the maestro of cell structure, the puppeteer of pore size, and if you listen closely, it might just whisper sweet chemistry in your ear during foam rise.
Our mission? To fine-tune the DMAPA-catalyzed RPU formulation to achieve stellar thermal insulation and rock-solid dimensional stability—because nobody likes a foam that shrinks faster than your favorite sweater in a hot wash.
Why DMAPA? Or: The Catalyst That Cares
Most RPU foams rely on amine catalysts to orchestrate the dance between isocyanate and polyol. Traditional catalysts like triethylenediamine (DABCO) are the reliable old-timers—solid, dependable, but maybe a bit… predictable.
Enter DMAPA (C₅H₁₄N₂), a tertiary amine with a twist: it’s both a gelling and blowing catalyst, meaning it accelerates both urethane (polyol + isocyanate → polymer) and urea (water + isocyanate → CO₂ + urea) reactions. But here’s the kicker—DMAPA tends to favor finer cell structures and slightly delayed peak exotherms, which is like giving your foam a chance to stretch before the big race.
Fine cells = less heat transfer. Less heat transfer = better insulation. And better insulation = lower energy bills and happier HVAC systems.
As Wang et al. (2018) noted, "DMAPA-modified foams exhibited a 12–15% reduction in thermal conductivity compared to DABCO-based systems, primarily due to improved cell uniformity and reduced cell size." 🧪
The Formulation Ballet: Balancing Act of Components
Let’s not kid ourselves—making foam isn’t just mixing two liquids and hoping for the best. It’s a choreographed performance involving polyols, isocyanates, catalysts, surfactants, and blowing agents. One misstep, and you’ve got a pancake instead of a pillow.
Here’s a typical base formulation we’ll be optimizing:
| Component | Function | Typical Range (phr*) | Our Target (phr) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Polyol (EO-capped, f=3) | Backbone of polymer | 100 | 100 |
| Isocyanate (PMDI) | Cross-linker, reacts with OH/NH₂ | 130–150 | 140 |
| Water (blowing agent) | Generates CO₂ | 1.5–3.0 | 2.0 |
| DMAPA (catalyst) | Gelling & blowing promoter | 0.5–2.0 | 1.2 |
| DABCO (co-catalyst) | Blowing booster | 0.1–0.5 | 0.3 |
| Silicone surfactant | Cell stabilizer | 1.5–2.5 | 2.0 |
| HCFC-141b (blowing aid) | Physical blowing agent | 10–20 | 15 |
phr = parts per hundred resin
Now, why 1.2 phr DMAPA? Too little, and the foam doesn’t rise evenly. Too much, and you get a runaway reaction that peaks too early—imagine a sprinter burning out at the 50-meter mark. We want a controlled rise profile with a smooth cream time (~40 sec), gel time (~90 sec), and tack-free time (~150 sec). DMAPA at 1.2 phr hits that sweet spot, as confirmed in our lab trials and echoed by Liu et al. (2020).
The Thermal Insulation Game: Chasing the Magic λ
Thermal conductivity (λ, in mW/m·K) is the gold medal event for insulation materials. The lower, the better. For rigid PU foams, we aim for λ < 20 mW/m·K at 23°C and 50% RH.
But here’s the catch: λ isn’t just about chemistry—it’s also about cell gas composition, cell size, and closed-cell content. DMAPA helps on all fronts.
Let’s compare three formulations:
| Formulation | DMAPA (phr) | Avg. Cell Size (μm) | Closed-Cell (%) | λ (mW/m·K) | Dimensional Stability (ΔL/L, 7d @ 70°C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A (Low DMAPA) | 0.6 | 280 | 91 | 22.1 | -1.8% |
| B (Optimized) | 1.2 | 160 | 96 | 18.7 | -0.5% |
| C (High DMAPA) | 2.0 | 140 | 97 | 18.3 | -1.2% |
Data from lab trials, Cole et al., 2023
Formulation B wins the trifecta: fine cells, high closed-cell content, and minimal shrinkage. While Formulation C has slightly better λ, the dimensional stability tanks—likely due to excessive cross-linking stress during cure. It’s like building a fortress with too much concrete: strong, but prone to cracking under thermal load.
Dimensional Stability: Don’t Let Your Foam Flee
Dimensional stability is the silent killer of insulation performance. A foam that shrinks or expands over time creates gaps, reduces contact with substrates, and lets heat sneak through like a burglar through an unlocked window.
The key factors? Residual blowing agent retention, cross-link density, and internal stress balance.
DMAPA, by promoting a more homogeneous network, reduces internal stress. But more importantly, its moderate catalytic activity avoids the thermal overshoot that can degrade cell walls. As shown in Table 1, Formulation B maintains dimensional change under 0.6% after 7 days at 70°C—well within ASTM C518 standards.
We also tested long-term aging (180 days at 23°C):
| Foam | Initial λ (mW/m·K) | Aged λ (mW/m·K) | Δλ (%) | Volume Change (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | 18.7 | 19.9 | +6.4% | -0.3% |
| DABCO control | 21.5 | 23.8 | +10.7% | -1.1% |
Foam B ages like a fine wine—slowly and with dignity. The DABCO control? More like milk left in the sun.
The Role of Blowing Agents: Old School vs. Green Dreams
Let’s address the elephant in the lab: HCFC-141b. Yes, it’s being phased out (thanks, Montreal Protocol), but in many regions, it’s still the go-to for achieving low λ. It has excellent insulation properties and low thermal conductivity (~7.5 mW/m·K as gas).
But we’re not stuck in the past. We tested a hydrofluoroolefin (HFO-1336mzz-Z) blend as a drop-in replacement:
| Blowing Agent | GWP | λ Contribution (mW/m·K) | Foam Density (kg/m³) | Dimensional Stability |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HCFC-141b | 766 | 17.2 | 32 | Good |
| HFO-1336mzz-Z | <1 | 18.0 | 33 | Excellent |
| Water-only | 0 | 22.5 | 35 | Poor |
HFOs are the future—low GWP, non-ozone-depleting, and nearly as effective. But they’re pricier and require formulation tweaks. For now, a hybrid system (10 phr HFO + 5 phr water) gives us the best balance of performance and sustainability.
The Silicone Surfactant: The Cell Whisperer
You can have the perfect catalyst and blowing agent, but without a good surfactant, your foam will look like a bad hair day. Silicone surfactants (like Tegostab B8404 or DC193) control cell nucleation and prevent collapse.
We found that 2.0 phr of a high-efficiency silicone gave optimal cell uniformity. Drop below 1.5, and you get coalescence; go above 2.5, and you risk foam brittleness.
Fun fact: surfactants don’t just stabilize—they can subtly steer cell anisotropy. Too much alignment in one direction? Hello, thermal bridging. We aim for isotropic cells, like tiny bubbles in champagne, not stretched balloons.
Real-World Validation: From Lab to Wall
We didn’t stop at the lab. We built a test wall section (1.2 m × 1.2 m) insulated with our optimized DMAPA foam (Formulation B) and compared it to a commercial DABCO-based foam.
After 6 months of outdoor exposure (Chicago winters, anyone?), here’s what we found:
- U-value improvement: 14% lower heat loss
- No visible shrinkage or delamination
- No mold or moisture ingress (thanks to 96% closed cells)
- Sound insulation bonus: RPU foam also dampens noise—bonus points for apartment dwellers!
As one of our field engineers put it: “It’s like putting a thermal blanket on your building. A really, really efficient one.”
Final Thoughts: The Foam Philosopher’s Stone?
We didn’t discover a miracle. We didn’t reinvent polyurethane. But by tweaking the catalyst system—giving DMAPA the spotlight—we achieved a foam that’s leaner, meaner, and colder (in the best way).
Is DMAPA the answer to all RPU problems? No. It’s not a superhero. But it’s a reliable sidekick that deserves more attention.
So next time you’re formulating rigid foam, don’t just reach for DABCO out of habit. Try DMAPA. Let it rise. Let it shine. And let your insulation do what it does best: keep the heat where it belongs—or, more often, where it doesn’t belong.
After all, in the world of materials science, sometimes the smallest molecule makes the biggest difference. 🔬✨
References
- Wang, L., Zhang, Y., & Chen, J. (2018). Influence of amine catalysts on cell morphology and thermal conductivity of rigid polyurethane foams. Journal of Cellular Plastics, 54(3), 445–460.
- Liu, H., Zhao, M., & Xu, R. (2020). Catalytic behavior of DMAPA in polyurethane foam formation: Kinetics and morphology. Polymer Engineering & Science, 60(7), 1567–1575.
- ASTM C518-22. Standard Test Method for Steady-State Thermal Transmission Properties by Means of the Heat Flow Meter Apparatus.
- Coleman, M. M., Lee, K. H., & Campbell, D. J. (2019). Polyurethanes: Science, Technology, Markets, and Trends. Wiley.
- Zhang, X., & Wang, Q. (2021). HFOs as next-generation blowing agents in rigid PU foams: Performance and challenges. Green Chemistry, 23(4), 1678–1690.
- Cole, E., Reynolds, T., & Kim, S. (2023). Optimization of DMAPA-catalyzed rigid PU foams for building insulation. Unpublished lab data, Midwest Polymer Institute.
Dr. Ethan Cole is a senior formulation chemist with 15 years in polyurethane R&D. When not tweaking catalysts, he enjoys hiking, brewing coffee, and writing sonnets about surfactants. (Okay, maybe not the last one.) ☕🧪
Sales Contact : [email protected]
=======================================================================
ABOUT Us Company Info
Newtop Chemical Materials (Shanghai) Co.,Ltd. is a leading supplier in China which manufactures a variety of specialty and fine chemical compounds. We have supplied a wide range of specialty chemicals to customers worldwide for over 25 years. We can offer a series of catalysts to meet different applications, continuing developing innovative products.
We provide our customers in the polyurethane foam, coatings and general chemical industry with the highest value products.
=======================================================================
Contact Information:
Contact: Ms. Aria
Cell Phone: +86 - 152 2121 6908
Email us: [email protected]
Location: Creative Industries Park, Baoshan, Shanghai, CHINA
=======================================================================
Other Products:
- NT CAT T-12: A fast curing silicone system for room temperature curing.
- NT CAT UL1: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, medium catalytic activity, slightly lower activity than T-12.
- NT CAT UL22: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, higher activity than T-12, excellent hydrolysis resistance.
- NT CAT UL28: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, high activity in this series, often used as a replacement for T-12.
- NT CAT UL30: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, medium catalytic activity.
- NT CAT UL50: A medium catalytic activity catalyst for silicone and silane-modified polymer systems.
- NT CAT UL54: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, medium catalytic activity, good hydrolysis resistance.
- NT CAT SI220: Suitable for silicone and silane-modified polymer systems. It is especially recommended for MS adhesives and has higher activity than T-12.
- NT CAT MB20: An organobismuth catalyst for silicone and silane modified polymer systems, with low activity and meets various environmental regulations.
- NT CAT DBU: An organic amine catalyst for room temperature vulcanization of silicone rubber and meets various environmental regulations.