Author
Listed:
- Giorgio Baldinelli
(Department of Engineering, University of Perugia, 06123 Perugia, Italy)
- Francesco Asdrubali
(Department of International Human and Social Sciences, Perugia Foreigners’ University, 06122 Perugia, Italy)
- Chiara Chiatti
(Department of International Human and Social Sciences, Perugia Foreigners’ University, 06122 Perugia, Italy)
- Dante Maria Gandola
(Department of International Human and Social Sciences, Perugia Foreigners’ University, 06122 Perugia, Italy)
- Stefano Fantucci
(Department of Energy, Politecnico di Torino, 10129 Torino, Italy)
- Valentina Serra
(Department of Energy, Politecnico di Torino, 10129 Torino, Italy)
- Valeria Villamil Cárdenas
(Department of Energy, Politecnico di Torino, 10129 Torino, Italy)
- Giorgia Autretto
(Department of Energy, Politecnico di Torino, 10129 Torino, Italy)
- Rossella Cottone
(Department of Energy, Politecnico di Torino, 10129 Torino, Italy
Department of Materials Engineering and Physics, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, 811 07 Bratislava, Slovakia)
- Cristiano Turrioni
(Sezione di Perugia, Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, 06123 Perugia, Italy)
Abstract
Accurate thermal characterization of building insulation materials is essential for reliable energy performance assessment, regulatory compliance, and the development of high-performance envelopes. On one hand, the growing adoption of innovative insulating products, such as nanoporous materials, aerogel-based composites, bio-based panels, and thin insulating coatings, helps to enhance buildings’ energy efficiency by means of sustainable raw materials. On the other hand, conventional measurement techniques encounter significant challenges, due to their heterogeneity, reduced thickness, and unconventional geometries. In this study, an intra-laboratory comparison of three widely used methods for thermal conductivity determination is presented: the Transient Plane Source (TPS, Hot Disk) method, the Guarded Hot Plate (GHP) method, and the Heat Flow Meter (HFM) method. A total of twelve insulating materials, spanning super-insulating cores, insulating renders, bio-based panels, and nanocomposite coatings, were experimentally characterized under controlled laboratory conditions. A view on the analyzed insulating materials’ cradle-to-grave environmental impact is also given, to enhance the users’ awareness for the highly informed choice. The results highlight systematic differences between transient and steady-state approaches, with TPS measurements generally exhibiting larger deviations for materials characterized by surface roughness, limited thickness, or strong internal heterogeneity. In contrast, GHP and HFM methods show closer agreement when specimen geometry and stabilization requirements are satisfied. The influence of contact resistance, probing depth, specimen preparation, and uncertainty propagation is critically analyzed for each technique. The study provides practical insights into the applicability limits of commonly used thermal characterization methods and emphasizes the importance of selecting measurement techniques in relation to material morphology and testing constraints. These findings support more reliable thermal property assessment of emerging insulation materials and contribute to improved consistency between laboratory measurements and energy performance evaluations for buildings.
Suggested Citation
Giorgio Baldinelli & Francesco Asdrubali & Chiara Chiatti & Dante Maria Gandola & Stefano Fantucci & Valentina Serra & Valeria Villamil Cárdenas & Giorgia Autretto & Rossella Cottone & Cristiano Turri, 2026.
"Thermal Characterization of Innovative Insulating Materials Through Different Methods: An Intra-Laboratory Study,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-27, May.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:9:p:4474-:d:1934293
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:9:p:4474-:d:1934293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.