Coatings Comparison
Cool Touch delivers personnel-burn protection and CUI elimination at a fraction of aerogel's material cost, but silica aerogel blankets remain the honest thermal-resistance leader at k 0.015–0.030 W/m·K when heat-loss economics justify the premium.
Silica aerogel blankets are the best conductor-stopper commercially available: nanoporous silica suppresses conduction to 0.015–0.024 W/m·K at ambient (rising to roughly 0.025–0.035 at industrial service temperatures), delivering mineral-wool-class R-values in a quarter of the thickness. They serve from cryogenic to 1,200°F in their respective grades, and their hydrophobic batting gives the best CUI story among wrap-on systems.
That performance is also the catch. Aerogel runs $8–50/ft² in materials — several times above coating costs — plus jacketing, plus cutting labor that multiplies on complex geometry, plus fragility that punishes high-traffic placement, plus the same shutdown logistics as conventional insulation. Cool Touch (Insulative Coat) attacks the same comfort-and-safety outcomes with film physics: ICP™-suppressed conduction (~0.05 W/m·K) plus 0.88–0.95 emissivity that radiates absorbed heat off the surface.
For specifiers, the choice is mission-driven. Where the job is touch-safety and corrosion-under-insulation control across a unit's 150–350°F balance of plant, Cool Touch is validated where it counts (TM21423: 41 mils holding a 239°F substrate to a 118°F touch surface), water-resistant with Rating-0 corrosion results, sprayed onto live equipment to 200°F, conformal to any geometry, and repairable with a roller. Where the economics are energy-loss driven — long steam runs, high differential temperatures, sub-ambient service, clearance-critical racks — aerogel earns its premium. The sections below cover both honestly.
Best for
Best for
| Attribute | Cool Touch (NanoTech) | Silica Aerogel Blankets |
|---|---|---|
| k-value | ~0.05 W/m·K film | 0.015–0.024 ambient; ~0.025–0.035 at 300°F service — genuinely best-in-class |
| Form | Spray/brush/roll liquid film | Flexible fiber-batting blanket, cut and wrapped |
| Personnel protection (TM21423-validated) | 41 mils held a 239°F substrate to a 118°F surface (single coat) | ~0.5–1.5 inch wrap + jacketing |
| Material cost | Mid-market coating | $8–50/ft² — several times coating material cost |
| Install on live equipment | Yes, surfaces to 200°F | Generally shutdown work |
| CUI behavior | Eliminated by design — seamless water-resistant film, Rating 0 corrosion tests | Hydrophobic batting — genuinely good CUI story (the category's best among wraps) |
| Mechanical durability | Elastomeric, abrasion-tolerant, repaint-repairable | Fragile; damages in high-traffic zones; silica dust on cutting |
| Geometry | Conforms seamlessly to anything | Cut-fit-seam at every fitting; labor multiplies with complexity |
| Inspectability | Substrate visible | Wrapped and jacketed — hidden steel |
| Temperature range | To 350°F substrate (hot side) | To 1,200°F (high-temp grades); cryogenic versions to -200°C |
| Standards | NACE/AMPP TM21423, ISO 9227/6270-1/12944 | ASTM C1728, NACE SP0198 |
k-value: Aerogel thermal conductivity per manufacturer datasheets (e.g. Aspen Pyrogel XTE), which show k near 0.014 W/m·K at low temperature rising with mean service temperature.
Material cost: Per-ft² figures reflect published distributor and direct-sale pricing for industrial silica-aerogel blankets (e.g. Aspen Pyrogel XTE / Spaceloft grades); installed cost adds jacketing and labor on top.
Temperature range: Grade ranges per manufacturer datasheets (Pyrogel XTE to 1,200°F/649°C; Cryogel Z to -200°C); ASTM C1728 spans -196°C to 649°C.
Standards: ASTM C1728 is the Standard Specification for Flexible Aerogel Insulation; NACE/AMPP SP0198 is the standard practice for control of corrosion under thermal insulation.
Both solve touch-safety; one solves it for a fraction of the spend. Aerogel's $8–50/ft² materials (plus jacketing, plus shutdown) buy thermal performance the burn-safety mission doesn't need — TM21423 validates Cool Touch touch-safe in a single 41-mil coat. Spend the difference on more linear feet.
With conductivity well below any coating — the gap widest at ambient and still meaningful at industrial service temperatures — aerogel is the honest king of heat retention per inch. When the project economics are energy-loss driven — long steam runs, high differential temperatures, costly process heat — premium blanket systems pay their way.
Blanket installation around operating equipment is slow, awkward, and usually deferred to turnaround. Cool Touch's mist-coat application on surfaces to 200°F closes the safety finding now.
Aerogel built its reputation in tight racks (half-inch wraps replacing three-inch wool). But if the line's need is touch-safety rather than heat retention, an 80-mil film is thinner still. Clearance favors both over conventional bulk; mission picks between them.
Aerogel blankets are famously fragile — scuffing sheds performance and silica dust, and damaged sections mean re-wrap. An elastomeric film takes the traffic and repairs with a brush.
Below-ambient is blanket-and-block territory; cryogenic aerogel grades run to -200°C. Cool Touch's lane is hot-side personnel protection and CUI elimination — we don't pretend otherwise.
Aerogel is the best conductor-stopper commercially available, and no honest coating company disputes it: nanoporous silica suppresses conduction to 0.015–0.024 W/m·K at ambient (rising to roughly 0.025–0.035 at industrial service temperatures — still comfortably ahead of every alternative). It delivers mineral-wool-class R-values in a quarter of the thickness, serves from cryogenic to 1,200°F in its respective grades, and its hydrophobic batting gives it the best CUI story among wrap-on systems. For energy-conservation economics, congested racks, and extreme temperature service, aerogel earns its premium.
That premium is the catch: $8–50/ft² in materials — several times above coating costs — plus jacketing, plus cutting labor that multiplies on complex geometry, plus fragility that punishes high-traffic placement, plus (in most practice) the same shutdown logistics as conventional insulation. Buying aerogel for a touch-safety problem is buying a race car to fetch groceries.
Aerogel blankets suppress conduction with nanostructure: pores smaller than air's mean free path strangle gas-phase heat transfer through a flexible batting. It is bulk insulation perfected — and priced like it, installed like it (cut, wrap, seam, jacket), and inspected like it (steel hidden until unwrapped).
Cool Touch attacks the same comfort-and-safety outcomes with film physics: ICP™-suppressed conduction (~0.05 W/m·K) plus 0.88–0.95 emissivity that radiates absorbed heat off the surface — a vector bulk insulation doesn't use. The result is validated where it counts (TM21423: 41 mils holding a 239°F substrate to a 118°F touch surface), water-resistant with Rating-0 corrosion results, applied by spray to live equipment, conformal to any geometry, and repairable with a roller. Aerogel optimizes thermal resistance; Cool Touch optimizes the mission most plants actually have — safe surfaces, dry steel, zero downtime — at a price that scales across the whole unit.
Full product spec, test data, application surfaces, and downloadable Technical Manual / TDS / SDS for the Insulative Coat (Cool Touch) system.
How a seamless insulative film compares to the conventional mineral-wool-plus-jacketing approach on cost, CUI, and inspectability.
How the ICP™ platform compares to older ceramic-microsphere thermal barrier chemistry on applied thickness, application time, and installed cost.
How Cool Touch compares to rigid cellular-glass insulation for personnel protection and corrosion-under-insulation control.
Send service temperatures, geometry, and what the project is actually solving for — safety, energy, or integrity. We'll show you where Cool Touch wins, and where the premium blanket genuinely earns its price.
