{"id":7239,"date":"2006-11-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-11-01T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/"},"modified":"2017-06-09T20:21:09","modified_gmt":"2017-06-09T20:21:09","slug":"an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations","status":"publish","type":"articles","link":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/","title":{"rendered":"An Industry  Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Corrosion under insulation (CUI) is the corrosion found  under thermal insulation and fireproofing materials. It most commonly results  in metal loss, rusting (see Photo 1), or cracking of the insulated components  (see Photo 2). It can foul bolt threads, lock critical valve stems, crack  instrument tubing, and otherwise interfere with routine plant operations. CUI  results in major equipment outages, production losses, and unexpected  maintenance costs in refineries and chemical processing plants.<\/p>\n<p>While CUI has occurred as long as hot and cold equipment has  been insulated, it was not discussed in scientific journals until the 1950s,  and the extent of this damaging corrosion problem was not widely recognized and  seriously examined until the 1980s.<\/p>\n<p>The National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE  International), the American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM), and the  Materials Technology Institute (MTI) held a joint symposium on this subject,  with speakers from industries worldwide. There was an open discussion on such  CUI topics as corrosion mechanisms, methods for mitigation, insulation  materials, and inspection. Comparing the various approaches, it was evident  that there were many similarities. Most of the attention up to that time had  been on bettering the individual components that make up an insulated system.  For example, paint manufacturers were concerned with the best paint to apply  under the insulation, insulation manufacturers were discussing the merits of  cellular glass versus calcium silicate, insulators were concerned about vapor  barriers and aluminum versus stainless steel jacketing, and plant inspectors  were looking for cost-effective methods to find CUI.<\/p>\n<p>Members of NACE International eventually developed a  consensus document to recommend current technology and industry practices for  mitigating CUI. Industry representatives on the committee charged with  developing the document were from firms producing, specifying, designing, and  using thermal insulation and fireproofing products on refinery and  petrochemical equipment and piping. The result was the NACE Recommended  Practice RP0198-98, &ldquo;The Control of Corrosion Under Thermal Insulation and  Fireproofing Materials&mdash;A Systems Approach.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>Although most attention has been focused on corrosion under  thermal insulation, fireproofing materials also function&mdash;at least in part&mdash;as  insulation applied between the critical steel structure and a potential fire. A  discussion of corrosion mechanisms, the root cause of failure, and corrosion  prevention was considered to be the same for corrosion under both insulation  and fireproofing in RP0198-98.<\/p>\n<p>The document includes the following six sections:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Section 1&mdash;a general introduction to the  scope of the problem<\/li>\n<li>Section 2&mdash;an explanation of the CUI  corrosion mechanisms<\/li>\n<li>Section 3&mdash;examples of mechanical design for  water-shedding insulation systems<\/li>\n<li>Section 4&mdash;a discussion of protective  coatings for the insulated components<\/li>\n<li>Section 5&mdash;information on insulation and  fireproofing materials<\/li>\n<li>Section 6&mdash;recommended inspection and  maintenance practices<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>Along with a brief introduction to CUI, Section 1 provides  background on past technical approaches to solving the problem.<\/p>\n<p>In its detailed discussion of CUI corrosion mechanisms,  Section 2 addresses the two main alloy families affected by CUI: carbon steels  and austenitic stainless steels.<\/p>\n<p>Carbon steels corrode, and stainless steels crack&mdash;not  because they are insulated, but because they are contacted by aerated water.  The role of insulation in the CUI problem is threefold. Insulation provides: 1)  an annular space or crevice for the retention of water and other corrosive  media; 2) a material that may wick or absorb water; and 3) a material that may  contribute contaminants that increase or accelerate the corrosion rate.<\/p>\n<p>The corrosion rate of carbon steel and the likelihood of  stainless steel cracking vary because they are controlled largely by the  temperature of the metal surface and the contaminants present in the water.<\/p>\n<h5>Effects and Sources of Water and Contaminants<\/h5>\n<p>Given that it is virtually impossible to exclude water from  an insulated system, temperatures&rsquo; effects play the major role in determining  the extent of the corrosion. Figure 3 describes the corrosivity of water in the  CUI temperature range.<\/p>\n<p>Inspection of equipment has shown that carbon steel  operating in the temperature range of 4&deg;C (25&deg;F) to 150&deg;C (300&deg;F) is at the  greatest risk of CUI. Equipment that operates continuously below -4&deg;C (25&deg;F)  usually remains free of corrosion, and corrosion of equipment operating above  150&deg;C (300&deg;F) is reduced. However, corrosion often occurs at those points of  water entry into the insulation system where the temperature is below 150&deg;C  (300&deg;F), at the ice-to-wet transition zones, in equipment in cyclical services,  and when the equipment is idle.<\/p>\n<p>As for austenitic stainless steels, the NACE document notes  that external stress corrosion cracking (ESCC) &ldquo;occurs in austenitic stainless  steel piping and process equipment when chlorides or other halides in the  environment or insulation material are transported in the presence of water to  the hot surface of stainless steel and are then concentrated by evaporation of  that water. This most commonly occurs beneath thermal insulation, but the  presence of insulation is not a requirement. Thermal insulation primarily  provides a medium to hold and transport the water with its chlorides to the  metal surface.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>Like carbon steel, the temperature range at which ESCC of  stainless steels is most likely to occur is not firmly established, but it is  generally accepted to be 50&deg; to 150&deg;C (120&deg; to 300&deg;F). Failures are less frequent  when metal temperature is outside this range. Below 50&deg;C (120&deg;F), the reaction  rate is low. Above 150&deg;C (300&deg;F), water is not normally present on the metal  surface and failures are infrequent. However, equipment that cycles through the  water dew point is particularly susceptible.<\/p>\n<h5>Mechanical Design of the Insulation System<\/h5>\n<p>A poorly designed or installed insulation system, or one  with penetrations through the insulation, permits water intrusion into the  system. Water also enters the system when vapor barriers, weather barriers,  mastics, and sealing caulked joints break down over time.<\/p>\n<p>The life of insulated systems can be significantly extended  by better design to limit protrusions, attachments, and supports associated  with vessels <br \/>\n  and piping.<\/p>\n<p>The mechanical design section of the NACE document discusses  specification requirements and common specification flaws to be avoided, such  as incorrect application of materials, product specification that does not  state the properties required, and improper or unclear application methods. The  section also discusses the key components of a properly designed insulation  system. Drawings are provided to illustrate design do&rsquo;s and don&rsquo;ts.<\/p>\n<p>The NACE document then covers how to select protective  coatings for carbon steel and austenitic stainless steel. Attempts to prevent  water from entering insulated systems though rigorous application of mechanical  design principles have not been successful; and corrosion-protection  techniques, such as inhibitors and cathodic protection, have been less  effective than protective coatings in mitigating CUI. Protective coatings have  been recognized and accepted as a highly effective method of protecting  insulated metallic substrates from corrosion.<\/p>\n<p>Thus, the consensus is that the basic solution for CUI  prevention is the use of a high-quality protective coating. The committee  recommends that whenever CUI is a consideration, a protective coating should be  employed to protect the equipment before it is insulated. What coating system is  most appropriate for protecting the metallic substrate depends on whether  carbon steel or stainless steel is being insulated, and on the temperature  range of the metal.<\/p>\n<p>Four protective coating systems are listed for austenitic  stainless steels. High-build epoxy is recommended for applications in the  temperature range of -50&deg; to 140&deg;F. For high-temperature applications to 700&deg;F,  modified silicone coatings are recommended. In addition to the coatings,  heavy-gauge, aluminum-foil wrapping has been successfully used to prevent ESCC.<\/p>\n<p>With carbon steels, tank lining systems formulated to  prevent corrosion are typically recommended for use on steel operating below  150&deg;C (300&deg;F) under thermal insulation. Additional coating systems are  recommended for higher operating temperatures. In all, 11 traditional coating  systems and a thermally sprayed aluminum coating are recommended in the  document.<\/p>\n<h5>The Full Range of Factors That Affect An Insulating System<\/h5>\n<p>&ldquo;Users who steam-purge lines shall select a coating capable  of withstanding the surface temperature for the duration of the purging. The  coating manufacturer should be consulted for specific temperature-resistance  information,&rdquo; the NACE document states.<\/p>\n<p>Another warning concerns inorganic zinc: &ldquo;Inorganic zinc  coatings or galvanizing shall not be used under thermal insulation in the  50&deg;-to-150&deg;C (120&deg;-to-300&deg;F) service temperature range for long-term or cyclic  service. Zinc provides inadequate corrosion resistance in closed, sometimes wet  environments.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>Section 5 of the NACE document covers insulation,  fireproofing, and accessory materials. It describes the properties of  industrial insulation, accessories for insulation, and fireproofing materials  that affect corrosion. The emphasis of this section is on service performance  at specific operating temperatures and the system&rsquo;s ability to exclude water  over the life of the system.<\/p>\n<p>The insulation materials covered in this section include the  following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Calcium  silicate<\/li>\n<li>Expanded  perlite<\/li>\n<li>Man-made  mineral fibers<\/li>\n<li>Cellular  glass<\/li>\n<li>Organic  foams<\/li>\n<li>Ceramic  fiber<\/li>\n<li>Historical  materials<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The section addresses ASTM qualification tests for  insulation that is used over stainless steel materials and chlorine content  test methods.<\/p>\n<p>Insulation accessory materials include components used to  fabricate insulation materials into shapes that fit pipes and equipment, as  well as those used to apply the shapes, provide weatherproofing, and seal  projections through the insulation system.<\/p>\n<p>In the long term, weather and vapor barriers break down or  are damaged to the point that they can no longer keep the insulation dry. So  maintenance and inspection of weatherproofing are essential to ensure the  integrity of the insulation and fireproofing system. Section 6 addresses  inspection and maintenance issues, and presents a checklist of inspection  details for new construction.<\/p>\n<p>Insulation on process equipment creates a significant  barrier to inspection to detect and assess CUI. Removing all insulation on  susceptible equipment is the only way to find all areas affected by corrosion.  But this is expensive and may not be practical or allowed for operating  equipment. Removing insulation may adversely affect operating conditions.<\/p>\n<p>The section also discusses methods for developing a  cost-effective inspection program to mitigate CUI. Factors to be used in  determining at-risk equipment include the following:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Age of the  equipment<\/li>\n<li>Type of  protective coating on the metal under the insulation<\/li>\n<li>Equipment  location<\/li>\n<li>Operating  temperature<\/li>\n<li>Construction  materials<\/li>\n<li>Consequences  of a leak<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Once the high-risk equipment has been identified and an  inspection work plan developed, trained inspectors should conduct a visual  examination following the key indicators for CUI listed in this section of the  NACE document. Additional nondestructive examination techniques to enhance, but  not replace, the visual inspection also are listed.<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that a systems approach to controlling CUI is  necessary. With the use of modern coatings technology, selection of appropriate  insulation materials, and good installation practices, it is reasonable to  expect cost-effective insulated piping and equipment to provide 20 to 30 years  of reliable performance.<\/p>\n<div id=\"images\">\n<div class=\"figure\"><a href=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg\"\/><\/a><b>Figure 1<\/b><\/p>\n<p class=\"figure-caption\">Photo 1<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"figure\"><a href=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_02.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_02.jpg\"\/><\/a><b>Figure 2<\/b><\/p>\n<p class=\"figure-caption\">Photo 2<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"figure\"><a href=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_03.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_03.jpg\"\/><\/a><b>Figure 3<\/b><\/p>\n<p class=\"figure-caption\">Figure 3<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Corrosion under insulation (CUI) is the corrosion found under thermal insulation and fireproofing materials. It most commonly results in metal loss, rusting (see Photo 1), or cracking of the insulated components (see Photo 2). It can foul bolt threads, lock critical valve stems, crack instrument tubing, and otherwise interfere with routine plant operations. CUI results<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":[154],"featured_media":0,"template":"","categories":[38,34,26,291],"class_list":["post-7239","articles","type-articles","status-publish","hentry","category-material-selection","category-industrial","category-corrosion","category-association-news","author-isaac-murry-funderburg"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v24.0 (Yoast SEO v24.6) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations - Insulation Outlook Magazine<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Corrosion under insulation (CUI) is the corrosion found under thermal insulation and fireproofing materials. It most commonly results in metal loss, rusting (see Photo 1), or cracking of the insulated components (see Photo 2). It can foul bolt threads, lock critical valve stems, crack instrument tubing, and otherwise interfere with routine plant operations. CUI results\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Insulation Outlook Magazine\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-06-09T20:21:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/\",\"name\":\"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations - Insulation Outlook Magazine\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-01T00:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-06-09T20:21:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/\",\"name\":\"Insulation Outlook Magazine\",\"description\":\"The only global magazine dedicated to insulation.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#organization\",\"name\":\"National Insulation Association\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2016\/10\/insulation-outlook-logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2016\/10\/insulation-outlook-logo.png\",\"width\":229,\"height\":90,\"caption\":\"National Insulation Association\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations - Insulation Outlook Magazine","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations","og_description":"Corrosion under insulation (CUI) is the corrosion found under thermal insulation and fireproofing materials. It most commonly results in metal loss, rusting (see Photo 1), or cracking of the insulated components (see Photo 2). It can foul bolt threads, lock critical valve stems, crack instrument tubing, and otherwise interfere with routine plant operations. CUI results","og_url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/","og_site_name":"Insulation Outlook Magazine","article_modified_time":"2017-06-09T20:21:09+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/","url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/","name":"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations - Insulation Outlook Magazine","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg","datePublished":"2006-11-01T00:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-06-09T20:21:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/06\/IO061102_01.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/articles\/an-industry-perspective-revisiting-recommendations\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"An Industry Perspective: Revisiting Recommendations"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#website","url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/","name":"Insulation Outlook Magazine","description":"The only global magazine dedicated to insulation.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#organization","name":"National Insulation Association","url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2016\/10\/insulation-outlook-logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2016\/10\/insulation-outlook-logo.png","width":229,"height":90,"caption":"National Insulation Association"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles\/7239","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/articles"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/articles"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7239"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7239"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/insulation.org\/io\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/author?post=7239"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}