This year marks 13 years since Q-Bot was founded.
In that time, we’ve evolved from a concept to a company delivering thousands of underfloor insulation installations across the UK and Europe, developing robotic systems and building a digital platform to manage compliance properly.
One thing has remained constant throughout.
From day one, the decision was to use BASF closed cell foam.
That wasn’t a casual choice. It was based on peer-reviewed science, backed up by independent analysis. We didn’t just take manufacturer claims at face value, we validated it through external work with organisations like Enhabit, Greengauge, Leeds Beckett University, and others who assessed how these systems actually perform in real buildings, not just in theory.
That work focused on the fundamentals: heat, air movement, and moisture drive: the things that cause buildings to fail. In suspended timber floors, it’s uncontrolled air movement that carries moisture into the structure and creates risk at joist ends and cold spots. Closed cell foam consistently dealt with that properly, limiting air movement and moisture ingress, and giving a predictable result rather than a gamble. That gave us a starting point grounded in evidence, not marketing.
From there, everything else followed.
When we started, spray foam already had a reputation problem. Some of it deserved. There were too many unknowns, too much inconsistency, and too little accountability in how materials were being applied and recorded. If we were going to build a business around it, we needed to remove as much of that uncertainty as possible.
We didn’t choose the foam based on price, we chose it based on risk.
What stood out with BASF early on wasn’t just performance on paper, it was how predictable the material was in practice. In subfloor voids, no two properties are the same. Conditions vary constantly: temperature, moisture, access, geometry and small inconsistencies in material behaviour quickly turn into large problems on site. We needed something that behaved the same way, every time.
That consistency is what allowed us to move from manual installs to a controlled, repeatable, robotic process.
There’s also a hard, technical reality behind that choice. BASF’s system forms a closed cell, seamless insulation layer with strong thermal performance, moisture resistance, and durability. ed These are key minimum requirements for suspended floors to function properly over time.
But the most important reason we stayed with BASF goes deeper than performance.
Traceability.
Every batch of material is documented, with a Certificate of Analysis and a clear link back to production and delivery. That level of transparency is not standard across the industry. In many cases, once material reaches site, the audit trail effectively stops.
We built around that and over time, we developed SWARM, our platform for survey, installation, and quality assurance, to capture everything that happens on a project. Property data, installation workflows, images, video evidence, quality checks and reporting are all recorded and tied back to the specific material used.
Every installation can be traced in that way, from the material batch, through delivery, to how it was installed and verified on site.
That level of visibility is what allows us to meet the requirements of a 25-year Insurance Backed Guarantee. It gives insurers and accreditation bodies a clear line of sight over what was used, how it was applied, and whether it meets the required standard. Without that, long-term guarantees become difficult to stand over.
In our case, the guarantee is supported by evidence rather than assumption, and that comes directly from combining material traceability with a system that captures the full audit trail.
We’re not trying to retrofit compliance onto a process that wasn’t built for it. We’ve built the process around it from the start. That system only works if the supply chain supports it.
10 years working with Econ, our supply partner for BASF Elastospray.
The role of Econ has gone well beyond distribution. They have provided consistent support on application, material behaviour, and best practice, alongside structured training that has helped maintain installation standards over time.
They’ve also supported us through accreditation processes and insurance requirements, where clarity around materials, documentation, and performance is critical. That level of engagement has made a tangible difference, not just in how we install, but in how we demonstrate compliance and stand over the work long term.
In a market where poor practice and inconsistency have created real issues, that level of technical and commercial support in the supply chain is not something we take lightly. We have seen plenty of alternative products over the years. Some cheaper, some newer, some positioned as improvements, but changing material is not a simple switch. It introduces unknowns in performance, in installation, in compliance, and in long-term durability.
A proven retrofit system combining robotics, digital compliance and fully traceable installations.
We’ve already built:
- a repeatable installation method
- a robotic delivery system
- a digital compliance platform
- and a fully traceable installation history
All around a material that has proven itself over time.
After 13 years, the conclusion is straightforward.
We didn’t stay with BASF because it was the only option.
We stayed with it because it consistently reduces risk in how we install, how we prove what we’ve done, and how those installations perform over time, and in today’s retrofit market, that’s what matters most.