Please Note! This is our archived old board, it is “read only.”
To visit our current active discussion board click below.
https://www.replacement-windows.com/windowbb/
Author: | FenEx |
Subject: | Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 16:28:38 |
Very Interesting Article... hope you all enjoy.
http://www.usglassmag.com/Door_and_Window_Maker/Backissues/April-May-June02/fearfactor.htm
A few key notes:
"After ten weeks of high humidity testing for initial Argon fill and retention, Edgetech’s Super Spacer and TruSeal’s Swiggle maintained well over a 90 percent fill rate. However, the Intercept units started at an 88-percent fill rate and after ten weeks dropped to a 74-percent fill rate. The units were also subjected to ten weeks of P1 tests. All units dropped to under the 90-percent rate: Super Spacer hit a low of 82; Intercept 70; and Swiggle 58."
(In only 10 weeks???????? WOW!!!)
"Revolutionizing the Industry"
"TPS turned out to be a revolution for the industry. The non-metallic TPS spacer provides the highest degree of thermal insulation in the edge zone, resulting in an even temperature distribution across the entire window surface for the ultimate occupant comfort."
"Also of interest to the consumer, the TPS material ensures a gas retention rate that is significantly better than the industry standard of 1 percent loss per year. Incidentally, our gas-filling system, integrated in the assembly and press machine, achieves gas-fill levels consistently better than 97 percent. The life of the unit, based on scientific test results, is anywhere between 80 and 300 years. Additionally, the black spacer is to reflect the colors of the window frame on the glass, thereby making the spacer practically invisible."
"There are now approximately 30 TPS systems operating worldwide, making everyone wonder why insulating glass (IG) units were not made that way all along. Now that there are two TPS systems up and running for well over a year in the United States (one for residential and one for commercial applications) it is the right time to explore the concept and its ramifications in greater detail."
I love technology... it makes my job easier.
FenEx
Author: | Window4U (IL) |
In Reply To: | Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 17:55:51 |
WOW! Great story and post FenEx. I'm glad to finally see some comparitive data between the TPS seals
the Schuco window has and the other spacers on the US market. It would be interesting to find out just how each company stacks up, since human error is a factor.
BTW, As long as that article was, I thought maybe Oberon wrote it. LOL!
Author: | Oberon |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by Window4U (IL)) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 18:35:42 |
HEY!!! I resemble that remark!
Concurs with W4U, excellent article FenEx (despite the apparent dig!)...
Remember a few weeks back and we were debating spacers a bit? I had said Swiggle was at the bottom of my "top 5" list?
At the time I mentioned that I had some test results that made me change my mind about Intercept and Swiggle - with Intercept number 5 and Swiggle 4 (opposite my original thought).
The statistics in that article looked awfully familiar ;-)
A really excellent read...thanks!
Author: | FenEx |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by Window4U (IL)) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 18:44:06 |
I especially like the part where Edgetech (Super-Spacer)supported the testing and then condemned it because they failed. PPG just recently ran the same testing with independent engineers and Super-Spacer failed again. I'll be able to share that publication soon. Ironically, in PPG's testing, PPG Intercept passes as they admit gas leakage... so... they told the truth. TPS showed no gas leakage on 6 year old units tested. This is because TPS reconstitutes itself 24/7 when heated... it never hardens and dries out. I also like the part about the lawyers getting involved. So many bogus manufacturer claims state that their spacers don't fail because gas loss is not covered... it's soon to be history. They won't fog up because they are 40%-70% filled with dessicant... yet they can leak gas like crazy and still claim a good seal???
In the article it claims that a European company will be testing each and every unit at the end of the production line. Guess who it is? Of course... as you can see... the competition prefers to see this as unfair.
I'll keep you posted as all the new test results are released.
FenEx
Author: | RC |
In Reply To: | Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 18:55:46 |
Interesting article, thanks! Excuse my ignorance, but are any of the spacers mentioned (in the article)used by Cardinal? I know Pella asks Cardinal for IG, but they specify an aluminum spacer rather than stainless steel So, is the Pella IG inferior?
Author: | Oberon |
In Reply To: | Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 21:00:19 |
One quick comment, the 10 weeks is in an accelerated weathering environment.
I don't know the actual conditions of the test, but that 10 weeks could relate to a good many years (or not so many years)...but even in extremely poor conditions, it is extremely unlikely that the argon would disipate in so short a time without a major seal failure.
But, that doesn't negate the results of the testing.
Author: | Oberon |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by RC) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 21:06:38 |
Pella does use an aluminum spacer in some products.
I believe that they also use the XL Stainless Steel spacer in some applications also, but I am not certain of that.
Some people (*ducking*) tend to lump all metal spacers in the same category and think that metal spacers are all the same; they are not. Aluminum is vastly inferior to the stainless. The XL actually appears to perform very well in testing and in the real world.
Hopefully, the results of the same testing using other products will be available soon.
This is a great post!
Author: | windowmann2000 |
In Reply To: | Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 22:19:29 |
Hi Fen Ex, isn't one week in testing equal to a year?
Author: | windowmann2000 |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-16 22:22:14 |
Don't you ever die, I love your detailed post and documentation, keep up the good work. BTW you may go to the head of the class.
Author: | FenEx |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by windowmann2000) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 01:36:16 |
From everything I can see, this was not an accelerated test. As a matter of fact, part of what I love about the article is that the manufacturers actually conducted their own tests. This test simply measures the percentage of inert gas fill more accurately than the syringe method as it can test the entire unit. If you think about it, Argon is much heavier than air... so if they used to take a test sample from the bottom of the I.G. they were receiving a higher concentration of Argon. Also, the amount of fill tested was sooo small that even the slightest miscalculation would result in a significant error in accuracy. This testing method is also supposed to be able to predict accelerated aging and seal failure dates. How cool is that? A window with an expiration date like milk. You were the one that actually inspired me to keep digging for more research on spacer performance. Thank you sir.
Author: | FenEx |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by Oberon) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 01:46:56 |
Cardinal did do the testing as stated in the article... and confirmed it's accuracy. However, they did not reveal their results in the article. I'll stay on this one and share any info I receive. Funny thing is, I was searching the net for an antacid for gas relief, and stumbled upon this article by accident. OK... I'm kidding.
Author: | FenEx |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by windowmann2000) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 02:01:00 |
Thank you for the compliments. I knew you would find this post of particular interest as we have discussed it on many occasions. I think I'll stay in the back... I am already enough of a target for controversial issues... I don't want to give anyone a clear shot.
Author: | Windowtech |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 03:48:54 |
This WAS an accelerated test. The conditions were 140 degrees F. 100% RH and high intensity UV exposure. It is generally believed that one week in this test is the equivalent of a year in the field. The argon readings were taken with the Gas Glass device and the measurements were taken in the middle of the units.
Author: | Windowtech |
In Reply To: | Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 03:54:26 |
This was accelerated aging and the conditions simulated a year of field exposure for every week. Super Spacer also passes the DIN test and is also well below that test requirement of <1% loss per year. Unlike TPS, Super Spacer is a structural foamed "thermoset" polymer (not thermoplastic), so it has 100% resiliency while providing dimensional stability under a wide range of temperature conditions.
Author: | curious |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by Windowtech) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 04:46:26 |
Windowtech, Your "unlike TPS" comment sounds like you think your seal is superior to the TPS seals. Is that what you meant, and if so, how is it better and what has gone wrong with TPS seals that I should know about while we make decisions on windows? Your comments insinuate that TPS does not have resilancy and will dry out and fail or something. Is this true? I haven't heard anything bad about TPS, just good things so I am curious. The article sure praises TPS and makes it sound like it's the best one out of all of them.
Thanks in advance for your answer.
Author: | Guy |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by Oberon) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 06:29:54 |
"Holy bull in the china shop batman" You guys are way to smart for my blue collar world. I'll stick to making it work out in the field. My brain hurts from all this stuff. Thats why I put you guy's on the top of the list. I'll hang in the back getting the Dunce cap for shooting you guys in the back of the head with spit balls!!! Just Kidding. Great article FenX. Like I said before I learn from you guys everyday. I'm still thinking my post earlier on FenX, Oberon, Windows4U and myself hooking up and forming a window company would be one fun ass trip!!!! GiT R DoNe! You guys are my idols!! I bow to theee! Great Post!!
Guy
Author: | Windowtech |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 08:48:38 |
What testing did Super Spacer fail? When an IG unit made with Super Spacer is tested for argon gas leakage, it is the sealant used in conjunction with Super Spacer that is being truly evaluated as it is what is keeping the argon in the unit at the bond-line interface. Edgetech does not manufacture the sealants that are used in conjunction with their spacer, but does have a recommended list. If a butyl sealant is used in conjunction with Super Spacer and proper workmanship practices are followed, these units are capable of passing argon retention standards. Also, Super Spacer units do not have to "reconstitute" when heated as Super Spacer remains tough and resilient at all window operating temperatures, because, unlike TPS, it is comprised of THERMOSET POLYMERS, not thermoplastics, which soften and flow when subjected to higher operating temperatures. Super Spacer is tough, yet resilient, and when used with the proper moisture blocking and gas-retaining sealant, it makes the most durable and robust IG units in the world!
Author: | FenEx |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by Windowtech) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-17 12:51:22 |
No need to defend Super Spacer to me, I didn't write the article... I simply posted it. As I understand it, PPG Industries did similar testing on all available spacers and claim that Super Spacer failed. I haven't been able to find the test results publically available on the Net as of yet, but when I do, I'll post the link. I did just notice that the secondary testing was accelerated(P-1).
I agree with your post for the most part. (you stated):
"When an IG unit made with Super Spacer is tested for argon gas leakage, it is the sealant used in conjunction with Super Spacer that is being truly evaluated as it is what is keeping the argon in the unit at the bond-line interface. Edgetech does not manufacture the sealants that are used in conjunction with their spacer, but does have a recommended list. If a butyl sealant is used in conjunction with Super Spacer and proper workmanship practices are followed, these units are capable of passing argon retention standards."
"Super Spacer is tough, yet resilient, and when used with the proper moisture blocking and gas-retaining sealant,..."
That is quite a few "Ifs" and "Whens" don't you agree? I would assume that people desiring the claimed performance of Super Spacer would expect the assurance of getting what they pay for without having to research each and every manufacturer's TSS production methods. Why doesn't Edgetech insist on edge-deletion and a butyl secondary seal to protect their reputation and the people buying their products? Until they do... it's a crap shoot in my book.
Author: | Windowtech |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-21 16:32:28 |
Edgetech performs Quality Audits on every manufacturer using Super Spacer. Sealants used must be on Edgetech's recommended list. Most manufacturers use butyl although their are several polyurethane and polysulfides also on the list. I don't really need to defend Super Spacer- you can ask ANY manufacturer that uses it and they will tell you that failure rates are as close to ZERO as one can get. As far as edge deletion goes, one must follow the recommendations of their glass supplier- Super Spacer bonds equally well to all low-e soft coats as well as to bare glass.
Author: | FenNovice |
In Reply To: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing (posted by FenEx) |
Subject: | RE: Spacer Gas Retention Testing |
Posted At: | 2004-08-24 15:46:01 |
From your postings it looks like TPS and SuperSpacer are the best spacers.
I live in NJ and I think Schuco is available here, but I want to get some other quotes and most of your other recommended window manufacturers do not use SuperSpacer or are not available in NJ.
Please let me know 2 or 3 SuperSpacer window companies you recommend for NJ.
Also from your postings it seems that installation is as important as window, so please recommend an installer for Schuco and the SuperSpacer windows. I live in the Red Bank area of Southern Central NJ.