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: | Curious |
| Subject: | Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-09-30 19:18:24 |
What is the meaning of Dessicant? Just trying to learn the window lingo on the fabulous site. Thanks
| Author: | Window4U |
| In Reply To: | Dessicant (posted by Curious) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-09-30 19:36:50 |
It's a high tech "sponge" that sucks up moisture that leaks in between the glass panes in windows that don't have great seals like TPS.
| Author: | Dan |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Window4U) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-09-30 20:04:40 |
Window4U,
Check out this link the below link. At the end of the page it states the following:
The TPS material is a butyl-based formulation containing desiccants and ultraviolet ray inhibitors. It comes from a 55-gallon drum and is applied directly onto the glass by a computer-driven extrusion nozzle. The process is in-line—meaning no separate spacer fabrication and application is necessary.
FYI desicant is used in every insulated glass systems used today. The only system that did not used desicant was the welded insulated glass that some companies used in the early 70's.
Desicants primary purpose is to absorb the moisture trapped between the insulated glass while it is being manufactured. It is also use to absord moisture that could form on the glass due to temperature differences that could cause the inside of the glass to fog. This is much more complicated than I think I need to explain.
TSP is a great product. SuperSpacer is a great product. Try finding information of how TSP is manufactured on the internet vs Super Spacer. If it were really so great I would think there would be more than one window manufacturer in the US that would be using the product.
| Author: | dealer |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Dan) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-09-30 20:21:07 |
Thanks Dan for an excellent article and the observation on TSP. Only 1 window manufacturer? Just amazing what information is being kept from us by the TSP enthusiasts on this board.
| Author: | Window4U (IL) |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Dan) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-09-30 21:37:05 |
I know that article by heart Dan. I use it in my Schuco demo every day. (And by the way, Superspacer is a nice product too.)
Where I don't follow your logic is your premise that if it isn't widely used in the U.S. yet, it must not be that great.
Does the technology have to be "cloned" by the industry here in the United States to be superior? I just don't get your premise Dan. The world extends a lot further than our borders.
By the way, do you know where vinyl windows were first made, or where the bulk of the resulting technology came from?
And do you know where the vinyl fabricating machinery and technology for the windows made in the U.S. generally comes from? I'll give you a hint. It's not the U.S.
| Author: | Dan |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Window4U (IL)) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-01 00:47:00 |
I have seen the equipment to produce the TSP at the IGM conventions in the states in the past. What I have yet to see is ANY US manufacturer using that technology. Why is that?
By the way I have been to a half dozen window manufacturers in Germany and Austria and their windows are much more superior to the windows manufactured in the states. If I was using vinyl extrusions that are of similar thickness as the Europeans, the cost of the vinyl in my windows would probably increase by 300%. Yes, their windows probably have 3 times as much vinyl content as our windows. But by the same token, they get a choice of any window style as long as it is a tilt and turn window.
The European windows are designed to last 150+ years. The windows produced in our country are mostly designed to last 10 to 50 years.
One other thing, most window companies in the states manufacture their own glass. of the companies I saw, none made their own glass and all used regular dual seal glass with either aluminum or steel spacer.
By the way, most of my equipment was manufactured in Germany.
| Author: | Art |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Dan) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-01 01:09:23 |
Dan -
I'm just a homeowner and not a pro and I do have Schuco windows now.
I'm not being snide but it seems to me that with this post you've answered your own question as to why no US manufacturer uses the TPS spacer at this time. You state that European windows are made to last approximately 3 to 15 times longer than those made in the US - wouldn't the spacer be a part of that? If US made windows are only constructed to last an average of, say, 30 or 40 years why in the world would the manufacturer bother to put in a spacer system that lives far longer?
Have I missed something here?
| Author: | Bill |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Art) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-01 02:28:02 |
Yes, if you click on window spacers to the left of the screen on this site then click on super spacer you will see a study done in London that included TPS and it concluded that Super Spacer was the best in all catagories
| Author: | Bob E. |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Bill) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-01 02:42:43 |
Bill, did you notice that the story was an excerpt from Edgetech's Superspacer website?? What did you expect them to say? I'm sure every spacer brand touts theirs as the best on their own website, and I'm also sure they use whatever study or data will support their claims.
| Author: | Art |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Bill) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-01 02:50:56 |
I see what you mean. I do have to wonder though, exactly what the categories were since it also states that the "primary objective was the evaluation of the thermal conductivity of commercially available warm edge spacer systems." I'd also be willing to bet that TPS could come up with independent studies that show their product to be the best in all categories. My point is that we don't have info there for the estimated life or projected failure rate of the spacer. Now don't take me wrong - I have nothing at all against SuperSpacer. By all indications it is right at the top of the heap with TPS - I'm not knocking it at all. I was simply offering an answer to Dan about why it isn't currently used by more than one US manufacturer.
| Author: | Oberon |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by dealer) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-01 13:52:51 |
Great thread! This is the sort of professional debate that works well for this site.
It was a debate, but from my perspective it questioned preconceptions and processes and procedures and information and not the poster's ability to cross the street unassisted.
| Author: | FenEx |
| In Reply To: | Dessicant (posted by Curious) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-03 19:39:57 |
Sorry for the late entry... I was out of town for a few days. A dessicant's sole purpose is to absorb moisture where it is unwanted and potentially damaging to the surrounding product.
| Author: | FenEx |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Dan) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-03 20:33:56 |
Dan
In response:
Dessicant's are not bad, they are good... depending on how they are used and what they are protecting. In the case of TPS, the 3.9% is to absorb and possible contaminants. In the case of metal spacers that are filled with dessicant or Super Spacer's 40% by weight dessicant content, I'll ask you why first... Why? I'd like to hear the "complicated version" please... as per your, "This is much more complicated than I think I need to explain".
Next you said, "It is also use to absord moisture that could form on the glass due to temperature differences that could cause the inside of the glass to fog." I totally agree... except for the fact that the best seal systems virtually eliminate all the moisture and if they maintain the seal... it can't re-enter. Would you buy a boat Dan that had a hull filled with dessicant? Why not... it's a good thing right? In small quantities, it forgives possible production flaws, in large quantities, it only protects the manufacturer by not allowing the purchaser to "see visable obstruction (fog)", between the glass and call for replacement. In the mean time, the invisible infiltrating oxygen from the ambient air is not only replacing the insulating Argon or Krypton gas fill, but it is destroying the soft Low-E coatings.
Next point, Schuco brought the TPS system to the states just recently about 6 years ago. Did you expect Cardinal or PPG to throw out billions invested in other well established manufacturing equipment? What would the investors think? Your are incorrect about most making their own glass. The above mentioned 2, probably make the glass for 80-90% of the industry (Oberon can verify). BTW... there is a second using TPS for commercial applications in the U.S. already. The Lenhardt/Bystronic TPS line ain't cheap.
It appears you have a genuine interest in the fenestration industry... you might want to look into it a bit more before making generalizations about products that may lack name recognition in the states. What companies did you visit in Europe???... as TPS is used by the largest and most successful. Please share.
FenEx
| Author: | Windowtech |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Window4U) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-04 17:42:11 |
This statement makes no sense to me. The same type of compound is used to seal behind Super Spacer as is used in TPS - BUTYL. But Super Spacer includes a much higher desiccant loading. One major advantage to Super Spacer is that the compound doing spacer duty is a thermoset vs. TPS and Duraseal, where the compounds doing spacer duty are thermoplastics. Thermosets have far superior creep resistance at higher operating temperatures and loading conditions.
| Author: | Window4U |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Windowtech) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-04 18:22:18 |
My statement was the first one posted and was meant in a light-hearted and tongue in cheek way. I was in a peculiar mood when I posted it. My apologies for not taking the time to post a meaningful and accurate response to this question on the first try.
| Author: | FenEx |
| In Reply To: | RE: Dessicant (posted by Windowtech) |
| Subject: | RE: Dessicant |
| Posted At: | 2004-10-04 19:00:43 |
Had to jump in. In most circumstances the SS applicators use silicon secondaries... far less effective at gas retention than the two-part polysulfide used by TPS. The primary used by SS is an acrylic adhesive... NOT a sealant. Explain to me how a thermoset is better in this case? Yes, it can't be reconstituted by heat of 300 degrees or more... how many windows are subjected to that... none! What is your point? In varifiable P-1 testing, SS lost almost 20% of their gas fill in a 10 year simulation while TPS lost nothing in the same test over 15 years. In addition... TPS is consistant while the application of SS varies with every manufacturer that bought the SS system... subject to acceptance and application of the "suggested preferred methods from Edgetech".
Creep resistance of "what" at higher temperatures and at what temperatures???? I appreciate your passion for the industry as I share it... but while your statement's of SS superiority may apply to other spacer systems... they don't to TPS. SS... in the best case application scenario, is second... that is a compliment.
Windowtech, we have shared these views in past. SS will obtain (and has) their share of the performance market... but that doesn't make them "The Best".