Archive through March 19, 2018

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message David J. Wyatt, CDT Senior Member Username: david_j_wyatt_cdt Post Number: 149 Registered: 03-2011 Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 07:55 am:    As I get older, I find it is best to check facts and opinions with my peers. I have long held the following notions: - HDPE is durable, less expensive than phenolic, but the colors are on the dull side. - Phenolic, on the other hand is more expensive than HDPE, has much wider color selection, but may not hold up as well in a public environment. - Screw retention on both is about equal. Are these notions still true? Thank you for any advice you can offer. Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 69 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 10:25 am:    I recently was asking myself the same questions ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1001 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 11:08 am:    My understanding is that HDPE is easy to damage as in mechanically carving into the surface. Phenolic not so much. Both suffer at the hands of Sharpies. I would expect both to stand up better than porcelain coated metal, stainless steel, and plastic laminate faced partitions. There are some interesting HDPE type partitions made from recycled plastic products that impart a very entertaining, colorful look. Very appropriate for libraries, kid venues, fun places. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 182 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 12:44 pm:    A question about overhead-supported toilet partition pilasters. I have a bank of 4 toilets with hard walls enclosing the bank on the sides. I can't install overhead structural supports, so am thinking about installing a beam between the side walls and supporting the pilasters from that. Have you ever seen or done this? Does any manufacturer offer this as an option? Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 903 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 02:42 pm:    The phenolic panels can be best thought of as really thick plastic laminate that has the finish laminate on both sides. This generally leaves a dark core. When carved on with a sharp object, the dark phenolic material shows through. There are exceptions to this, but it generally the case. J. Peter Jordan, FCSI, AIA, CCS, LEED AP, SCIP Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 552 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, July 26, 2016 - 02:49 pm:    With HPDE you need to confirm with the manufacturer that the color and texture you want is available with the combustibility rating you need. Your selected manufacturer's dozens of colors available in many textures may really only be 3 or 4 colors in one texture if you need to meet NFPA 286. This information can be hard to find or omitted entirely on the manufacture's website, model specs, binders and brochures. Edward J Dueppen, RA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Senior Member Username: edueppen Post Number: 25 Registered: 08-2013 Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - 09:22 am:    As with many product selections, compromise is involved. I had a university housing client who really liked HDPE and used it on many projects. But on a new dormitory we went with solid color phenolic (solid color all of the way through). Doing the old key scratch test (there should be an ASTM for this) I was impressed at the difference: HDPE gouges easily, meanwhile I was afraid of dulling my key on the phenolic. And as I recall the phenolic, with the right cleaner, was able to remove permanent markers fairly easily. Some drawbacks to the solid color phenolic were cost and a mild degree of brittleness. The latter was witnessed when the installer tried to drive screws in without pre-drilling the holes. This could be remedied also by using throughbolts. As for general durability, when I saw the phenolic partitions during my one year POE walk-through they still looked as good as the day I did my punch list. I recommend getting some samples and performing your own in-house durability testing. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 184 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - 01:02 pm:    Has anyone tried quartz surfacing (Ceasarstone, Silestone, Zodiac, etc) for toilet partitions. Very scratch and stain resistant. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Wayne Yancey Senior Member Username: wayne_yancey Post Number: 785 Registered: 01-2008 Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - 01:10 pm:    None of those but I have specified DuPont Corian toilet compartments. Ronald J. Ray, RA, CCS, CCCA, CSI, AIA Senior Member Username: rjray Post Number: 144 Registered: 04-2004 Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - 03:35 pm:    My understanding is that the surface of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) is not as durable as phenolic, but is around 8 percent less expensive. Both come with the same industry wide warranty (15 years against something happening) Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: michael_chusid Post Number: 185 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - 04:01 pm:    You are correct about polyethylene being easier to scratch than phenolic. However, about 93 percent of a quartz surfacing product is quartz, #7 on the Mohs scale (10 being the hardest). When I wrote about quartz surfacing for Construction Specifier, I hired a lab to do a mohs test, and did my own version of the key test. Neither the lab nor I could detect any scratches. The areas of poly are too small to display scratches. I think it would be a great material for toilet partitions, but have not seen it used for that purpose. Michael Chusid, RA FCSI CCS www.chusid.com www.buildingproduct.guru 818-219-4937 Paul Sweet (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Friday, July 29, 2016 - 12:29 pm:    Quartz is probably too pricey for most uses nowadays. I remember when marble was used for toilet partitions in college & institutional buildings. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1491 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, July 29, 2016 - 02:22 pm:    I have created a comparison matrix of all the toilet partition type materials. I would be happy to share it with the group if you give me comments on your experiences. Please email me at david@axtconsulting.com David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC anon (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Friday, July 29, 2016 - 02:47 pm:    Dave, Can you post this info on your Product Reps search website? Then we can all get access to it, might generate more traffic to your site as well! Elias Saltz, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Senior Member Username: elias_saltz Post Number: 17 Registered: 03-2009 Posted on Friday, July 29, 2016 - 03:27 pm:    I'd be interested in seeing the matrix as well. I find myself getting mixed up, particularly about the different plastic partition materials. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1492 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, July 29, 2016 - 03:54 pm:    Anon, Good idea! I posted my toilet partition comparison matrix to Local Product Reps website. www.localproductreps.com Please email any corrections that you might have. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1493 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Friday, July 29, 2016 - 05:53 pm:    I specify a lot of school projects and my number one choice for toilet partitions is solid phenolic core. Solid phenolic is an extremely durable partition with the added advantage of the capability of using many plastic laminates as decorative facing. I do not specify metal or plastic laminate (with particle board core). Some school districts prefer solid plastic but those partitions come in only a few color choices. Remember that solid plastic is recycled milk jugs and they will burn but are self extinguishing. For this reason I specify an aluminum strip at the bottom of the partition. As far as mounting goes, I specify overhead braced and floor to ceiling urinal screens. The overhead bar is aluminum with a rather sharp edge to prevent kids from hanging on it. The problem with floor to ceiling braced is that on tall floor to ceiling heights the partitions get wobbly. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1002 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Saturday, July 30, 2016 - 12:29 pm:    David, thank you for posting that. Very thorough and useful. J. Peter Jordan Senior Member Username: jpjordan Post Number: 905 Registered: 05-2004 Posted on Saturday, July 30, 2016 - 01:16 pm:    What is missing from David's otherwise very useful matrix is stainless steel partitions with solid core. The core is usually "marine" plywood. These are heavy, expensive, and virtually indestructible. I have specified these for applications at airports and USMC bases. J. Peter Jordan, FCSI, AIA, CCS, LEED AP, SCIP John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1682 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, August 01, 2016 - 03:31 pm:    HDPE can be damaged by flame as well. Of course, the biggest cause of failure (as anyone who's ever used a public restroom can attest) is the failure to use decent hardware - and especially fasteners - to mount the things to the wall. Dewayne Dean Senior Member Username: ddean Post Number: 71 Registered: 02-2016 Posted on Monday, August 01, 2016 - 04:36 pm:    I am always dismayed at the tiny little brackets on urinal screens. They have no hope of lasting. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1494 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Tuesday, August 02, 2016 - 12:41 pm:    Thanks Peter! I had not idea that those stainless solid core partitions existed. John and Dewayne, I agree with you and never specify Zamac (pot metal) hardware. It is just not durable enough. I specify stainless steel heavy duty hardware and full length bracket channels. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1685 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Tuesday, August 02, 2016 - 01:57 pm:    And number of fasteners! and into structure! Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 684 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Friday, March 16, 2018 - 11:50 pm:    RE: NFPA 286 & HDPE toilet partitions. Has anyone seen the Settlement between Bobrick & Scranton Products that came out on Monday? It was brought to my attention by one of my reps. It was the result of a lawsuit between Bobrick & Scranton (Scranton lost)and is apparently prohibited from shipping any HDPE material that hasn't been tested per NFPA 286. This only affects toilet partitions. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 1008 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Sunday, March 18, 2018 - 08:30 am:    http://info.bobrick.com/settlement Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 341 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, March 19, 2018 - 10:28 am:    Okay, it's first thing Monday morning, and I actually read the 119 page settlement agreement. In summary, Scranton agrees to have Intertek test their HPDE for NFPS 286 compliance. Until they have proved compliance, Scranton will send a customer letter to everyone who orders their product, reminding them that it is NOT NFPA 286 compliant. What the settlement agreement doesn't say, is what will Scranton do about all the HPDE toilet partitions already installed that do not meet NFPA 286? There is nothing about this lawsuit on the Scranton website, their parent company CPG International, or their parent company's new name The Azek Company. - Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP, EDAC Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 640 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Monday, March 19, 2018 - 12:23 pm:    I posted here back in 2016 after one of our projects got bit by this issue without really knowing why. We had selected a color and texture for Scranton HDPE partitions using available Scranton literature. Only when we received the submittal during CA did we learn from the submitter that only a couple of their color/texture combinations "passed" NFPA 286. This limitation could not be found in the literature available to us but was confirmed in a phone conversation with the manufacturer. The submitter also noted that both Scranton and Lamtech both used HPDE color/texture panels manufactured by a third party, Vycom Industriies. Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 343 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Monday, March 19, 2018 - 12:55 pm:    Vycom is owned by the parent company of Scranton. Robert E. Woodburn, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 195 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Monday, March 19, 2018 - 01:35 pm:    David, your posting of the comparison chart did indeed draw me to your site. The chart is very helpful. Thank you! But I was confused by the apparent description of SCRC as "Solid through color phenolic," which I had understood to be a subset of Phenolic (where the core and facings are all through-color laminate). Is this conflating two different types? Or is my understanding wrong? So I Googled SCRC and found this from a distributor (PartitionPlus): "Solid Color Reinforced Composite is a dyed fibrous material that is reinforced with polycarbonate and phenolic resins coated with a non-ghosting, graffiti-resistant surface thermoset and integrally fused into a homogeneous piece"--which matched my recollection that it was more like Trex and other resin-wood fiber composites. Granted, phenolic has a fiber base (resin-impregnated Kraft paper, or perhaps white or colored paper for the through-color products), but isn't it essentially still a laminated product? Robert E. Woodburn, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bob_woodburn Post Number: 196 Registered: 11-2010 Posted on Monday, March 19, 2018 - 01:52 pm:    (I meant phenolic is made up entirely of laminated material, and didn't mean to seem to confuse it with "Plastic Laminate Clad.") Solid phenolic is essentially monolithic; its surface doesn't delaminate. Is its core unlaminated solid phenolic resin? And I wasn't aware that SCRC, coated with "a non-ghosting, graffiti-resistant surface" integrally fused to its core, is not exactly the monolithic material I had imagined it to be.