RB wrote:



J. Clarke wrote:
Unisaw A100 wrote:


Meaningless statement. Says you have no experience, no test results, no
theory, nothing to suggest that there might be a problem, all that you
know is that DuPont told you one way to do a job and so to your way of
thinking that is the only possible way to do it.


Wow! How do you breath with your pants so bunched up J.?


Coming from someone who is arguing engineering on the basis of religious
faith (There is only One Good, Right, and True DuPont Way and all other
paths lead to damnation) that's a laugh.

And if you buy that you probably believe that there is no coincidence
between the patents on R-12 running out and the "discovery" that it
contributed to "global warming." We just finished Memorial Day weekend
and lit fires all three nights because it was CCCCold. Global warming???

Get your plots straight--CFCs contribute to ozone depletion, not global
warming.

Is all capitalist plot Natasha. Keel moose and squir-rel.

RB


UA100



--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

p_j wrote:

Mark & Juanita wrote:

One thing that Cambria states is that they manufacture their product in
Minnesota (if that makes a difference to you). [Still not comfortable
with their claims that Cambria is "Natural Stone" though]

Use frickin granite. Sealing it is trivial.

Mind you don't drop it on your OH!

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"RB" wrote in message
I see nothing in the two links you provided that support your very
incorrect assertion that MMA is an epoxy. There is little similarity
between MMA and epoxy.

I agree ... you do "see nothing".

It could be that you either didn't read, or that you jumped so quickly to
correct, like some of the other "technically correct" around here, that you
failed to understand/grasp what was said: That "epoxy" is a term commonly
used for the two part adhesives/fillers used by those installing solid
surface countertops, whether these mixtures be technically "epoxy" or not
.... you even witness a licensed Corian installer make the EXACT same
reference in a previous post ... which proves my original point, whether you
agree or not.

Now, I used to think that "Political Correctness" was a pox on the cultural
landscape, but damn if it doesn't pale in comparison with the petty
"Technical Correctness" gleefully wielded hereabouts at every opportunity as
one-upmanship.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/15/04

Swingman wrote:

"RB" wrote in message
I see nothing in the two links you provided that support your very
incorrect assertion that MMA is an epoxy. There is little similarity
between MMA and epoxy.

I agree ... you do "see nothing".

It could be that you either didn't read, or that you jumped so quickly to
correct, like some of the other "technically correct" around here, that
you failed to understand/grasp what was said: That "epoxy" is a term
commonly used for the two part adhesives/fillers used by those installing
solid surface countertops, whether these mixtures be technically "epoxy"
or not ... you even witness a licensed Corian installer make the EXACT
same reference in a previous post ... which proves my original point,
whether you agree or not.

Now, I used to think that "Political Correctness" was a pox on the
cultural landscape, but damn if it doesn't pale in comparison with the
petty "Technical Correctness" gleefully wielded hereabouts at every
opportunity as one-upmanship.

If you think that "Technical correctness" is mere one-upsmanship, one these
days reality is going to bite you in the ass bigtime. With any luck you'll
survive the experience with your limbs intact.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Epoxy is used to refer to any two-part adhesive system only by those
whose knowledge is so lacking that all they comprehend is that two parts
of something are to be mixed together.

Fortunately the English language is very robust and it affords us the
opportunity when it is important to speak in a manner such that
ambiguities and misunderstandings are kept to a minimum. One of the
ways this is done is to know the definitions of words. What you are
saying is that because someone who didn't know the meaning of the word
"epoxy" and used it to refer to a totally different adhesive "epoxy" has
now been redefined.

It doesn't work that way. "Technical correctness" isn't the issue. If
the words you utter don't have a universally understood meaning (a
definition) then you might just as well communicate with monosyllabic
grunts.

Proper use of the language is frequently an indicator of one's
education, knowledge and intelligence. Improper use of the language
is... well I let you complete the thought.

RB

Swingman wrote:
"RB" wrote in message

I see nothing in the two links you provided that support your very
incorrect assertion that MMA is an epoxy. There is little similarity
between MMA and epoxy.


I agree ... you do "see nothing".

It could be that you either didn't read, or that you jumped so quickly to
correct, like some of the other "technically correct" around here, that you
failed to understand/grasp what was said: That "epoxy" is a term commonly
used for the two part adhesives/fillers used by those installing solid
surface countertops, whether these mixtures be technically "epoxy" or not
... you even witness a licensed Corian installer make the EXACT same
reference in a previous post ... which proves my original point, whether you
agree or not.

Now, I used to think that "Political Correctness" was a pox on the cultural
landscape, but damn if it doesn't pale in comparison with the petty
"Technical Correctness" gleefully wielded hereabouts at every opportunity as
one-upmanship.

J. Clarke wrote:
Swingman wrote:


"RB" wrote in message

I see nothing in the two links you provided that support your very
incorrect assertion that MMA is an epoxy. There is little similarity
between MMA and epoxy.

I agree ... you do "see nothing".

It could be that you either didn't read, or that you jumped so quickly to
correct, like some of the other "technically correct" around here, that
you failed to understand/grasp what was said: That "epoxy" is a term
commonly used for the two part adhesives/fillers used by those installing
solid surface countertops, whether these mixtures be technically "epoxy"
or not ... you even witness a licensed Corian installer make the EXACT
same reference in a previous post ... which proves my original point,
whether you agree or not.

Now, I used to think that "Political Correctness" was a pox on the
cultural landscape, but damn if it doesn't pale in comparison with the
petty "Technical Correctness" gleefully wielded hereabouts at every
opportunity as one-upmanship.


If you think that "Technical correctness" is mere one-upsmanship, one these
days reality is going to bite you in the ass bigtime. With any luck you'll
survive the experience with your limbs intact.

I favor genetic selection.

RB

Rick Samuel writes:

I work with epoxy and glass & graphite fibers. Epoxy is
almost $1000/qt, fibers about $100/lb. Rings
weigh around 350-400lbs. Yes, there is only ONE way to do
some things.

What epoxy are you buying for $1000 a quart!? I buy epoxy for $30 to $50
a quart unless I need something special.

Brian Elfert

"RB" wrote in message ...
Epoxy is used to refer to any two-part adhesive system only by those
whose knowledge is so lacking that all they comprehend is that two parts
of something are to be mixed together.

Precisely! See, that wasn't so difficult, was it? ... and it dovetails
nicely witth my remarked upon "common usage" of the term, doncha think?.

BTW, to be "technically correct" there are really no "dovetails", as such,
in the above sentence, but you now get the idea of common usage, right?

Fortunately the English language ...

snip

And unfortunately, anyone with a keyboard, and delusions of superiority, can
pollute a woodworking forum with sanctimonious crap like the snippage.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/15/04

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 14:37:25 -0400, RB wrote:

Epoxy is used to refer to any two-part adhesive system only by those
whose knowledge is so lacking that all they comprehend is that two parts
of something are to be mixed together.

Fortunately the English language is very robust and it affords us the
opportunity when it is important to speak in a manner such that
ambiguities and misunderstandings are kept to a minimum. One of the
ways this is done is to know the definitions of words. What you are
saying is that because someone who didn't know the meaning of the word
"epoxy" and used it to refer to a totally different adhesive "epoxy" has
now been redefined.

It doesn't work that way. "Technical correctness" isn't the issue. If
the words you utter don't have a universally understood meaning (a
definition) then you might just as well communicate with monosyllabic
grunts.

Proper use of the language is frequently an indicator of one's
education, knowledge and intelligence. Improper use of the language
is... well I let you complete the thought.

RB

Research Article
Viscoelastic behaviour of epoxy resins modified with poly(methyl
methacrylate)
I. Mondragon 1 *, P. M. Remiro 1, M. D. Martin 1, A. Valea 1, M.
Franco 1, V. Bellenguer 2
1Departamento Ingeniería Química y del Medio Ambiente, Escuela
Universitaria Ingeniería Técnica Industrial, Universidad País
Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU), Avda. Felipe IV, 1 B,
20011 San Sebastián/Donostia, Spain
2École Nationale Supérieure dArts et Métiers (ENSAM), 151, boulevard
de lHôpital, 75640 Paris, France


Abstract
The viscoelastic behaviour of a stoichiometric diglycidyl ether of
bisphenol-A, (DGEBA), 4,4-diaminodiphenylmethanes (DDM)s epoxy matrix
modified with several amounts of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) has
been studied by dynamic-mechanical analysis. Mixtures pre-cured at
80°C ranged from transparency to opacity as thermoplastic content
changed from 5 to 15wt%. These changes have been attributed to
variations in the ratio between polymerization rate and phase
separation rate when PMMA content increased in the mixtures. When PMMA
segregated from the epoxy matrix during curing, it had no influence on
the crosslinking density of the epoxy phase. The clear decrease of
temperature and activation energy of the relaxation with respect to
those values for the neat matrix, observed for the 5wt%
PMMA-containing mixture but not for the 15wt% PMMA-containing one, are
proposed to be a consequence of physical interactions between the PMMA
chains and some epoxy oligomers. The dissimilar variation of the
height of the relaxation with frequency when compared to that for the
other relaxations studied, outlines the significance of physical
factors influencing this relaxation. © 1998 Society of Chemical
Industry

Received: 17 December 1997; Revised: 6 March 1998; Accepted: 31 March
1998
*Correspondence to I. Mondragon, Departamento Ingeniería Química y del
Medio Ambiente, Escuela Universitaria Ingeniería Técnica Industrial,
Universidad País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU), Avda.
Felipe IV, 1 B, 20011 San Sebastián/Donostia, Spain


Funding Agency: UPV; Grant Number: 112.263-EA135/92
Funding Agency: CICYT; Grant Number: AP92-15998035




Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 21:06:17 GMT, Bay Area Dave
wrote:

more quotes from Tommy!

dave

Tom Watson wrote:

snip snip

You don't get it, do you, davey?



Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

Tom Watson wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 14:37:25 -0400, RB wrote:

Epoxy is used to refer to any two-part adhesive system only by those
whose knowledge is so lacking that all they comprehend is that two parts
of something are to be mixed together.

Fortunately the English language is very robust and it affords us the
opportunity when it is important to speak in a manner such that
ambiguities and misunderstandings are kept to a minimum. One of the
ways this is done is to know the definitions of words. What you are
saying is that because someone who didn't know the meaning of the word
"epoxy" and used it to refer to a totally different adhesive "epoxy" has
now been redefined.

It doesn't work that way. "Technical correctness" isn't the issue. If
the words you utter don't have a universally understood meaning (a
definition) then you might just as well communicate with monosyllabic
grunts.

Proper use of the language is frequently an indicator of one's
education, knowledge and intelligence. Improper use of the language
is... well I let you complete the thought.

RB

Research Article
Viscoelastic behaviour of epoxy resins modified with poly(methyl
methacrylate)
I. Mondragon 1 *, P. M. Remiro 1, M. D. Martin 1, A. Valea 1, M.
Franco 1, V. Bellenguer 2
1Departamento Ingeniería Química y del Medio Ambiente, Escuela
Universitaria Ingeniería Técnica Industrial, Universidad País
Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU), Avda. Felipe IV, 1 B,
20011 San Sebastián/Donostia, Spain
2École Nationale Supérieure dArts et Métiers (ENSAM), 151, boulevard
de lHôpital, 75640 Paris, France


Abstract
The viscoelastic behaviour of a stoichiometric diglycidyl ether of
bisphenol-A, (DGEBA), 4,4-diaminodiphenylmethanes (DDM)s epoxy matrix
modified with several amounts of poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) has
been studied by dynamic-mechanical analysis. Mixtures pre-cured at
80°C ranged from transparency to opacity as thermoplastic content
changed from 5 to 15wt%. These changes have been attributed to
variations in the ratio between polymerization rate and phase
separation rate when PMMA content increased in the mixtures. When PMMA
segregated from the epoxy matrix during curing, it had no influence on
the crosslinking density of the epoxy phase. The clear decrease of
temperature and activation energy of the relaxation with respect to
those values for the neat matrix, observed for the 5wt%
PMMA-containing mixture but not for the 15wt% PMMA-containing one, are
proposed to be a consequence of physical interactions between the PMMA
chains and some epoxy oligomers. The dissimilar variation of the
height of the relaxation with frequency when compared to that for the
other relaxations studied, outlines the significance of physical
factors influencing this relaxation. © 1998 Society of Chemical
Industry

Received: 17 December 1997; Revised: 6 March 1998; Accepted: 31 March
1998
*Correspondence to I. Mondragon, Departamento Ingeniería Química y del
Medio Ambiente, Escuela Universitaria Ingeniería Técnica Industrial,
Universidad País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU), Avda.
Felipe IV, 1 B, 20011 San Sebastián/Donostia, Spain


Funding Agency: UPV; Grant Number: 112.263-EA135/92
Funding Agency: CICYT; Grant Number: AP92-15998035

Good try. Shame you don't understand what you're reading. For example
"when PMMA segregated from the epoxy matrix during curing, it had no
influence on the crosslinking of the epoxy phase". Right there in your own
quote it is clearly stated that PMMA is different from epoxy.

Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Tommy, Tommy, Tommy! I do, I do!

dave

Tom Watson wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 21:06:17 GMT, Bay Area Dave
wrote:


more quotes from Tommy!

dave

Tom Watson wrote:

snip snip


You don't get it, do you, davey?



Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 19:22:23 -0400, "J. Clarke"

snip


Good try. Shame you don't understand what you're reading. For example
"when PMMA segregated from the epoxy matrix during curing, it had no
influence on the crosslinking of the epoxy phase". Right there in your own
quote it is clearly stated that PMMA is different from epoxy.



John...


I think that that WAS his point....

wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 19:22:23 -0400, "J. Clarke"

snip


Good try. Shame you don't understand what you're reading. For example
"when PMMA segregated from the epoxy matrix during curing, it had no
influence on the crosslinking of the epoxy phase". Right there in your
own quote it is clearly stated that PMMA is different from epoxy.



John...


I think that that WAS his point....

If so, I apologize, I'm losing track of the players in this discussion.

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)