Talk:Solid surface material

Is "Solid surface" a trade mark? Biscuittin (talk) 23:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It seems to be a generic name. Everybody makes some kind of plastic stuff with more or less different fillers and pigments, and "solid surface" seems to be the banner that collects them all. As opposed to, stone, tile, laminate, wood, or steel countertops. --Wtshymanski (talk) 21:53, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

"Solid surface" is the catch-all for resin-binded surfaces that use an non-specific material (such as bauxite) to create a non-variegated (i.e., without discernible patterns) look. While the manufacturing process of thermocompression may be similar, the characteristics of engineered stone -- mainly with the use of quartz as the stone -- provides a surface with different characteristics, such as scratch resistance and enhanced protection from UV degradation. Other stones can be used, such as crushed marble or granite, to give the surface natural color and characteristics in a reconstituted form. Engineered stone needs to be differentiated from solid surface.Psemerson (talk) 18:03, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

My problem is that the home decorating books that I can find don't give any engineering details. A tabular numerical comparision of the tensile and compressive strengths, impact toughness, scratch resistance, UV resistance, heat resistance, fire resistance, etc. by some standardized test method, would be helpful to compare all the resin composite countertops. Even the fake quartz countertops do not recommend exposure to UV outdoors, so it may not matter too much what the other 90+% of filler is, if the 10%- of resin is the part that degrades in sunlight. Can the "Corian" types not also do fake marble appearance? My fake quartz countertop has a speckled appearance, but I think I have seen similar patterns from the all-plastic varieties, too. "Engineered stone" is in my opinion a pompous marketing term, I'd be happier if they called it "sand-filled composite" or something like that. It's not stone, it's more like a concrete made with a plastic resin binder. At least "solid surface" is accurate, though not too descriptive (you wouldn't make a countertop out of a liquid or gas). --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:30, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Let me begin by disclosing that I've worked professionally in the countertop industry for 28 years, and have written a column on countertop fabrication for a leading kitchen and bath industry trade publication for over 20 years. I oppose merging this article on Solid surface with the article on Engineered stone. These are distinct categories of materials, and have different appearances, performance characteristics and chemical compositions. They are fabricated and installed using different tools, equipment, techniques and skills. They have different advantages and disadvantages, and are maintained and repaired differently.

Most products classified as "solid surface materials" use alumina trihydrate, a very fine powder, as the mineral filler, and are based on acrylic resins, polyester resins or a blend. It is not correct to call such products "all-plastic" as the mineral filler (not a plastic) amounts to the majority of the product's composition. Acrylic based solid surface materials are not subject to UV degradation. Corian, the market leader in solid surface materials, has manufactured marbleized patterns for over 30 years, and granite-like patterns for over 20 years.

The engineered stone products use much larger and harder mineral (quartz) particles. I am unaware of any using crushed marble, since marble is significantly softer and is subject to degradation when exposed to acidic foods and beverages such as citrus, vinegar and wine. Psemerson may be thinking of a third product category often called "cultured marble", which consists of a blend of calcium carbonate and polyester resins, with a thin protective resin layer on top called a "gel coat". This is a product commonly used to make less-expensive vanity tops.

Wtshymanski is entitled to personal opinions about terminology and what's a "pompous marketing term", but on Wikipedia, we use the terminology that the reliable sources use, and the generally accepted generic terms are "solid surface material" and "engineered stone". These terms are used by trade associations, trade publications and by most manufacturers when speaking of their competitor's products.

Don't expect most "home decorating books" to provide you the sort of standardized test results you mention, Wtshymanski, because this information is considered boring and irrelevant by 99% of residential consumers. However, most major manufacturers publish this information, and it is made available to architects and engineers working on commercial projects, some of whom actually pay attention to this sort of information.

I edit only occasionally in this area, since I make my living from these products and therefore have a conflict of interest. However, I am willing to advise and collaborate whenever my experience might come in useful. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm with Biscuittin here, as I've never seen the term used in Canada, including my time working with installer trades. A bit of quick googling seems to show me that it's pretty much a US term, but I don't have a suggested replacement, other than 'Countertops'. Codesmith —Preceding undated comment added 21:25, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

What I consider to be reliable sources regarding countertop materials

General sources:

My knowledge of reliable sources is limited to those in the United States. I am sure that reliable sources published in other countries are also available. Some materials published in trade publications, such as new product announcements and reports of company personnel changes, are based primarily on press releases and should be taken with a grain of salt. Articles signed by staff writers or industry experts usually have greater reliability, in my opinion.

• International Surface Fabricators Association

• Surface Fabrication magazine stopped publishing in December, 2009, but its useful archives are still available online

These are the leading general interest trade publications for professionals employed in the kitchen and bath industry in the United States. They are not consumer magazines. They are competing publications and both have been published for decades:

• Kitchen and Bath Business magazine

• Kitchen & Bath Design News magazine

More specific sources:

• What is Solid Surface?

• ATH – Filler With An Attitude

• What is Quartz Surfacing or Engineered Stone?

• The Manufacture of Engineered Stone and Installation of Quartz Surfacing Countertops

I have written a column on countertop fabrication which has been published in Kitchen & Bath Design News magazine for 21 years now. I believe that my column has a good reputation in the industry, but I will leave it to other editors to decide whether it should be considered a reliable source:

• My recent columns in Kitchen & Bath Design News magazine

• 10 year archive of my columns

In conclusion, here's a column I wrote called Wikipedia and the Kitchen & Bath Industry. Comments are welcomed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Proposed body content

In response to the AfD, I propose replacing most or all of the body content with the following. As I disclosed here on this page 13 years ago, and also at the current AfD, I have a major conflict of interest about this topic. Cullen328 (talk) 01:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't object to this, but I'm not really a reader of this sort of content. I'd suggest mentioning the possibilities for colour and granite/marble-like finishes if the sources allow. I note the books need pages, or if those don't exist, then chapter/section names. ETA: Do we really need the long list of competitor tradenames? I think that's one thing that makes it feel promotional. Espresso Addict (talk) 02:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I am on travel this week, so won't do any serious editing until next week, only comments if relevant (nothing yet on the suggested content). Ldm1954 (talk) 03:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Espresso Addict, I added a statement about the wide variety of colors and patterns, and a reference to a reliable source verifying that assertion. I have also added either page numbers or chapter names to all the references. I feel differently than you do about the names of the competitors to Corian. Without them, I think that the content reads as promotion of DuPont Corian. I think that mentioning the competitors helps to emphasize that solid surface materials is a product category and not just a way of describing one brand. Readers should know that there are alternatives to Corian and in my opinion, each of those brand names is a plausible search term that ought to have a redirect to this article, in my opinion. Cullen328 (talk) 07:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

History and characteristics

DuPont created and marketed the first solid surface material in 1967, trademarked as Corian. The product was invented by DuPont biochemist Don Slocum that year, and was patented in 1968. Corian consists of a blend of alumina trihydrate, acrylic resin and various pigments. Originally marketed as a countertop material for both residential and commercial applications, it has since been used in many other applications including furniture.

Other companies introduced competing products of greater or lesser similarity. Competitors included Gibraltar , Fountainhead, Avonite, Hanex, HiMacs, Staron and Surrell. Some of these brands used different resins such as polyester which have different performance characteristics and some are no longer on the market.

Solid surface materials are available in a wide variety of colors and patterns. Some of the patterns emulate granite and marble while other patterns are original. The most common thickness is 1/2" (13 mm) although other thicknesses are available for other applications, such as tub and shower surrounds.

These products are non-porous, sanitary, moderately heat resistant and repairable. Versions of solid surface materials based on acrylic resins can be thermoformed into components of various curved shapes.

Fabrication and installation

Standards for properly working with solid surface materials are well-established within the construction industry. These include procedures for creating inconspicuous seams, built up decorative edges, various styles of backsplashes and installing sinks, including integral solid surface sinks.

References

Move

Per the discussion during the AfD, I've boldly moved the article to solid surface material, and redirected Solid surface to Solid geometry per the hatnote target for now. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Espresso Addict, will you please also consider substituting the referenced content that I drafted in the two sections above for the poorly referenced content that is now in the body of the article? Cullen328 (talk) 17:49, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328: I was waiting for Ldm1954 to express an opinion; he might still be travelling? Espresso Addict (talk) 19:19, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Ldm1954 has been editing extensively in recent days. Cullen328 (talk) 19:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Not really editing, I was just doing the occasional comment while recovering from a cold. I am OK with the redirect and change; @Espresso Addict do you want to do the replacement of the text? I may be able to do it tomorrow. Ldm1954 (talk) 19:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

To editors Espresso Addict and Cullen328: I did a little editing, mainly a minor clarification in the first sentence and adding a few external links that I felt might be useful. The only think I do wonder a little about is that this is perhaps too US-centric. Any thoughts on UK/Aus/Canada etc? Ldm1954 (talk) 14:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I've added a note on what is known of the safety issue re dust. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)