EXPRESS FILMS EXPERT QUIZ #1 - OCTOBER 2011

vquestfilms.com · October 26, 2011

What you see on the NFRC sticker is what you get

Hi Vq,

Not exactly. I refer you to the disclaimers commonly found in data tables:

Bekaert makes no representation or warranty, expressed or implied, including the implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, that its products will conform to these test data. Bekaert shall not be responsible for variations in quality, composition, appearance, performance, or other feature. . . . ..

Hanita: Performance results are calculated on 3mm glass using NFRC methodology and LBNL Window 5.2 software, and are subject to variations in process conditions within industry standards and are only intended for estimating purposes.

3M (My favorite one) The information provided in this report is believed to be reliable; however, due to the wide variety of intervening factors, 3M does not warrant that the results will necessarily be obtained.

Huper Optik (On their data cards) This data is subject to variations within industry standards.

By the way, has anyone ever seen published guidelines on how much your published data can deviate from your "typical production runs"? Absent proof to the contrary, I say it does not exist.

There is a much better way to go about it.

-Howard

Film manufacture performance data tables are a totally different animal from an NFRC sticker. One is center of glass and the latter is whole window system performance. You cannot compare the two they have no relation because they are generated differently. NFRC goes by a strict set of procedures whereas film manufactures try to follow a general rule but there is no official standardization.

If you want who window data for a glass type that is not on an NFRC sticker then you will have to model the glass using simulation software. Again we go back to the whole pencil versus pen thing... I'll take the pen in this case. :twocents

Fiveofeen · October 26, 2011

Great posts Rob!

EWF · October 26, 2011

Film manufacture performance data tables are a totally different animal from an NFRC sticker.

Actually, they correlate quite well. The majority of them differ by low single digit percentages.

-Howard

vquestfilms.com · October 26, 2011

As far as justification of pricing goes, one of the most overlooked factors in ROI is the product's ability or even inability to maintain its performance. Most inexpensive window films contain dyes or pigments that lighten up over time and exposure.

Hi Vq,I

I totally agree and we know this to be factually correct from all the QUV testing that EWF does. It is perhaps the best reason why automotive films are not ideal for flat glass applications when energy savings is a primary objective.

That being said, there are less expensive alternatives to Ultra-HIgh-Priced products that would also not suffer from longitudinal performance degradation. One example would be a stable sputtered alloy (like NiChrome) or even a simple vapor deposited aluminum film (like Silver). We have seen those endure 6,000+ hours of QUV testing with no appreciable loss in solar control properties.

This aspect should be factored into any film-vs-film decision. Many people conclude that the slight decrease in performance over time is acceptable and preferable to a high end product with a 400% (up front) higher price tag.

-Howard

Howard,

I applaud EWF on the acquisition and use of your own in house QUV equipment. You are probably the only distributor in the US that has their own. I wish I could have one! :drool

Aluminum, Nichrome are some of the most popular components used in film because they are cheap and plentiful. Under certain conditions they also oxidize which affects not performance but the optical qualities and aesthetics of the product. That can be a big negative with consumers and they normally do not find this fact out until after the film is installed. The reflectivity of both materials is not always welcome in the architectural community despite its ability to reflect large amounts of energy. In my option, this and some other issues are what give window films a bad name in they eyes of the public and other industries that we attempt to network with.

There needs to be other options, you can't force everyone to eat hamburger...

Our industry has been affected profoundly by commodity products like silver reflective, bronze, and dyed films. What happens with most silver reflective AL or NiC films is that there are no separators except price. Anyone can get a hold of these films and come to an open bid and then it becomes a price war. Sure, you can get your film cheap but what is your margin going to be when the project is done? Commodity thinking is what keeps dealers at 1990's pricing with little or no healthy margin to grow their companies. Who wants that? Does anyone here like it that way? :hmmm

Film durability is so overlooked in flat glass. Most people assume things perform the same throughout the warranty life of the film. They couldn't be more mistaken, there are some flat glass films that degrade up too 15% in performance in just a few years. The problem is that you or I cannot publish which products those are, we can only address the component technologies and not the brands.

You raise some good points Howard. I often think it is assumed that all we sell is ceramic films. The fact is that we also sell a traditional silver, bronze, a dual reflective, exterior, and a few other film technologies because there is no film that fits every circumstance.

At the end of the day we will do what is best for the customer and we also try to be good stewards of the window film marketplace. That does not always mean go with the cheaper reflective silver film. You can alter skylines with that stuff if you are not careful and that can get your customer in a lot of hot water with city officials. Then there is the local strip mall that comes to mind. Storefronts are not going to fair well with ultra reflective silver films. I was recently in a high rise with a restaurant on the top floor. City views were amazing, especially at night when things were lit up. Again, a film cheap as it may be with a much higher VLRI would kill those spectacular views at night!

My point... there is the right fit product for everything and we do our best as a supplier to separate ourselves and give our partners options. If we have something that makes the grade and even makes our dealers a healthier margin then what is so wrong with that? You point out the high price tag on some film technologies but you also need to consider the over all value to dealers and some of the coverages that come with these products. We bring a program to dealers that separates them from their competition. We do not sell film to anyone that comes to our website with a credit card. This is valuable in the eyes of some window film professionals, not everyone but to some it makes a difference. Would you dealers out there rather have a $500.00 cap per window on glass breakage or a $2000.00 cap per window? A 15 year commercial warranty or a 10 year commercial warranty? Matching warranty coverage with OEM warranties or no match? NFRC certification? How about real energy modeling services, we offer that as well.

Many people conclude that the slight decrease in performance over time is acceptable and preferable to a high end product with a 400% (up front) higher price tag.

Is this a fact? If you are projecting ROI's do you include the decrease in performance into your projection and tell the consumer?

400% up front does not mean it is going 400% more on the retail side...

EWF · October 26, 2011

NFRC goes by a strict set of procedures whereas film manufactures try to follow a general rule but there is no official standardization.

If this is true, then explain the following which is printed on a Huper Optik Data card sitting on my desk:

"All data calculated using the equations and definitions in ISO9050 & ASHRAE Handbook"

-Howard

vquestfilms.com · October 26, 2011

NFRC goes by a strict set of procedures whereas film manufactures try to follow a general rule but there is no official standardization.

If this is true, then explain the following which is printed on a Huper Optik Data card sitting on my desk:

"All data calculated using the equations and definitions in ISO9050 & ASHRAE Handbook"

-Howard

I did explain it. "film manufactures try to follow a general rule but there is no official standardization." Everyone has a different nuances in their data interpretations.

Here Huper is referencing definitions and equations from ISO9050 and ASHRAE Handbook. You forgot to add what is listed after that on their newest data sheets. It says "The data is subject to variations within industry standards."

Let me ask you this. I am looking at a Nexfil performance data card. It lists ASTM D1003, "Nexfil Method", and KS M 3832 testing standards. Can you explain what these are?

EWF · October 26, 2011

BIM is not about issuing a guarantee, that would be foolish.

Models, simulations, computer analysis, projections . . . .. . All without guarantees.

If I want to know how hot something is, I don't need I computer - I need a thermometer.

I am not an anti-technology stone age type of individual. I fly technologically advanced aircraft and I understand the difference between theoretical vs. actual performance.

I know that there are projects where the theoretical models are held in high regard. But for 99.7% of applications, when you are simply trying to figure out which of several films is providing the most shading of the incoming radiation, a handheld BTU meter will give you that answer in an instant.

-Howard