Question about Mineral Wool
- Thread starter bzakes2375
- Start date
Monkey Allen
Fork and spoon operator
That's what a lot of mine is...recycled plastic. Hard to cut. I also have some pink glasswool stuff. And Martini Absorb.
The stuff I have is probably about as useful as egg cartons on the walls.
Oh well, it's only time and money hey?
The stuff I have is probably about as useful as egg cartons on the walls.
Oh well, it's only time and money hey?
Monkey Allen
Fork and spoon operator
So you tried with the eco wool, it didn't work then you went to the rock wool?
Monkey Allen
Fork and spoon operator
Right. I think I should go back and read the discussion properly. I'm not fully on track here.
Monkey Allen
Fork and spoon operator
Sorry to bug you...can you give an rough idea of how much it would cost to buy 12 panels 50mm thick about 120cmx60cm roughly? Of the Acousti Absorb 3
TAE
All you have is now
Organic gets used improperly often. Organic is anything derived from an animal, plant, or single-celled life form. Carbon is what most earthly living organism are based upon.
Of course you are right about just because it's organic it's not okay to ingest or breathe ..Death cap mushroom...c-ya
I grew up in construction...set tile for 20 years and then sold natural and man made stone for the last 20+. I have written MSD sheets for the products we sold.
Silicosis is the biggy Silica dust once it enters your lungs is going to stay there forever....the body can not make it dissolve. as it builds up ...it gets worse we all have a bit of it in our lungs...Dumbasses like myself who tore out old tubs and showers without a mask, mixed thinset and grout without a mask have more.
Marble dust no big problem it's made up of calcium carbonate and it dissolves over time...when you use the word Plastic...that's a broad brush stroke... The dust of most plastics once breathed into your lungs are going nowhere and are there forever. The long term effects are not as well documented as silica but my money is on it is just as bad for you as silica cause it isn't going away and will build up if you keep breathing it...can't be good.
Last edited:
TAE
All you have is now
That'll leave a mark
TalismanRich
Well-known member
That's so very true. One of the first of my classmates to die was a doctor. Young, very sharp, personable. He was working at a suburban medical clinic.
The one patient that didn't like his diagnosis and treatment shot him right there in the office.
Shot in the office.
Last edited:
jimmys69
MOODerator
Oh my, don't let WWLaidback see this or it could turn into another worthless political nerf footbal. ... lol!
From what I have learned in my research, is that as long as any carcinogenic material is contained, then it is not an issue. That being said, it is hard to trust facts these days when everyone is claiming whatever. Could be fact, could be bullshit hype to sell product? I don't know.
I have seen testing data that shows the simple and cheap pink fluffy stuff is better at acoustic performance. The data data I have found on similar polyester products show that it is less effective at lower frequencies. We obviously make choices based on what we feel is healthy, and what has the best results. I don't really have an opinion otherwise beyond what I have used and plan to use based on my research. To each their own and look forward to hearing about great experiences!
Last edited:
Monkey Allen
Fork and spoon operator
South East QLD.
TalismanRich
Well-known member
I was actually wondering if doing panels, etc with rockwool, then putting something like the foam tiles on top would give the optimum solution. Tiles only seem to be effective above about the 500Hz area, and rockwool is most effective there. Plus you can get those fancy colorful designs. Look good and be effective too!
Folkcafe
Active member
With the OP MIA, it seems the topic has changed.
Too often sound absorption is very much misunderstood. Much like a sponge with water, absorption is finite. Take a large sponge and point a water hose at it, that sponge is only going to absorb so much, and the rest is going to splash off. Years ago we mainly looked at the NRC and STC ratings when building sound treatment. Today the best way to choose absorptive materials is using Gas Flow Resistivity ratings. Like my sponge analogy, sound hitting insulation materials will penetrate until the resistance based on the materials ability to allow sound waves to penetrate, causes the sound to then reflect back. Simply put, at some point, sound absorptive materials all become reflective. The old adage, the best sound absorber is an open window because sound waves exit and don't reflect back.
GFR numbers can be used to model and graph across the audio spectrum and there are online calculators. There are a number of threads on other forums with common insulation products from around the globe with the manufacturers testing results with these numbers. Worse case, you can call a manufacturer up and ask, though some products they don't do this test.
When I recently redid my sound treatment, I modelled various available products and selected what would work based on the problem frequencies I identified via room acoustic measurements. Here is the practical problem with mixing and matching. You just don't know where you'll reach reflectivity. The only way to know would be to lab test and that is not practical for DIY. In all you'll likely add enough resistance with one material as to greatly reduce the effectiveness of the other.
OC 703 has long been the gold standard for sound treatment and is still currently being used in many commercial products. A big part of the reason for this is aesthetics, (i.e. it looks good). Problem is, it has its own issues. OC retested and the new ratings are not nearly as good. Maybe manufacturing methods changed but it no longer is as effective at low frequencies. Also add GFR numbers and model, you'll find that after 4 inches, it becomes reflective at lower frequencies. There became this mythology around it that survives even though so much of what we know has changed. In the old days we always assumed that if you added more, the lower frequency NRC numbers would add up to more absorption. It doesn't. In many of these products including 703, just going thicker isn't better at low frequencies. Generally, the higher the density, (higher GFR) the higher the resistivity. Low density pink fluffy stuff is more effective when going thicker for lower frequencies.
Point is, measure acoustically and engineer a solution that meets the needs. Or just throw stuff up on the walls and hope it does something.
Too often sound absorption is very much misunderstood. Much like a sponge with water, absorption is finite. Take a large sponge and point a water hose at it, that sponge is only going to absorb so much, and the rest is going to splash off. Years ago we mainly looked at the NRC and STC ratings when building sound treatment. Today the best way to choose absorptive materials is using Gas Flow Resistivity ratings. Like my sponge analogy, sound hitting insulation materials will penetrate until the resistance based on the materials ability to allow sound waves to penetrate, causes the sound to then reflect back. Simply put, at some point, sound absorptive materials all become reflective. The old adage, the best sound absorber is an open window because sound waves exit and don't reflect back.
GFR numbers can be used to model and graph across the audio spectrum and there are online calculators. There are a number of threads on other forums with common insulation products from around the globe with the manufacturers testing results with these numbers. Worse case, you can call a manufacturer up and ask, though some products they don't do this test.
When I recently redid my sound treatment, I modelled various available products and selected what would work based on the problem frequencies I identified via room acoustic measurements. Here is the practical problem with mixing and matching. You just don't know where you'll reach reflectivity. The only way to know would be to lab test and that is not practical for DIY. In all you'll likely add enough resistance with one material as to greatly reduce the effectiveness of the other.
OC 703 has long been the gold standard for sound treatment and is still currently being used in many commercial products. A big part of the reason for this is aesthetics, (i.e. it looks good). Problem is, it has its own issues. OC retested and the new ratings are not nearly as good. Maybe manufacturing methods changed but it no longer is as effective at low frequencies. Also add GFR numbers and model, you'll find that after 4 inches, it becomes reflective at lower frequencies. There became this mythology around it that survives even though so much of what we know has changed. In the old days we always assumed that if you added more, the lower frequency NRC numbers would add up to more absorption. It doesn't. In many of these products including 703, just going thicker isn't better at low frequencies. Generally, the higher the density, (higher GFR) the higher the resistivity. Low density pink fluffy stuff is more effective when going thicker for lower frequencies.
Point is, measure acoustically and engineer a solution that meets the needs. Or just throw stuff up on the walls and hope it does something.
TalismanRich
Well-known member
The problem with the sponge analogy is that a sponge will saturate because the water doesn't change. WIth sound absorption, the sound energy is actually converted to heat. Unless you are putting kilowatts of sound energy out, it's not going to "saturate" to the point that you can even detect the increase in temperature.
Instead think of it more in terms of light. Things will absorb specific wavelengths of light, and reflect others. Those absorbed are converted to heat. A black curtain will absorb the majority of the light. A medium grey will also absorb the same wavelengths, just at a lower efficiency. White will reflect all wavelengths back. A red curtain absorbs the light but reflects back red. Likewise, certain materials are going to absorb different sound frequencies, based on density, rigidity, and thickness. The glass that is used to make OC703 would probably make a nice reflective window if cast into a smooth, very rigid plate.
The biggest problem for most people is that measuring sound is not as easily done and interpreted as viewing a room and looking at the light. It's easy to see that the corner is darker, or seeing a light reflecting in a mirror or off a window. Hearing bass bloom in the corner is the same as getting the reflection of a lamp in a mirror.
Putting up a thin layer of low density fiberglass for sound control is about as effective as putting up sheer curtains to keep the sunlight out of your room. Putting up a wall with mass loaded vinyl and rockwool panels is like adding thick blackout curtains.
Instead think of it more in terms of light. Things will absorb specific wavelengths of light, and reflect others. Those absorbed are converted to heat. A black curtain will absorb the majority of the light. A medium grey will also absorb the same wavelengths, just at a lower efficiency. White will reflect all wavelengths back. A red curtain absorbs the light but reflects back red. Likewise, certain materials are going to absorb different sound frequencies, based on density, rigidity, and thickness. The glass that is used to make OC703 would probably make a nice reflective window if cast into a smooth, very rigid plate.
The biggest problem for most people is that measuring sound is not as easily done and interpreted as viewing a room and looking at the light. It's easy to see that the corner is darker, or seeing a light reflecting in a mirror or off a window. Hearing bass bloom in the corner is the same as getting the reflection of a lamp in a mirror.
Putting up a thin layer of low density fiberglass for sound control is about as effective as putting up sheer curtains to keep the sunlight out of your room. Putting up a wall with mass loaded vinyl and rockwool panels is like adding thick blackout curtains.
If you are trying to 'stop' sound you have a good point. But lining the hard surfaces even with thin whatever can help the reflected internal sound.
Nothing is perfect or foolproof. If there are sound/acoustic benefits with polyester over fiberglass/rockwool, then go with it. Health wise I wouldn't be so quick to judge.
Slouching Raymond
Well-known member
There's two discussions going on here. One is Blocking sound (soundproofing), and the other is blocking reflections.
To block sound transfer you need mass. I found an informative list of materials with their mass given.
Top of the list was gold, then lead, and it went through things like granite, concrete, glass etc.
So if you want a soundproof room, build it out of thick solid gold.
If you want to block reflections, you're going to need something that moves, to absorb the vibrations, and as T-Rich says warms up as it captures energy.
You'll need walls with little trees all over them. At the extremeties, the little branches will vibrate the most, and the vibrations will get weaker toward the stiffer trunk base.
The little trees approximate to fibreglass fibres, and thicker rockwool strands. Perhaps the most effective solution would be a gradual grading from fibreglass to rockwool.
Maybe I should patent that.
To block sound transfer you need mass. I found an informative list of materials with their mass given.
Top of the list was gold, then lead, and it went through things like granite, concrete, glass etc.
So if you want a soundproof room, build it out of thick solid gold.
If you want to block reflections, you're going to need something that moves, to absorb the vibrations, and as T-Rich says warms up as it captures energy.
You'll need walls with little trees all over them. At the extremeties, the little branches will vibrate the most, and the vibrations will get weaker toward the stiffer trunk base.
The little trees approximate to fibreglass fibres, and thicker rockwool strands. Perhaps the most effective solution would be a gradual grading from fibreglass to rockwool.
Maybe I should patent that.