design forum - DesignAddict


	> Edit your post


	title of this thread your message Sorry for the delay. I can assure you retirement does not make the days longer on the contrary.... The question about environmental impact is a good but difficult one and I fear I would not do the methodology justice if I try to explain it within the short context of this forum. So allow me to give you the link to a pdf document that is more explicit and has been put together by the very people that developed the system. Please open the Eco-indicator 99 pdf file One comment about the control of moulds at subcontractors. Considering that the Eames shell production was initiated many years before the introduction of so called pre-pregs Pre-pregs are pre mixed polyester and glass fibre that includes all the components but also so retarding chemicals that give the mixture a reasonable shelf time. Heat and pressure during the production play the role of catalyst. These pre-pregs require steel or at least a good quality aluminium mould and will produce a shell every two-three minutes. At the time H.M. had the Eames shells made the available technology was the so called wet method which requires les expensive moulds (most often in glass fibre re-enforced polyester) but because of the slow process (the shell stays in the mould for at least an hour) they needed quite a number of moulds. I find it very difficult to believe that all these moulds?and we are talking about hundreds? are still in well controlled locations. I have doubts about that? One other consideration that the environmental one is that an injection moulded shell of this size costs around U.S.$ 2,50-2,75 to produce (including the material) whereas a pre-preg produced shell in glass fibre and polyester is closer to U.S.$ 12,50-13,50. Prices are based on U.S. production conditions not of-shore?. associated web images (optional) associated web link (optional) your email your password create a forums account \| you forgot your password?