Talk:Borosilicate glass
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Melting point
Hi Alex, sorry to correct your sentence again, but the heat resistance of borosilicate glass is definitely not generated from its "higher melting point". Actually glass doesn't have any such thing as a melting point. Also borosilicate glass doesn't even have a higher softening temperature than conventional soda-lime glass. The main advantage is the low thermal expansion coefficient. It makes borosilicate glass less sensitive to thermal gradients and thermal shock. Regards, Herbert
The mixture as a whole has to be heated to a higher temperature before it liquefies to the point that it can be shaped; Corning had to develop new forges that could produce and withstand 1000 C. I'm not mischaracterizing the nature of the glass, it was a major engineering challenge to mass-produce in the early days. --Alexwcovington (talk) 12:42, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- P.S. As a side note I would advise registering a username or logging in so your work and comments can be properly attributed.
I see there are two more reverts here now. Can the anon user please post here with sources stating reason for his/her reverts? Inter 12:56, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- I apologize for my overzealousness. I mistakenly believed at the time of the edits that it was the melting point that was the major difference; indeed the melting point of Pyrex is about 821 C [1], much lower than a typical glass, well over 1000 C [2]. By examining sources here [3] for a more typical glass (0.672 J / g * cm3), [0.161 *4.18]) and here for borosilicate [4] (0.753 J / g * cm3), I see a significant difference in heat capacity. It is possible that Corning needed the new forges to allow for mixing at the desired consistency, and maybe to overcome the added heat resistance, though I'm less confident of that now.
- Modifying article thusly. --Alexwcovington (talk) 06:50, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The confustion comes from soda lime glass, which I am supposing is not normal window pane glass. Soda lime glass has a definitly lower melting point. Indolering
Looks like somebody knows, so howcum the melting temp (which I understood Pyrex was developed for) isn't mentioned? Trekphiler 00:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge of bomex, kimax and pyrex articles
Lacrima97: It doesn't matter if the bomex section is merged, but if it is, pyrex and kimax should also be merged. They are all different brands, and i know that i really needed the information I posted about bomex, so just do what you wish with it, as long as the facts are known. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.79.242.166 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 4 January 2006 UTC.
Makes sense to merge them (IMO) as long as we setup redirect pages from Pyrex, Kimax, and Bomex into Borosilicate glass. Marius 21:38, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
- I concur; I'd like to see all three merged in, with the appropriate redirects. --moof 03:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
It is VERY TRUE, all these brands of glass are nearly the exact same glass, just brands. Why would be have a different article for each brand of ketchup? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.35.161.79 (talk • contribs) 16:42, 16 June 2006 UTC.
It is not advisible to enclude the two trade names as part of borosilicate, as borosilicates are a type of glass denoted due to the % of Boric oxide present used as a flux. The companies only wish to add their trade names as a marketing exercise. There are 1000's of compositions manuafctured that come under the unbrella of 'Borosilicates' should they all merge pages?? The only company who truely could have a claim to merge is 'PYREX' teh original trade name asscoiated with the formulation of a borosilicate type glass. Furthermore the main attribute of borosilicates is not only the thermal expansion, but moreso that these glass types are hydrolytically stable, offering excellent chemical resistance (except HF of course)as apposed to most other glass types. Simon Brigham
I'm against merging the Pyrex article with this one. It has become fairly developed, including information specific to the brand name, and deserves its own article. It might make sense to transfer some of the information from that article to this one, though. -- Heptite (T) (C) (@) 16:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
I support merging in Kimax and Bomex to here, but not Pyrex. Pyrex, like Kleenex, is a genericised trademark, and so by our guidelines deserves its own article. The others, on the other hand, are not notable enough to warrant their own articles. Besides, the Kimax and Bomex articles as written say nothing that is of note that isn't said in this article. — Saxifrage ✎ 20:48, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Other uses
It should just say dildo instead of other uses - some people might click on it whilst having a parent watching and it could lead to quite an embarrising conversation.
[edit] Moving general borosilicate info here from Pyrex
I'm not sure about merging, but certainly now that "Pyrex isn't pyrex" (heh) it would make sense to move the general borosilicate chemistry info from the Pyrex article in here. Chris Cunningham 11:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Done. Chris Cunningham 10:51, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Translation
I want someone to help telling me how can I say "Borosilicate glass" in spanish for the translation.
Maybe I can type "Vidrio borosilicato" or "Vidrio de borosílice", but I´m not sure about the correct form. Damërung 13:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Durability
Can some knowledgeable soul please add a section explaining to what degree imperfections in borosilicate products (such as air bubbles, chips and cracks) affect their safety and usability for heating, vacuum and pressurization? Information on this is hard to find, and contradictory at best. Some people say an air bubble will cause a borosilicate piece to explode when heated or subjected to vacuum/pressure, others say it doesn't do anything. Same thing for chips. It'd be nice to have the correct answer available in WP for easy access. 97.82.247.200 23:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Manufacturing process
Is the reference to silicate glass correct? shouldn't it be soda-lime glass? Axiosaurus 15:26, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Usage: conflict with another article
3rd to last paragraph in "usage" section says "Borosilicate glass is not used for high quality lenses due to striations and inclusions common to this type of glass."
BUT article "Crown glass (optics)" says "the borosilicate glass Schott BK7 is an extremely common crown glass, used in precision lenses."
Will some expert kindly resolve this conflict???
Perhaps something like: "Most borsosilicate glasses are not used ... but some (e.g., Schott BK7) are made well enough for such use." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.249.41.138 (talk) 03:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
Resolved: This now includes mention of BK-7 and similar types of borosilicate optical glass, and B270 and similar but less expensive types of borosilicate glass for eyeglasses. You can buy borosilicate in any grade required, from exceptionally fine melts of special BK-7 to very cheap industrial grades. -Rstevec —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.13.44 (talk) 05:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Is the "Schott Duran" glassware borosilicate glassware?
Does anyone know? If it is not then it is not related to this article and should be removed. If it is then it should be captioned as "borosilicate glassware, here displayed two beakers and a test tube" not "Schott Duran glassware, here displayed two beakers and a test tube". Can anyone confirm if they are borosilicate or not? Sean.barton (talk) 00:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Probably it must be borosilicate. I don't see why it would be added to the article if it were not. I'll change the caption, but if I am wrong someone please correct it. Sean.barton (talk) 20:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
