View Poll Results: Which of the following statements is true?

Voters
120. You may not vote on this poll
  • Trivex is more impact resistant and has more tensile strength than Polycarbonate

    58 48.33%
  • Trivex has less impact resistance but more tensile strength than Polycarbonate

    27 22.50%
  • Trivex has less impact resistance and less tensile strength than Polycarbonate

    9 7.50%
  • Both Trivex and Polycarbonate are essentially equal in impact resistance and tensile strength

    26 21.67%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 64

Thread: Polycarbonate vs. Trivex (NEW THREAD - edited by Moderator)

  1. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    Wish I could find an E. Mail I once received on how we survived the 50's (the last time America was happy) for you. Then you might begin to understand. But I doubt it as you probably grew up in a world that believes it needs government protection.

    Chip

  2. #27
    Master OptiBoarder chm2023's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Camp Hill/NYC
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,196
    Actually I grew up in the fifties. I completely agree it was a wonderful time. Some of us even learned math!!!

  3. #28
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    I just have to add my $.02. I tried poly lenses for myself (not aspheric though) and could not tolerate the "tunnel vision" I experienced. I'm about a -3 myope. I wear mid-index comfortably, but poly and me just did not get along.

    About the tinting of poly - as Pete said, raw poly will not tint at all. If you want super scratch resistance, you have to settle for lighter tints. The softer the coat, the better the tint. Remember that ALL of the tint is on a thin little layer of coating on the back side, so don't hope for great sunglasses unless you are willing to sacrifice the scratch resistance. Adding the tint to the manufacturing process was a good idea. Unfortunately it did not catch on. I'm pretty certain that trivex has the same inherant problems but does absorb tint in its raw form. If you add scratch resistant coating, you have the same issue.

    As to the matter of safety - when you drill anything, safety is no longer a selling point. Drilling creates a weakness in the material that is measurable when compared to undrilled lenses of the same material. If safety is an issue, don't sell drilled rimless.

    There you have it. $.02 worth, at least. :D

    shutterbug

  4. #29
    Jeweled Eyewear Billy Brock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    118
    hello all, very interesting variety of posts on the thread.....here is a photo of my personal test between a Trivex blank, concrete and the tire on my car

    before Trivex came along, in my opinion there was not a better choice than poly, and I still beleive "choose the best product for the current situation"

    thanks Pete for all the technical stats....... education is the key to helping me do a better job

    B
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails tired.jpg  

  5. #30
    sub specie aeternitatis Pete Hanlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Hickory Creek, TX
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    4,964
    That's the best use of a Trivex lens I've seen to date!!! I would encourage everyone to do the same!

    (Sorry, I couldn't resist...)

    This past year, I've been able to look at a LOT of failed lenses- of all materials, shapes, and sources. I am more convinced than ever that proper processing techniques make all the difference in the world when it comes to how well a lens will hold up.

    Long story short, any lens can fail if it is processed poorly enough. For example, if you have a Trivex or poly lens actually crack (I've seen both), take a long, hard, magnified look at the bevel of the lens. My bet would be you will see several small microcracks in the edge of the lens. This usually comes from a dull cutting surface and it creates a sort of "rip" in the edge of the lens. This "rip" can develop into a crack- especially if the lens is oversized or otherwise poorly mounted (take a look at your glasses in a polariscope and look for areas of tension... you will definitely be able to notice an oversized lens).

    Happy processing, and keep using those Trivex lenses as speed bumps!!!
    ;)
    Pete Hanlin, ABOM
    Vice President Professional Services
    Essilor of America

    http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74

  6. #31
    Jeweled Eyewear Billy Brock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    118
    LOL LOL ! ! ......... good one Pete ! ........ "speedbumps" ...........:)

    I wish I could have used that speed lens under my tire on this time intensive design.......... the pictured poly lens was not very old when it split ......... (notice in the closeup it had been chamfered) ...... :(

    I processed this poly Rx utilizing all the steps Pete & others have posted over the last few months & it still failed ...... (always occurs on the expensive stuff)

    Recently technology has afforded us a wealth of alternative lens material choices............. IMHO, the patient would not have been inconvenienced had Trivex been the initial material of choice.

    I stand by Pete in saying try to process the best lens material to compliment the frame of choice Rx.


    B
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails chamfered.jpg  

  7. #32
    Master OptiBoarder keithbenjamin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    680
    Has everyone seen the impact test videos put out by Younger that RT mentioned? Regardless of whether or not there was any bias engineered into the test, the results are still pretty dramatic. Besides, who is to say whether a person in more likely to get hit in the eye with a pointed object or a blunt object? :shiner:

    The links for the videos on the Younger site are dead, so I went ahead and posted them. You can see them via the link below.

    (Pointed) Impact Test Videos

    I omitted the spectralite test. If anyone is interested, I can put that one up too.

    -K

  8. #33
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Perfect example.........................

    I wish I could have used that speed lens under my tire on this time intensive design.......... the pictured poly lens was not very old when it split ......... (notice in the closeup it had been chamfered) ......


    If you would have put a drop of OMS "EDGIT" or "POLY EDGE POLISH" into those holes, you would have sealed the microscopic cracks that you produced while drilling and NO crazing would have occurred !

  9. #34
    Jeweled Eyewear Billy Brock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Fort Worth, Texas
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    118
    thanks Chris,

    which one of the two products is the absolute best one for stopping poly from splitting ........... I'll try anything ! !

    This is another perfect example in my personal situation where Trivex has been the better choice ......... I don't have to hunt down fix me solutions for Trivex: drill it, mount it & you don't see the job back again until it's time for a new Rx........... hopefully your chemical will make poly a drill it, FIX IT and ship it product

    appreciate the help !

    B

  10. #35
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Poly hole crack sealing

    which one of the two products is the absolute best one for stopping poly from splitting ........... I'll try anything ! !

    Billy,

    Actually they are both the same with the difference the "Edgit" contains color that fuses with the poly.

    Send me your name and address by e-mail and I will send you a sample with a glass dropper to get it into the hole and make your trial.

  11. #36
    OptiBoard Apprentice Gov't Mule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Field
    Posts
    16

    Intersting Reasoning

    I also have looked for the answer to the above question. Colts Labs folks should know? Why don't we ask them?

    I said I would post the info on Friday, and I am still trying to get more specific data on the impact resistance of Trivex. Unfortunately, I don't have some of the really cool instruments that R&D gets to use here in my office, or...
    Even after all the discussion, people are voting for option number one. (Trivex is more impact resistant and has more tensile strength than Polycarbonate)

    Only three have voted for the correct answer (#2) , and one of them was me, so...(Trivex has less impact resistance but more tensile strength than Polycarbonate)
    Pete Hanlin
    St. Petersburg, FL
    Essilor Lens Group

    A subsidiary of Essilor International, S.A., Gentex Optics, Inc. is a leader in the manufacture of ophthalmic lenses, specifically the revolutionary new polycarbonate lenses.
    I am not too sure how revolutionary an abbe value around 30 and little 'spider-web' cracks on drilled rimless are. I know that I always find this 'debate' redicilous. I hope I am doing all this quoting and linking right... Follow this link to find out what is known about the two lens materials:

    http://www.ppg.com/chm_optical/trivex_ppg.htm

    Another thing I know to be true is that if I owned an extremly large polycarbonate plant, I would be doing whatever I could to protect it. Not to mention the fact that a Trivex Varilux Comfort would be one of the easiest lenses ever for a patient to adapt to. Along with being extemely light weight, optically pour, and scratch resistent we now know, from reading the information in the link above, that it passes FDA drop ball tests @1.0mm CT and meets ANSI Z87.1 '89 standards. Trivex is also the only material, other than polycarbonate, that passed the High Velocity Impact test. So we know it is impact resistent.

    Perhaps they have to try and change the name of it a few times before it will take off.

    Just some facts to ponder.

  12. #37
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    Pete - the darn thing wouldn't let me vote. Said I already did! I'm afraid old timers disease has set in!



    To the post:

    As to lenses causing the loss of eyes - it's almost never the lens at fault, but some other impact that the lens could not stop. If you are hit hard enough to break a standard plastic lens even, you are going to be hurting.

    ;)

    shutterbug

  13. #38
    Bad address email on file Oha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    55
    Here's the link to the poly council. Its a great site!

    http://www.polycarb.org
    Last edited by Oha; 10-24-2003 at 09:13 PM.

  14. #39
    sub specie aeternitatis Pete Hanlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Hickory Creek, TX
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    4,964
    Wow, I hadn't visited this thread for some time. I didn't realize there had been so many posts as of late.

    I'm not sure where the "revolutionary new polycarbonate" quote came from. I don't believe I made that statement (especially since polycarbonate has been around for decades now).

    Regarding the cracks you have experienced, there is quite a bit of R&D being done right now to make those a thing of the past. So far, they have determined that the cracking does not occur on uncoated polycarbonate lenses. Also, the cracking occurs because of the microcracks created during edging/drilling (as Mr. Ryser has noted).

    Just to revisit an old, tired subject, however... Trivex is- IMHO- never going to "take off" as a lens material (and I don't care what you call it). Not because there will be some conspiracy to keep it off the market, but simply because the material does not offer that much of a benefit over existing products that are produced at lower expense.

    Additionally, it is not as if Trivex doesn't have its own processing difficulties. The material heats up quite a bit when edged and takes longer to process. In a high volume laboratory, this is a serious impediment. We've seen accounts that have tried to switch some business to Trivex- only to switch back to polycarbonte.

    Now, when someone with the obvious experience and technical expertise of a Billy Brock has difficulty with a material cracking, does that lead me to believe there is a problem to address? Sure enough! I believe we need to continue to find ways to reduce the heat involved in drilling and addressing the microcracks that result. However, I still maintain that polycarbonate is a very easy material to properly drill. If you are experiencing massive problems with cracking, you probably aren't drilling with proper technique.

    PS- I have some pretty pictures of Trivex lenses that have crazed after drilling as well... its not just a poly issue
    Pete Hanlin, ABOM
    Vice President Professional Services
    Essilor of America

    http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74

  15. #40
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    d

  16. #41
    Master OptiBoarder keithbenjamin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    680
    Most thought provoking Shutterbug! I'll have to say I agree completely ...I think. :D

  17. #42
    Rising Star sticklert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    51
    Hey Pete,

    Why don't you post those pretty pictures of Trivex? I am sure I am not the only one who would like to see them......
    Todd Stickler, ABOC

  18. #43
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Getting interesting ...................................

    sticklert said:
    Hey Pete,

    Why don't you post those pretty pictures of Trivex? I am sure I am not the only one who would like to see them......

    Could become a very heated thread .................... the spokesman of another large corporation is challenging the competition to a debate.........................


    To bad that there is a quite week coming up because of all the poeple taking time off before the long holiday weekend.

  19. #44
    OptiBoard Apprentice Gov't Mule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Field
    Posts
    16

    Poly Breakage

    Here are some examples I was able to find... Since I don't know how to do this attachment stuff, bear with me.

  20. #45
    OptiBoard Apprentice Gov't Mule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Field
    Posts
    16

    Again

    Let me try this gain

  21. #46
    OptiBoard Apprentice Gov't Mule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Field
    Posts
    16

    Couple More

    Next two are Poly.





    This last one is a Trivex lens where the frame broke. We simply pushed out the bushing and remounted lenses into new chasis. More to come... and I personally challenge anyone to show the opposite of these pictures to be true on drilled rimless.

    I strongly caution you all to remember where you are getting your information from on the Poly v Trivex issue. As I have stated before, if I owned, or worked for a company that owned, an extremly large Polycarbonate manufacturing facility, I wouldn't be too warm to the idea of promoting Trivex. My two cents worth.


  22. #47
    sub specie aeternitatis Pete Hanlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Hickory Creek, TX
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    4,964
    I strongly caution you all to remember where you are getting your information from on the Poly v Trivex issue. As I have stated before, if I owned, or worked for a company that owned, an extremly large Polycarbonate manufacturing facility, I wouldn't be too warm to the idea of promoting Trivex. My two cents worth.
    I agree that one must consider the source when receiving information on any product. After all, I do work for a company which specifically chose not to manufacture Trivex lenses. Such a "strong caution," however, seems to imply that false information has been provided...

    Factually speaking...
    • Trivex is a material that has a lower specific gravity than polycarbonate.
    • Due to polycarbonate's higher index of refraction, Trivex and polycarboante lenses of the same power will have the same weight.
    • When ground to the same center thickness, a polycarbonate lens will be thinner than a Trivex lens of equal power.
    • Using the "drop ball" test, polycarbonate performs better than Trivex- because polycarbonate's impact resistance in this test is less affected by SRC and ARC coatings than Trivex.
    • A test can be devised (using a weighted, pointy projectile) where Trivex outperforms polycarbonate.
    • Trivex performs very well in drill mounted applications, however, so does polycarbonate. It can be demonstrated that, when mounted properly, polycarbonate has excellent properties for drill mount applications.
    • The cause for polycarbonate lens failures in drill mount applications seems to be SRC and ARC (uncoated lenses do not fail). Micro-cracks in the coating have the potential to propogate into full lens failures when not removed by chamfering. These coating cracks can be observed on drilled Trivex lenses as well.


    Whether or not I work for a company that has made an investment in the fastest growing lens material of the past decade (polycarbonate) doesn't alter the fact that Trivex is neither thinner nor lighter than polycarbonate in real application. It also doesn't affect that fact that Trivex is available in a relatively small number of PAL designs, and costs more than polycarbonate.

    The only thing that has been a positive for Trivex is its suitability for drill mounting- and it does appear to be a good material for this purpose. However, I would urge the optician to excersize strong caution when a Trivex manufacturer tells them Trivex is the only material suitable for drill mounting- this is simply false and misleading.

    In real life, polycarbonate and pretty much all of your high index materials perform very well in drill mount applications. Naturally, their performance will be greatly affected by the quality of the drill mount.

    If you are using Trivex and feel it is providing the best combination of value, cosmetics, and safety for your patients- well, keep using it. Trivex is by no means a "horrible" product. In my opinion, however, it offers very little in the way of added value to the patient or the eye care professional.

    I admit that some people who I respect very much claim that there is really something to this Trivex stuff (they "see better" through the lens, or it "drills better"). All I can go by is my own observation, however, and my lensometer, eyes, and drill don't tell me that this material offers anything that justifies its added expense for a 1.530 index product. For my money, I will invest in a readily available, proven product that is light and thin- polycarbonte.
    Pete Hanlin, ABOM
    Vice President Professional Services
    Essilor of America

    http://linkedin.com/in/pete-hanlin-72a3a74

  23. #48
    Master OptiBoarder keithbenjamin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    680
    In your comparison Pete, you basically outlined two very equal lenses, in your eyes. The concensus does seem to be however that Trivex does drill better and is better optically, which you seem to have a hard time conceding.

    As far as price, if you're not comaparing apples to oranges there is little, if any difference. You have to remember that Phoenix is spheric and the Trilogy is aspheric. Between spheric poly and spheric Trivex (apples and apples) there is NO difference in price. Between aspheric poly and aspheric Trivex the difference is FAR LESS than indicated in other posts.

    So, in summary you have two pretty equal lenses in terms of thickness, weight and safety. Trivex is probably better for drilling, is certainly superior optically, and is easier to tint. Trilogy comes with a lifetime guarantee against drill mount cracking. There is little, if any difference in price when comparing apples to apples.

    ...bang for my buck goes to Trivex.

  24. #49
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    I beg to differ ..................................

    Shutterbug said:
    If you want super scratch resistance, you have to settle for lighter tints.

    There you have it. $.02 worth, at least. :D

    shutterbug
    WRONG:

    By using MICRO-TINTS you can go up to 2% to 3% transmission on a Poly with a hard tintable coating in 5 to 8 minutes of tinting time.

    Uncoated Trivex will tint by any method but the tint comes off by applying any solvent as lens cleaners containing Isopropyl which most of them do. The only way Trivex is colorfast is by having a coating applied

  25. #50
    OptiBoard Apprentice Gov't Mule's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The Field
    Posts
    16
    "I admit that some people who I respect very much claim that there is really something to this Trivex stuff (they "see better" through the lens, or it "drills better"). All I can go by is my own observation, however, and my lensometer, eyes, and drill don't tell me that this material offers anything that justifies its added expense for a 1.530 index product. For my money, I will invest in a readily available, proven product that is light and thin- polycarbonte."

    Wow! And to think we are all trying to give people the best possible vision. It is ridiculous to think that it is not worth an extra $1.50 for better vision.

    Perhaps I had this all wrong.

    For awhile there I forgot we were all in this to make money, not to offer the best possible lenses to the final consumer. Maybe this is what separates the French and their sympathizers from the rest of us.

    Here is another thing to consider. Let's say we were all in the hearing aid business. Would you want to offer the hearing aid that allows there to be some muffled sounds, or would you want to offer the one that has nice crisp sharp sound? I believe you get the point.

    Thank you for the debate, I consider my job here finished.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Trivex
    By docwatson in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-17-2003, 11:25 AM
  2. Research Reveals: Trivex Material Offers More Than Triple Benefit
    By Newsroom in forum Optical Industry News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-25-2002, 03:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •