Dear Editor
7th February 2012

In December, the BFRC told simulators to stop using the thermal conductivity value of 0.13 W/mk claimed for Thermoseal Thermobar spacer bar plastic material. Previous simulations are not correct. The revision is because the performance Thermoseal claimed cannot be independently verified.

This ends a period of nearly two years when Thermoseal used an incorrect value of 0.13 instead of 0.175 W/mk, and on that basis claimed in advertising and PR to have an equal or better performance than other brands. It doesn’t, but that hasn’t stopped them over claiming. Other spacer bar companies knew they were wrong and repeatedly asked the BFRC for proof. The numbers have now been shown to be fanciful but the WER licences which were issued to a number of companies with this value are only too real.

What do all those companies do whose licences are invalid? Do they have any comeback? What about other companies – sealed unit manufacturers, window manufacturers and installers, simulators and systems companies - who rely on the integrity of technical data and the assurances that performance claims will be substantiated?

This month (February) Thermoseal says in an article in the trade press: “if you acquire a valid simulation report with a warm edge spacer stated by a brand within the report eg SWISSPACER V you don’t have to use the exact product. As long as the spacer you’d like to use is considered ‘same’ or ‘better’ performance then there will be no issue with the substitution. All that is required is a letter or email to the BFRC informing them of the change in specification.”

How easy is that! But how valid is valid; and how reliable can substitution be in these circumstances? We have to trust that the figures companies provide the BFRC and other bodies are reliable and capable of being verified by independent bodies. Companies invest time and money in acquiring these licences to help their performance in the market: they don’t expect them to be based on made up numbers.

It hasn’t stopped SWISSPACER growing fast and becoming the clear market leader based on reliable technical specification data and tried and tested performance. But many other companies would be a lot better off and happier if Thermoseal had informed the BFRC two years ago of Thermobar’s true performance specifications.

Why did it take so long to disallow Thermobar’s claims? Is the data correct now?

Yours sincerely

Vic De Costa
SWISSPACER Marketing & Sales Manager UK & Ireland