Alpharag Foamboard vs Artcare Foamboard???

Create a Post
tnframer408

tnframer408

SGF, Supreme Grumble Framer
Joined
Dec 11, 2001
Posts
1,506
Loc
Knoxville TN
Today's LJ delivery came with the substitution of the cotton rag surface Alpharag board (LJ #ACR32) instead of the Artcare Foamboard (LJ#AC32) I normally use. Because they were out of stock in Atlanta, I'm getting the rag covered for same price.

Now besides the rag covering, what's the difference? We ususally use the Artcare as a backing board after having mounted the art on a piece of rag. Doyu think I can bypass that step and mount directly on this ACR32???

We never drymount using the AC32 so I wouldn't use the ACR for that.

Just would like to know what various applications there are for the product and if I should perhaps permanently switch to the rag covered board.
 
Michael,
We got some rag-foamboard sometime back, and, if I remember, it was a substitution too.
We love it! I do, particularly, because it cuts so much easier and cleaner than the 'glossy' foamcore.
That's all we order now.
I can't tell you about the c/p factors. I just know it is much easier to work with.
 
Michael,

Oh, you're a lucky guy. I ordered a case of True Vu Thermacoat board 40x60 1/8" for L-J delivery. They call and asked if they could substitute 3/16" since they were out of 1/8". When I got the delivery, they had also substituted 32x40 for the 40x60, but billed me for the 40x60. I sent the case back.

The 'Artcare' label should mean that it incorporates the zeolite technology but is not a rag product. Maybe Nona can elaborate (or correct me) if the Framing Goddess hasn't scared her off with her Crescent war-cry.

I'm stepping out on thin ice here (which, by the way, Dogzilla did this morning with predictible results.) My understanding is that the "order of preference" for C-P backing would be something like this, starting with most preferable:
</font>
  1. 4-ply rag with Coroplast or archival corrugated filler </font>
  2. Rag-covered fomeboard </font>
  3. Acid-free fomeboard (with the Artcare being better than other brands if you accept the zeolite premise) </font>
  4. Regular fomecore </font>
  5. Chipboard, corrugated and all that other evil stuff </font>
I would guess that <U>items 2-4 could be improved with a layer of rag between the art and the backer.</U>

BTW, I never HEARD of Coroplast until I invaded The Grumble. I thought acid-free fomecore was pretty much the ultimate backing.

Ron
 
Ron:

What puzzles me is this: This board is listed as having a cotton facing. Which sounds to me like I could use it in place of the rag mounting boards I use for my limited editions, etc etc.

Like Emmeril says: kick it up a notch

Keep the doggie out of the water. Chilled pooch ain't fun. ;)
 
I would think that rag-covered fome would be equivalent to rag board over acid-free fome, except that the rag covering isn't anywheres near 4-ply. We can speculate all day about this, but it would be nice to hear from someone who actually knows.

Do you call it 'fome' or 'foam?' I use both terms so nobody feels left out.

Ron
 
Ron,
There is also Archival corrugate to add to your list. It’s a gray purified corrugate that you can get from University products, I believe, or a white one from Bainbridge. The corrugate is completely archival and suitable for C/P (conservation/preservation) framing. The Bainbridge product, called Archival Corrugate, has Artcare to provide protection for the art.

The rag covering on the foamboard was made for the people who like rag. No foamboard, not even the Bainbridge product with Artcare on both coversheets and in the foam itself is meant as a backing board. To meet FACTS guidelines, a full, four ply backing board is recommended to protect the art. Foamboard is meant to be a filler board or to be used for strength and rigidity behind the backing board.

The foam in foamboard, any foamboard is styrene, which is a material that will outgas. Nothing should ever be in direct contact with it. The Bainbridge foamboard, because it does have the zeolites in it to trap the pollutants from the styrene is the best one to put in the housing. If I have a job where the customer insists it be as cheap as possible, I would feel that I could hinge it to the archival foamboard, especially with Artcare, but normally, would not.

The corrugate, even though a totally pure product is also not good for hinging directly on because it has ridges which might be embossed into the art if not separated with a full, four-ply board.

Bainbridge also now has a black Archival foamboard with Artcare in it. I asked the product manager a long time ago why they didn’t have one and he said why would we want one. I said to mount newspapers on or to use behind shadow box spacers. It would also work when something has to be built up, or to float mats. The black edge would be less visible. They just introduced one in New York

I also would like Speedmount on black archival foamboard. Bainbridge doesn’t want to do that because things are not supposed to be mounted for C/P framing, in most cases and not on foamboard. If there is a need for the product, framers have to let them know. The glue on the Speedmount is archival quality, but the foamboard that it is on is not.

Colorplast is benign, is rigid and has no styrene.

I hope this helps a bit.

Nona Powers, CPF, GCF
www.nonapowers.com

My posts sure do get long. I’ll have to become a person of fewer words. HA!!
 
Thanks, Nona. I was hoping you'd be around. I've edited my list so that future generations of impressionable young Grumblers can bask in our combined wisdom. (Your contribution being about 99% of it.)

I'm going to look into the archival corrugated, since I think it's more readily available from my vendors than Coroplast.

I don't see how you could make your posts much shorter. You're not exactly rambling.

Ron
 
Nona:

Many thanks for the indepth reply.

Now the question is: why are there two products which appear virtually identical? Just for those folks who like the rag facing vs. those that don't???

Still confused
shrug.gif
 
I am curious about the reference to the styrene core of Fome-Cor outgassing. I know that the covering paper of regular old Fome-Cor is acidic, but as far as I am aware, styrene is an inert polymer and does not outgas. This is according to the conservation scientists at the Canadian Conservation Institute.

I'm aware that the gases used to manufacture sytrene have been changed for environmental reasons, but as far as I know, these do not bond to the polymer, and so should not affect its stability. Is there new scientific evidence that some types of styrene outgas, or is this just an urban myth?

Rebecca
 
Ron, Coroplast is very easy to get, University Products has it. I love the stuff. If you don't have their catalog, I would suggest anyone who is interested in conservation products call for one. They have everything you could think of.
 
Good Evening Grumblers,

Now you know when I get time to catch up. I heard the answer to the "out-gassing" question about foamboard again today from the Hunt Beinfang people and as stated, it has NO outgassing regardless of facing paper. That RAG facing paper substituted for the Artcare may have been the Beinfang product. It looks pretty nice and is very easy to cut. Just telling you what I heard from the people you are suposed to know. :rolleyes:

Lois@Superior Picture Frame Products
(800) 231-6229
Lois@spfpinc.com
 
Okie Dokie,
I guess I'll put my two cents in......

As a chemist I've followed with interest these statements about Foamboard outgassing. NB has indicated in advertisements that it was determined by an independent study.

Nona,
Could you perhaps direct me to the Study in question? I have several questions and as Rebecca stated earlier, although I'm not a Polymer Chemist, I qustion the validity of the statements. I have worked in the Forensic, Oil, Coatings, Hazmat and Environmental Fields for 20+ years as an Analytical Chemist. I've heard the stories about formaldehyde outgassing from chip board etc. Polystyrene is a stable polymer at normal temperature and pressure. It does however breakdown pretty fast when exposed to heat. It also burns easily and gives off some very toxic gases when it does so. I would really just like to read the "independent" studies before I really put my foot in my mouth.

Is it possible that you can help me to do this Nona? (Not necessarily put my foot in my mouth, but read the study ;) )
 
I didn’t get the “Outgassing” thing from N&B, I got it from the research our PPFA chapter did years ago on framing products. At the time the research we did showed that there are several kinds of plastics. Acrylic and polyester are stable, inert and won’t harm anything that comes in contact with them. Styrene, on the other hand, yellows and will add to the deterioration of anything it touches. Foamboard has a styrene middle and has never been considered safe when in contact with art, no matter what kind of covering sheet is on it. Even the so-called archival foamboards yellow over time. The Bainbridge Artcare makes it a better product but still should not come in direct contact with art.

I read Rebecca’s question and not being able to answer, I have written to two different scientists who work in the field for clarification. I had heard recently that the new styrene based “plastic” frames are sold as being non-damaging and I also asked about that.

I am not a scientist, I’m a framer who cares about what I use. It’s one of the reasons that specification sheets about products and the FACTS guidelines are so crucial. I don’t have time, or knowledge to know everything I should about every product I use and need to rely on others for the information. Even explaining the information. I may have received bad or incomplete info in the past, but if so, many others are under the same misinformation. At the time someone said that about the plastic frames being safe, another framer was standing with me and asked how they could do that.

As soon as I get an answer from the people in the field, I will post it here. It might take a few days, but I won’t give up until I have some answers.

Nona Powers, CPF, GCF
www.nonapowers.com
 
The short answer is, FomeCore has the Canadian Conservation Institute's seal of approval.

The long answer is...I did some internet research going to the Conservation Distribution List (the conservators' Grumble, you can find it through Conservation On Line's website), and it seems that 1997 was a big year for questions about the stability of polystyrene. The Grumble is even mentioned as being the source of the outgassing issue! Anyway, an object conservator saw the Grumble discussion, and put a posting on the CDL, saying that he was under the impression that polystyrene was stable, could find no literature about off-gassing, and asked if anyone had heard about this. There were no replys to his posting, although I did find some lively discussions about polystyrene CD jewel cases.

I then visited the Canadian Conservation Institute's website, and found a very useful article called "Guidelines for Selecting Materials for Exhibit, Storage and Transportation", by Jean Titreault. FomeCore is listed as a "good" material, right up there with Coroplast. The CCI has an excellent, world-wide reputation, and I feel quite confident about their recommendations.

FomeCore was first patented in the 1950's and, over the years, has probably been faced with some pretty strange papers and adhesives. I have seen old FomeCore with very yellowed facing papers, and would certainly not want to use the non-rag variety for a long term contact material. 4-ply rag or purified cellulose matboard is still the
best backboard, but I wouldn't throw FomeCore out with the bathwater just yet.

Hope this sheds some light!

Rebecca
 
Nona,
Please don't be offended, I feel that if anybody can get to the bottom of tings you can. My statement about Outgassing and N&B was due to an advertisement that is in the last Decor Magazine. Again if they have the studies independent or not, I believe that you're the one person that could get them.

I've always heard that opinions are like a**ho**s everyone's got one.

I've based most of my career in scientific fact, and wonder where some information comes from at times. I talked to you a little bit in Louisville at last years Newmark show and I know you are one of the best. Like Rebecca I've done an extensive internet search (Didn't find what she did) and went back to my polymer chemistry books and still can not find a solid answer. This is where the physical testing and studies come in.

I am hoping you can "Get to the Bottom of this" then I'll go on to causing trouble about something else....Like Computer Geeks.
 
The reason I want to continue this discussion, and I think any discussion is a good thing because it helps us all learns and knowledge is never a bad thing. Framers need as much knowledge as they can get, count me as a framer. I wrote to Norman Boris, a very respected paper expert at Bainbridge about the styrene question. This is his reply.

1. Artcare technology is in both the Alpharag foamboard and the Reg.
Archival foamboard. The only difference between the two products
are the surface papers. The alphacellulose source on one is from
cotton linters and the other from purified wood. We have both
products because framers requested both.
All archival properties are the same for both and both utilize the
Artcare technology for adsorbing pollutants and outgassed
materials.
2. Polystyrene is considered inert by many. But we have had aging
studies performed by Rutgers University which demonstrates that
outgassing does occur and that the Artcare technology significantly
reduces this outgassing.
3. Concerning proper archival uses for these foamboards, I think that
is better left to industry experts like yourself and individual
framers to determine at what archival framing level an individual
is comfortable using these materials. Suffice to say that we know
of no potentially harmful materials in terms of permanence in
either Artcare Archival foamboard and Alpharag Artcare Archival
foamboard.

I am supposed to get additional information from a person who actually works with the foamboard so stay tuned.

I never wanted to discourage the use of foamboard, it’s too useful a product, but I don’t want it misused. If it‘s inert, why can’t a framer hinge directly on it, especially if using the rag or purified paper covered ones? Where did it get the “out gassing” label it received from the moment it was introduced? (Someone said to me that just about everything outgases in one way or another.)

Foamboard is so useful because it doesn’t warp like cardboard or other filler type boards, It doesn’t hold moisture, it’s very lightweight, it’s easy to work with requiring no additional tools to cut or shape it, it’s readily available from our regular suppliers, it doesn’t have ridges, it comes in black as well as white but if it’s inert, can a framer hinge directly on it and if not, why not? I know Hugh Phibbs monitors this forum, can you answer these questions Hugh?

Nona Powers, CPF, GCF
www.nonapowers.com
 
Hi Nona -

Thanks so much for doing that leg work! It's always interesting to try and untangle ideas back to their source. You seem to have some clout with the Bainbridge people - perhaps you could help me get a copy of this Rutgers report! I'd love to see it myself, and would also like to forward it to conservation scientists at CCI to get their opinion.

Artificial aging results can vary according to what Temperature and Relative Humidity are used, and so I'm curious so see how they did it. Also dying to know WHAT gas is outgased (sounds rude, dosen't it!).

One reason it might not be recommended for direct hinging is that it doesn't have the moisture buffering properties of cellulose matboard. (Hugh, the Preservator, wrote about this on an earler post. If there is a swing in Relative Humidity, the artwork will ripple more if it is the only thing absorbing and desorbing the moisture. This hydrophobic property is one of the things that makes it (like Coroplast) so useful for final backboards - I think framers call these the "filler". They act as a moisture barriers.

Thanks Again,

Rebecca
 
Nona and Rebecca,
The only thing that could outgas is styrene monomer or solvent used as carrier (Toluene for Styrenated rubber) When the board is manufactured I can see the potential for outgassing until it has cured. Once cured polystyrene should be stable at normal temperature and pressure. Add heat and it will deteriorate quickly, fire or in the front window sort of thing. If polystyrene is not stable shouldn't we be more concerned with our cup of coffee in a foam cup than a movie poster, the increase in heat from the coffee and you are ingesting these evil gases from polystyrene. Environmentalists hate polystyrene because it doesn't decay and break down like good trash should. (I know I'm being flippant here but not towards you.)

Nona, I've done aging studies on paint and I know that the conditions we subjected the panels to were pretty severe and that's what makes me wonder about these things. I too would like to see the study if you can dig it up. I wouldn't mind reading it either.
 
Being not Mr. Wizard (remember him?), I rely on the common sense of others in reply to my uncommon curiosity.

Several conservators have said that the problem with expanded polystyrene foam center board is not the styrene itself. The problem is the contaminated air inside the foam.

My understanding is that styrene emits potentially-harmful gasses when it is heated.

The manufacturing of polystyrene foam board involves blowing air into heated polystyrene, creating countless tiny air channels inside the board. The chemical nasties of heated styrene are trapped in the labyrinth of those air channels after the styrene cools, and they slowly but surely escape over time.

Have you ever opened a fresh box of foam center board and sensed a plastic-like aroma? Could that aroma be the chemical nasties creeping out? "Experts" have said yes. Unencumbered by factual analysis, I agree.

Gimme a story that makes more sense, and I'll take it.
 
Originally posted by jvandy57:
...If polystyrene is not stable shouldn't we be more concerned with our cup of coffee in a foam cup than a movie poster, the increase in heat from the coffee and you are ingesting these evil gases from polystyrene...
Click to expand...
Nobody gives a hoot for a cheap poster; we mount those to foam center board all the time. It's those valuables that we should be careful about. How valuable? How careful? Well, now we get to the slippery slope of opinion.

That's a good question about the coffee cup, Jerry. The cross-section of my styrofoam cup doesn't look like the cross-section of my foam center board. Could it be that the styrene cups are made by a process that doesn't inject air?

Or could it be that the limited exposure to gasses offed (new word there) isn't harmful to us living organisms?

Or could it be that polystyrene is OK when it's "fresh", but gets more dangerous as it ages?

The world of chemistry is wonderful, I'm sure.
 
Jim,
I agree that if I was framing a priceless artifact that I would go to extremes to make sure that it was done properly.

However, since polystyrene is the issue here, the difference between styrofoam cups and styrofoam boards is the amount of air used in the manufacture of each. This whole issue concerns me only to the extent that somebody, somewhere, has made "allegations" (for lack of a better word) that foamcore board outgasses evil materials that will damage paper. Formaldehyde was a big environmental issue when it concerned chipboard and particle board that was manufactured and then "Outgased" formaldehyde. This is true when the product is first manufactured, but once cured......

Now Rebecca, A conservationist from Canada, has asked the same questions about foamboard. She also goes as far to say that it's approved for use by the Canadian What-cha-ma-call-it (Don't hurt me Rebecca, I just can't remember right now)
You say, "Conservators say...." and I'm saying, "Okie dokie...Who, What, When, Where and Why."

Based on the chemistry behind polymers, of which polystyrene is one, the logic just doesn't follow. I'll be happy to say "Never Mind" when there is some scientific data proving or disproving this concept. (ie Show me the Money)

The amount of free monomer that is present in polystyrene once it's extruded is minimal, based on the chemistry. Once cured and set those little air pockets are pretty stable. When you cut it there might be a tiny bit of unreacted material present, but then again a Fart contains hydrogen sulfide. There are more contaminates floating around in the air we breath and hang our art in, that are more detrimental than the unreacted monomer in foamcore. Have you ever smelled the acrylates when you cut plexiglass? No different than the smell you get opening a new case of foamcore. How do you protect the art from the edge of newly cut plexi?
 
shrug.gif

"X" says foam center board is harmless, and will use it in framing everything.

"Z" says foam center board emits harmful chemicals, and will not use it in framing valuables.

If "X" is wrong, harm could come to the valuables. If "Z" is wrong, there's no harm.

So long as there's any doubt, I'll go with "Z".
 
Jim, I absolutely agree that common sense caution is good. I think Jerry and I just like to get to the bottom of a good mystery, and not take things on faith. Must be form Missouri.

I did find an interesting article on the manufacture of polyolefin foams (polyethylene, proplyene...) which may have some application here. It seems that the replacement of HCFC blowing agents with more environmentally friendly ones has caused some changes in manufacture.

First though, antioxidants and heat stabilizers are added to the polymer to prevent its breakdown at processing temperatures, so there shouldn't be any bad gases coming form this source.

There are two kind of blowing agents, chemical and physical. Chemical blowing agents either react, or decompose during manufacture to form gases (nitrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and/or ammonia). The problem with chemical agents is that they can leave up to 10% solid residues in/on the foam, which may have conservation implications, but probably not gassy ones.

Physical blowing agents are low boiling point hydrocarbons and/or nitrogen and maybe carbon dioxide, and leave no residues. In all cases, the blowing agent permeates out of the foam, and is replace by air. Manufacturers typically store the foam until the blowing agent concentration is less than .02%, ok from a conservation standpoint. I'm guessing that the same is true for polystyrene foams, and that any outgasing concerns are not caused by blowing agents.

The new blowing agents do however sometimes require changes in the polymer resin composition to achieve appropriate foaming, and this may have conservation implications.

I'm going to try and contact the author (Scott Williams, CCI) to see what he knows about polystyrene foam, and maybe someone (Nona?) can persuade Bainbridge to rustle up a copy of the Rutgers report.

Rebecca
 
This whole thing is starting to make my head hurt!!
icon9.gif


Here I was, content in my ignorance, busily cutting and mounting and backing with Artcare, secure in the knowledge? that those little "zimolites" or whatever they are called are in there doing their jobs and eating up all the bad gas from wherever it is being emitted.

Now I find out that I am whiffing CO, CO<sub>2</sub>, and a whole host of other nasties and it just shakes my beliefs in the whole free enterprise system!

To think that anyone would make a product that can screw up your mind, make you hallucinate, give you a rash, stop your productive organs from producing, and generally mess up your whole afternoon, and THEN sell it to a group of unsuspecting picture framers, is mind boggling! (What mind you have left after sniffing all these dumb compounds and "stuff".)

I am about ready to go back to cardboard and Elmer's and forget about all this conservation/preservation/equalization/preparation/proper utilization gunk!!
cry.gif


Now I must have a moment of quiet as I ponder my future in the framing battlefield. ;)

Thank you.

Framerguy

Heading to the case of foamcore to sniff and wait.
 
Awww, poor Framerguy - not to worry, it's just the obsessive-compulsive nature of conservators. Husband has more or less leaned to deal with it and, as I said to my brother-in-law, - be thankful you only have to watch it, imagine having to live it!

Rebecca
 
This is why it is so important to have solid information about the products we all use. The object is not to get more confused, but to maybe understand more the make up of things so we can make informed choices when deciding to use one product or another. Companies should be straight forward and share what they know and the compnaies that do, should be aplauded for it. Of course there will always be proprietory info that can't be shared, but info that affects how the product is used should be. I have to conclude from what I've read here that foamboard is a bettr product than I thought it was. I still would not hinge to it, but as a filler board, especially with the Artcare, it's a good product.

Nona Powers, CPF, GCF
www.nonapowers.com
 
While you are here and dwelling on foamboard & its properties, could any of you 'splain to me what all goes in to the manufacture of a sheet of paper covered foam? Is there a bonding agent between foam and paper, and if so, what is it's nature?
I only ask because of emperical observation. I reframed a complete collection of photos that were mounted to and matted with 4-ply rag. They were glazed with regular glass, in metal frames and backed with foamboard (don't know whose, but from the age I would guess Monsanto). Around the perimeter of the foamboard, and accross the back of the foam where the wire was, the foamboard was greatly discolored. This collection had been under climate control since framing, and most of it had been stored in a racking system. Some was hung for display. The edge discoloration I can understand since there had been tape applied as a form of dust seal, but the board next to the wire leaves me guessing. (Non-coated wire with little visible corrosion). Any guesses?
 
I don't know all the anmswers to your quetion, but I do know there is no glue in the manufature of foamboard. The cover sheets are put on while the foam is hot and it automatically sticks on.

Nona Powers, CPF, GCF
www.nonapowers.com
 
This tread is an example of why I think the Grumble is so great. The question of the stablity
of polystyrene has been out there for years. It does break down in UV and I have seen some examples that turned color after prolonged exposure to high heat and humidity, but that change may have been caused by addatives. CCI's
opinion should be taken very seriously and thier
web site is definately worth a visit. Like
Jim, I have smelled monomer when pulling it out
of the box, but many things that are fresh from
the factory may have odors that are not present
later. Thus, it is a good candidate for use as
a backing board, but should not be used as a back
mat, because it can't respond to changes in RH
the way a pure paper product would. Even four ply
conservation quality board will not have the same
expansion/contraction rates as a single sheet of
paper would, which makes pass through hinges and
edge supports that are secured away from the edges
of the work so useful.The better quality facing
papers will be worth the money over time, since
they will be less likely to break down and cause
the board to loose its strength. This is analogous
to the situation with dust cover paper. A buffered
paper will stand up to pollution, while kraft will
weaken and get holes in it, turning it into a
dust collector. Both polypropylene double wall
(Coroplast or Corex) and good quality foam type
boards have the advantage of a layer of plastic
that will slow the transmission of water vapor
and atmospheric pollution. Neither is going to
perform well in a fire, but when that happens
other problems arise. At this point, these seem
to be the best choices for backing boards.

Hugh
 
Can you all stand one more post on styrene? I realize it has been totally covered, but I for one have found it very valuable and I've learned a lot. I wrote to paul Stroch and this is his reply.

Nona Powers, CPF, GCF
www.nonapowers.com

Styrene foam is different from the solid, high-density, high-impact styrene and styrene co-polymers that are used in the frames. To make a plastic foam, other agents, such as gases and plasticizers are used as foam-forming components. These agents are what can off-gas from a foam core
board over time and cause adverse reactions with art work. Harder molded styrene or styrene-butadiene-rubber (SBR), is generally inert and stable if correctly manufactured and cured. Polystyrene is stable except to light exposure, which will yellow it and lead to loss of strength. Acid pollutants such as high levels of sulphur oxides, can degrade the forms of styrene. Hydrocarbon solvents and alcohols can degrade it as well, so you should watch which cleaners are used on styrene frames. I would imagine that the frames are made with copolymers and light stabilizers so they will degrade very slowly.

I hope that this has helped clear up some of the confusion on this subject.
Sincerely,
Paul Storch

References used:
Blank, Sharon, "An Introduction to Plastics and Rubbers in Collections", Studies in Conservation, Volume 35, Allen, N.S., et al, editors, Polymers in Conservation, Royal Society
of Chemistry, 1992.
 
Create a Post
Back
Top