Synseal fights back with conservatory roof test video!
In a previous post I discussed an Ultraframe Roof Video which had been doing the rounds suggesting that only Ultraframe roofs could withstand the extremes of the British weather. The video showed the Wintech test centre putting a number of conservatory roof systems through rigorous testing, and the comments posted on my blog suggested the industry was split as to the validity of the video.
I had my own concerns about how independent the testing of non-Ultraframe roofs actually were. And, more specifically, the finger seemed to be pointed at the Synseal (or Global) roof system in particular, with the roof apparently failing spectacularly at 30mph mph wind speeds.
Well, Synseal decided to take their roof back to Wintech (the same place Ultraframe had visited) and fit their conservatory roof to Synseal recommended standards, and see how it would actually perform.
The results are as follows:
The Ultraframe roof video implied that a Synseal roof would fail at wind speeds as low as 30mph, while Ultraframe roofs could withstand hurricane force windows of 130mph.
So, how can Synseal visit the same testing centre, fit their roof system correctly and find that the roof actually withstands 160mph wind speeds???
OK, I’m going to be accused of being biased towards Synseal. But, in my previous post I pointed out that I’ve fitted hundreds of Ultraframe and Synseal roofs, and both systems are fit for purpose.
My point is that Ultraframe have clearly twisted the rules here, and fair play to Synseal for setting the record straight. The Ultraframe video was clearly complete nonsense, and the suggestion that independent fitters were used to fit competitor roofs is clearly wrong.
Surely fair competition involves selling the benefits of your own product, not trying to slag off the competition unfairly!
6 responses so far ↓
1 Nicsurvey // Mar 10, 2008 at 3:18 pm
How is it that Wintech have confirmed that they CAN NOT measure windspeed above 130mph also this conservatory looks to be around 2.5 mtrs x 2.5mtrs which in its self is the sturdiest of structures where Ultraframe used a 3.5mtr x 4.5 mtr size which will test a roof to its full, and lastly why is it a differant test was used on the synseal roof compared to Ultraframe and by that i mean a fan was used to push from the inside of the Ultraframe roof adding to the uplift effect, but the fan used on the Synseal roof was pulling the roof down helping keep the roof in place, i am very interested in someone confirming my points of above.
2 Renegade Conservatory Guy // Mar 12, 2008 at 11:30 am
Hi ‘Nicsurvey’
I’ve had a look at both videos again, and it looks like both tests have been performed on the same size of conservatory.
The Synseal video clearly does not have a 2.5m x 2.5m conservatory being tested. I would recommend you go back and watch both videos again!
As for the other points you mention, I have requested some clarification from Synseal as I do not know the answers. I’ll update when I find out.
Thanks
3 Nicsurvey // Mar 13, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Thank you for responding i am afraid i do know the answers i have spoken to Windtech and i have confirmation on my points so i await synseals response with perticular interest.
4 Renegade Conservatory Guy // Mar 13, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Hi Nick
As soon as I have spoken with the key person at Synseal, I’ll update you, or maybe he’ll respond here…
5 Nicsurvey // Apr 26, 2008 at 11:43 am
Still no reply i wonder why and i just heard Global roofs no longer have BBA certification it has been withdrawn anyone know why ????
6 Andy Ball // May 7, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Synseal is committed to continuous testing and improvement. Over the last few years there have been over 130 product developments on our conservatory roofs. Recently we have had the roof tested for extreme weather – including wind and snow. The roof surpassed even our expectations – it survived the equivalent of winds of 160 miles an hour and snow of nine feet deep. There has been a question regards to the speed of the wind. It is a fact that the engine used is capable of blowing only the equivalent of 90mph, so the Synseal test had to be augmented by additional pressure being applied to the inside of the conservatory, in exactly the same way as Ultraframe test. The only difference being that the Ultraframe roof only withstood a combined pressure equivalent of 130mph and Synseal’s stood up to 160mph equivalent.
The different test referred to by Nicsurvey was an additional snow load test. Ultraframe did not carry out this snow load test hence the writer’s confusion. In this negative pressure test the Synseal roof withstood 3,700 pascals which independent structural engineers confirm is equivalent to 9 feet of snow.
It is also worth noting that that Synseal’s tests were in one day only, were only on one roof, and only one test. Not over a two week period with various different roofs and tweaks.
Although in the last few weeks there have been misinterpretations and misunderstandings with regard to the BBA accreditation that our roof systems carry (largely due to the volume of product developments introduced over the past three years). We can confirm that Synseal is committed to continual product development for our conservatory products AND to continue into the future with BBA accreditation.
I hope this clarifies any questions raised.
Leave a Comment