Plastic: A Creative Manual

PLASTIC A CREATIVE MANUAL

PLASTIC A CREATIVE MANUAL

IF FOUND, PLEASE RETURN TO ............................................................................................................................

HE / SHE MAY BE REACHED BY

PHONE

EMAIL

POST

............................................................................................................................

ADDITIONAL NOTES ............................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................ ............................................................................................................................

WITH THANKS TO ZOE LAUGHLIN & MARK SMOUT

ABSTRACT

Globally, we produce 300 million metric tons of plastic every year (Statista, 2015).

The advantages of this versatile and low cost material come at a price, however, as the environmental impact of plastics consumption is substantial. In developed nations such as the United States, where responsibility for plastic waste is relinquished at the close of a bin, only 5% of the plastic discarded is recycled (McCorquodale & Hanaor, 2006, p.127).

Inspired by the practical advice offered by household reference books such as Haynes Manuals, and the everyday environmentalism of the Whole Earth Catalog, the purpose of this thesis is to offer an alternative method for recycling our plastic waste.

Through a series of material tests and prototypes, the manual is presented in the form of a ‘Plastics Cookbook’, with technical information about plastic and three do-ityourself ‘recipes’ which are designed to engender a hands-on and creative approach to recycling.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 11

LITERATURE REVIEW 13

PLASTICS IN DESIGN & THE ENVIRONMENT 21

TECHNICAL INFORMATION 43

THE PLASTICS COOKBOOK 57

RESULTS & DISCUSSION 83

CONCLUSIONS 137

BIBLIOGRAPHY 139

10

11

INTRODUCTION

A CREATIVE MANUAL FOR THE USE OF PLASTICS

The ideas behind this thesis have developed in conjunction with my design research into household waste and architectures constructed from recycled materials. These themes emerged as I explored the materiality of things in my home and as I became aware of the relationship between everyday products and broader issues relating to consumerism, obsolescence and waste.

Perhaps as a result of its synthetic qualities and its ubiquity in low cost products such as food packaging, plastic seemed unique as a material in its low worth to society.

There seems to be a lack of information which encourages consumers to re-use plastic materials as opposed to throwing them away. Thus, the ambition for the thesis was to create a manual for plastics, in which useful advice could be offered to individuals wishing to recycle plastic in a creative way.

As such, this thesis is structured in three parts. The first section introduces the history of plastics; the impact their use has on the environment; some examples of common applications in architecture; and it explores the concept of a materials manual in the context of other household instructables. The main body of this document is the manual itself, which is split into a chapter containing technical information and a ‘plastics cookbook’ with three architecturally themed ‘recipes’. The final section discusses the successes and failures of these material projects as well as evaluating the intentions behind the manual.

Fig 1.0 Jerusalem Cookbook Cover

12

13

LITERATURE REVIEW

WHAT ARE MANUALS FOR?

The intention behind putting together this manual is to encourage a do-it-yourself approach to recycling and re-using plastics. Having said this, there appears to be no model for this specific type of materials guide. As such, this chapter looks to define what manuals are and discusses the characteristics of similar handbooks found in the home.

In essence, a manual is a form of document which contains instructions and technical information to help people setup, use and maintain consumer goods such as computers and home appliances (McMurrey 2015). In most cases, an accompanying user guide is provided as the systems required to operate the product are technologically advanced. As a result, the type of content covered in reference books can range from safety and warranty information to product specifications and installation instructions (McMurrey, 2015). Although this information is typically written by an expert, the language used should be easy to understand and is often supplemented with images illustrating key points.

TYPES OF MANUAL | COOKBOOKS

Recipe books are a good example of user guides found in the home. Although their familiar format can mask the technical information they contain, they behave in much the same way as a software manual or other types of practical handbook. With cookbooks, this data usually takes the form of a list of ingredients coupled with a set of simple instructions and cooking times, which assist the chef in preparing the meal.

‘Jerusalem’ is interesting in that it presents recipes from another part of the world. As such, if I were to use the manual, I would be able to cook Israeli and Palestinian food, without having any prior knowledge of the region’s cuisine. This factor embodies the fundamental ambition behind any manual.

Published in 2012, the cookbook is organised into ten chapters and an index at the back lists all the recipes according to ingredient (Ottolenghi & Tamimi, 2012, p.5). An introduction at the front of the book offers readers a guide to the area’s gastronomy and a brief commentary outlining the authors’ reasons for making the book. In their words, “although Jerusamelites have so much in common, food, at the moment, seems to be the only unifying force” (Ottolenghi & Tamimi, 2012, p.12) in a city divided by politics and religion. As such, no distinction is made in the arrangement of recipes between Arab and Jewish dishes and a history of the city is included to describe the parallel impact both cultures have had on local food.

Fig 1.1 Steering Column Assembly

14

15

The chapters are ordered in accordance with most cookbooks: starters at the beginning, followed by main courses and then desserts. Each category contains approximately 30 recipes and the recipes themselves cover a spread each. In this way, a photograph of the final dish is laid out on one page, adjacent to the instructions and ingredients which are necessary to make it. Traditional recipes such as Baba Ghanoush remain unchanged, however the authors admit they used some “poetic licence” (Ottolenghi & Tamimi, 2012, p.15) to adjust other recipes to their taste. This is one of the key attributes I wish to take from the cookbook: the idea that the creative projects can be presented as recipes, with step-by-step guidelines and ‘cooking times’, but with a degree of flexibility which encourages experimentation and permits the addition of other ingredients into the mix.

VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPAIR

The Haynes Manual is part of a series of servicing and repair books, which cover over 400 types of cars and motorbikes. The process of writing each manual takes two mechanics approximately 20 - 30 weeks and is based on the principle of completely disassembling the project car and then rebuilding it (Haynes Online, 2015). As a result, every component is catalogued and analysed, and the resulting reference book is densely packed with technical information and highly detailed drawings of engine parts and wiring diagrams.

The inside cover informs readers that the “aim of the manual is to help you get the best value from your vehicle” (Mead, 2003, p.0.6). Although it recognises that in some cases it may be more practical to take the car to a garage, the statement adds that the ambition of the manual is to encourage owners to tackle the work themselves (Mead, 2003, p.0.6). To help owners diagnose and fix any problems, the handbook is divided into four sections: ‘Living with Your Car’, ‘Maintenance’, ‘Repairs & Overhaul’ and ‘Reference’. Essential information concerning roadside repairs and weekly checks are located in the first chapter so owners can access this information quickly. The ‘Maintenance’ section provides product specifications, schedules and procedural information for routine servicing. It also links to the ‘Reference’ chapter at the back of the book, where owners can find advice for buying spare parts (Mead, 2003, p.REF.3).

The most extensive chapter in the manual is ‘Repairs & Overhaul’. It contains a comprehensive set of guidelines for fixing engine parts and associated mechanisms such as the exhaust, transmission and suspension (Mead, 2003, p.10.1). A general description of the component and its function is given, followed by a clear step-bystep sequence outlining the process of removing, repairing and re-fitting the piece.

Alongside these instructions, photographs and highly detailed drawings, such as the

16

exploded axonometric in figure 1.1, enable the reader to obtain an understanding of each component and its role within a system. The technical aesthetic of these illustrations and the matter-of-fact style of writing which the manual employs, lends it a wholly different feel to that of the recipe book. In my opinion, it gives the book a sense of authority on the subject and gives the reader confidence that the changes they are making will have a benefit to the vehicle’s performance.

In compiling a creative manual for plastics, I think it is important to complement the playfulness of the proposed material ‘recipes’, with the engineering approach of the Haynes Manual. As such, the first section of the plastics cookbook will be dedicated to providing sufficient information concerning the properties and manufacture of plastic.

The hope is that this technical information will give readers the tools necessary to understand why the material behaves in certain ways.

ALTERNATIVE LIVING

In 1968, Stewart Brand was inspired to create a new form of “information delivery service” (Kirk, 2007, p.1), which would offer individuals with an ecological sensibility and an interest in sustainable technologies, a comprehensive guide for counterculture living. The idea was the culmination of a number of years spent visiting alternative communities in the American Midwest. He noticed that these separate communities were struggling because of a lack of expertise (Kirk, 2007, p.1). As such, he wanted to provide a forum which would connect these communities together and offer a platform for sharing practical information and ideas.

The result was the publication of his ‘Whole Earth Catalog’ in 1968, which contained an immense variety of product reviews and essays focusing on useful tools and methods for self-sufficiency (Kirk, 2007, p.2). These ranged from information for building geodesic domes to literature concerning Japanese society. The only factors in deciding whether an item should be listed or not, was if it was considered: “useful as a tool, relevant to independent education, high quality or low cost and easily available by mail” (The Last Whole Earth Catalog, 1971, p.1).

The immediate aftermath of the Second World War had witnessed a period of immense industrialisation and technological development in the United States (Kirk, 2007, p.6).

This phenomenon was met with great scepticism by the American environmentalist movement, which fostered an image of ecological activism as a “fight between technology and nature” (Kirk, 2007, p.13). In contrast, Brand’s catalogue offered an optimistic vision for environmental activists looking to reconcile the onset of massconsumption with the ideals of sustainable living (Kirk, 2007, p.9). The fundamental

Fig 1.2 The Last Whole Earth Catalog Cover

17

18

success of his approach was based on a belief in technical ingenuity and the power of individuals to effect meaningful change in the world (Kirk, 2007, p.6).

As was the case with the institutionalised attitudes of American environmentalism in the 1960s, the top-down approach of current recycling initiatives does not appear sufficient to counter the increasing amounts of plastic waste we are producing around the world. Instead, my interest in putting together a plastics manual, concentrates on questioning what we as individuals can achieve if we take ownership of these problems and if we have the necessary information to empower us when searching for new ways to re-use plastic products. As such, the Plastics Cookbook borrows heavily from the culture of “amateur invention and technological development� (Kirk, 2007, p.9) promoted by the Whole Earth Catalog.

Having said this, one criticism I have of the catalogue concerns the sheer quantity of information it contains. There are no clear chapter headings and as a result I found the document quite incomprehensible. My hope for this handbook is that in its limited scope of research and simple recipe format, the information provided herewith will be much clearer to the reader. In conclusion, I hope to combine the environmental concern displayed by the Whole Earth Catalog with the technical rigour of the Haynes Manuals and the creativity of the cookbooks.

Fig 1.3 Whole Earth Catalog Spread

19

Figs 2.0 & 2.1 Bakelite Products

20

21

PLASTICS IN DESIGN & THE ENVIRONMENT

A HISTORY OF PLASTICS

Although natural polymers have existed for a very long time, it was the scientific and technological advances prompted by the Industrial Revolution that enabled significant breakthroughs in the history and development of modern plastics (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.244). The introduction of sulphur to natural rubber production, in a process known as ‘vulcanisation’, was characteristic of the chemical experimentation going on during the late eighteenth century (Ashby, 2009, p.5). Such innovation in manufacturing and in the chemical modification of organic compounds, marked a shift away from the use of natural plant resins and gums, to the production of wholly synthetic polymers such as Polyethylene (Quarmby, 1974, p.12).

In 1862, Alexander Parkes showcased what is considered to be the first man-made plastic, at the Great Exhibition in London (Quarmby, 1974, p.12). Cellulose nitrate was the main ingredient required to make ‘Parkesine’, a new material described by the exhibition’s jury as: “hard as horn, but as flexible as leather” (Quarmby, 1974, p.12).

Although nitrocellulose had already been discovered in the 1840s and was renowned for its explosive qualities, Parkes added sulphur chloride to the mixture and tweaked the manufacturing process to create a thermoplastic (Quarmby, 1974, p.12).

Skilled in metallurgy, Parkes had already pioneered the process of adding phosphorus to certain metals such as copper, whilst working at an electroplating factory (Quarmby, 1974, p.11). Such experimentation with alloys, gained Alexander Parkes the understanding which would be fundamental to the creation of Parkesine and define the future development of plastics: the ability to optimise the chemistry and performance of polymers, by synthesising different elements together (Howes & Laughlin, 2012, p.132).

Parkesine contained cellulose, an organic compound found in plants. Consequently, the first fully synthetic plastic was developed in 1907, when Leo Baekeland was successful in controlling the synthesis between phenol and formaldehyde to create ‘Bakelite’ (Ashby, 2009, p.5). By managing the temperature and amount of pressure applied to the reaction, Baekeland was able to create a rigid and heat-resistant thermosetting plastic. It became widely used in a diverse range of products such as the camera and Yo-Yo shown overleaf.

As the material science behind the manufacture of plastics improved, the 1930s saw the greatest proliferation of products made from plastic. These included: Polystyrene (1929), Neoprene (1930), Polyester (1930), PVC (1933), Nylon (1935), PTFE (1938) and Polyurethane (1939) (The Plastics Historical Society, 2015). A German chemist, Hermann Staudinger, had published his research into the structure of polymers and concluded that they were composed of repeating molecular units, held together by

Fig 2.2 1970s Plastic Products

22

Figs 2.3 - 2.5 1970s Plastic Products

23

24

strong covalent bonds (Quarmby, 1974, p.13). His observations were key in turning plastics production from an experimental endeavour into a science.

Towards the end of the twentieth century, although designers had revelled in the “freedom of form and colour” (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.247) plastics had to offer, the mass-production and poor design of most products had degraded the material’s value in society (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.247). Aside from the standard connotations suggestive of fluidity and flexibility, the semantics of the term ‘plastic’ had become synonymous with attributes such as ‘fake’ and ‘cheap’ by 1963 (Online Etymology Dictionary, 2015).

Nevertheless, throughout the 1960s and 70s, the expanding family of plastic materials continued to spread into new applications (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.247). In particular metals, which had traditionally been dominant in industries such as car manufacturing and building construction, lost ground to high performance polymers with a high resistance to environmental effects and good thermal insulation properties (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.247). An example of this trend is evidenced by the introduction of ‘Radel’, a highly rigid and temperature resistant plastic in the surgical instrument market (Lefteri, 2009, p.59). With a melting temperature of 207°C and a resilience to the corrosive effects of sterilisation, it represents a cost-effective alternative to the ubiquitous use of stainless steel in medical equipment (Lefteri, 2009, p.59).

The latest development within the plastics industry has been the move away from polymers which are synthesised using the by-products of crude oil refinement. As the impact of industrial plastics production on the environment has become more apparent, biodegradable plastics synthesised from agricultural products, such as the methanol found in starch, have become more popular (Howes & Laughlin, 2012, p.133). The following chapter investigates the environmental concerns regarding plastic materials in more detail.

Figs 2.6 & 2.7 Biodegradable Bag & Radel Plastic

25

Figa 3.0 & 3.1 Consumerism & Resource Extraction

26

27

MATERIALS & THE ENVIRONMENT

We rely on materials to sustain economic growth, to provide energy for our homes and to make products which satisfy everyday needs. As our dependence has shifted to nonrenewable materials, it has become apparent that we are surpassing the ability of the environment to cope with current consumption rates (Ashby, 2009, p.6). Worldwide, we consume approximately 10 billion tonnes of materials every year or an average of 1.5 tonnes per person (Ashby, 2009, p.16). ‘The World Counts’, estimates we need 1.6 Earths to offset the current strain we place on natural resources (The World Counts, 2015).

Unsustainable levels of demand are exacerbated in developed nations, where capitalist economies facilitate the acquisition of material possessions in ever-greater amounts (Falasca-Zamponi, 2011, p.3). In the United States, for example, the quantity of materials consumed by one person in a year, exceeds the 10 tonne mark (Ashby, 2009, p.16). Consequently, reserves of many natural resources, such as copper and oil, are running very low and are estimated to last for only another 30 to 50 years (Desjardins, 2015). If current levels of production continue to exhaust the world’s finite resources, we threaten the quality of life for future generations.

Aside from the socioeconomic issues and damage to ecosystems from resource depletion, the industrial processing of materials also has a negative impact on the environment (Falasca-Zamponi, 2011, p.1). The energy required to manufacture commodities, is for the most part provided by fossil fuels which release carbon dioxide when combusted.

These greenhouse gases trap infrared radiation within the atmosphere, causing global warming. In the last five decades, temperatures have increased at a rate double that of the previous century, with ominous consequences for global sea levels (FalascaZamponi, 2011, p.1). With rising temperatures, the delicate biodiversity of many ecosystems will suffer, as species succumb to the effects of climate change and extreme weather events (Falasca-Zamponi, 2011, p.1).

Another problem facing the environment concerns the way in which we dispose of products once they become obsolete and how we treat the waste generated by manufacturing processes. Returning to the example of developed nations, high labour costs make replacing commodities more economical than maintaining and repairing them (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.161). In the United States, the EPA calculated that Americans generated over 250 million tons of waste in 2012 alone (Environmental Protection Agency, 2015). More importantly, 65.5% of this waste was either landfilled or incinerated (Environmental Protection Agency, 2015). As such, the way we extract, process, use and dispose of materials has a significant impact on the environment.

Fig 3.2 Marine Debris

28

29

THE PROBLEM WITH PLASTICS

So far, we have discussed the effects materials in general can have on our surroundings and identified three key areas of concern: resource depletion, climate change and waste. In the last 70 years, global consumption of synthetic plastics has risen by over 2000% and now exceeds that of any metal except steel (McCorquodale & Hanaor, 2006, p.119). The problem with plastic, however, is that it possesses certain characteristics which contribute to the negative impact our use of materials is having on the environment.

Firstly, the fabrication of plastic is dependent on distillates of oil for its raw ingredients.

Oil is a very limited resource, however, and current estimates gauge plastics manufacture accounts for 8% of global oil consumption (McCorquodale & Hanaor, 2006, p.119).

Although this figure is significantly less than the proportion of oil used for fuel, the rate of plastics manufacture is increasing by 4% each year (McCorquodale & Hanaor, 2006, p.119). As such, plastics will continue to intensify the adverse effects of resource depletion and sponsor the pollution caused by crude oil extraction.

Plastics manufacture requires plenty of heat and is only worthwhile in large production runs. In other words, the fabrication of plastic occurs at an industrial scale and is an inherently energy intensive process. Harmful emissions are also released during the treatment of polymers and can include toxic levels of ammonia, benzene and mercury as well as other volatile compounds (Berge, 2000, p.154). As such, the production of plastics has damaging consequences for air quality and the considerable amount of power required to operate facilities adds to the global production of greenhouse gases.

Perhaps the most significant drawback of plastics is the fact that they are nonbiodegradable. Although ultraviolet radiation can deteriorate a plastic over time, the tightly packed structures of synthetic polymers are too tough to be broken down by microorganisms (McCorquodale & Hanaor, 2006, p.121). As such, it is estimated plastics take thousands of years to decompose (The World Counts, 2015).

Despite this fact, plastics are used extensively in disposable packaging and other applications with short lifecycles that accelerate the material’s progression to landfill.

The statistics in figures 3.3 - 3.6 give an impression of the scale of the problem facing landfills in the United States alone. The bar chart in figure 3.4 describes the increasing volume of plastics discarded as a proportion of the total materials collected in the waste stream: by 2010 plastics represented the single largest quantity of materials sent to landfill. The reasons for this growing trend are illustrated in figures 3.5 and 3.6 which show that 91% of plastics are not recycled.

Plastic products are also specified in applications in such a way that repairing them is

1000 Tons

30

250 225 200 175 125 100 75 50 25 0

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

Percentage %

Figs 3.3 & 3.4

Total Waste Sent to Landfill in the US As a Proportion of Total Collected in Waste Stream

80 80 70 70

Other Wood

60 60

Textiles 50 50

Rubber

40 40

Plastics

30 30

Metals 20 20

Glass

10 10

Paper

00

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

Types of Waste Sent to Landfill Percentage of Total Collected in Waste Stream

2010

31

Other Resins 4,000

PET 4,520

12.6%

PS 2,240

14.2%

7.1% HDPE 5,530

17.4% PP 7,190

22.7%

PVC 870

23.2%

LDPE 7,350

PLA 50

Total: 31,750

Figs 3.5 & 3.6

Types of Plastic Collected in Waste Stream Thousands of Tons (2010)

Other Resins 3,100

PET 3,640

PS 2,220

10.7%

12.6%

7.7% 17.1% PP 7,150

HDPE 4,960

24.7% 24.0%

PVC 870

LDPE 6,960

PLA 50

Total: 28,950

Plastic Sent to Landfill Thousands of Tons (2010)

32

not economically viable (Berge, 2000, p.154). For example, in the construction industry, plastics are often detailed in hard-to-reach places such as vapour barriers within walls.

As a result, plastics are contradictory in nature, in the sense that they tend to have a very short functional lifespan and yet remain inert in the environment for an incredibly long time. The problem with this characteristic of plastic waste is that a significant proportion of it ends up in our oceans and has a detrimental effect on marine life.

Figs 3.7 & 3.8 Oil & Plastic Pollution

33

34

EXAMPLES OF PLASTICS IN CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE

The variety of plastic products available to the construction industry is extensive, as such they can be found in many applications ranging from glazing elements to interior furnishings and plumbing fixtures (Dietz, 1969, p.77). The six projects illustrated in this chapter are good examples of the way plastic materials have been specified in contemporary architecture. The first four focus on the most common use of plastic, namely cladding, while the last two are indicative of the growing trend in plastics which form both load-bearing elements and surface materials.

Overleaf, the undulating profile of each PMMA panel forms a sculptural screen for Reiss’ flagship store in London. The panels have been machined using CNC-milling techniques, as such each segment is unique with varying thicknesses and surface finishes (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.108). In Herzog & de Meuron’s Laban Centre, shown in figures 4.1 & 4.2, a colourful skin of Polycarbonate sheeting is fixed to an inner concrete wall, adding vitality to the façade and improving the building’s thermal performance (Herzog & De Meuron, 2015).

Peter Cook and Colin Fournier’s Kunsthaus Graz and Zaha Hadid’s Chanel Mobile Art Pavilion, are examples of architectural styles which are made possible through the novel and fluid forms plastic materials offer. As figure 4.3 shows, the museum’s curved PMMA roof panels are fixed to mounting brackets but do not form a weather-tight enclosure. Instead, rainwater is permitted to pass through the gaps between panels, onto a secondary plastic membrane which has been applied to the building’s surface. In comparison, Hadid’s temporary pavilion is constructed from fibreglass sheets bolted to a steel framework and a series of ETFE rooflights. As a result of their complex shape, each of the 400 fibreglass panels required separate moulds (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.97).

Hoofdoorp bus station and Atelier van Lieshout’s parasitic addition to Utrecht’s Centraal Museum are two precedents for the design of plastic as structure and building envelope. To reduce construction costs, CNC-milled blocks of expanded Polystyrene were utilised to mimic concrete in the complex forms of the bus station (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.132). For similarly pragmatic reasons, rigid Polyurethane was set within two layers of glass-reinforced Polyester to produce a strong, lightweight and thermally efficient room for the museum’s director (Atelier van Lieshout, 2015).

Fig 4.0 PMMA Facade Panels

35

Figs 4.1 & 4.2 Polycarbonate Sheeting

36

Figs 4.3 & 4.4 Kunsthaus Graz

37

Figs 4.5 & 4.6 Chanel Mobile Art Pavilion

38

Fig 4.7 Fibreglass Panels

39

Figs 4.8 & 4.9 Hoofdoorp Bus Station

40

Figs 4.10 - 4.13 Hoofdoorp Bus Station

41

Figs 4.14 & 4.15 ‘Clip On’ by Atelier van Lieshout

42

T

H

E

P

L

A

S

I T

C

S

C

O

O

K

B

O

O

K

The aim of the following two chapters is to give an impression of the content and format the published manual will take. In reality, the cookbook would have additional recipes and the technical section would be far more comprehensive. For example, I have not included my research into polymer structures, synthesising techniques and other manufacturing processes such as calendering and compression moulding.

45

TECHNICAL INFORMATION

BASICS OF PLASTIC

What are plastics? It should be a simple question to answer however the characteristics of each plastic can differ greatly from one to the other (Dietz, 1969, p.46). Within the same family of polymers, the performance characteristics and visual appearance of individual plastics can vary greatly. Polystyrene for example, is hard, susceptible to cracking under stress and highly transparent in its simplest form (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.258). However, with the addition of a foaming agent, an expanded foam product can be made from Polystyrene which is white, soft and crushes under low loads (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.36).

In spite of this, there are a number of attributes which define and differentiate plastics from other materials. First is that plastics can be considered artificial: they are the “chemist’s contribution to the materials world” (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.245).

Synthesising techniques such as polymerisation have enabled the creation of materials which are not present in the natural world (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.27).

A second feature shared by modern plastics, concerns the range of ingredients which are necessary for their manufacture. The majority of plastics are derived from the by-products of the oil and natural gas industries and all contain the essential elements carbon, hydrogen and oxygen (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.21). Other chemical elements such as chlorine, fluorine and nitrogen are also present (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.245).

Perhaps the most obvious characteristic apparent in all synthetic polymers, is one which is linked to the underlying meaning of the term ‘plastic’. In etymological terms, the word ‘plastic’ is derived from the Latin and Greek words ‘plasticus’ and ‘plastikos’ (Online Etymology Dictionary, 2015). In both these languages, the meaning of the adjective can be translated as “capable of being shaped or moulded” (Online Etymology Dictionary, 2015).

Consequently, it is the intrinsic capacity of the material to be manipulated into desired forms, which qualifies a wide range of synthetic polymers as plastic, even though on the face of it, they often appear and behave very differently from one another. At this point, it is quite pertinent to note that some polymers can be shaped repeatedly if re-heated, while others can be deformed only once, however this is something I will explain further in the sections concerning thermoplastics and thermosets.

The final defining attribute of plastics concerns their chemical composition. Plastics can be considered high polymers - that is to say, they are molecular structures which consist of “numerous small, relatively simple repeating units combined into very large

46

aggregations” (Dietz, 1969, p.46). Polyethylene, a plastic widely used in packaging, is one example of a polymer which has been created by the linking together of smaller molecules. An Ethylene monomer is considered to be ‘unsaturated’ as the pair of carbon atoms are joined at more than one valence point. With the addition of a catalyst, this extra link between the carbon atoms can be broken free and the Ethylene monomers begin to attach to each other, forming long chains (Dietz, 1969, p.47).

CLASSIFICATION | THERMOPLASTICS

Thermoplastics include synthetic polymers which are characterised by a lack of crosslinking between molecular chains (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.24). In terms of molecular structure, the chemical bonds in thermoplastics are often arranged in an amorphous form although crystalline structures are also common (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.245). As would be expected, the more crystalline the molecular structure of the thermoplastic, the greater the material’s resistance to chemical corrosion and the more stable it is under high temperatures (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.245). Despite this, amorphous structures display superior transparency and are less likely to shrink in size once moulded (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.245).

What distinguishes thermoplastics from thermosets, is that the process of heating and cooling the plastic to achieve a desired shape, can be repeated. This is because the polymer chains within the material have not formed strong atomic bonds with each other, but instead are linked by secondary valence forces which are easy to break down with heat (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.24). As the melting point of these connections lies below the material’s decomposition temperature, reheating a thermoplastic which has already undergone plastic deformation, will simply cause it to melt again (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.26). As a result, thermoplastics can be recycled.

THERMOSETTING PLASTICS

In their book, ‘Materials and Design’, Mike Ashby and Kara Johnson use Araldite as an example which embodies many of the features commonly exhibited by thermosets.

Developed in 1946, Araldite is a strong adhesive made from the mixture of an epoxy resin called Epichlorohydrin and a catalysing agent known as Bisphenol-A (Mallick, 1997, p.122). When combined, the Bisphenol-A compound polymerises with the synthetic resin, which creates a vast number of cross-links between the polymer chains and causes the paste to harden (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.245). It is this high degree of cross-linking found within Araldite’s molecular structure, which characterises thermosets (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.26).

Thermoplastics (No Cross-links)

Thermosets (Cross-linking in Blue)

Figs 5.0 & 5.1

47

48

As in the case of Araldite, most thermosetting plastics are synthesised from the reaction between two chemical ingredients. Due to the abundance of atomic bonds which form once these chemicals have catalysed, the ability of individual monomers to move freely within the polymer structure is severely restricted (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.26). Consequently, the temperature required to break these connections and melt the plastic is much higher than the temperature at which the material begins to disintegrate (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.26). This condition limits thermosets as they can only exist in a ‘plastic’ state once. In other words, once these materials set, they do so irreversibly and cannot be broken down again, re-heated or recycled (Dietz, 1969, p.55).

49

MATERIAL PROPERTIES | RESISTANCE TO ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Plastics are a relatively new addition to the materials world and their durability and performance when exposed to climatic conditions are not wholly understood. In comparison to natural materials such as wood and metal, however, plastics demonstrate a high resistance to the corrosive effects of weathering and require minimal upkeep (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.16). As a result of their synthetic make-up, plastics do not biodegrade. This means that they do not rust or rot and can withstand exposure to moisture, salts and acidic chemicals (Dietz, 1969, p.74).

Ultraviolet radiation, however, does pose a risk to synthetic polymers. During the fabrication process, high intensity manufacturing techniques can introduce photosensitive impurities into the plastic’s polymer structure (Socioeconomic Data & Applications Center, 2015). Plastics such as Polypropylene and LDPE are particularly susceptible as these additional chromophoric moieties photo-degrade the material via “free radical mechanisms” (Jones, 2015). The photoreactions that occur can discolour the material and cause surface fragmentation. If rain washes these particles away, the ultraviolet radiation can penetrate further into the polymer and induce significant structural damage through ‘micro-cracking’ and ‘chalking’ (Jones, 2015).

THERMAL PROPERTIES

Although the precise effects vary from polymer to polymer, changes in temperature have an adverse impact on the structural integrity of plastic materials. Synthetic polymers have a high co-efficient of thermal expansion; as such an increase in temperature causes a disproportionate rate of enlargement relative to other materials (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.17). Repeated expansion and shrinkage strains the material and can lead to “fatigue, cracking and failure” (Dietz, 1969, p.67), specifically in areas of concentrated stress such as corners.

During the design of plastic components, it becomes very important to allow for expansion joints and prevent sharp transitions between sections. The plastic aesthetic we are accustomed to of filleted corners, hollow forms and curved surfaces, are highly engineered solutions for the problem of temperature differential (Tangram Technology, 2015).

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

Indicators of a material’s physical capability include stiffness, toughness and tensile strength. These factors gauge the following: the ratio of material displacement relative to an applied force; the energy required to break a material on impact; and the

50

resistance of a material to break under tension (Engineering Dictionary, 2015).

The graphs overleaf plot the toughness of different materials against their strength.

Glass, for example, is a very strong material but shatters easily; as such it lies towards the brittle end of the toughness spectrum. As defined by the light blue region in figure 5.2, polymers exhibit greater strength than most woods, foams and rubbers, although in comparison to metals, they are significantly weaker. In terms of impact strength, however, polymers are comparable to far stronger materials. Plastics such as Nylon and Polypropylene lie within a range of 1 - 4 KJ/m2 on the toughness scale, which is roughly equivalent to cast iron or lead.

In terms of stiffness and tensile strength, most synthetic polymers display attributes which are similar to those of wood and concrete (Dietz, 1969, p.62). For this reason, plastics are not normally specified within load-bearing applications (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.16).

FIRE PERFORMANCE

The chemical constitution of plastics derives from natural elements such as carbon and hydrogen. Despite the fact that some are slower burning than others, like all organic materials, plastics are highly flammable (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.17).

Depending on its classification, heat from a fire will either deform the plastic until it fails, or degrade the cross-linkages within its polymer structure, decomposing the material entirely.

As a plastic burns, carbon dioxide and water are released in the fire’s smoke but a lack of oxygen around the blaze will promote the discharge of highly toxic carbon monoxide (Dietz, 1969, p.72). If chemicals such as chlorine or sulphur are contained in the polymer structure, traces of these elements will also be found in the gases emanating from the fire (Dietz, 1969, p.72). As a result, the specification of plastic products in buildings is normally restricted to areas with lenient fire performance requirements (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.17).

51

Synthetic Polymers

Strength (MPa)

Ceramics

Strength (MPa)

10,000

10,000

1000

1000

Zirconia Glass

Nylon Polyethylene 100

10

10 PMMA

PP 1

0.01

0.1

1

10

100

Concrete

0.1 0.001

0.01

Toughness (kJ/m2) Wood

Strength (MPa)

1

10,000

10,000

1000

1000

100

10

10

1

1

Lead

MDF 0.01

0.1

1

Toughness (kJ/m2)

100

Cast Iron Aluminium

Paper

100

0.1 0.001

10

Metals

Strength (MPa)

Oak

0.1

Toughness (kJ/m2)

10

100

0.1 0.001

0.01

0.1

1

Toughness (kJ/m2)

10

100

Figs 5.2 - 5.5 Material Toughness

1

0.1 0.001

Brick 100

Figs 5.6 & 5.7 Plastic Pellets & Injection Mould

52

53

PLASTICS MANUFACTURE

MANUFACTURING PROCESSES

The choice of manufacturing technique is dependent on a set of variables: namely the component’s polymer type, its desired profile, surface finish and batch size (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.308). Products which are highly complex and require large production runs can be processed with high pressure techniques such as compression and injection moulding.

Film and sheet materials are usually fabricated with extruders and calendering equipment, while expanded foam products and insulation sprays are made using foaming agents and basic moulds. This section focuses on three popular manufacturing techniques: injection moulding, extrusion and foaming.

INJECTION MOULDING

The injection moulding of plastics was developed in the mid-1800s and was the result of technology transfer from die-casting techniques employed in metal manufacturing (Thomas, 1947, p.3). Since then, no other manufacturing process has matched the influence injection moulding techniques have had on plastic production (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.312). The gamut of components formed using this process is extensive and ranges from toys and cosmetic packaging, to plumbing fittings and electrical fixtures (Dietz, 1969, p.116).

To begin with, thermoplastic granules are fed into a hopper and then funnelled into a heated barrel within the machine (Quarmby, 1974, p.33). Once inside, the calidity of the cylinder’s sides and the friction generated by a rotating screw, are enough to melt the plastic as it is forced along the length of the barrel (Dietz, 1969, p.116).

By the time it reaches the high-pressure nozzle at the end of the drum, the moulding compound has melted sufficiently to be at the right consistency for filling intricate cavities within the moulds (Quarmby, 1974, p.33). These moulds are maintained at room temperature, as such heat from the molten mixture dissipates into the metal and the plastic component hardens quickly (Thomas, 1947, p.2).

The main advantage of injection moulding over other methods, is that the cooling times of thermoplastics can be significantly shortened (Dietz, 1969, p.116). Coupled with the high quality of machined moulds, injection moulding represents the most effective method for mass-producing detailed and highly complex components (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.312). The level of post-processing is minimal too: the sprues which form within the channels and gates linking separate mould cavities, are easy to break off and can be ground down and re-used in the fabrication process (Quarmby, 1974, p.33).

54

EXTRUSION

Extruders work much in the same was as injection moulding apparatus, however in place of the steel moulds, interchangeable dies are fitted at the end of the heated barrel. The profile of these dies determines the shape of the plastic material which is extruded from the machine. For example, a circular hole in the die will extrude a rod and a rectangular shape will form a bar (Quarmby, 1974, p.31).

Extruders are suited to the fabrication of hollow sections such as pipes, however a slight variant of this manufacturing technique is also used in the fabrication of plastic bottles (Quarmby, 1974, p.32). As the tube emerges from the machine, it is clamped by a two-part mould with a small opening at one end (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.314).

Before the plastic has had a chance to cool, hot air is then blown inside, stretching the plastic lining against the cavity walls, much in the same way a vacuum-forming machine works. For this reason, extrusion blow-moulding is restricted to thermoplastics such as PET, HDPE and PP (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.314).

FOAMING

Foaming is a low pressure, low temperature and relatively cheap manufacturing process best described by the fabrication of expanded Polystyrene foam. Beads containing foaming agents, such as Pentane gas, are poured into large aluminium moulds and steam-heated (Dietz, 1969, p.121). As the moulds heat up and the Polystyrene begins to fuse together, the foaming agents release carbon dioxide, causing the mixture to expand by up to 20 times its original size (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.315).

As the material cools, it becomes rigid and can be cut into smaller pieces for packaging material. The expanded foam products are also extremely lightweight, have low vapour permeability and their high porosity and closed cell structure give them extremely good thermal insulation properties (Ashby & Johnson, 2002, p.315). As such, expanded foam mouldings are commonly used as vapour barriers and insulation panels in building construction (Dietz, 1969, p.121).

Figs 5.8 & 5.9 Extruding Machine & Foaming Moulds

55

Figs 5.10 & 5.11 Foam Products

56

THE PLASTICS COOKBOOK

Fig 6.0 Material Prototypes

59

Figs 6.1 - 6.4 HDPE Sheet Material

60

61

RECIPE 1

RECYCLED HDPE SHEET MATERIAL

TIME REQUIRED

Preparation: 90mins Working: 15mins MATERIALS & TOOLS REQUIRED

25no. Milk Bottles Storage Containers Teflon Sheets Heat Press SAFETY EQUIPMENT REQUIRED

Safety Gloves Scissors

Figs 6.5 - 6.8 Recipe Images

62

63

•

Cut bottles and caps into small pieces

•

Place Teflon sheets on heat press

•

Scatter HDPE onto Teflon sheet

•

Place another Teflon sheet above plastic

•

Close heat press

•

Set temperature to 175°C

•

Check HDPE every 5mins

Figs 6.9 - 6.12 Recipe Images

INSTRUCTIONS

Figs 6.13 - 6.14 Dissolved Polystyrene

64

65

RECIPE 2

DISSOLVED POLYSTYRENE FILLER

TIME REQUIRED

Preparation: 15mins Working: 30mins MATERIALS & TOOLS REQUIRED

Expanded Polystyrene Foam Acetone Spatulas Mixing Bowl Bandsaw SAFETY EQUIPMENT REQUIRED

Saftey Glasses Rubber Gloves Vapour Mask

Figs 6.15 - 6.18 Recipe Images

66

67

•

Use bandsaw to cut Polystyrene foam into small chunks

•

Place Polystyrene in mixing bowl

•

Pour Acetone over foam

•

Stir mixture

•

Keep stirring until the Acetone has evaporated

•

Leave Polystyrene to harden in a well ventilated space

Figs 6.19 - 6.22 Recipe Images

INSTRUCTIONS

Figs 6.23 - 6.24 Polyethylene Brick

68

69

RECIPE 3

PLASTIC BAG BRICKS

TIME REQUIRED

Preparation: 5mins Working: 240mins MATERIALS & TOOLS REQUIRED

250no. Plastic Bags Heat Press Teflon Sheets Pencil Measuring Tape Bandsaw SAFETY EQUIPMENT REQUIRED

Safety Glasses Safety Gloves Dust Mask

Figs 6.25 - 6.28 Recipe Images

70

71

•

Fold bags in thirds and prepare bundles of 3

•

Place a bundle on the heat press

•

Set temperature to 135°C and close heat press

•

Allow bags to cool and peel from top plate if necessary

•

Place another bundle on top and repeat process

•

If heat causes the bags to deform, flip the bundle and lower hot plate

•

As the block thickens, increase the temperature to 140°C

•

Repeat the process until desired height is achieved

•

Use a bandsaw to trim block’s edges

Figs 6.29 - 6.32 Recipe Images

INSTRUCTIONS

72

POSSIBLE APPLICATIONS

Fig 7.0

75

PLASTIC BAG TARPAULIN

Fig 7.1

76

EMERGENCY FLOOD RELIEF POLYETHYLENE BLOCK ROAD COVERING

Fig 7.2

77

POLYETHYLENE BRICK ACOUSTIC BAFFLES

Fig 7.3

78

DISSOLVED POLYSTYRENE PUMICE STONE

Fig 7.4

79

DISSOLVED POLYSTYRENE STRUCTURAL DAMPING

Fig 7.5

80

PLASTIC SANDALS (HDPE SOLES & PLASTIC BAG STRAPS)

83

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

DEVELOPING THE PLASTICS COOKBOOK

The Plastics Cookbook contains three ‘recipes’: a sheet material for surface finishes derived from recycled milk bottles, a filler made from dissolved Polystyrene packaging and a brick created from disused plastic bags. In the first chapter of this handbook, an analysis of existing household manuals was carried out within the Literature Review and although several elements of each case study informed the format and scope of this thesis, it also confirmed the unprecedented nature of this type of materials guide.

As a result, many of the ideas and methods developed for each creative project were the result of a process involving trial and error. Although the architectural concepts underpinning each recipe were driven in most part by my interest in the use of recycled plastics in design, I had no prior experience of working with synthetic polymers. As such, the step-by-step information presented in the Cookbook was a culmination of knowledge gained from various material tests, which I carried out between February and April 2015.

Consequently, the aim of this chapter is to discuss and examine the successful prototypes, failed experiments and discarded ideas which shaped my understanding of the material and which proved invaluable for putting together the manual.

I began by collecting empty milk bottles in the hope of creating a form of homemade plastic sheet material. Research into similar products indicated that a temperature of 175°C was optimal for melting the HDPE (Materia, 2015). As figures 8.0 and 8.1 show, this heat setting was successful as the plastic scraps softened and fused together seamlessly. Instead of carefully placing each piece of plastic onto the Teflon and successively building up layers to form a sheet, I poured the entirety of the HDPE material onto the heat press and used the weight of its top plate to spread the plastic evenly. Again this worked very effectively and considerably shortened the working time for the project.

Ironically, the successes of the recycled HDPE experiment contributed to the failure of my initial tests with Polyethylene bags. The images of crumpled plastic in figures 8.2 - 8.4, describe some of the problems I encountered when making the Polyethylene brick. In contrast to the HDPE, I wasn’t sure what temperature to set the heat press at.

As such, I resorted to the same setting of 175°C but this proved too hot for the plastic bags. The heat singed the Polyethylene and deformed the bags to such an extent that it was very difficult to layer them in the heat press.

To overcome this issue, I trialled different heat settings and discovered that a temperature of 135°C was sufficient to melt the Polyethylene without drastically disfiguring it.

Additionally, I found that increasing the temperature to 140°C improved the fusion

Fig 8.0 HDPE Pieces

84

Fig 8.1 Melted HDPE

85

Figs 8.2 - 8.4 Failed Polyethylene Heat Press Tests

86

87

between bags as the block thickened. As heat pressing the plastic bags individually was very time consuming, I also attempted to vary the number of layers I applied per press and found that a number of 3 was appropriate. Fewer layers and the bags would warp, too many and the heat would not penetrate far enough to fuse the lower bags together.

I wanted the Polyethylene block to resemble a normal clay brick as closely as possible, so I measured out a standard brick dimension on the top face and used a bandsaw to trim off the edges. By exposing the inside of the brick, it was really interesting to note the instances where the heat press had not fused the plastic together properly.

Figures 8.5 - 8.8 clearly show the small pockets of air which had formed within the block’s structure. Other parts, however, had melted perfectly and it was impossible to distinguish between one plastic bag layer and the other.

Dissolving Polystyrene was a much simpler procedure and the only problem I faced was related to obtaining an adequate concentration of Acetone solvent. Although my ambition for the manual had always been to locate the materials and tools necessary to carry out these projects within the home, I found that the Acetone liquid contained within nail polish remover was too diluted to dissolve the expanded Polystyrene foam.

In the end I had to resort to ordering pure Acetone from a chemical supplier.

Acetone aside, ensuring that the instructions contained within the handbook could be replicated at home, was very important for maintaining the manual’s do-it-yourself credentials. Specifically, I wanted to find an alternative for the techniques involving a heat press. The photographs on the following spreads illustrate my attempts at emulating the recipe instructions with an iron and oven.

Baking the milk bottles seemed to work initially, however the process never fully melted the HDPE, even though the oven had been set at 175°C. As shown in figure 8.13, the greaseproof paper burnt before the plastic had fully melted. The resulting combination of smoke and plastic fumes meant that I had to abandon the test after one hour. In comparison, ironing both the HDPE and Polyethylene was successful.

Fig 8.5 Polyethylene Block

88

Figs 8.6 - 8.8 Air Bubbles in Polyethylene

89

Figs 8.9 - 8.12 Baking HDPE Test

90

Fig 8.13 Failed Test

91

Figs 8.14 - 8.17 HDPE Ironing Test

92

Figs 8.18 - 8.21 HDPE Ironing Test

93

Figs 8.22 - 8.25 Polyethylene Ironing Test

94

Figs 8.26 - 8.29 Polyethylene Ironing Test

95

Fig 8.30 Ironed Polyethylene

96

Fig 8.31 Ironed Polyethylene

97

Figs 9.0 - 9.3 Material Tests

98

99

MATERIAL TESTS

To better understand the technical information I propose to be in the manual, I conducted a series of trials which tested the materials devised for the Plastics Cookbook. By cutting, sawing, drilling and sanding the different plastics, I hoped to gain an understanding of how the materials behaved when worked.

First, I used simple tools such as a Stanley knife and some shears to cut the plastic. In both cases, the Polystyrene and Polyethylene proved very difficult to cut. The outer shell of the Polystyrene was too tough for the Stanley knife to pierce and the dense layering of bags in the brick resisted the shears. In comparison, the HDPE was easy to cut. The sample illustrated in figure 9.10 was composed of two layers of plastic ironed together. As such, it took a matter of seconds to slice and trim it with the knife and shears. Although the heat-pressed HDPE was thicker and more resilient, it was very brittle and I was able to snap off the small triangular piece shown in figure 9.13, by scoring the material a number of times. Afterwards, I tested the materials with workshop machinery such as the bandsaw, belt-sander and pillar drill depicted in figures 9.22 - 9.33.

The results of the pillar drill experiment were particularly interesting. The sheet material and plastic brick behaved much in the same way as wood: there was minimal resistance to the rotating drill bit and plastic shavings would scatter around the hole.

Although it was easy to drill through the hard casing of the Polystyrene, as I released the drill and lifted it from within the material, I noticed the drill bit was covered in a thick tangle of plastic. Furthermore, the hole which had been carved out a few moments ago, slowly disappeared as the Polystyrene inside expanded and shifted to plug the gap.

Until then, I had presumed that the dissolved Polystyrene form was entirely solid as it was extremely rigid. As such, it was surprising to discover that there were traces of Acetone trapped inside and that the Polystyrene was still malleable.

I also tested the different plastics’ performance in terms of stiffness, flammability and compressive strength. The stiffness test involved trying to bend each plastic material with my hands. Again, the thin sample of HDPE could be bent very easily and gave way proportionally to the amount of force I exerted. However, I was not able to break the thicker sample of HDPE, despite the fact I mounted it onto a vice and leant back with my whole body weight. Instead only slight cracks were visible on the material’s surface as if the plastic had shattered. I found that the Polyethylene’s laminated structure was very difficult to bend at first, however with enough force it suddenly gave way and spliced in a similar fashion to a strip of wood.

In terms of fire, the dissolved Polystyrene was extremely flammable. It ignited rapidly, charred the plastic and gave off thick black smoke, although the flame did not spread

Figs 9.4 - 9.7 Material Tests

100

101

across the sample’s surface quickly. Similarly, the spread of fire across the Polyethylene brick was very limited - the photo in figure 9.38 shows the small extent of damage after 10 minutes. The HDPE sheet emitted a colourless gas and completely melted within three minutes. As the material melted, small droplets of molten plastic began to drip off the edges. This observation highlights one of the issues posing thermoplastics when faced with fire. The flaming droplets can ignite unaffected areas and exacerbate the spread of fire (Engelsmann, Spalding & Peters, 2010, p.18).

The final test was performed solely on the Polyethylene brick, as I wanted to test its compressive strength in comparison to a traditional clay brick. The equipment I used functioned by exerting an upwards force on the material and counteracting this motion with a fixed paddle above the plastic sample. The pressure applied increased in small increments until the machine deemed that the material had failed. As you can see in figure 9.45, the crusher was stopped at a force of 93.78kN / 0.586MPa. Although this is considerably less than a clay brick, which resists pressures up to 20MPa, I had to stop the procedure, as the steel supports holding the plastic brick in place were buckling and I was worried I might damage the machine or cause injury to passersby (Go Brick, 2015). Having said this, the brick had already started to deform substantially by this point. Figure 9.42 shows the extent of splaying along the short faces of the brick. As such it is unlikely that the Polyethylene would have matched the compressive strength of a clay brick.

These tests were not performed in a laboratory and apart from the compressive strength machine that I operated, the outcomes of each trial were not measured with scientific equipment. As a result, the accuracy and thoroughness of my findings are limited and any definitive conclusions concerning the material properties of each plastic project would require further testing. Nevertheless, the observations I was able to make were interesting as they offer some suggestions as to whether these prototypes are appropriate for use in buildings.

Although the unusual appearance and physical properties of the dissolved Polystyrene were quite remarkable, I found it very difficult to manipulate and work with once the outer surface had hardened. I would also be hesitant to specify such a highly flammable material in any architectural situation: it ignited instantly and the toxic smoke it released could pose a lethal risk in the advent of fire.

In comparison, the recycled sheet material was easy to machine and in its potential variety of colours, I believe it could suit a range of applications such as flooring and work surfaces.

Figs 9.8 - 9.9 Material Tests

102

103

Meanwhile the brick was simple to make, both with workshop equipment and at home with an iron, and the Polyethylene responded well to post-processing. Given the fact that four billion plastic bags are thrown away each year in the EU alone, the case for recycling them is very strong (Summers, 2015). On average, it takes approximately 16,000 conventional bricks to build a three-bedroom home, as such it would be possible to build over 850 houses a year from a resource that currently goes to waste (KGB, 2015).

Figs 9.10 - 9.13 Stanley Knife Tests

104

Figs 9.14 - 9.17 Shears Tests

105

Figs 9.18 - 9.21 Hacksaw Tests

106

Figs 9.22 - 9.25 Bandsaw Tests

107

Figs 9.26 - 9.29 Belt Sanding Tests

108

Figs 9.30 - 9.33 Pillar Drill Tests

109

Figs 9.34 - 9.37 Stiffness Tests

110

Figs 9.38 - 9.41 Fire Performance Tests

111

Figs 9.42 - 9.45 Compressive Strength Test (Mild Steel Buckling)

112

Fig 9.46 Compressive Strength Test

113

114

TESTING THE MANUALS

On Wednesday 25th March, I organised a workshop to test the effectiveness of the handbook, particularly its ability to communicate the instructions of the Cookbook’s three material recipes. As both the recycled sheet material and the plastic bag brick required the use of a heat press, only two of the recipe manuals were handed out: ‘Dissolving Polystyrene’ and the ‘Polyethylene Brick’ tutorial.

Although I was present throughout the workshop to document the results of each test, I did not run through the manuals or provide any further assistance to participants: my aim was to ensure that those taking part relied solely on the cookbooks for information.

At the end of the material experiments, I asked each person to fill out a questionnaire, which asked how straightforward they had found the procedure and whether they had deviated from the guidelines in the recipe book.

As the questionnaires in figures 10.43 and 10.45 demonstrate, a key piece of information I had not conveyed in the manuals, was that the reaction between Acetone and Polystyrene becomes very cold. This example highlights the limitations of using a printed format: the manual’s owner is unlikely to be aware of any experiential information that is not clearly described either within the technical information section, or by the step-by-step sequence of instructions and photographs.

As such, it is common for contemporary instructables to take the form of videos found online or applications which can be downloaded onto devices such as tablets and mobile phones. These modern technologies offer a superior range of services to a traditional manual format. For example, the ‘Comments’ section on Youtube provides a forum for people to share feedback in response to a tutorial which has been posted on the site. These discussions are handy for plugging any gaps in the original media’s information. Similarly, mobile applications allow users to integrate their findings with other platforms such as social media. As a result, independent findings can be publicised to form a communal pool of information. Lastly, digital formats also offer greater flexibility, in the sense that the information they provide can be updated frequently and quickly. In comparison, the printing costs associated with producing revised editions of a handbook can be prohibitive.

Having said this, as a consequence of developing these material projects in a workshop environment, I felt that having the document at hand would be very convenient. In places such as a garden, an internet connection is not always available, as such the main advantage of having a printed manual, is the fact a user can have it in front of them wherever they carry out the experiments. In this way, a user can also personalise their handbook, by adding notes in the margins of alternative ingredients and methods they discovered during the making process. In addition, the written text enables readers to

Figs 10.0 - 10.2 Plastics Workshop

115

Figs 10.3 & 10.4 Handing Out Manuals

116

117

follow the guidelines at their own pace: there is no need to keep pausing a film in order to keep up with the tutorial’s presentation. If any substances are spilt, the damage to the manual can be regarded as adding character to the text, whereas liquids can permanently ruin electronic equipment. Consequently, one situation is a celebration of the experience, where the manual becomes part of the making; the other is a situation where the messy nature of experimentation, inflicts irreversible damage to the process of making.

My findings from the workshop supported my opinion that the manual was the format for best communicating the information within this thesis. In my review of the ‘Jerusalem’ cookbook, I concluded that its single image of the final dish, permitted readers a greater degree of freedom when it came to interpreting the recipes. However, the manuals I handed out contained photographs of each step in the process, so I was concerned my approach would be too prescriptive to promote experimentation.

As such, it was encouraging to observe how participants did not simply follow the handbooks word for word. Instead, rather than re-creating the experiments, they read the information, played with the materials and then returned to the manual as and when they needed further instructions. As a result, the volunteers tested the material properties in novel ways and imagined possible applications which I had not previously considered. For example, in figures 10.15 and 10.21, the participants tested the transparency of the dissolved Polystyrene and attempted to mould the material.

Similarly, as shown in figure 10.34, another person sandwiched Teflon sheets within the plastic bag layers, to create folds in the Polyethylene brick.

I was also asked questions such as whether the Polystyrene could be frozen or put in a microwave? What would happen if the mixture were heated, would it solidify more quickly? Could the dissolved Polystyrene be 3D-printed? These discussions and the manner of experimentation which saw participants testing the properties of each material, either by stretching it, using it to create joints or compositing it with other materials such as copper powder and plaster, made for a very engaging workshop.

In summary, the manual format gave each participant enough space to experiment with the materials. As such, not only was it an effective means for providing technical information, but the handbook layout succeeded in fostering the creative approach to recycling plastics, which I strived for in the introduction to this thesis.

Figs 10.5 - 10.8 Dissolving Polystyrene

118

Figs 10.9 & 10.10 Dissolving Polystyrene

119

Figs 10.11 - 10.13 Testing Material Properties

120

Figs 10.14 - 10.16 Experimenting with Moulds

121

Figs 10.17 - 10.20 Creating Thin Sheet Material

122

Figs 10.21 & 10.22 Testing Translucency

123

Figs 10.23 - 10.25 Composites & Tool Handles

124

Figs 10.26 & 10.27 Forming Joints

125

Figs 10.28 - 10.31 Heat Pressing Polyethylene Bags

126

Figs 10.32 & 10.33 Heat Pressing Polyethylene Bags

127

Figs 10.34 & 10.35 Inserting Teflon Sheets Between Layers of Plastic

128

Figs 10.36 & 10.37 Creating Folds in Polyethylene Layers

129

Figs 10.38 & 10.39 Reinforcing Polyethylene Brick

130

Figs 10.40 & 10.41 Reinforcing Polyethylene Brick

131

Fig 10.42 Questionnaire

132

Fig 10.43 Questionnaire

133 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK

Fig 10.44 Questionnaire

WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 134

Fig 10.45 Questionnaire

135 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK

Fig 10.46 Questionnaire

WORKSHOP FEEDBACK 136

137

CONCLUSIONS

As a result of the technical research and material testing I undertook for this thesis, I have learnt a considerable amount in relation to plastic and the way in which we interact with it as a material. An appreciation of the staggering quantity of plastic waste we generate, led to an exploration of the low value we currently ascribe to it in society. We tend to specify plastic for disposable and worthless products such as packaging, or detail it in such a way that the material has a short functional lifespan.

My study into the chemical composition of thermoplastics, has taught me that we are not taking advantage of the full potential some plastics have to offer, in being 100% recyclable. I also found that manuals are a valuable tool for materials experimentation and can help to shift the perception of plastic towards something more usable and transformable at the domestic scale. I hope the do-it-yourself projects contained within this Plastics Cookbook, demonstrate that the methods and equipment needed to realise this potential are not sophisticated.

138

139

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Ashby, F.M., 2009. Materials and the Environment: Eco-Informed Material Choice. Burlington, Mass: Butterworth-Heinemann Ashby, F.M. & Johnson, K., 2002. Materials and Design: the Art & Science of Material Selection in Product Design. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Butterworth-Heinemann Berge, B., 2000. The Ecology of Building Materials. Oxford: Architectural Press Brand, S., 1971. The Last Whole Earth Catalog: Access to Tools. Hammondsworth: Portola Institute Dietz, H.G.A., 1969. Plastics for Architects & Builders. London: M.I.T. Press Engelsmann, S., Spalding, V. & Peters, S., 2010. Plastics in Architecture and Construction.

Basel: Birkh채user Falasca-Zamponi, S., 2011. Waste & Consumption: Capitalism, the Environment & the Life of Things. New York; London: Routledge Howes, P. & Laughlin, Z., 2012. Material Matters: New Materials in Design. London: Black Dog Kirk, A.G., 2007. Counterculture Green: The Whole Earth Catalog and American Environmentalism.

Lawrence: University Press of Kansas Mallick, P.K., 1997. Composites Engineering Handbook. New York: Marcel Dekker McCorquodale, D. & Hanaor, C., 2006. Recycle: the Essential Guide. London: Black Dog Mead, S.J., 2003. Mini Service & Repair Manual. Sparkford: Haynes Publishing Group Ottolenghi, Y. &Tamimi, S., 2012. Jerusalem. London: Ebury Press Quarmby, A., 1974. The Plastics Architect. London: Pall Mall Press Thomas, I., 1947. Injection Molding of Plastics. New York: Reinhold

140

JOURNALS

Lefteri, C., 2009. Tough Plastic to Replace Metal. Ingredients: A Materials Project Journal.

4 (1), pp. 58 - 59.

WEBSITES

Atelier van Lieshout. 1997. Clip On (online). Available from: http://www.ateliervanlieshout.com (accessed 16th April 2015) Desjardins, J. 2014. A Forecast of When We’ll Run Out of Each Metal (online). Available from: http://www.visualcapitalist.com/forecast-when-well-run-out-of-each-metal/ (accessed 8th April 2015) Engineering Dictionary. 2015. Definition of: Stiffness (online). Available from: http://www.engineering-dictionary.org/stiffness (accessed 3rd April 2015) Environmental Protection Agency. 2014. Municipal Solid Waste Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States: Tables and Figures for 2012 (online). Available from: http://www.epa.gov/solidwaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/2012_msw_dat_tbls.pdf (accessed 21st February 2015) Go Brick. 2007. Specifications for and Classification of Brick (online). Available from: http://www.gobrick.com/portals/25/docs/technical%20notes/tn9a.pdf (accessed 18th April 2015) Haynes Online. 2015. About Haynes (online). Available from: http://www.haynes.co.uk/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/HaynesAboutView?langId=1&storeId=10001&catalogId=10001 (accessed 14th April 2015) Herzog & De Meuron. 2015. 160 Laban Dance Centre (online). Available from: http://www.herzogdemeuron.com/index/projects/complete-works/151-175/160laban-dance-centre.html (accessed 16th April 2015) Jones, M.S. 2002. Clip On (online). Available from: http://www.niwa.co.nz/sites/niwa.co.nz/files/import/attachments/Jones.pdf (accessed 2nd April 2015) KGB Answers. 2014. How Many Bricks Does it Take to Build the Average 3 Bedroom House? (online). Available from: http://www.kgbanswers.co.uk/how-many-bricks-does-ittake-to-build-the-average-3-bedroom-house/4908799 (accessed 18th April 2015)

141

McMurrey, D. 2013. User Guides: Tell Them How to Operate It! (online). Available from: http://www.prismnet.com/~hcexres/textbook/user_guides.html (accessed 14th April 2015) Online Etymology Dictionary. 2015. Search: Plastic (online). Available from: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_ frame=0&search=plastic&searchmode=none (accessed 4th March 2015) Plastics Historical Society. 2011. People & Polymers (online). Available from: http://www.plastiquarian.com/index.php?id=4&pcon= (accessed 20th February 2015) Materia. 2015. Recycled Plastic Sheets (online). Available from: http://materia.nl/material/recycled-plastic-sheets/ (accessed 17th April 2015) Socioeconomic Data & Applications Center. 1998. UV Damage to Polymers (online).

Available from: http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/ozone/docs/UNEP98/ UNEP98p62.html (accessed 2nd April 2015) Statista. 2015. Production of Plastics Worldwide from 1950 to 2013 (in Million Metric Tons) (online). Available from: http://www.statista.com/statistics/282732/globalproduction-of-plastics-since-1950/ (accessed 18th April 2015) Summers, C. 2012. What Should Be Done About Plastic Bags? (online). Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17027990 (accessed 18th April 2015) Tangram Technology. 2009. Design Guides for Plastics (online). Available from: http://www.tangram.co.uk/Design%20Guides%20for%20Plastics.pdf (accessed 31st March 2015) The World Counts. 1997. Plastic in the Ocean Facts (online). Available from: http://www.theworldcounts.com/counters/waste_pollution_facts/plastic_in_the_ ocean_facts (accessed 9th April 2015)

142

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1.0 http://www.ebberiginal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/jerusalem-ottolenghi. jpg Figure 1.1 http://www.rover-classics.co.uk/images/reference/thumbnailv8/steering/gallery/ images/steering%20column%20shaft%20&%20linkage_jpg.jpg Figure 1.2 http://designinquiry.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/wec_cover.gif Figure 1.3 http://www.wholeearth.com/category.php?rec=7 Figure 2.0 https://farm1.staticflickr.com/208/483766882_39c83cf262_o_d.jpg, https://www. flickr.com/photos/galessa/483766882 Figure 2.1 https://farm1.staticflickr.com/147/401871570_a8d1281727_o_d.jpg, https://www. flickr.com/photos/galessa/401871570 Figures 2.2 - 2.5 https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7043/7001923426_fb53cbc763_o_d.jpg, https:// www.flickr.com/photos/bb-foto/7001923426/in/set-72157629683068503 Figure 2.6 http://cdnimg.webstaurantstore.com/images/products/extra_large/95528/140965. jpg Figure 2.7 http://www.solvayplastics.com/sites/solvayplastics/en/news/publishingimages/ retractor_metal_replacement_case_study-2.jpg Figure 3.0 http://cdn.onegreenplanet.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10//2011/05/Problemwith-Abundance.jpg Figure 3.1 http://sustinable.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ea965a7b-977d-427e-ad90-

143

de5db57cd0fd-2060x1236.jpeg Figure 3.2 https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-p_kil1fwl18/tx6bi7dkybi/aaaaaaaaawa/ tp0epar5szo/s1600/10279.jpg Figures 3.3 - 3.6 http://www.epa.gov/solidwaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/2012_msw_dat_tbls.pdf Figure 3.7 http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1885911/images/o-plastic-ocean-facebook.jpg Figure 3.8 http://www.unmotivating.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/overpopulation-06. jpg Figure 4.0 https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ab/2d/65/ ab2d65d22a01ca2bf30f6b1cba9e567c.jpg Figure 4.1 https://centreoftheworld.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/dsc_0016.jpg Figure 4.2 http://evanchakroff.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/090716-090722-londonhdm-laban-dance-center-6.jpg Figure 4.3 http://c1038.r38.cf3.rackcdn.com/group4/building38574/media/xvjx_kh04.jpg Figure 4.4 http://c1038.r38.cf3.rackcdn.com/group4/building38574/media/ Figure 4.5 http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/ 2011/06/1308263949-k55622.jpg Figure 4.6 http://www.erratica.us/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/100_3473.jpg

144

Figure 4.7 http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/1308264501-k55187.jpg Figure 4.8 http://www.krith.nl/html/selectie/busstation%20hoofddorp%203.jpg Figure 4.9 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3890/15107448529_0fddf68a88_o_d.jpg, https:// www.flickr.com/photos/trevorpatt/15107448529 Figure 4.10 https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1129/1269670641_3b83ea28e4_o_d.jpg, https:// www.flickr.com/photos/dod-projects/1269670641 Figure 4.11 http://acdn.architizer.com/thumbnails-production/00/16/001646aa1ebb5052868f 1810701aee36.jpg Figure 4.12 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3848/15107653668_0816a97f64_o_d.jpg, https:// www.flickr.com/photos/trevorpatt/15107653668 Figure 4.13 https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3841/15284870622_f8760681fa_o_d.jpg, https:// www.flickr.com/photos/trevorpatt/15284870622 Figure 4.14 & 4.15 https://klaasantonmulder.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/utrecht-rabo-080.jpg Figures 5.2 - 5.5 http://www-materials.eng.cam.ac.uk/mpsite/interactive_charts/strength-toughness/ basic.html Figure 5.6 http://independentplastic.com/media/design_assets/background_images/blackcirc.jpeg Figure 5.7 http://ssplastics.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/tooling-services.jpg

145

Figure 5.8 http://www.21hgjx.com/companypic/bizpic/qingdaohuasu/ qingdaohuasu-20081120162553.jpg Figure 5.9 http://www.ferro-press.hu/galeria/Technologiak/EPS%20habgyartas_2.jpg Figure 5.10 http://main.abqjournal.netdna-cdn.com/wpFigure 5.11 http://www.foam-mn.com/siteimages/billets.jpg

All other illustrations and photographs are by the author.

WORD COUNT: 9,694

MIKE SLADE SN: 12058114 UNIT 11