Rubbermaid Cooler Materials ID solved!!!

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

brewtus_

I say, lookey here son...
HBT Supporter
Joined
Oct 9, 2008
Messages
229
Reaction score
23
Location
Dayton, Ohio
This new thread is in response to the "Rubbemaid No" thread posted by Hex (https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f11/rubbermaid-says-no-203227/. I thought it made sense to start a new thread in case anyone is interesed in this info and didn't plan on returning to the old thread.

So last night after my "chemistry lesson" on plastics, everyone still had some questions regarding the materials making the mash tun. Is it HDPE, LDPE, PP, LLDPE or MDPE? Turns out it's none of them!!!!

My mash tun sacrificed some small shavings from itself in the name of science to identify it's composition. I took the samples into the lab for chemical analysis. My cooler is a Rubbermaid 1655, 7 gallon, manufactured September 2007. Here are the results:

>Lid: HDPE

>Orange plastic on outside: HDPE

>White plastic on inside: Modified polypropylene copolymer (i.e. Dow Engage 8450, 8540 or similar resin). The melting point is somewhere between 100 and 110 deg C, which would make it fine for mashing, just don't pour boiling water (100C) in it or it may deform. This type of material is often used in car panels or bumpers where you need a rigid plastic but also need it to "give" some so that it does not shatter when banged into, especially at low temperatures.

Wait, there's a "7" on the bottom of the cooler! It can't be HDPE! Yes it can. There's a "7" on the bottom because the cooler istelf is composed of at least three layers of different polymers - the HDPE orange part, the PP copolymer and the insulating layer inside (urethane? foamed styrene? not sure since I don't feel like destroying the cooler to find out). The recycling number "7" is applied when the finished good has multiple layers and/or multiple blends of different polymers in it's composition. When discarded, the entire cooler is considered for recycling, not each of its individual parts. Number 7's are often thrown out at the recycling center since they are not "pure" materials.

Warning: Science below!

This is concerning the white portion only. It would have been ideal situation to determine melting points and glass transition temperatures to get a better ID, but a differential scanning calorimeter is required for that, and mine happens to be broken. So I just used infrared spectroscopy to ID the plastic. I needed to get the plastic into a thin film for analysis, so that required melting it and pressing it out. I started at 100C, and it softened but did not melt all the way. Mission accomplished at 110C. If this were PP, it would have melted at 160C (or perhaps 130C if it were syndiotactic). So I knew it wasn't PP. Then I actually took the sample to the spectrometer, and the results showed a infrared spectrum matching PP. But wait, there was also the indication of some PE present. I then realized that this had to be a PE modified PP copolymer. This makes sense since the PE portion lowers the crystallinity of the PP giving better low temperature properties (this is supposed to be a cooler after all). HDPE would not be ideal at below freezing temps, and LDPE is too elastomeric. A modified PP copolymer gives a rigid material with better low temp properties.

I have the FTIR data saved as a picture, but have no way of posting it. Can someone give me a hand with it?

The lid and orange parts were easily ID'd by the same methods. There is the indication that there may be some UV stabilizers in the orange portion.

I would have like to have done more, but I only had an extremely small sample size (only a few milligrams) and didn't want to kill my mash tun completely.

Cheers!
 
Good job, but your only half way finished with your part of the experiment (if you choose to accept the mission).

And someone else here may be able to help to keep your costs down.

Get two samples of water, one taken from 170f water before, and one sample of 170f water after one hour in water cooler.

Post results of your findings in Parts Per (?) here on this thread.

Cheers.
 
Brewtus...

YOU FREAKIN' ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I owe you a homebrew or 6.
Thanks so much for taking the time & effort to do this. :rockin:
 
That's great but just because it won't melt doesn't mean it won't leach. We already knew it wouldn't melt. I don't mean to disturb the **** on this again but we were arguing about negative health effects, not whether it would melt. Thanks for determining the type of plastic though. At least we know that. Good work!
 
Good job, but your only half way finished with your part of the experiment (if you choose to accept the mission).

And someone else here may be able to help to keep your costs down.

Get two samples of water, one taken from 170f water before, and one sample of 170f water after one hour in water cooler.

Post results of your findings in Parts Per (?) here on this thread.

Cheers.

Damn man... kind of an unappreciative attitude considering the trouble he went through to answer your question when everyone else was chucking stones at you.

BTW - Ever stop to think that maybe water (oh - and should that be tap, deionized, or distilled?) might not be a good indicator of what might happen when an acidic wort is used in its stead?

And PPM of what? What exactly should he be looking for?

I don't think you have the background to be suggesting test methods.
 
Good job, but your only half way finished with your part of the experiment (if you choose to accept the mission).

And someone else here may be able to help to keep your costs down.

Get two samples of water, one taken from 170f water before, and one sample of 170f water after one hour in water cooler.

Post results of your findings in Parts Per (?) here on this thread.

Cheers.

What analytes would you be interested in? Heavy metals (Pb, Hg, Cd, etc.), polyaromatic hydrocarbons, halogens, phthalates, BPA or some other boogie man chemicals that everyone seems to be scared of? And at what sensitivity (pph, ppm, ppb)? What exactly are we afraid of leaching out of the plastic and into our beer?

It would make more sense to first see if any of the analytes of interest are even in the plastic first before determining if they would even leach out.

Look at the report from the water company and see what's in your water, because you're adding that to your beer as well. Even distilled water from the store has non desireable stuff in it at the ppm level. Unless you're willing to pay $$$$$, you're not getting "pure" water.
 
Why not just say "I don't want to know if anything leaches from the plastic that could have negative health effects because I like using a cooler and I'm not going to change anyway."
 
Brewtus - I tried PM'ing you w/ my email address so I could get that FTIR image hosted & posted for you, but your inbox is full.
 
I found the following link which I believe shows the engage 8540 copolymer, which is one of the plastics Brewtus ID'd this as likely being, along with three other 'engage' products, to have been rated food-safe up to 180 degrees F:

http://www.nsf.org/Certified/Food/Listings.asp?Company=13870&Standard=051

Engage 8003 is too elastomeric and has a melt point of 77C.
Engage 8440, 8480 and 8540 are all very similar with melt points of 93C, 99C and 104C. Based on how it behaved at 100C (did not melt) and melted fine at 110C, my thoughts are that it is Engage 8540, not Engage 8480. Flex modulus measurement would be the yes/no between the two.
 
More info...

On the assumption it is 8540 as Brewtus presumes it probably is:

A) It complies with FDA FCN 424:
http://www.ides.com/pweb/obds.aspx?E=30976

B) In FCN 424, the following is stated on 'intended use':

"As articles or components of articles used in contact with all types of food under Conditions of Use A through H, as described in Table 2."

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/fcnDetailNavigation.cfm?rpt=fcsListing&id=424

C) And here's a link including Table 2 referenced above:

http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/FoodContactSubstancesFCS/ucm109358.htm
 
There's no irony, it's just the rules about needing a certain ## of posts before you can post pics. Brewtus, I tried PM'ing you so you could email me the file and I'll post it, but your box is full.
 
i dont see any irony at all. i'm waiting for my post count to reach over 25 so i'm allowed to post pictures as well.......

brewtus, great work. i work with engage copolymers every day (along with 50 or so other polypropylene derivatives), its cool so see other things made with them than the automotive compounds we do.
 
Here's the FTIR image from Brewtus:

rubbermaid_ftir.jpg
 
Christ. The first snow hasn't even flown here yet and the inane Winter cabin-fever flame wars are already starting...
 
i dont see any irony at all. i'm waiting for my post count to reach over 25 so i'm allowed to post pictures as well.......

It was a joke. You just posted the most technical, self-completed, scientific analysis/experiment that anyone on this board has ever posted, and can't post a simple picture.

That's not irony?
 
... if it was that he couldn't figure out how to click the little "picture" or "attachment" icons, it'd be irony. As it was, no more ironic that rain on your wedding day.
 
Awesome work brewtus. Nice to see someone kill an argument dead in such a way. Now we all know factually that our cooler's are GTG...of course without knowing this I have used my cooler for years to brew thinking I was angrilly challenging the gods to try their hardest to smote me down with the plastic death syndrome :)

I will say I chuckled at first when I read the needing help posting pics part too. I then looked at brewtus' post numbers and clued in, but see the humor.

Anyway, nice work killing assumption with science.
 
Okay cool so coolers are safe to 180f just like the buckets. Sweet!!! Thanks for all the time on this!
 
And BIRD, agreed that it was NOT ironic because he could do a complex thing but was unable to execute a simple one.....(because he is BLOCKED from doing it)

But it WAS ironic that he was authorized to execute such a complex operation, but not authorized to execute a simple seemingly harmless one.

So it WAS ironic.


And your posts scolding people for combative posts, when that seems to be all you do is kinda IRONIC too.
 
So, everyone that has thanked me or who has learned something, you're welcome. I'm just glad that I was able to provide some information that wasn't already out there. There's no need for bickering, I'm not telling anyone what is right or what is wrong, I'm just supplying some data and letting you guys make up your own minds. I hope I can provide my services again in the future for some other unforseen calamity in the clash between plastics, chemistry and brewing.

I actually chuckled at the pun Airbornguy made. That was a pretty funny statement, I knew exactly where he was going! Thanks to tunoffun for actually posting the picture.

Now if I can just figure out how to use this darn bottle opener...

:tank:
 
Thanks a ton for the experimentation!

I have nothing useful to add so I will leave you with this very mature thought:

The left side of the top graphic looks like the picture of a woman's internal parts from sex ed class
 
So, everyone that has thanked me or who has learned something, you're welcome. I'm just glad that I was able to provide some information that wasn't already out there. There's no need for bickering, I'm not telling anyone what is right or what is wrong, I'm just supplying some data and letting you guys make up your own minds. I hope I can provide my services again in the future for some other unforseen calamity in the clash between plastics, chemistry and brewing.

I actually chuckled at the pun Airbornguy made. That was a pretty funny statement, I knew exactly where he was going! Thanks to tunoffun for actually posting the picture.

Now if I can just figure out how to use this darn bottle opener...

:tank:

Cheers man! Welcome to HBT.
 
:D
So, everyone that has thanked me or who has learned something, you're welcome. I'm just glad that I was able to provide some information that wasn't already out there. There's no need for bickering, I'm not telling anyone what is right or what is wrong, I'm just supplying some data and letting you guys make up your own minds. I hope I can provide my services again in the future for some other unforseen calamity in the clash between plastics, chemistry and brewing.

I actually chuckled at the pun Airbornguy made. That was a pretty funny statement, I knew exactly where he was going! Thanks to tunoffun for actually posting the picture.

Now if I can just figure out how to use this darn bottle opener...

:tank:

Nice post and +1...I chucked too and knew where he was going...didn't make any more of it. Welcome to HBT!

There are a number of us that will prove without a doubt if there's anything to be concerned about in mashing with these coolers...just follow this thread for another five or ten years...and see If WE stArT DOINg GOofY thINGs! :D

So...everything look good for 304 stainless steel mash tuns? :mug:
 
Brewtus,
Any chance you could take a few shavings off of a poland spring water cooler jug? We could put to rest the better bottle vs water cooler jug debate.
 
Brewtus,

1+ to you !

Thanks for an awesome analysis. You're a true scientist with an inquisitive mind that won't let go of a question until you driven it to the ground and and a good teacher too for explaining the whole thing to us much simpler folk.

BTW, for what it's worth, I'm stickin' with my cooler MLT.

Now if I could just the toxic waste and pesticides out of my water....
 
Brewtus,
Any chance you could take a few shavings off of a poland spring water cooler jug? We could put to rest the better bottle vs water cooler jug debate.

I may be able to do something with that in the first quarter of 2011. That's when I'm getting some new thermal analysis equipment to replace my broken DSC. What I suspect is that the Better Bottles do indeed have a copolymer along with PET which changes its crystalinity vs. the "normal" PET of your Polar Springs bottle. This may have an effect on gas permeability, however, if you're using PET (#1 recycle symbol) you're probably OK with your Polar Springs bottle.
 
Back
Top