|
|
|
May 2nd, 2009, 11:40
|
#1 |
 A Total Bastard
|
Investigating BioVALs BB Claims
I'm starting this as a new thread because I don't want to pollute a retailers' thread with this discussion.
I've taken it upon myself to look into BioVALs online representations of their BB product, in particular their resin based clear "BBBMAX" .27gr BB and the company "Levante Labs" in Switzerland. I'm interested in this product because of the unique claims being made by the manufacturer and the information about it that they've posted on their website. I've been unable to obtain any samples of this product as I've not found a retailer with it in stock, but I am looking forward to actually trying it. ====================================== Issues so far: 1. The Levante Labs Report. There are absolutely no references or credentialed persons in this document and in fact, there is a signature on the document indicating that the document is authorized for release, but there are no names of persons, technicians, engineers, or scientists or their credentials that conducted the tests. Typically technical reports of this nature are heavily credentialed to support the findings of the report. Additionally Levante Labs does not appear in any Swiss business directories and has no internet presence other than the report itself. I have inquiries through the Swiss Consulate in Ottawa for verification of the existence of such a firm at the address in the document to see if I can get more information about this firm. The fact that you can obtain this report by mailing a self-addressed stamped envelope to the address on the report itself indicates nothing - for all you know, this is a post office box or someone's basement. So, so far I've been unable to validate the authenticity of this report, More to come as I find more information. 2. BioVALs "Certificate" on Website http://www.biovalbbb.eu/uploads/pdf/...tification.pdf This is a BioVAL authored document that claims its subordinate supplier's material meets an EU specification for biodegradability. It goes on to state that it is an "unsigned official document". Hmmm... Seems a lot of BioVAL documents are unsigned but official. Its an officious looking document at first glance but in fact when you look at it in detail, its not a certificate, its not even issued by a governing body of any kind. At best I would call this a claim of compliance. =============================================== I will be upfront about this, I am a BB retailer here in Canada, so I do have declared interests in this area. I am not attempting to create a discrediting campaign for BioVALor its MAXBBB, rather, I am trying to validate pubically made claims so I can better understand their product, its origins and its real endorsements, certifications and performance warranties. They claim this BB is better than anything else on the market. Perhaps they're right, but I intend to hold their feet to the fire on their scientific and testing claims. I do invite Stefano Valentino, the CEO on BioVAL to address these issues directly or to contact me with further information that clarifies the above issues in order to validate the credentials and certificates they make claim to. Please do not post in this thread unless you have information to contribute to the above mentioned issues or have direct knowledge of BioVAL and its testing and compliance processes and certificates, or information that can enable a third party to validate the Levante Labs document or the existence of the company itself. Any independent analysis with a name/author is also useful. Please feel free to bookmark this thread and check it from time to time for updates. Last edited by Scarecrow; May 5th, 2009 at 09:45.. |
|
|
May 2nd, 2009, 17:58
|
#2 |
|
A Total Bastard
|
An interesting article worth reading points out that the actual material in the BBBMax product is undisclosed, even in the MSDS sheets (how that is allowable I am not sure).
http://chairsoft-press.com/articles/...ical-analysis/ BioVAL previous biodegradable BBs have a disclosed recipe and that is confirmed by the MSDS sheet, however, the new BBBMax BB is an entirely different material and has its own sheet. Old Formula: http://www.biovalbbb.eu/uploads/pdf/BBB%20MSDS%20AA.pdf New MAXBBB Formula: http://www.biovalbbb.eu/uploads/pdf/...0MSDS%20AA.pdf The article does some comparisions by reverse engineering the weight and size to get a specific gravity and therefore a short list of substances that the product could be made of. Basically in the absence of any other information from BioVAL, it looks like the closest chemical description for this substance is (drum roll please) GLASS. Here is a clip from that article: Conclusion So if BBBMAX aren’t plastic or biodegradable, then what are they made of? What material * Shatters on impact, * Has a melting point of 500° to 1800° centigrade, * Has a density of about 2.4 g/cm^3, * Is not flammable, * Can be dissolved by strong acids and bases, * Is made of natural ingredients and is non-toxic, * and finally, is transparent? The only material that comes to mind that has all these properties yet is cheap enough to be a candidate for disposable BBs is glass. For comparison, here is a material safety data sheet for a type of optical glass (meaning transparent) with a density and melting point that closely match those of the BBBMAX. The BK-7 optical glass from that MSDS has a melting point of 532° C while the Bioval claims the BBBMAX has a melting point of 500° C or above and the BK-7 has a specific gravity of 2.39g/cm3 while the BBBMAX has a specific gravity of approximately 2.4g/cm3. Remember where Bioval claimed on their FAQ that the BBBMAX is not glass? This is now a little hard to believe. If a material behaves like, melts like, dissolves like, weighs like, and looks like glass; one would tend to believe that it was glass. If they are in fact, some form of glass, does this not conflict with Bioval’s statement on their safety page that the BBBMAX meets the MILPOL requirement of biodegradability? |
|
|
|
May 2nd, 2009, 23:40
|
#3 |
|
There are some really bad logic in that blog that your second post referred to there from my point of view, which I consider the meat and core of yoru argument.
1) BioVAL already said BBBMax is made out of resin. Resin ain't glass. Case in point, if you were to use www.matweb.com, and use "resin" with a minimal melting point of 500*C, you would have 21 hits. To use temperature alone to figure out which material it is IN ABSENCE OF ANY SALIENT MATERIAL FEATURE is a bit like using weight to tell my age, my height, my gender and race etc. 2) The term biodegradable pretty vague too, especially in absence of any data on how it degrades. Remember, biodegrabeable is degradation of a material by natural means, it doesn't just have to be nom-nom-noms for bacteria (e.g. UV degradation, humidity degradation, etc.) 3) Too much room for error in that calculation. 2 things a) the author ASSUMED that the BB is 6mm. Most BBs advertised as 6mm are in fact more often lower than that. See this as a good example. Even just by deviation of 0.1mm will compound the final error to 4% (1.6% ^ 3)- and this is without considering the other possible error. Are you willing to go out and call someone a fraud with a possible deviation in your data by a minimum of 4%, possibly more? b) there is no way of telling how "pure" is the component used to make the 0.27g BBs. It's all fine and well if they are only using 1 material component, but if they are using 2 different componentns with different weight and material specs you start to have a headache. 3 or more and it's starting to become impossible. The way the author did his calculation, he only assumed that it is a 1 component system - when there are good reasons to suspect that the BBBMax is quite possibly a 2 component or more system. (A BB made purely out of pure resin and can be used in high-temperature application isn't likely to be cheap to start with) What is the lesson learnt here? ASSUME makes ASS out of U and ME. The author in that blog used too much assumptions. Any university undergraduate project supervisor will happily kick you in the butt if you were to write a report using so much assumptions! 4) And lastly:there is this thing called the synergistic effect in material science - you add 2 materials together you can get a better property, i.e 1 + 1 to get 3. The manufacturer may have taken advantage of this to claim that their product is thermal-stable. However, when you mix something together though, you could lose volume etc, which wrecks havoc on specific gravity calculations. Again, without knowing whether the BB is made out of just 1 component or more, using specific gravity to determine a material is a bit fallacious. The best way to investigate the manufactuere's claim? Get some samples (which should be easily done if you ask nicely and pay for postage), lay them out under the sun, and see what happens after 30 days ("The Composting Test"). This is far more reliable than any armchair calculation done by even the best mathematician armed with the latest version of Perry's Chem Engineering handbook next to him.. Last edited by Amoki; May 2nd, 2009 at 23:54.. |
|
|
|
|
May 4th, 2009, 12:29
|
#4 |
Beating the dead horse to death
I am new here so please forgive me if my post if it violates some rule I am not aware of.
The subject of BIOVAL BBBMAX has been beat to death over at Arnie's where the better part of 1000 posts and 10000 views have covered everything from biodegradability to Levante Lab's test. The conclusion over there is that: (1) Levante's credentials (or lack thereof) is really irrelevant. The point of lab tests is that they are presented in a way that anyone may repeat them in the same controlled lab environment and publish the test results. If they are different then a discussion may be initiated as to the merits of the tests themselves. (2) The “G” word (glass) is so vague in scientific/physics that saying something is made of “some form of glass” is rather misleading. Glass is a process and most anything can be made into glass. It is simply a matter of cooling speed. Water and even polymers for example can be made into glass if the cooling process is done right. Furthermore a little investigating on Google Patents show a few patents for BIODEGRADABLE glass. I guess a more correct term would be AMORPHOUS SOLIDS. Most classes of solid materials can be found or prepared in an amorphous form. For instance, common window glass is an amorphous solid, many polymers (such as polystyrene) are amorphous, and even foods such as cotton candy are amorphous solids (Brittanica and Wikipedia). (3) Biodegradability (the “B” word) is a term that can also be (mis)used in such a way as to create a lot of confusion. I can identify 3 different definitions: one is legal (with all its different national, regional connotations), another is based on international standards (ex. ISO 14855 etc etc) and lastly one that is set in the public mind. What does it mean to you? Your answer is not wrong in fact you will probably be able to find your own definition somewhere on the web or in a technical manual. (4) Whether or not ANY bb is dangerous depends solely on the velocity and distance such a bb is fired period full stop. No bb has magical powers that suddenly come to life once such a bb leaves the barrel of an airsoft gun. (5) Does the BIOVAL BBBMAX break glass (oops sorry, the amorphous solid used to make transparent panels in cars and houses)? Never tried. Not on our field. Point is who cares. It doesn’t break good quality ANSI/EN/MILSPEC ballistic eyewear and it doesn’t cause damage to gear or airsoft guns. Mesh goggles, God forbid! Those things are simply dangerous and completely banned here and should be banned everywhere. Why anyone would spend huge $ on gear and not spend good $ on protecting eyes and face is beyond me. I will leave that debate to another thread. (6) There are plenty of pictures on the web and in the forums of normal plastic bbs breaking optics, celphones, teath and even skin. Vehicles on the field are illegal here because too many people have been hit or even run over by them. In fact, if you fire plastic bbs at the right speed and distance at a car window that window will eventually resonate and shatter. We use BIOVAL BBB, BBBFLUO (tracer) and BBBMAX regularly and we are quite satisfied. In fact the BBBMAX is the best bb we have ever tried in any airsoft gun by far. Try it and if you don’t like it stop using it but don’t discount any transcendental powers simply because it is different! For sure it is better than any existing bbs by far! I guess that is what scares most bb producers. I am also guessing that is why the motto for the BBBMAX in latin is, "Oderint Dum Metuant" (Let them Hate as Long as they Fear). Last edited by Easy; May 4th, 2009 at 12:40.. |
|
|
|
|
May 4th, 2009, 16:27
|
#5 | |
|
As I have stated on the retail thread, all of my own testing has confrimed the Levante lab tests. I have yet to have someone shoot these BB's into me for a tissue damage comparison but that is completely irrelevant.
As always Airsoft in North america is a year behind (or more) than in Europe. Scarecrow PM me and we will arrange for some BB's to get to you as they are sold out across the planet.
__________________
Do you know what ruins airsoft? (Chair), (Drama), (Air), (Sugar) softers, filthy casuals --- Quote:
WANTED PTW Receiver PRIME, STG, Factory |
|
|
|
|
May 4th, 2009, 21:45
|
#6 | |
|
A Total Bastard
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
May 4th, 2009, 22:19
|
#7 | ||
|
A Total Bastard
|
Quote:
The credentials and background of Levante Labs goes to the heart of supporting the credibility of the report. The merit of the tests themselves has EVERYTHING to do with the credibility of the document!!! I've be unable to validate the existence of this firm. If the firm can been shown that it is an independent entity contracted by BioVAL versus having been crafted by BioVAL itself, it means the difference between a real study or a marketing tool. If its a marketing tool, it should be known for what it is. And if it is a marketing tool and not a real study, thats a whole other problem that I won't go into here now, because I have not established an answer to that one way or another. Its like the tobbacco industry's own studies back in the 50's and 60's attempting to disspell the mounting evidence of the health risks of smoking cigarettes with commissioning their own studies! Peer review and critical deconstruction of medical data resulted in a complete refutation of their studies and showed them to be marketing ploys having little to do with looking after the welfare of their customers. Quote:
As I've said, I've not concluded anything but I find both your posts rather quick to defend conclusions I haven't made one way or the other yet. Terrific, you're happy with the BB and you're willing to use it because it meets your needs and you're satified that its safe within your personal boundaries of 'safe'. You have an opinion and I respect that. Many here have used other BioVAL BB products here in the past and not been satisfied with the results and thats their opinion, so you in turn have to respect that experience and opinion. Also, most of what was posted at Arnies in that thread was 95% opinion with about 5% fact and opinion does not constitute fact. I am still assembling facts from evidence and the available data to satisfy my own curiosity. Once I am satisfied with the facts, I'll render an opinion, but from what I read so far, being a critical thinker, amd having spent six years in the business myself, I am seeing things in that Levante Labs document and the lack of certain information to be very, very suspicious because they point to a potential of having obscuficating inconvenient facts or truths. So this horse is far from dead yet, and I intend to beat it until I am satisfied one way or another. |
||
|
|
|
May 4th, 2009, 22:30
|
#8 |
|
A Total Bastard
|
Amoki, I am not qualified in any way in materials science to support or refute what you've posted, so its just going to stand there in the thread, but I ask you this: why doesn't the MSDS sheet disclose the actual chemical make up of the 'resin'? Why is the material not chemically identified on their website or in any of their materials? Why does the author of the blog have to go to the trouble of reverse engineering the material through math in the first place?? These questions are rhetorical. Draw your own conclusions all I ask is that you think about it.
|
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 01:19
|
#9 | |
|
Quote:
Last edited by Easy; May 5th, 2009 at 03:07.. Reason: edited by Easy info was incorrect |
||
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 01:46
|
#10 | ||
Fact and Fiction
Quote:
 Under normal circumstances i would agree with you. Unfortunately these are not normal circumstances. Try downloading the MSDS for Gorilla Glue. You will see that the MSDS has "trade secret" written exactly where the ingredient everyone wants to know about should be. You will see this with many products. It is perfectly legitimate, in my view, to doubt or question any lab report and its claims. In fact, it was made clear by players and game field owners that even if the report was prepared in a more conventional manner they would still question and be filled with scepticism. This is just part of human nature when something new and innovative hits the market. The point is that these persons (includingmyself) have acquired the BBBMAX and tried them. These "field trials" have accumulated tons of empirical evidence from all over the world (including Taiwan, Japan, EU and USA). Players are crazy about them because the BBBMAX are: (1) As close as you can possibly want a bb to be perfectly spherical; (2) No bubbles; (3) Even density; (4) small, fast and accurate; when compared to plastic or bioplastic bbs. **Bottom line is that even though i agree with you, i must admit that in the face of hands-on positive experience questioning the "format" (and therefore the credibility) of the LEVANTE LABS report is simply an exercise in academic discussion. The real world results are all that matter to us on the playing field. In this sense, the LEVANTE LAB report and BIOVAL's claims are largely irrelevant.** A lot of Europeans contacted BIOVAL and LEVANTE LABS. The Fiduciary representing LEVANTE stated on letterhead that items were omitted so that the competition would not have access to persons or materials. Also, that they do not want to be flooded with requests for information from the international airsoft community and above all do not want to be dragged into any issues. Lastly, how you intend to investigate this "marketing conspiracy theory" (lol) is very interesting. Switzerland, is the most secretive society in the world where violations of privacy, company requests for confidentiality and banking secrecy carries a jail term and a fine. You will need to some heavy duty proof to substantiate your claims, tests and opinions. Conclusion: (1) To refute (or even accept) the Levante paper you must have an independent lab run the testing. That includes a CO2 cannon and all the bbs they tested. Repeatability is the only real question mark. If this is not possible then we will all want to see your report. No easy task and a lot of us have found it to be to expensive to do. It is much easier to spend $/€ to buy the BIOVAL BBBMAX and form our own opinions. (2) In the final analysis, we as players don't give a hoot about the LEVANTE LABS test, BIOVAL's claims or any test for/againts either. We have formed our opinions based on tests in the field. Empirical evidence accumulated in many different parts of the world and in many different environments holds up better than any lab test. The evidence from the field is that the BIOVAL BBBMAX is a great product. Quote:
Furthermore, attributing special ballistic qualities (exterior and impact) to the BBBMAX based on speculation about materials, hardness etc is somewhat simplistic. They are better for specific physical properties. They are polished to perfection (better than any plastic), they are of even density, and they lack air bubbles inside. These are facts not opinion that translate into better ballistic properties. Its as simple as that. Now my question is since BIOVAL made a great bb (BBBMAX), isn't simply a natural knee-jerk reaction by some producers to attempt to discredit them for this achievement? BIOVAL is doing a great service for airsoft spending time and money on developing great products for us and we as players thank them for it. They are sticking thier neck out with claims and tests which is more than i can say for the rest ofd the pack. Moreover, the Dept of Natural Resources Washington State have approved the BIOVAL BBB products for use on public land. This alone is an "A" for effort to BIOVAL. Lastly, we are all waiting for the BIOVAL BBBDIMPLEX bb, aka the Golf Ball BBB. They claim this to be the cats a$$ of bbs. We shall see. We will all buy a bag and test it ourselves. In this sense this dead horse continues to be clubbed to death. Last edited by Easy; May 5th, 2009 at 05:30.. Reason: Edited for accuracy |
|||
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 09:17
|
#11 | ||
|
A Total Bastard
|
Quote:
And you're using the phrase "marketing conspiracy theory". There is nothing conspiratorial about it. Marketing is by its design and nature used as a tool to sway opinion. If you're a critical thinker, when you see marketing materials you read it, understanding that its from the manufacturer and its an "ad" and its purpose is to promote the product for sale. Scientific analysis if it is to be considered as such should be independent of a manufacturers marketing claim and that independence should be open, credentialed and referenceable. Easy, I notice you've got 2 posts so far here at ASC, so you're obviously here just to discuss this one thing. Thats fine, and I don't have a problem with that but in your big long post you haven't contributed any new information and all you've done is defended what is already there and castigated me for not accepting it at face value like a lot of other people have. I'll ask you to cease posting in this thread unless you have new information to offer in regards to the issues I've identified in Post #1, which are very specific questions that I have yet got answers for. And yes, I have samples coming in and my testing won't be limited to shooting it out of my gun - I've not questioned their performance and really don't intend to until after I've satisfied myself as to their chemistry. And I can tell you when I do that, my document will come with credible, third party verifiable sources in a laboratory environment. I understand if I present a scientific document the burden of proof will be mine and I have zero problems with that. Quote:
Thank you for your time on this Easy, but, as I said, restrict all future posts to providing evidentary information in respect to the questions in post #1. |
||
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 09:20
|
#12 | |
|
A Total Bastard
|
Quote:
To clarify the costing, the shipping was $14 USD, so the product itself was $24, but that was 2000. I think the product is just beginning to get into the North American supply chain and I think at the beginning unless BioVAL has pricing restrictions, you might seem some profit taking on initial sales. Pretty normal for a premium product that is in high demand and low supply. Converted to Canadian dollars my final landed cost is $49 CAD. Last edited by Scarecrow; May 5th, 2009 at 09:22.. |
|
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 10:38
|
#13 |
|
Scarecrow - I agree with you and i am hardly castigating your posts. I have no evidence nor do i have answers to your questions. Even if i did it would be regarded with suspicion. I think that the accepted convention is that "evidence" on the web is like muddy water, difficult to phathom. The only proof i have is from personal experience and that of those i play with. I am assuming that this is unacceptable to you. So be it. As for marketing, the first BBBMAX I used were given to me (about 50) and i tried them in a couple of sniper rifles and AEGs. Never looked back since. I guess players will decide for themselves. As for the number of posts ... well ... give me a chance i only just signed up ... lol.
|
|
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 10:41
|
#14 | |
|
A Total Bastard
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
May 5th, 2009, 12:06
|
#15 |
|
A Total Bastard
|
I've had an interesting call back from the Swiss Consular Mission in Toronto this morning. Spoke with a very nice lady (named "Kathy") with a Swiss accent who went through the business registries and found no registration for a "Levante Labs" at the address indicated in the report, or in their registry country wide.
She is sending me some additional information via email regarding the local business registry she used and is going to get me into contact with a trade representative to look into it further in case her registry is incomplete. I asked her if it was possible that a registered business would not be in her listing and she was doubtful but if it is not, it would be because it was registered very recently (ie: last 60 days) and that's why she wants to follow up with the trade representative who would have access to more detailed information. She was very helpful and very "open" despite Easy's earlier worries about the secretiveness of the Swiss (lol). I wasn't arrested or imprisoned, and am still happily sitting at home enjoying a cup of tea. As usual this information is just that, information as I gather it, and in of itself, is not conclusive as of yet. I will keep you informed. Last edited by Scarecrow; May 5th, 2009 at 12:10.. |
|
|
  |
|
||||||
| Bookmarks |
|
|
 |
|
