Is Edead v1SE butyl based?

[hondarider 10+ year member]

On Eds website it says that it is butyl but on the sound deadener showdown it says that it isn't.

http://www.sounddeadenershowdown.com/which/

Does anyone use this deadening is it very good? It is only $1.28 per square foot with the forum discount.

Click to read more...

 

[msimon 10+ year member]

The showdown used the older eDead. The new eDead is butyl based, but it has a mylar foil instead of the typical aluminum.

 

[~Magick_Man~ 10+ year member]

yeah the v1se2 is butyl, but the old v1se was asphalt.

the newer stuff is very flexible and alot easier to apply than the old stuff too.

~Magick_Man~

 

[Rudy 10+ year member]

That's correct - old is asphalt new is butyl. I'll have the new stuff on SDS in a few weeks.

Flexibility isn't really a good thing. One of things you want sound deadeners to do is stiffen panels. Flexible doesn't do that. You also want it to act as a barier. That works best when the constraining layer and adhesive have different densities. Mylar is just not as good as aluminum.

 

[Eugenics 5,000+ posts]

regardless you're till supplying a shitty company by using eD. they seem to fail regardless of what they do. issues of neglect and greed seem to plague them.

 

[hikneeken 10+ year member]

don't know why all the bad talk about ed on the boards but i just got the v1se2

http://cgi.ebay.com/120Sq-Ft-eDead-v1SE-Sound-Deadening_W0QQitemZ190083190657QQihZ009QQcategoryZ67760QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

1 layer did a ok just but 2 layers is comparable or better than my previous car with dynamat extreme

so I do think its worth its price

also if a thicker aluminum layer bothers you so muich go and get some aluminum tape to add over the edead

 

[hikneeken 10+ year member]

just to throw this in there

i place the same amount of edead on the license plate i have now as my older plate and flicked them to compare sounds

the edead seems like it held up to the xtreme... no ding noise just sounded solid with 1 layer on the plate

but inside the car you'll def. need 2 layers or atlest i did

 

[Eugenics 5,000+ posts]

its because you're ignorant, no worries.

 

[Relax 10+ year member]

That's correct - old is asphalt new is butyl. I'll have the new stuff on SDS in a few weeks.
Flexibility isn't really a good thing. One of things you want sound deadeners to do is stiffen panels. Flexible doesn't do that. You also want it to act as a barier. That works best when the constraining layer and adhesive have different densities. Mylar is just not as good as aluminum.

Stiffening panels raises their resonant frequency while deadening them is an attempt to lower it. So you do want your deadening to be flexible and massive so it can lower the resonant frequency and not raise it slightly simultaneously.

Flexible and massive = 2 steps forward

Massive and stiff = 1.5 steps forward

 

[Rudy 10+ year member]

Stiffening panels raises their resonant frequency while deadening them is an attempt to lower it. So you do want your deadening to be flexible and massive so it can lower the resonant frequency and not raise it slightly simultaneously.
Flexible and massive = 2 steps forward

Massive and stiff = 1.5 steps forward

Honestly man, those numbers aren't supported. They assume a system with only two variables and that the relevant frequencies are evenly distributed around this freqency shift zone. There are more factors at play. Consider the tension between the foil and the adhesive. Consider all the possible mechanisms for energy loss.

I am aware of some testing going on right now that may shed more light on this, but my experience with these products suggests that the reverse is closer to reality.

 

[Anthony Collova 10+ year member]

Stiffening panels raises their resonant frequency while deadening them is an attempt to lower it. So you do want your deadening to be flexible and massive so it can lower the resonant frequency and not raise it slightly simultaneously.
Flexible and massive = 2 steps forward

Massive and stiff = 1.5 steps forward

Not so. Deadening is not an attempt to lower the rf of a panel. Thats the point of Mass loading.

Though strengthening a panel will slightly raise the Res Freq of a panel, adding mass, weight or strength to a panel will make it harder to vibrate with the same given energy. The amount that it gets raised by the foil being used by sound deadening mats is very small.

This is the basic concept behind mass loading dampers which are not an efficient way to treat vibrations. The added mass does help when other damping methods are used however.

Constraint layer dampers, for example, contain 2 parts; flexible adhesive and a stiff constraining layer, usually foil.

The flexibility you are looking for is in the adhesive layer. This is actually elastomeric, not flexible. The more ridged or stiff the foil is, the more control it will keep of the adhesive layer and the more vibrations the butyl will convert in to heat. This is why Hushmat recently stopped using mylar as their constraining layer and switched to a .127 micron foil. It works better. The thicker the foil, the stringer it is, the better it works. The raising of the resonant frequency due to the strength of the foil is exponentially reduced by the adhesive layer proportionately to the strength of the foil.

Reduce the thickness of the foil and though the resonant frequency might change slightly the efficiency of the butyl gets drastically decreased. The trade off is great and mandatory.

ANT

http://www.secondskinaudio.com