My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
My last 2 twin XL natural latex toppers weighed 10 lbs, and the other 11 lbs, then what is the guestimate of density? Just curious. Trying to figure out if this is really dunlop or natural talalay (O-stock latex toppers). Thanks if anyone responds  |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
3.69 sounds like a low density for latex. Maybe that is the reason it is so cheap, they are making it lower density? That's why this is such a frustrating industry to deal with. Hard to know exactly what one is getting and how it will perform. I guess it is probably best to stick with reliable manufacturers (which I assume includes Latex International). |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
| because rubber foam is a complex 3D shape it is far more difficult to calculate the true density of the material. the 3.69lb is what we would call the "mean density" or average density, including void area (holes), the true density of your topper is significantly higher than 3.69lbs. But I couldn't say how much, im not good enough with math to know what algorithm you use to figure it out, but if you could count exactly how many holes there are and the diameter of each one, then you could figure out the total void area and subtract this value from your original cubic foot volume. Then finally use that number with your mass to get the true density of the actual material itself....yeah lots of fun. weee-hooo |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
Right, didn't even think about the holes. I calculated the approximate density for a piece of LI blended latex (2.8" thick) and came up with a density of 4.63. 100% natural would be even higher. So, the density still seems a bit low for the overstock topper, but maybe a lower ILD piece will be less? That would make some sense. Also, maybe it is not really 1.5", but something a little less. If I assume 10.5 lb.s and 1.4", then the density would be 4.15. Not sure how much the density would vary by ILD. Perhaps the overstock is mostly synthetic? That would have a lower density. They say all natural, but who knows. This message was modified Jan 16, 2010 by sandman
|
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
Very interesting, because I was confused as it is very dense, firm; not at all like the talalay 24 ILD (that was marked). But as I remember we weighed each twin XL on a human scale with a body plus latex, then without. So not really that accurate I suppose. I just know I have a 4 lb. density 1" memory foam and it is as light as a feather (didn't weigh it). So guess this won't solve if it is Dunlop natural, or Talalay natural or synthetic. My feeling is that it is Dunlop or Natural Talalay. I do have a Natura 1" and it is Talalay, as well as the 24ILD Latex International topper. By the way it is truly acurately actually 1.5", not less than either. That is a grab bag for you LOL. I do feel like it is a decent quality, other than misplaced holes, and the one piece having a good chunk that obviously didn't fill up the mold. I don't think they are used either, just seconds or refused latex pieces that were going to be made into mattresses. They were all clean, except one. Also the one I did clean up with water it didn't tear the latex (I was careful) but if it were talalay wouldn't not clean up as easy? |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
sandman wrote: Right, didn't even think about the holes. I calculated the approximate density for a piece of LI blended latex (2.8" thick) and came up with a density of 4.63. 100% natural would be even higher. So, the density still seems a bit low for the overstock topper, but maybe a lower ILD piece will be less? That would make some sense. Also, maybe it is not really 1.5", but something a little less. If I assume 10.5 lb.s and 1.4", then the density would be 4.15. Not sure how much the density would vary by ILD. Perhaps the overstock is mostly synthetic? That would have a lower density. They say all natural, but who knows. based on some companies all natural can mean anywhere between 100% natural and 100% synthetic lol. Kinda hard to know for sure without an actual inspection sheet or atleast some kind of certification from 3rd party testers. I have a 1.39 cubic foot bun sample at my store of all natural dunlop 2" firm, 4" medium, 2" soft, ILD's are unknown but I am very tempted to weigh it and calculate the mean density. |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
That would be interesting to see the density  |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
| trick is accurately measuring it....the most accurate scale by far I have access to is the one at my gym...how funny would that be to bring in some latex samples to weigh them? |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
| i just measured the weight of my bun sample. the 'mean' density of these cores is 4.6 pounds per cubic foot. the sample pieces used are a 2" firm, 4" medium and 2" soft pieces. I will post pics of these samples in the 'irregular spacing' thread. |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
Budgy, that is almost identical to what I calculated for a piece of blended Talatech (F or XF, can't remember). I am surprised that the dunlop was not higher? Did you calcualate 1 density or a density for each of 3 pieces? If so, what are the individual piece densities? The Overstock does seem like a lightweight, if the size and weigth calculated by LEO are respresentative. |
Re: My latex twin XL latex topper weights 10 lbs...
|
I calculated the average of all 3. So the XF in this case would be even higher density. And the true density of the firm in this case is going to be significantly higher than the mean, the holes in this core are the diameter of pennies and there are lots of them. Its important to know the difference because the mean density does not describe how the actual rubber itself compresses. I am really only measuring these out of curiousity, not really to make any definitive statement. It might also be higher than what I measured as these pieces are wrapped in an extremely thin organic cotton mesh and I subtracted .5 pounds from the sample before doing the calculating to compensate. This message was modified Jan 17, 2010 by budgy
|