Talk:Cross-linked polyethylene

message: I can't find any good information about the history of PEX pipe, specifically how long it has been used for household cold/drinking water.  I've heard it's been used in Europe for a decades, but can't find any reliable source to back this up.  If someone could find one and add this to the article, that would be great.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaxelrod (talk • contribs) 17:11, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: CAN ANY BODY TELL ME THAT THE FINSIHED STOCK OF XLPE COMPOUND IF COMES IN CONTACT OF WATER THAN WHAT TYPE OF DAMAGE WILL OCCUR. WETHER THE MATERIAL IS SALVAGEABLE? OR ANY APPLICATIONS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.125.194.121  (talk • contribs) 11:25, April 11, 2008
:First, please STOP SHOUTING.  Second, this isn't a plumbing forum; this page is only for discussion of improvements to the Cross-linked polyethylene article.  For answers to your questions, please visit the Web sites of the various manufacturers of PEX/XLPE plumbing systems, where you'll find specifications and FAQs. —QuicksilverT @ 16:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Damages to XLPE compound by water? 

message: It would be desirable/useful to understand who the current producers of XLPE are and the material differences of their products Mstefaniak (talk) 20:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That would have the effect of turning the article into a link farm, in violation of WP policy.  The section on Classification describes the main categories of PEX-A, -B, and -C.  Knowing the class of a candidate product and the characteristics of each class should be sufficient for the curious reader. —QuicksilverT @ 16:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current/past producers 

message: CalPipes (a pipefitters union in California) has opposed proposals to allow PEX in California potable water lines.  (http://www.calpipes.org/ProtectingCalifornians_PEX.asp)
CalPipes argues that California's proposals allow inappropriate kind(s) of PEX piping.  CalPipes specifically complains about contaminants (such as MTBE, which is more commonly found in gasoline) forming in hot water lines.  CalPipe also complains about PEX pipes that do not contain enough antioxidants to resist both sunlight (before installation) and hot chlorinated water (during years of use).
CalPipes links to research results from Chemical Accident Reconstruction Services (Chemaxx) (http://chemaxx.com/polytube1.htm).  Chemaxx states that peroxides used to make some kinds of PEX can leach into drinking water, and break down to form contaminants (such as MTBE) which are more commonly found in gasoline.
CalPipes' website includes a letter from Lubrizol (http://www.calpipes.org/pdf/Lubrizol_Letter.pdf).  Lubrizol's letter points out that there are various standards for PEX pipes, some stricter than others.
Lubrizol's website (http://www.lubrizol.com/BuildingSolutions/TradeName/FlowGuardFlex/TypesPex.html) explains that Lubrizol's brand of PEX is made using the silane process.  Lubrizol also points out that the silane process allows much higher levels of antioxidants in the PEX, so silane PEX can resist much more sunlight and hot chlorinated water than PEX made by either the peroxide process or the radiation process.
-- Jasper (talk) 23:25, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: CalPipes' arguments are alarmist in nature, designed to create FUD and slow down or prevent the adoption of PEX in California for the benefit of union members and the general detriment of the public.  (Their page URL, "ProtectingCalifornians_PEX.asp" must be some kind of twisted joke:  It should have been named "ProtectingPlumbers.asp".)  It's moot, anyway, since, after dragging their feet for a decade, in January 2009 the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) unanimously approved PEX for the California Plumbing Code (CPC), effective August 1, 2009, and furthermore, permitted local jurisdictions to approve PEX in general plumbing applications, effective immediately.  If there were any real health or reliability problems with PEX in plumbing systems, we'd have heard the message from Europe decades ago, where they began using it in the 1960s, well before it was introduced in Canada and the United States.  However, if the different PEX processes can be shown to have advantages or disadvantages in certain applications, it may be useful to add this information, perhaps in tabular form, to this Wikipedia article in an NPOV format.  However, unless one is concerned about extreme water conditions, due to chlorination, high temperature, mineral content, etc., almost any class of PEX can be used interchangeably.—QuicksilverT @ 16:42, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison of types 

message: I updated 2 dead links. They have valid information but are from a site that sells PEX. The information is good but some may want to see if they can find a better non-commercial link. I only did this as it was the best one I could find to replace a dead one that is still valid but may be open to doubt.--Marlin1975 (talk) 16:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update Dead Links 

message: it retains it's shape because of plastic deformation, not "shape memory" because plain aluminium isn't a shape memory alloy
shape memory alloys have to be heat treated for permanently deform or restore original form  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.137.121 (talk) 22:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PEX-AL-PEX 

message: What does HE-PEX have to do with aluminum PEX? Nothing actually; it just looks like a sneaky ad for Uponor.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.114.190.2 (talk) 14:32, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  PEX-AL-PEX 

message: I came to this page looking for information about rotational molded XLPE tanks, especially susceptibility to UV and other degradation mechanisms, expected life in various environments.  The article seems focused solely on pipe.  I'd like to see this topic expanded to cover other uses for XLPE.  Here's a link to one manufacturer http://www.aschulman.com/Americas/Rotomolding/Products/40/778/SCHULINK.aspx Slick4668 (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Uses for Cross-Linked Polyethylene 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Cross-linked polyethylene's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "Kaiser":
From High-performance plastics:  
From Polyethylene: 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 22:57, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Cross-linked polyethylene]] 

message: Noticed a lack of discussion / material that mentions expansion fittings and their use in PEX-A. Seems a bit of an oversight considering their widespread use. Also simply not comfortable typing this myself. 209.252.172.194 (talk) 01:27, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion fittings