The Merry Month : by Robert Merry
What, who or why is engineered stone?
There is a debate going on – and in some places raging. Knickers are very twisted. When is a stone not a stone and when does it become engineered?
What does engineered and sintered mean, anyway? I won’t attempt to explain these in detail here, as I’m not entirely sure and perhaps that’s the problem.
I do know there are many simulated stone products on the market and they have been increasing.
Kitchen worktops have traditionally been the focus of stone imitations. There is an array of other look-a-like worktop finishes that are designed to represent or imitate the look of metal, cement, timber and any combination (witness the article on the KBB exhibition in last month’s edition of NSS). Does the Cement Society or the Timber Trade Association protest at this? As the worksurface rarely competes with the real thing, I imagine not.
There is also a proliferation of printed images of natural stone veining on ceramic and porcelain tiles. So perfect is the printing that client’s are asking why natural stone isn’t perfectly book matched like ceramic? Natural stone can only be perfectly book matched on one directional joint, not both horizontal and vertical. The vein moves through the block, naturally, making this impossible.
Do we in the stone industry protest against the replication of a natural product and the marketing of that product with names that would imply a close association with the real thing? Yes we do (or some of us, at least).
But many stone fabricators’ work man-made products. They are compatible with most thin stone format cutting and polishing machinery. Some out-perform limestone and marble as work surfaces and it could be argued match granite and slate in terms of fitness for purpose. They come in a wide variety of colours and finishes, don’t require high maintenance and are consistent across slabs.
On the negative side, some mark with heat and tension cracking may occur if not carefully cut and if corners are not pre-drilled. They can sometimes be a bit lifeless. And it isn’t natural stone, even though the manufacturers sometimes call it that.
The Stone Federation GB is currently debating whether to include reference to engineered stone / quartz in their excellent suite of data sheets and guides. There is significant resistance from those members who prefer a more traditional approach. Stone is stone, not engineered.
But is the protest about the material or is it about simulation? Are we worried about losing our identity among the snow storm of products associating themselves with natural stone? Are we Cheddar Cheese or Champagne, the names of which have geographical protection? Do we need European protection? Though it might be a bit late for that.
Changing the name of the stone to hide its identity from competitors has become a bad habit, particularly in interiors. This has led to confusion among professionals specifying stone and, at worst, is a deception that does not do any of us proud.
This has been partially addressed by the European Products Directive, July 2013, incorporated into the Building Regulations. But it is not enforced strongly enough and CE Certificates are sometimes as fabricated as the names given to the stone they purport to identify.
It seems slightly hypercritical to complain about other trades pinching an association with the ‘real thing’ when we can’t quite decide what the ‘real thing’ is ourselves. If we can’t name it properly, why should anyone else?
I wonder if there was a similar reaction when terrazzo and agglomerated stone products were first introduced?
BSEN 5385 Part 5 2009 is titled ‘Design & installation of terrazzo, natural stone & agglomerated stone tile & slab flooring – code of practice’.
It seems to me that if stone people are using a product we should all embrace it and make sure we understand it. That way we can best serve the customer and our stone industry.