The Nano Cube Cracks - Getting to the truth...

[drwatson]

I don't see how your list of questions 'gets to the truth...'...since these are all questions that Nano Cube owners who have had their tanks crack have already answered--are you saying that those people whose tanks cracked are lying or "is misinformed..." that perhaps their tank didn't crack at all, it was all just one big wet dream?

 

Well my attempt was to organize and centralize data on the subject, instead of having multiple threads that flow of track . I never stated anyone is lying, you said that. Big Wet Dream - very cute.

 

If you want to get to the truth...figure out the standards for aquarium glass thickness SHOULD be...you will realize that nano cube's glass is that thinner than what is required...which is why the problem incurred mostly in 24 gallons and not 12's...the water volume increased but the glass thickness, did not to make up for the increased volume.

 

I am not a certified glass expert so I cannot comment.

 

The problem will only be isolated, if JBJ recalls all of the cubes, and does something about it. People have had their tanks set up for 6 months to 1 year before a single hairline crack ever appears--so I would have to say that with every cube out there, it is PROBABLE. Now, does that give you peace of mind that you got an answer--or did the peace of mind you want mean that you want the answer you wanted to hear?

 

Peace of mind requires a larger statistical base upon which one can arrive at a factual conclusion. As of now, with only a limited number of votes and posts on this board regaridng the issue, and taking into account the estimated number of nano cubes sold per quarter, one cannot discern whether the problem is isolated or not.

 

And then ask yourself...why car seat manufacturers, children's toys or even kitchen gadgets have ever been recalled...because of hazardous incidents (to not ALL products, but some which have caused red flags for them to be recalled--they're not gonna wait until all the children who are sitting on those precious carseats suffer injuries before they recall anything...). People's homes have been put at risk with these tanks cracking--with fires that have luckily have not incurred complete home-damage. I don't recall saying anything in the box or manual saying "Danger: May cause fires."...and any aquarium manufacturer who says that they do not cover the dangers caused by having plugs near water is a MORON.

 

A fish tank is not a car seat nor a children’s toy nor a kitchen appliance, it's a tank in which a consumer fills water and fish and whatever else he/she determines for entertainment. I believe owning a fish tank imposes a known risk. You have risk of electrocution, risk of infection, risk of the ballasts short circuiting, and so on and so on. If the manufacturer has 'knowingly' contributed to this risk, than the manufacturer should have to step up and address it immediately.

[rbaby]

Many kitchen appliances and children's toys are also for entertainment...mind you...so your logic evades me. Especially since they're all recalled for the same things: DAMAGE TO PROPERTY OR INJURY. Now, wouldn't you say that a house getting burned down because a tank cracked due to manufacturer's lack of living up to the standards of the industry is a pretty BIG cause for injury and/or damage to property? I think you failed to notice that.

 

With that said--it does not need to have a 50% crack rate for it to be "factual", even if it is at 2%, that is cause for alarm because if it does crack, much is at stake especially when JBJ will not cover you for the livestock cost and the time you spent investing into your tank...because you were secured up to 6 months of the tank's ability to withstand WHAT IT WAS INTENDED FOR, only to crack unknowingly.

 

Keep in mind that much of the cracks that are happening--JBJ is blaming it on the shipping or the routes they endure to get to the consumer. However, these tanks arrive with NO OTHER DAMAGE, except to the glass--the back wall is a glass, but it only happens in the display area--NO TANK MADE OF GLASS SHOULD EVER CRACK BY SHIPMENT, PERIOD. Especially if they are empty!

 

You don't need to be a glass expert--you just need to do what you are claiming to do with this thread: RESEARCH. You just sound very insensitive to those who HAVE suffered--sympathize? I don't sense it...especially when you disregard those who have already had their rooms...kitchens and carpets damaged because of the issue /shrug...but maybe if this happened to more people, you would then consider it "peace of mind"...but do you really want that? /shrug.

[HighTide]

Speaking as a retailer, I believe that the issue is much inflated due to the crack rate witnessed in initial shipping. As advised from JBJ, about 1/20 arrive cracked. Packing is not the issue, as the cubes were packed in a box almost twice the size of the actual cube, and the rest peanuts.

The issue, IMO, is simply due to the general neglect with shippers.

I believe this is due to the fact that this not the type of item that was previoulsy shipped in this manner. When you get a tank shipped to a store from a wholesaler, the appropriate precautions are taken, and they are primarly sent by the wholesalers specific, if not owned, shipping agent. This isnt UPS, or USPS, or even Fed-ex.

Given the fact that 1/20 will arrive cracked/broken (12/24g the same), as JBJ stated, (these are shipped individually, UPS) it stands to reason that this could really be a source for further the cracking subject.

[steelhealr]

Sorry High Tide..my tank arrived intact. I disagree. I had no cracks or glass defects. Starting up my cube thread I was over that baby with a fine tooth comb.I zoomed on all my pix and I can't see it. Water tested it for a week. The crack was latent. Check out Oceanic's 30G cube at Petsmart....that glass is THICK. The glass on the 24G Nano Cube is too thin. So thin in fact, that, I agree with rbaby..a strong tank should survive the shipping process.

 

I am not a retailer, so, I respect your input. However, being in the same ..uh...boat (?) as sNEIRBO (save the damage to a house), I've been following this stuff now for weeks (sadly, to my dismay). I am convinced from the engineering comments and data that has been posted, from administrators to glaziers, that this is an engineering problem and shipping brings out that flaw. I only hope that the people here with intact 24s successfully running for months now (and some of whom have been SW gurus to me) don't suffer latent cracks as well. SH

[HighTide]

I do see the potential issue with the 24s, really, we dont carry them. Primarily it has been storage issues but, I actually joined this site, as well as some others, for research.

Just to be on the safe side, I dont think we will be carrying them unless they do decide to thicken the glass, and maybe increase the radius of the corners.

With a background in engineering, the entire line seems a bit thin for me, considering the plastic support of the structure and seemingly narrow angle of the bend in the glass.

[drwatson]

rbaby

 

Many kitchen appliances and children's toys are also for entertainment...mind you...so your logic evades me. Especially since they're all recalled for the same things: DAMAGE TO PROPERTY OR INJURY. Now, wouldn't you say that a house getting burned down because a tank cracked due to manufacturer's lack of living up to the standards of the industry is a pretty BIG cause for injury and/or damage to property? I think you failed to notice that.

 

As I stated before, If the JBJ is producing defective products than it is requried to provide a recall and address customers concerns.

 

With that said--it does not need to have a 50% crack rate for it to be "factual", even if it is at 2%, that is cause for alarm because if it does crack, much is at stake especially when JBJ will not cover you for the livestock cost and the time you spent investing into your tank...because you were secured up to 6 months of the tank's ability to withstand WHAT IT WAS INTENDED FOR, only to crack unknowingly.

 

I think most people continue to miss my point here, I never suggested anyone is lying, I am just trying to understand whether these cases are isolated or not.

 

Keep in mind that much of the cracks that are happening--JBJ is blaming it on the shipping or the routes they endure to get to the consumer. However, these tanks arrive with NO OTHER DAMAGE, except to the glass--the back wall is a glass, but it only happens in the display area--NO TANK MADE OF GLASS SHOULD EVER CRACK BY SHIPMENT, PERIOD. Especially if they are empty!

 

I agree that cracks should not happen during shipping. My tank was packed very tight with an decent amount of packing material. I did not order my tank online however, I purchased it from an LFS. I would never recommend ordering a glass tank over the interent unless it was the only viable option. I just don't trust the shipping process with fragile materials.

 

You don't need to be a glass expert--you just need to do what you are claiming to do with this thread: RESEARCH. You just sound very insensitive to those who HAVE suffered--sympathize? I don't sense it...especially when you disregard those who have already had their rooms...kitchens and carpets damaged because of the issue /shrug...but maybe if this happened to more people, you would then consider it "peace of mind"...but do you really want that? /shrug.

 

I am sorry if you feel that I am not sensitive enough to the issue, but I am attempting to be unbias in my evaluation of the situation. Trust me I am as human as any other and if my nano cube cracked than I would be extremely upset. I would also like to state for the record that if my nano cube cracked, not only would I file a complaint with JBJ, but I would NOT purchase another product from the manufacturer, not even except a replacement.

 

On these forums once you let emotion enter into an argument you loose credibility.

[drwatson]

rbaby quoted:

 

With that said--it does not need to have a 50% crack rate for it to be "factual", even if it is at 2%

 

About 10-20 (depending upon the manufacturer) automobiles out of the 200 arrive fresh from the factory with defects. This is a known statistical number, it does not warrant a recall. Are all cars bad, just because there are a few lemons in the mix ? The reason why I will side with a manufacturer in this case is becuase it is very difficult, if not impossible, to make every product perfect. Some products during the manufacturing process will fail to meet standards. There are also plenty of people who cannot follow instructions or warranties and disclaimers who will attempt to blaim the manufacturer for fault. Case in Point: The lady who burned herself drinking McDonalds Coffee and sued and won. On the other side of the coin there are plenty of greedy and deceptive manufacturers who will cover up anything to make a buck. Case in Point: Ford Pinto Scandel - we all remember how Ford felt that the cost of human lives was a cheaper alternative than a .29 cent correction to the gas tank to prevent explosion.

 

We are so very eager in this society to judge others, but when that finger is pointed in our face, we are quick to pass the blame onto another. Lets get some facts here, and try to be open and unbias.

[Cellenzweig]

About 10-20 (depending upon the manufacturer) automobiles out of the 200 arrive fresh from the factory with defects. This is a known statistical number, it does not warrant a recall.

A car is made from thousands of parts that are assembled in hundreds of different factories. A Nano-Cube is a simple glass box. You're comparing apples and oranges.

 

Are all cars bad, just because there are a few lemons in the mix ?

No, not all cars are bad. Are all aquariums bad, just because there are a few lemons in the mix? No, there's lots of brands other than JBJ that build tanks that don't spontaniously crack.

[drwatson]

Cellenzweig

 

A car is made from thousands of parts that are assembled in hundreds of different factories. A Nano-Cube is a simple glass box. You're comparing apples and oranges.

 

I do 100% agree with you that a glass box as small as a nano SHOULD in fact be a straightforward process in which the plausible number of failures falls into 'nano' like percentages. I think my example for sake of argument is fair, to show that all industries have a certain threshold of failure including automobiles whose safety is of the utmost concern, but I will also agree it was apples to oranges.

 

No, not all cars are bad. Are all aquariums bad, just because there are a few lemons in the mix? No, there's lots of brands other than JBJ that build tanks that don't spontaniously crack.

 

The problem is we don't know how or why the aquarium spontaneously cracked. Why do some people who have had the nano cube for a long period of time experience no problems, while some crack out of the blue a couple months down the road ? With out this vital information, how can we 'judge' anyone or anything ?

 

If you go onto any forum you will find hundreds of posts claiming great sucess with Product A, and hundreds of posts clamining problems with Product A.

 

Go to dpreview.com, a photography site I frequent. Go to any forum be it Canon, Sony, or Nikon. On all of those forums there are people who claim that Canon makes defective cameras, and Nikon makes defective cameras, and Sony makes defectives cameras. If you lurk around long enough you yourself will begin to think that camera manufacturers make nothing but defective cameras. Are there defective cameras, certainly. Are all cameras defective, no.

[sNEIRBO]

I think part of the problem with analyzing this is, there appears to be 2 separate issues here. There are Cubes that crack quickly (within hours) and there are Cubes that crack eventually (take months to crack). In my opinion, the quick crackers can be written off as shipping induced stresses, not properly inspected, bad setup, etc. The "eventual crackers" are the most troublesome. An "eventual" can mean lots of losses to livestock, etc. and this is causing the most heartburn at this time. There are a lot of people looking at their $1000+ investment and thinking "If this cracks . . . "

 

Like I said earlier, I have been thinking about these issues for over a month now. In the Engineering world, there are several processes by which you determine root causes of failures. One used in the Automotive Engineering field is known as a Fishbone Analysis - you basically sit around with your collegues and bounce possible causes of the failures off of each other. Sometimes you get some wild stuff you immediately throw out like - the wheel bearing failed because the operator hit a cat. But usually you end up with maybe a dozen sound possibilities that you then go off to test. After having spent a month thinking about this, investigating this, talking about this, here's what my list is down to -

 

1) Tank Design - those curved corners are problems. They create a situation of compression on the interior, tension on the exterior. A situation well suited for cracking. There's probably a reason most tanks of this design are made from a more stable material like Acrylic.

2) Material - namely the glass thickness. 3.83mm might be thick enough for the 6 Gallon, might be marginal for the 12 Gallon, probably too thin for the 24 Gallon. In my mind, this issue has been proven with "prove_it"s post to the DIY site showing required material thicknesses for margins of safety.

3) Manufacturing - without seeing the setup at the plant, there is the possibility of multiple machines making these tanks. The possibility exists that several machines make excellent Cubes, and one machine is running marginally bad and making bad product. Even a small scratch on a forming die could be causing the problem.

4) Assembly - I remember reading that JBJ said they were now using a different adhesive for assembly of the plastic trim pieces. An adhesive that was more flexible. Was the original adhesive expanding when it cured and cracking the tanks? Or possibly expanding in it's cured / hardened state due to ambient temperature flucuations and cracking the glass in the weakest part of the design (the corners)?

5) Raw Material - the possibility exist of a bad batch of glass. Some people are reporting bubbles in their glass. Some people are reporting inclusion cracks. A bad batch of glass would explain a lot.

 

The problem I have now, is how to prove / disprove any of these hypothesis'. I don't work for JBJ or the foreign manufacturer, so I don't have access to data or equipment. And more importantly, I don't think JBJ has any input into the manufacturing of this product either. Everyone needs to accept that there are problems for which we will probably never know the root cause. So, at this point, we're all left with a couple of options -

 

A) Accept the risks and move on with your Nano Cube for better or worse. But you are aware of the problems, potential hazzards and possible losses.

Give up on the product and move into a different system.

 

I am at option B right now. I'm looking for something different, comparing prices, etc. I love my Aquarium, but hate having to keep it in the basement. I want it back in my living space as family member, not religated to the basement like the troubled pet.

 

I want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

 

Cheers -

sNEIRBO

[steelhealr]

sNEIRBO...well said. I think this last post of yours closes the book on this for me. Your engineering experience makes your arguments compelling IMO. If Chris can come up with a system soon, I may wait a little longer. Otherwise, I think I'm on to a different system. PM me with anything good you come up with and perhaps I'll go with a similar system. Presently, my basement is unfinished, so, I would think the cube is going to end up down there as a quarantine tank or,perhaps a frag tank if I get that far. A structural failure down there would lead to no losses. Like you, my kids deserve to have the tank upstairs where they can enjoy it. SH

[drwatson]

sNEIRBO, I also concur. I think your hypothesis is nicely written and offers the most probable circumstances in which these cracks can occur. I also think steelhealr said it best when he stated that 'this closes the book'. My reasoning for starting this thread was to bring thought to the table, make people aware of the situation, and offer plausible explanations as well as explore the entire problem in detail. I like making people think, I like exploring both sides of an argument. This type of though process is something that is necessary on forums. As I said before, one person yells fire and a thousand people run, no one looks back, no one questions the source. People don't think for themseleves these days, they believe what they see on tv, read in the paper, and obtain from the internet.

 

Continuing this thread, however, will most likely lead to civil unrest as some people are quite upset about the subject and have already drawn their own conclusions.

[sNEIRBO]

I'm not sure my root cause analysis puts this whole issue to rest. It puts it to rest for SH and I, because we're both at solution - find a different system and move on / away from a Nano Cube. I've done the footwork, it's now up to JBJ to complete the work and give us the answers to the questions.

[HighTide]

I just found this....

http://www.nano-reef.com/forums/showthread...hlight=nanocube