Jump to content

Final Paint.


MikeD

Recommended Posts

Some advice/views would be welcome on the following:

 

I have just completed two years (circa 1500 hours) getting this abandoned project back up to scratch. Numerous mods have been done and lots of remedial work has been completed… now the finishing.

 

I have used a primer /filler as a rough guide coat and have rubbed about 90% back off again. After filling with Super Fill (it’s so easy to work with but expensive!) I’m now applying UV Smooth Prime, mainly because I can apply it with a roller. The original primer/filler was applied by spraying in my back yard, it provided a nice overspray finish on all my house windows and my wife’s car! Hence the roller.

 

Now the final coat, has anyone used a water based single pack finishing coat that can be either applied by spraying or roller, if you have, or know of someone that has done this, what was the finish like and how durable was the finished surface? I’ve read a lot of claims that it’s possible but never been able to verify the claims of durability.

 

MikeD (U.K.)

Tell me and I forget.

Show me and I remember.

Involve me and I understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some advice/views would be welcome on the following:

 

I have just completed two years (circa 1500 hours) getting this abandoned project back up to scratch. Numerous mods have been done and lots of remedial work has been completed… now the finishing.

 

I have used a primer /filler as a rough guide coat and have rubbed about 90% back off again. After filling with Super Fill (it’s so easy to work with but expensive!) I’m now applying UV Smooth Prime, mainly because I can apply it with a roller. The original primer/filler was applied by spraying in my back yard, it provided a nice overspray finish on all my house windows and my wife’s car! Hence the roller.

 

Now the final coat, has anyone used a water based single pack finishing coat that can be either applied by spraying or roller, if you have, or know of someone that has done this, what was the finish like and how durable was the finished surface? I’ve read a lot of claims that it’s possible but never been able to verify the claims of durability.

 

MikeD (U.K.)

I have seen some that was applied with a roller and a brush. they are used on boats. just a note on the UV smooth prime. it is now recommended by the manufacture that it be seal coated with a 2 part epoxy primer before the top coat as there are many who did not and there top coat would peel off with very little effort

http://www.polyfiber.com/uvsmooth/

Evolultion Eze RG -a two place side by side-200 Knots on 200 HP. A&P / pilot for over 30 years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And don't forget the three week dry time! I was in a big hurry on one of my wings and built a temporary oven around it and cured it for two days at 130 F. The rest of the plane did dry for three weeks. It's holding up fine after about 17 months now with PPG Concept as a final coat.

Dave Adams

Long EZ N83DT

Race 83

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... I’m now applying UV Smooth Prime...

 

... Now the final coat, has anyone used a water based single pack finishing coat that can be either applied by spraying or roller..

I would strongly recommend against using either Smooth Prime OR any water based finish. I know of at least five people (myself included) with COZY MKIV's alone that have had major problems with both. While certainly not guaranteed to have a problem (there are numerous reports of people using smooth prime sucessfully, although I have never heard of a successful report of a water based top coat produced for airplanes) it is far more likely to have a problem that with using standard auto or boat type finishes, some of which can be rolled/brushed.

 

The COZY archives are replete with stories of the problems with Smooth Prime and the Top Gloss water based top coat (which I used, and am now peeling off for a repaint, which John Slade did a few years ago as well). Polyfiber took the Top Gloss paint off the market due to the acknowledged issues. It's beyond me why they continue to sell the Smooth Prime. They currently recommend an epoxy primer (which, no surprise, they also sell) as a coating OVER the smooth prime prior to application of ANY top coat.

 

If I were you, I'd remove as much of the smooth prime as is reasonably possible and go with a standard coating. That's what I'm currently doing to my plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...it <water based paint> is far more likely to have a problem that with using standard auto or boat type finishes, some of which can be rolled/brushed. ...

 

This is an interesting statement. BMW, Mercedes Benz and Porsche all use Glasurit-90 water based paints (wbp). BMW has been for about 10 years. Toyota and Lexus use waterbased paint also. Ford, Mazda, and GM are either switching or have already switched to waterborne paints.

 

Granted, there are complaints of wbp paint being softer and scratching easier than the decade old solvent paints. However, I think wbp is fast becoming the standard in auto finishes. It has made leaps and bounds in the last few years and will continue to do so as concern is directed at the environmental costs of solvent based paints.

 

For myself, I am keeping an open mind for now and keeping my ear to the press for further developments. I will not be using smoothprome though!

 

Carl

 

ref: quick googe search

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is an interesting statement. BMW, Mercedes Benz and Porsche all use Glasurit-90 water based paints (wbp). BMW has been for about 10 years. Toyota and Lexus use waterbased paint also. Ford, Mazda, and GM are either switching or have already switched to waterborne paints.

And if you can get BMW, MB or Porsche to paint your plane with their paints in their booths with their robots and processes, and bake it in their ovens, then you will get the results that they get.

 

If you use the airplane waterbased paints available in the US, you won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marc said:

And if you can get BMW, MB or Porsche to paint your plane with their paints in their booths with their robots and processes, and bake it in their ovens, then you will get the results that they get.

 

I worked in the office furniture business for 20 years. We made the change to water based paint back in the late 80's it was a nightmare. They did get it right finally but like Marc said you have to bake the stuff. Robots dont paint as good as a good painter but it is hard to beat that 350 degree oven to get a shiny hard paint job. STeve

Steve Harmon

Lovin Life in Idaho

Cozy IV Plans #1466 N232CZ

http://websites.expercraft.com/bigsteve/

Working on Chapter 19,21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All,

 

I used polyfiber silvershield and smoothprime with bad results - the material lifted in high humidity once the silvershiled was exposed during the sanding process. It rusted, as expected. I wouldn't paint over rust...

 

Conversely, I used polyfiber 'UV smoothprime' with excellent results, both in Seattle and Melbourne Australia. Two diametrically opposite climates I can assure you.

 

The UV smoothprime was however a skin irritant for me. It produced some pretty itchy chemical burns that occurred 'from the inside out' as my doctor stated. Not good. This occurs on less than 1% of the population, but even the slightest exposure during application, cure or sanding has the effect. Massive exposure is not advisable. Charcoal filters and a full chem suit did work for me, but when I visually checked the cure a week later for all of a minute or two, I got burns on my hands.

 

I would recommend UV smoothprime if it's not an allergin to you. Product support was excellent. Check the MDA card.

 

I have no issues with the paint over the top. I used PPG base and clear, 2004 Audi silver applied at less than 60F ambient in a carport booth from harbour freight and more lights than you can poke a stick at... :-)

 

I have no allergic issues with any resin systems I used. I have used basically all recommended types; Safetpoxy (original and II), EZ poxy, MGS L285, West, Aeropoxy, Araldite K3600 and the list goes on. I never use gloves (I HATE GLOVES), and occasionally use barrier cream over the 16 year project + 18 months for downdraft conversion.

Cheers,

 

Wayne Blackler

IO-360 Long EZ

VH-WEZ (N360WZ)

Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

http://v2.ez.org/feature/F0411-1/F0411-1.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conversely, I used polyfiber 'UV smoothprime' with excellent results...

In other words, you were one of the lucky ones.

 

Other people have had miserable results with the UV SmoothPrime, and I can give you a list of names if you'd like, on COZY MKIV's alone.

 

I never use gloves (I HATE GLOVES), and occasionally use barrier cream over the 16 year project + 18 months for downdraft conversion.

In other words, you are one of the lucky ones, as Mike Melvill has been. Please do NOT use your luck as an indication that it is reasonable for ANYONE to assume that they will be as lucky as you if they are as reckless, which is exactly what you have been.

 

Barrier cream is useless. Good gloves are the only localized protection, and good organic vapor masks or air flow hoods are the only systemic protection for long term exposure. There was a very good discussion on the canard-aviators mailing list on this exact subject recently.

 

It amazes me, with what medical science knows about allergic reactions, their severity and the causes, that anyone is willing to take the chance of getting epoxy on their bare skin on a regular basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other words, you were one of the lucky ones.

 

Other people have had miserable results with the UV SmoothPrime, and I can give you a list of names if you'd like, on COZY MKIV's alone.

 

In other words, you are one of the lucky ones, as Mike Melvill has been. Please do NOT use your luck as an indication that it is reasonable for ANYONE to assume that they will be as lucky as you if they are as reckless, which is exactly what you have been.

 

Barrier cream is useless. Good gloves are the only localized protection, and good organic vapor masks or air flow hoods are the only systemic protection for long term exposure. There was a very good discussion on the canard-aviators mailing list on this exact subject recently.

 

It amazes me, with what medical science knows about allergic reactions, their severity and the causes, that anyone is willing to take the chance of getting epoxy on their bare skin on a regular basis.

 

Marc

You hit this right on the head about epoxy usage.

Wayne, your are a great builder but Marc is so very right about proper epoxy handling. Start wearing a good pair of gloves, this goes for every one else using the same practices. This stuff does not tell you that you should start using better judgment when using it. It’s a time bomb that goes off in seconds and if you are lucky enough to be able to continue working with epoxy you will be one of the lucky ones. Like any product you have to respect it .

My .02

 

Bob Setzer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stand corrected on epoxy handling. Indeed Mike and I have been wreckless as have many others to varying degrees. I would caution use of barrier cream, although I will continue to use it - If it finds it's way into your laminate, it is a serious structural defect. I am cautious there. Agree with Marc, barrier cream does not provide protection. It only allows easy removal of what little uncured resin might find it's way onto my hands during a small layup. I would only recommend vinyl gloves. I remember HExcel stating "Use latex at your own risk" as it has marginal protection. I used vinyl gloves on all the large layups, as at 17-20 years of age, mum and dad ensured I did... IT's the small, 95% of the aircraft type layups I tend to only use barrier cream as I seldom get any on my hands. I even recall "This <material> is known to cause birth defects in the state of California". Might have been EZ poxy. I check the MSDS card.

 

As for UV smoothprime, I disagree on the basis that I have used a number of batches, over a number of years, in a variety of different climates without any issue whatsoever. Perhaps the materials were not mixed, applied or cured correctly. That would be my guess. Perhaps the crosslinker was lifed. PErhaps it was the original smoothprime or silvershiled some of these guys used. I think it is incorrect to judge that material on such a small sample space without known quality controls, or heresay. I think Marc, with all due respect, you were one of the unlucky ones.

Cheers,

 

Wayne Blackler

IO-360 Long EZ

VH-WEZ (N360WZ)

Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

http://v2.ez.org/feature/F0411-1/F0411-1.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... I would only recommend vinyl gloves...

Vinyl is as useless with epoxy as latex is. Please read the multitudinous information in both the canard-aviators and COZY mailing list archives. Butyl or Nitrile gloves for epoxy protection are what you want.

 

As for UV smoothprime, I disagree on the basis that I have used a number of batches, over a number of years, in a variety of different climates without any issue whatsoever...

So? If 95% of the people that use it don't have problems, then only 5% will have problems. But if 5% have problems with SP, and only 0.1% have problems with standard primers and paints, which one would you rather take a chance on?

 

... I think it is incorrect to judge that material on such a small sample space without known quality controls, or heresay.

But your "number of batches" is somehow more meaningful? Would you like to know the upper bound of failure rate for a single failure when using a population size of 10 or twenty, with a 95% confidence level? Look it up. It's the number of failures that matters - not the number of successes, and like I said, I've got a list of actual failures - not hearsay.

 

I think Marc, with all due respect, you were one of the unlucky ones.

No luck involved at all - it's statistics, and the stuff fails far more often than alternatives. Not all the time, by any means, and the failure rate is still relatively small, but it's FAR higher than anything else out there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So? If 95% of the people that use it don't have problems, then only 5% will have problems. But if 5% have problems with SP, and only 0.1% have problems with standard primers and paints, which one would you rather take a chance on?

 

But your "number of batches" is somehow more meaningful? Would you like to know the upper bound of failure rate for a single failure when using a population size of 10 or twenty, with a 95% confidence level? Look it up. It's the number of failures that matters - not the number of successes, and like I said, I've got a list of actual failures - not hearsay.

 

No luck involved at all - it's statistics, and the stuff fails far more often than alternatives. Not all the time, by any means, and the failure rate is still relatively small, but it's FAR higher than anything else out there.

 

 

"FAR higher than anything else out there" - Come on Marc, stick to facts and data. You don't have that data. . .

 

""number of batches" is somehow more meaningful?" Yes, batches do matter , particualry to the FAA. So do statistics. Check FAR 25 on statistic based allowables on something like laminate performance... Try 25.613a... That's one we deal with daily. We had to use multiple batches.

 

I wonder what the FAA cert plan would be for a bonded structure on a spaceship...?

Cheers,

 

Wayne Blackler

IO-360 Long EZ

VH-WEZ (N360WZ)

Melbourne, AUSTRALIA

http://v2.ez.org/feature/F0411-1/F0411-1.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"FAR higher than anything else out there" - Come on Marc, stick to facts and data. You don't have that data. . .

Wayne, you wanna use potential crap on your plane, go right ahead. When I talk to 10 people who've used a material and 1/2 of them tell me that it's failed in one way or another, and I talk to 10 people that have used another material, and none of them tell me that they've had any type of failure, and then I ask another 10 who've used each, and I get the same types of answers (multiple failures of one, and none of the other), I can infer that the failure rate of one material is far higher than the failure rate of another.

 

I did not pick the sample population - it's random - I just ask folks what they used to paint their planes when I see the plane, and I've certainly heard many tales of SP being used successfully. But it's clear to me that the failure rate is far higher than for other systems. Why? Don't know, and don't care. If it's only possible to use successfully with a skillset that most homebuilders don't have, then it's not something they should be using.

 

At any rate, since there are many other, just as good, materials out there that don't have high failure rates, there's no reason not to use them.

 

And Scaled is quite familiar with A-basis, B-basis, and material allowable issues associated with composite laminates, as well as FAR requirements, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information