This is a Special Top-Coat Application
We are sealing the floors of a new home which had micro cracks in the floor within a year of the foundation being poured. We hand sealed the micro cracks first and then applied a thin coating to seal the floor, it is awaiting a decorative coat from the owner of the house.
October 18, 2018 at the Cheshire Fair Grounds in Swanzey, NH. Come join us craving pumpkins, creating Pink Pumpkins to support Joy’s network, and have a great night of community fun.
The Festival is All day on Oct. 20 at the Cheshire Fairgrounds.
And don’t forget the Pink Pumpkin Challenge to Raise money for Joy’s Network here in Southwestern NH.
We finished by rolling on a Pure Polyurea top coat for UV stability and long term service live. This added texture on the floor. Ok we are not great photographers but we install a superior solution for our customers.
The coating protects the Water Chasing® vapor barrier primer and provides a finished final product.
Results are a good look with exceptional service life and wear performance.
This is the first half of a Sealing and Coating job in Swanzey NH. We applied a coat of Perma-Guard™ Water Chasing® Primer with a Top Coat with Slip resistance the next morning.
2nd day photos to come…….
Finishing Basement Water-sealing in Winchester, NH.
We cut in the Walls and Edges as the first step with Perma-Block™ Water chasing primer to start the installation. Then we sealed the center of the room after removing the tape and inspecting the walls and perimeter areas.
Misconception: Thicker Is Better
While it’s true that you need a certain mil(s) (one thousandth of an inch) thickness of material for a functional coating, it’s not true that when you’ve achieved the film thickness specified for job success that you need to apply more material.
It’s impossible to compare the thickness of one formula with the thickness of a competitor’s formula. For example, Company A may claim that its 1/4” thick coating is automatically better than Company B’s 1/8” thick coating. There’s no enforcement regarding actual thickness of a coating when it’s tested for physical properties.
However, a company with an underperforming formulation, or perhaps more focused on its profits, may encourage customers to use as much material as possible in an application. It’s possible that they may promote the falsehood that thicker is better to get customers to use more material and bolster performance through sheer quantity.
A formulation using higher quality and higher cost raw materials will perform better and cost more on a per mil basis, but it won’t need as much material to perform as good, or better, than a lower quality, less expensive material.
Companies promoting the misconception that “thicker is better” are likely offering poor quality products that are inexpensive. Avoid the false claim that you need 250 mils to get a good coating strength–possibly a result of the high filler content in their costing systems. A high performance coating using quality raw materials won’t need the same thickness to match, or exceed, the performance of a cheap, filler-laden coating. Thicker is not necessarily better.
Issue 10: Polyurea Hybrid Coatings: Understand the Differences
Sometimes a customer is told that a supplier has a polyurea hybrid and that a hybrid will outperform polyurethane because of the polyurea component of the formula. However, all polyurea hybrid coatings are not created equal.
Most customers take what they are told at face value, without a more in-depth understanding of the issues involved. Customers should ask questions. If the polyurea component is the determining factor that boosts the physical properties, exactly how much of the hybrid product is polyurea coating and how much is polyurethane? One supplier could offer an 80% polyurea coating/20% polyurethane mix to get one level of performance; a second could have a 50%/50% ratio to have a perfectly balanced blend, according to its claims; and a third could use a 99% polyurethane/1% polyurea coating system. While each supplier would be correct in calling their product a Polyurea Hybrid, the customers of each would be purchasing a coating with drastically different performance characteristics.
It’s extremely important to know what you’re buying. Too many coating specifiers are unaware of the subtle differences in these coatings and their properties. Every contractor should either seek out specifiers that understand the key differences between polyurea hybrid coatings or be willing to train the specifiers with whom they work.
Safer is Always Better
Many safety issues surround polyurea coating handling and application. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) should always be used according to the polyurea coating system and the application equipment used. The safety of applicators, observers, and unknowing passersby is critical, as underscored by OSHA regulations.
The use of PPE cannot, and should not, be the only way to stay safe. The real risk to the polyurea coating spray applicator stems from the actual chemistry itself. These materials are reactive. Even though they can be touted as environmentally friendly once cured, they must be respected and handled with caution during application. Safer formulations should be available to applicators choosing to limit risk exposure while handling and applying the coating.
Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate (MDI) adds another facet to the safety issue. While MDI has a variety of forms, it’s well known that exposure to vapor or small particle MDI can cause sensitization, health-related problems, and death. To date, there have been at least four deaths attributable to MDI overexposure. The federal government issued a report after the causes of the deaths had been investigated. Tragically, the investigation was limited to exploring the circumstances surrounding these deaths and the PPE that should be used in their light, not what can be done to mitigate and reduce these risks from an equipment or application method viewpoint.
Alternative application methods and/or techniques, along with different equipment options, could greatly reduce risks arising from spraying polyurea-type coatings. However, large equipment manufacturers have no incentive to bring attention to such possibilities, since employing safer spraying parameters would include not purchasing or using the equipment they presently offer.
Common sense safety precautions include covering the skin, wearing eye protection, and using a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved respirator. When spraying isocyanate-based (MDI or other) material, wear a respirator at all times; and, if spraying in a confined space, a supplied air respirator.
But don’t only consider respiratory protection in assessing the equipment necessary to manage the health risks posed by spraying polyurea types of coating systems. The increased risk of skin contact from spray mist when spraying polyureas, polyurethanes, and polyurea hybrid materials using high pressure spray equipment is also a considerable concern.
Anyone having experienced high pressure spraying, hot spray, is familiar with the mist cloud that forms around the spray area and moves with any air movement. This mist contains reacted, reacting, and unreacted particles of isocyanates, amines, polyols, or other additives included in the original formulation. Therefore, it’s recommended that not only the skin surfaces of the body be fully covered, but also that a full-face respirator be used to protect the eyes and facial skin from the coating mist moving around the sides of protective eye wear or face shields and being deposited onto the skin. A hooded suit, or head sock, may also be worn to protect the heads of those within the spray area.
The link between particle size and potential health risks is not generally discussed in trade publications. In fact, there is a direct relationship between smaller particle size and a higher likelihood that the particle could pass through, or around, safety equipment and/or be deposited on something that is touched later when the user is not wearing gloves. Exposure to the chemicals can result before, during, or after actual spraying. It’s imperative to consider personal protection during the entire process: arrival, taping or masking out, equipment setup, substrate preparation, test spraying, actual job spraying, unmasking or untaping, clean up, and use.
Since smaller particle sizes are suspended in the air more easily, and are more easily passed through or around safety equipment, larger particle size application equipment should be considered a safer alternative—that is, cold spray and warm spray low-pressure equipment.
The Importance of Aliphatic Coatings and UV-Stability
In theory, UV-stable products should have very little loss of gloss or color fade over time, even when exposed to sunlight. On the other hand, non-UV-stable products will first lose gloss when exposed to sunlight, then fade and/or yellow, and, eventually, experience polymer breakdown and coating failure. By definition, aliphatic polyurea coating systems are UV-stable, while aromatic polyurea coating systems are not. What seems pure and simple, is neither pure or simple.
Labels of aliphatic coating products can be deceptive. Although a number of aliphatic systems are truly 100% aliphatic, there are too many aliphatic products out there that are, in fact, blends of aliphatic and aromatic. Some producers will make a blend that is only 51% aliphatic and 49% aromatic and still claim it is an aliphatic product. While there is some argument for this being true, is the customer educated during the purchasing process?
Educate yourself. When purchasing an aliphatic system, ask the producer about the percent of aliphatic materials in their product. Read the product’s Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS). An aliphatic polyurea coating will contain only IPDI and/or HDI isocyanate (Side A) component. An aromatic polyurea coating uses MDI or TDI isocyanate. Since MDI and TDI are not UV-stable, you should not find either of these components in a truly aliphatic product.