axel_lotta wrote:Hey Foilholio, could you post a picture or details on what brand and formulation of Silicon you use?
Well it's sounding like my silicone was different than others, I can't remember the brand, but it was the most expensive, clear and acetic. You mentioned roof silicone( I know you said acetic), this is usually neutral cure, the acid from acetic cure can take the protective coatings off things and then they rust. Not the nicest look on something new. There is quite a different feel between neutral and acetic. As I said Pansh use a silicone coating and you only need ask anyone who has had one of them about sand sticking and it doesn't, nor does water. As Regis just said.
axel_lotta wrote:With respect Foilholio
It's ok to disagree with me lol. I ain't going to berate you unless you go on and on like kitexpert,windrider or
...pullstrings... the trio of terrific fools they are.
I'll take what you have done with respect too. You have a proper porosity meter, I do not. I do know for certain a thicker coating is more likely to sit on the surface and a thinner one will penetrate. I sprayed some of my kite coating on a wetsuit and it just went in and did nothing. I am also certain a skin will seal better, like the rubber skin on a wetsuit. Durability is a bit of a guess, this I am referring to the sealer/porosity lasting not abrasion. You may have a very good technique using a thicker mixture and rubbing/wiping it in with some foam! I will have to give it a try
I can look at your kite numbers and see you used quite a bit. 3to4 tubes? So that is .25 to .33 tube per meter of kite(12m). I used 1 tube on an 8m kite so 0.125tube/m2. Of 1 tube I was able to get 91.8g of shoe goo out of 98grams possible in the tube. This becomes 41.8g when set or dry. Inevitably there is more wastage from spray etc, so at a guess 21g to 38g ended up on the kite, lets say 30g. Now the density and amount of solids in marine goop is slightly less than shoegoo. Marine goop (toluene version I couldn't find a xylene version??
) has a specific gravity of 0.886, so 109.4ml has 97g. lets assume you can only get 93.7% out of the tube like me so you have 90.9g per tube. Of that only 45% is solid, so 40.9g. So out of a possible 122.7g(3tubes) and 163.6g (4 tubes) out of tube amount you got 100grams on the kite. That is not much wastage but similar to what can/could be achieved with a spray gun, I think your foam may have had quite a bit left in it?
So lets compare my 30g vs your 100gram. 3.75g/m2 vs 8.33g/m2. Now if my guess at how much wastage is off it of course will change things but that is still an interesting comparison. I think I could have doubled the amount I applied and got much better results but already the result are very good! Considering my kite is a psycho4 and you want to apply double to your pyscho4 it will also be interesting what results you get with the current amount 8.33g/m2 or double at 16.66g/m2 (the 666 mixture
http://eclecticproducts.com/downloads/t ... nglish.pdf
http://eclecticproducts.com/downloads/t ... nglish.pdf
axel_lotta wrote:it is also less of a health hazard than Toluene
I don't know about xylenes being less lethal than toluene. I can find info that they are pretty comparable in oral and inhalation, admittedly toluene needs a 1/3 less for inhalation, but then for skin exposure xylene is 3x more potent than toluene on rabbits. I think they deserve equal caution, and you couldn't say one is much more dangerous than the other.
axel_lotta wrote:in my opinion Marine Goop is an exceptional product, it is extremely tough and wear resistant whilst being ridiculously stretchy (it can stretch to 900% without breaking)
In my opinion it is the same SBR as in all the other Electic product just with some UV additive. But I will see how my shoegoo holds up and I might use the marine stuff in future.
Please see below for all the test results. All test times are stated in minutes and seconds and should be reasonably similar to what you would find using a commercially available porosity tester as the vacuum pressure and fabric cross section are very close to standard.
The disclaimer: All tests (apart from the final before and after porosity tests at the bottom of the page which were done on my FS S3 deluxe) were done with 3 samples each of identical UNCOATED ripstop nylon. Apart from the fact I could not find a kite or paraglider to cut up and use despite many many months of trying, the advantage of this method was that each test piece was identical and judged for its weight increase and sealing capability on its own merits. That said, a foil kite made of uncoated ripstop would not fly and thus the test was a little unrealistic in that way. This is why the measured results were so much better with one coat on my actual kite (even with its initially terrible porosity readings) than was measured with two coats of the same solution on the test pieces. This is also why the water based 'wash-in' solutions by Nikwax performed very badly, they never had a chance against completely uncoated fabric, and therefore you MAY get some decrease in porosity on an actual kite although I would personally never use them with so many better and more permanent options out there. The only way the foil community is going to get some decent data is to unfortunately coat our own kites and share the results, however in my opinion this MUST be done with before and after treatment porosity tests on multiple sites on the kite to be in any way usefully conclusive. Here is a link to a very easily made and cheap tester that would be great as a standard (I have made mine with some very slight mods to help seal the fabric which I will post later): https://vimeo.com/124682223
WoW that is some truly EPIC work you have done! Thanks heaps
Can you elaborate a little on what "seepage" was? I guess it was the second coat crossing to the other side?
Kites will get different results than to plain fabric, as you say. There is the potential for seals to form by bonding with the existing coating. Possibly a thinner coating could achieve this better on old flysurfers where the coating is on the inside of the fabric. A porosity meter would be a good way to test the results, but many checks would need to be performed to get a more accurate average. It's notable at certain points on flysurfers the coating really comes off quickly and a lot. A simple "Full kite deflation test" is a simple and good way to gauge some sort of results. I think a "full kite pressure test" would be the most accurate way to test changes in the kite. How I am not sure, some way similar I guess how homes are pressure tested.