How does anyone coat a car with only 10cc of product?!?!?!?

[Audios S6]

For any to consider or refute.

Most of these coatings are moisture cured. I take that to mean they are using the H2O in the air as part of the reaction. Since we think of these as a SI-O bond, I have to also assume it is taking the oxygen from the H2O and the hydrogen ends up as part of a volatile compound (maybe an alcohol of some kind).

So there is certainly the potential that you are adding to what is in the bottle as part of the chemical reaction. It's also possible that the reactive molecule is larger in it's bottled form than after the reaction. It's also possible that the chemical structure is a matrix rather than the linear molecules dispersed in solvent in the bottle and literally builds itself larger on the surface just due to the geometry.

This is all speculation and without the manufacturer's chemists or some other independent chemist dropping by to enlighten us, it will remain speculation. But does provide an explanation for how your tiny bottle can grow when exposed to air.

 

[zmcgovern45]

like you illustrated before, though...1-2 microns...i can imagine that's well within the margin of error for many gauges. too small.

^exactly... one, there is tolerance/error in the instrumentation. two, you would have to identify the exact same spot on the panel down to the fraction of a millimeter, otherwise there is variance in film thickness that will come into play.

It is something that would have to be performed in a controlled environment by professionals to have any sort of valid data in my opinion.

 

[conman1395]

you could do a before and after and see the difference. so, uncoated panel, measure...coated panel, measure.

i actually tried it with a piece of uniform sheen, uniform thickness steel at one point but my gauge is not repeatable enough to account for something so small, so i was getting readings that didn't help one way or the other.

like you illustrated before, though...1-2 microns...i can imagine that's well within the margin of error for many gauges. too small.

That's what I meant: before and after comparison.

Now all I want to be able to measure is a polisher's output so we can get quantifiably compare a BOSS vs a Rupes. Todd seems to be avoiding my question though....

 

[Zubair]

Am I missing something but is the coating being on the paint, not wearing away like usual lsp's the primary objective? Not the current dilemma of how thick it is? I would be glad its there at 24 months even with out any measurable micron over having 1-2 microns after initial application and nothing/no protection after a few months or worse, weeks.

My point is durable protection as in length of time protecting the paint should override thickness of protection if it's especially very temporary.

 

[SYMAWD]

Am I missing something but is the coating being on the paint, not wearing away like usual lsp's the primary objective? Not the current dilemma of how thick it is? I would be glad its there at 24 months even with out any measurable micron over having 1-2 microns after initial application and nothing/no protection after a few months or worse, weeks.

My point is durable protection as in length of time protecting the paint should override thickness of protection if it's especially very temporary.

But we are more concerned with manufacturer's coating thickness claims in this thread than actual durability.

 

[Zubair]

But we are more concerned with manufacturer's coating thickness claims in this thread than actual durability.

Yes but durability should be the sole and primary purpose, of what purpose would a coating of 1 micron vs 2 micron serve if its only lasts 2 weeks? Why the infatuation with thickness over durability?

 

[GSKR]

I think this is a dead topic that has been scoured back and forth,I wouldn't even go there,if you personally don't believe the mathematics that equate the product thickness or volume per application don't use it.

 

[Audios S6]

Yes but durability should be the sole and primary purpose, of what purpose would a coating of 1 micron vs 2 micron serve if its only lasts 2 weeks? Why the infatuation with thickness over durability?

I believe it is important because most light defects are in the top few microns. When we claim it acts as a sacrificial surface, that is, we are removing coating rather than paint to remove the defects, that would require the coating have such a thickness. If it does not, that negates one of the many benefits of the coating that we perceive.

 

[FUNX650]

Yes but durability should be the sole and primary purpose, of what purpose would a coating of 1 micron vs 2 micron serve if its only lasts 2 weeks? Why the infatuation with thickness over durability?

IMO:
There surely can be a relationship between
thickness and durability...as well as between
thickness, durability, and "hardness".

I believe it is important because most light defects are in the top few microns. When we claim it acts as a sacrificial surface, that is, we are removing coating rather than paint to remove the defects, that would require the coating have such a thickness. If it does not, that negates one of the many benefits of the coating that we perceive.

^^^:goodpost:^^^

The thicker the Coating, the less chance of it
being penetrated by extraneous substances.
Throw in some of the "hardness-factor" and the
unlikelihood of penetration increases exponentially!

And...might as well add the following post to the:
Thickness vs. Durability discussion:

For any to consider or refute.

Most of these coatings are moisture cured. I take that to mean they are using the H2O in the air as part of the reaction. Since we think of these as a SI-O bond, I have to also assume it is taking the oxygen from the H2O and the hydrogen ends up as part of a volatile compound (maybe an alcohol of some kind).

So there is certainly the potential that you are adding to what is in the bottle as part of the chemical reaction. It's also possible that the reactive molecule is larger in it's bottled form than after the reaction. It's also possible that the chemical structure is a matrix rather than the linear molecules dispersed in solvent in the bottle and literally builds itself larger on the surface just due to the geometry.

This is all speculation and without the manufacturer's chemists or some other independent chemist dropping by to enlighten us, it will remain speculation. But does provide an explanation for how your tiny bottle can grow when exposed to air.

If the size of a water molecule = 0.278 nm; and:
If the thickness(length) of micron = 1,000 nm; then:

How thick would you want the Coating to be?
a.) ~ 4.00 water molecules thick
b.) ~ 4,000-6,000 water molecules thick
c.) Thickness doesn't play a role


Bob

 

[hollerstiltner]

If we're after the thickness of the cured product, percent solids; I'd imagine someone with time and money to burn could do it.

Buy a container of whatever product you intend to use. Also, buy a plate of some type of substance the coating won't adhere to. I'm thinking of a wax block. Just guessing on that one.

Weight the block, then place a measured amount of the product on the block. Reweigh the two together

Now just wait for it to cure.

After its cured, weight it all again. Calculate the percent of product that remained to tell you how much of the product is carrier compounds and how much is left behind.

Volume is a little tricker. Remove the dried product from the wax. Prepare a graduated cylinder with a precise amount of water, then dump the dried product in the water and measure the change in volume. Then you can say X ml of products gives X ml of cured product.

All that's left to know is the surface area of the care you wanted to coat. Divide it all out to get an average theoretical film thickness.

I'm sure something is wrong with my logic, but it's worth a shot if someone really wants to know.

 

[swanicyouth]

Lol.

Anyone who has used a PTG knows the readings are not 100% repeatable.

As an example, you can measure the same spot 5 times and get 5 different readings - all a few microns apart.

So, take the highest of the 5 "after" readings - that's how the manufacturers' claim increased thickness.

My parents used to call it a "cock and bull story".

 

[FrankS]

I used about 5cc of Opti Gloss Coat to coat this Mercedes and used it generously, more than what the directions called for.

Tried to post a picture of just the car but the AG photo gallery is not working properly.

Here's the complete write-up: http://www.autogeekonline.net/forum/show-n-shine/86354-2008-mercedes-c300-detail-dr-colorchip-opti-gloss-coat.html

 

[conman1395]

Yes but durability should be the sole and primary purpose, of what purpose would a coating of 1 micron vs 2 micron serve if its only lasts 2 weeks? Why the infatuation with thickness over durability?

YES, durability is what is important BUT we're not talking about that. We are simply talking about the thickness whether it applies to durability or not.

 

[GSKR]

If we're after the thickness of the cured product, percent solids; I'd imagine someone with time and money to burn could do it.

Buy a container of whatever product you intend to use. Also, buy a plate of some type of substance the coating won't adhere to. I'm thinking of a wax block. Just guessing on that one.

Weight the block, then place a measured amount of the product on the block. Reweigh the two together

Now just wait for it to cure.

After its cured, weight it all again. Calculate the percent of product that remained to tell you how much of the product is carrier compounds and how much is left behind.

Volume is a little tricker. Remove the dried product from the wax. Prepare a graduated cylinder with a precise amount of water, then dump the dried product in the water and measure the change in volume. Then you can say X ml of products gives X ml of cured product.

All that's left to know is the surface area of the care you wanted to coat. Divide it all out to get an average theoretical film thickness.

I'm sure something is wrong with my logic, but it's worth a shot if someone really wants to know.

could be logical.

 

[boatmangc]

I just did 2 LWB High roof Sprinter vans with coatings
Opti coat with 15cc
and the other ( a LWB High roof extended) with 15cc of Pinnacle Black Label Diamond Coating, no problem.
That included wheels and plastics.

Except for the roof, I got an altitude nosebleed form the big one.