Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 06-16-2012, 10:46 PM   #1
Scraping Paint
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 131
expansion foam coating

The reasons for coating the foam are to prevent the foam from absorbing water and to act as a fire retardant coat.

Which coat is recommended, is epoxy better than "regular paint"?
__________________
Advertisement

Singleprop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2012, 11:09 PM   #2
Grand Vizier
 
Delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,497
Epoxy burns real fine by itself. Fire redardant paint would be better. If you wanted to avoid moisture absorption, seems like a light coat of penetrating eopxy followed by redardant paint would work. Perhaps this:

Firefree Coatings - Fire Resistant & Fire Retardant Non-Toxic Paints for Building Materials
__________________

Delfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 06:15 AM   #3
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singleprop View Post
The reasons for coating the foam are to prevent the foam from absorbing water and to act as a fire retardant coat.

Which coat is recommended, is epoxy better than "regular paint"?
aready in place? if not...why not start with a closed cell expanding foam?
psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 09:18 AM   #4
Scraping Paint
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by psneeld View Post
aready in place? if not...why not start with a closed cell expanding foam?
It is closed cell, but that doesn't mean that it is closed or not able to absorb water.
Singleprop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 09:34 AM   #5
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by Singleprop View Post
It is closed cell, but that doesn't mean that it is closed or not able to absorb water.
What I am getting at is... are you using home canned stuff or a marine 2 part that really isn't supposed to absorb water (in a realstic timeframe)?

the cheaper home stuff in a can is like a sponge no matter it says on the can...I've tried it...maybe some is truly "closed cell" but I haven't found any...unless the "pond and stone" stuff is any better, The surface is water resistant but break that and the inside is spongy when it comes to absorbing water.

If you want water"proof" foam...what about 2 part marine stuff?
psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 10:45 AM   #6
Grand Vizier
 
Delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by psneeld View Post
What I am getting at is... are you using home canned stuff or a marine 2 part that really isn't supposed to absorb water (in a realstic timeframe)?

the cheaper home stuff in a can is like a sponge no matter it says on the can...I've tried it...maybe some is truly "closed cell" but I haven't found any...unless the "pond and stone" stuff is any better, The surface is water resistant but break that and the inside is spongy when it comes to absorbing water.

If you want water"proof" foam...what about 2 part marine stuff?
The problem arises over time. Uncoated foam, including the 2 part stuff, will oxidize opening cells and absorbing water, especially if the skim coat is nicked. Because the stuff gives off cyanide gas when it burns it should be coated with a fire resistant paint to address that safety concern, but also to inhibit oxidation. As noted, if you want optimal protection, highly reduced epoxy or epoxy paint sprayed on first, followed by fire-resistant paint would seem to be recommended.

Lots of foam is used for insulation and condensation control, but like everything in boats, it represents a compromise. Easy to apply, kills you if it burns. That's why a number of builders won't use it, preferring USCG approved fiberglass batts so condensation can run to the bilges rather than collecting locally in a broken down area of foam. I tried to get the best of both worlds on Delfin by applying waterproof acoustical cork to the steel first, followed by fiberglass batts. The result seems to be no condensation, no fire hazard and a quiet full. On a steel circa 1960's Vripak I looked at (Constance in Anacortes), the yard glued balsa to the hull, then coated that with a thick layer of tar. That worked for condensation and noise control, but I should think the tar would burn like doxy if given the opportunity.
Delfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 12:26 PM   #7
Scraping Paint
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 131
Delfin, your answers are very useful,as always, thanks.
Singleprop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:27 PM   #8
Scraping Paint
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 131
Would a reduced rust primer epoxy like Intershield 300 be acceptable or is there a better choice?
Singleprop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2012, 11:36 PM   #9
Grand Vizier
 
Delfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,497
That's a great product, but depending on cost, seems like overkill. I think all you are trying to do is seal the foam so that it can't oxidize, then coat it with a fire resistant coating for safety. Tnemec makes a wide range of epoxy primers and topcoats that are pretty economical. The State of Washington specifies their products for re-coating of bridges, and I have used it with good results, at least so far.
__________________

Delfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012