Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 66

Thread: Latex Paint for Your Homebuilt

  1. #11
    Jim Heffelfinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, California, United States
    Posts
    416
    BTW - there are different levels sheen of clear acrylic paint. BTW - Latex is a misnomer - they are all 100% acrylic if it says Latex.
    http://www.pnta.com/scenic/paint/clear-acrylic/?utm_source=googl
    e&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=shopping&gclid=CJ-V17zxm7oCFS_ZQgoddn0ARQ

  2. #12
    rwanttaja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    2,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Heffelfinger View Post
    Therefore begs the question - do any of the "paints" we use have the level of controls you aspire to have? The house paint companies produce millions of gallons of the same paint (base) where the aircraft industry produces a few thousand. So if I pull out a can of simple, well proven, single part paint from a big box or buy a system of paints from an aircraft finishing company that has 3 or 4 different layers each with different thinners and catalysts all of which are subject to the painter's whim in mixing, equipment use, temperature, humidity..... they both have the same variability?
    Plus the fact that the aviation paint might have been sitting on the bottom of a pallet in a warehouse for gawds know how long, while the stuff at Lowes' is pretty fresh.

    Ron Wanttaja

  3. #13
    Aaron Novak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wi
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by rwanttaja View Post
    Plus the fact that the aviation paint might have been sitting on the bottom of a pallet in a warehouse for gawds know how long, while the stuff at Lowes' is pretty fresh.

    Ron Wanttaja
    Actually any material that has to conform to an actual formula or material specification is fine by me for testing. What I do not like at all is someone confusing a brand with a specification. Dutch-Boy max-bond exterior.....is not a material specification, and what is in that gallon jug is anyones guess. Performance specifications do not mean anything outside of the specific test done. The formulation could change at any time, with no notice given, and when used outside of the scope of the performance testing, the suitability cannot be predicted. Without material control, you cannot do testing to dertermine the suitability of anything, for anything unless you have a performance test to validate every single batch, which is fine too. If someone wanted to develop, test, validate and get approval (if needed) of a covering system using a "latex" type system I think thats great. But that would require control of the physical materials, and in the low volumes that would be used, the price would increase. In all honesty, anything but that, would be like telling someone to weld with coat hangar.


    P.S. Ron, you cannot control how something is treated after it leaves the manufacturer. That is a seperate issue that does not at all relate to the material control of a product. And if you want to talk control of your product sitting on the shelves, better hope your Lowes paint never froze....but im sure they would destroy it if it had....
    Last edited by Aaron Novak; 10-16-2013 at 12:40 PM.

  4. #14
    Sam Buchanan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    KDCU
    Posts
    567

    Goggles

    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Novak View Post
    Actually any material that has to conform to an actual formula or material specification is fine by me for testing. What I do not like at all is someone confusing a brand with a specification. Dutch-Boy max-bond exterior.....is not a material specification, and what is in that gallon jug is anyones guess. Performance specifications do not mean anything outside of the specific test done. The formulation could change at any time, with no notice given, and when used outside of the scope of the performance testing, the suitability cannot be predicted. Without material control, you cannot do testing to dertermine the suitability of anything, for anything unless you have a performance test to validate every single batch, which is fine too. If someone wanted to develop, test, validate and get approval (if needed) of a covering system using a "latex" type system I think thats great. But that would require control of the physical materials, and in the low volumes that would be used, the price would increase. In all honesty, anything but that, would be like telling someone to weld with coat hangar.


    P.S. Ron, you cannot control how something is treated after it leaves the manufacturer. That is a seperate issue that does not at all relate to the material control of a product. And if you want to talk control of your product sitting on the shelves, better hope your Lowes paint never froze....but im sure they would destroy it if it had....
    I have latex paint on my Legal Eagle. The plane is a one-off, welded and glued together by a builder with no formal training in aircraft construction, and with no basis of quality control other than what I am willing to risk when I fly it. The engine is a 1/2 VW, highly fabricated and built to no specification. The fabric installation consist of uncertificated fabric installed by a builder with no formal training in fabric installation, so no control specifications.

    Let's see...name brand latex paint with the highest price the manufacturer offers and pulled from a batch of who knows how many thousands of gallons with the manufacturer's reputation at stake.

    Me thinks the latex paint has the most highly developed control process of any component of my plane!

    Let's get real.
    Last edited by Sam Buchanan; 10-16-2013 at 05:17 PM.
    Sam Buchanan
    The RV Journal RV-6 build log
    Fokker D.VII semi-replica build log

  5. #15
    Aaron Novak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Oshkosh, Wi
    Posts
    361
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Buchanan View Post
    I have latex paint on my Legal Eagle. The plane is a one-off, welded and glued together by a builder with no formal training in aircraft construction, and with no basis of quality control other than what I am willing to risk when I fly it. The engine is a 1/2 VW, highly fabricated and built to no specification. The fabric installation consist of uncertificated fabric installed by a builder with no formal training in fabric installation, so no control specifications.

    Let's see...name brand latex paint with the highest price the manufacturer offers and pulled from a batch of who knows how many thousands of gallons with the manufacturer's reputation at stake.

    Me thinks the latex paint has the most highly developed control process of any component of my plane!

    Let's get real.

    Sam,
    You are missing my point. Its not YOU im concerned about, but rather the people that follow YOU by example. Say YOU used ABC brand paint on your project, and it has worked well for years. YOU tell someone about it and how great ABC is. THEY go buy the same ABC brand paint, not knowing that some part of the formula has changed since the can and label are the same, and proceed to use it based on YOUR results from what they think is the exact same material. The slight formula change makes no difference when used on wood or composite material ( the indended substrates ), but instead reacts with the adhesive used to glue the fabric on ( never tested by the paint manufacturer ). Paint formulas are constantly changing in the "house paint" market, and since the end useage here is completely different than anything the manufacturer would test for, that is where the danger comes in. If YOU want to do the testing and experimentation on a batch of material YOU bought to determine its suitability for YOU, thats great. However I think it is completely careless and dangerous to suggest a product that you cannot assure the composition of.

  6. #16
    Jim Heffelfinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, California, United States
    Posts
    416
    I use Tidy Cat litter under my tires to get my car moving after being stuck in the snow.


    Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not
    necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any agency of the U.S. government. Examples of
    analysis performed within this article are only examples. They should not be utilized in real-world
    analytic products as they are based only on very limited and dated open source information.
    Assumptions made within the analysis are not reflective of the position of any U.S. government entity
    Last edited by Hal Bryan; 10-17-2013 at 07:19 AM.

  7. #17
    Jim Heffelfinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, California, United States
    Posts
    416
    A quick check of Mr. Novak's prior posts clearly define a line of thinking that is emblematic of his quest for process controls and exactness.
    It is true Mr. Novak - all you say.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gonzales, LA
    Posts
    175
    What part of "experimental" does someone not get, here?

  9. #19
    bookmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    209
    Common sense goes a long way here. I have no problem at all painting my 85 mph Nieuport 17 with latex paint. It will be hangared and flys slow. If I was building a 300 mph rocket sled, my common sense says I might better invest in a more proven finish for aircraft of that speed factor.

    As builders, we must make many decisions based on our personal anlaysis of the risk.

    PS: Let's play nice here.

    Dale
    Dale Cavin
    Florida Panhandle
    Current Project: Airdrome Aeroplanes Full Size Nieuport 17

  10. #20
    Sam Buchanan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    KDCU
    Posts
    567
    Quote Originally Posted by Aaron Novak View Post
    Sam,
    You are missing my point. Its not YOU im concerned about, but rather the people that follow YOU by example. Say YOU used ABC brand paint on your project, and it has worked well for years. YOU tell someone about it and how great ABC is. THEY go buy the same ABC brand paint, not knowing that some part of the formula has changed since the can and label are the same, and proceed to use it based on YOUR results from what they think is the exact same material. The slight formula change makes no difference when used on wood or composite material ( the indended substrates ), but instead reacts with the adhesive used to glue the fabric on ( never tested by the paint manufacturer ). Paint formulas are constantly changing in the "house paint" market, and since the end useage here is completely different than anything the manufacturer would test for, that is where the danger comes in. If YOU want to do the testing and experimentation on a batch of material YOU bought to determine its suitability for YOU, thats great. However I think it is completely careless and dangerous to suggest a product that you cannot assure the composition of.
    Let me begin by saying that I find the insinuation that what I have posted is "completely careless and dangerous" personally offensive and insulting. Those that have used my services as an EAA Technical Counselor and friend to a multitude of builders would also be offended by that statement.

    Now....having gotten that out of the way, here are some thoughts concerning the use of latex paint for EXPERIMENTAL aircraft:

    We are indeed talking EXPERIMENTAL aviation on this forum. If a builder is not comfortable with the latex process, or it doesn't meet his personal risk management....then don't use it. Latex paint is not for every builder or every aircraft. It has been adopted primarily for inexpensive, slow aircraft where spending upwards of 25% of the airframe cost in finishing materials is not practical. If I was building a Bearhawk, J-3 clone, or other $30,000 airframe, or an airframe designed for high cruise speed, latex would not be my choice. Resale value of a more expensive airframe would be impacted by the use of latex paint because not all buyers would accept that finish.

    My personal experience with latex paint on inexpensive and slow aircraft covers a span of twenty years. Latex was first introduced to the low-n-slow community a few years prior to my first project. There is a lot of field history on latex paint, and it has proven to have a good track record. But, it was controversial when first introduced to experimental aviation and remains a subject that generates opposing opinions.

    The presenter of the webinar that began this thread, and my personal experience, does not drive anyone exclusively toward a particular brand but instead presents a process. I have used various brands of latex over twenty years and have found all of them to meet my expectations. I do, however, recommend buying the premium level of latex paint regardless of brand. A premium grade of primer is also important for UV protection and adhesion. These recommendations are apparent to those who actually watched the webinar.

    I have not seen any evidence of incompatibility of latex with PolyTac adhesive. The few times I have had opportunity to remove lightweight latex-finished fabric that was attached with PolyTac has resulted in the fabric tearing instead of the glue joints failing.

    So....there is considerable field history to support the use of latex paint. But if a builder doesn't want to use it for whatever reason...use something else. But please don't denigrate the users of latex just because it doesn't meet your personal standards.
    Last edited by Sam Buchanan; 10-17-2013 at 07:29 AM.
    Sam Buchanan
    The RV Journal RV-6 build log
    Fokker D.VII semi-replica build log

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •