|12-28-2012 08:04 AM|
|mluckett4410||In this forum you are talking about paint. I am a paint chemist and I do dabble a little with auto primers and clear coats. Polyurethanes can be rock hard or a elastic soft touch. Polyurethane is what you get when you mix a 1. Isocyanate with a 2. Polyol. Urethane or really polyurethanes can be acrylic, polyester,alkyd, vinyl, Nitrocellulose, cellulose acetate butyrate and on and on. All of thiese items in the second group are the polyol. Water is a polyol H-OH, this will cause CO2 bubbles in your paint. This is why there are urethane grade solvents which are very low in moisture. We also use moisture scavengers to consume water. A polyurethane can be lacquer solids of 15-20% to 100% solids. There are so many products out there and so many claims it is hard to keep it straight. Japaneses, German, and American automakers all have different approaches to clear coat hardness and they all have advantages and disadvantages. Polyurethane is the predominate clear coat chemistry hands down. Where I work we still make Nitrocellulose Lacquers just like the old days.|
|08-23-2005 01:01 PM|
powderbill: Great explanation! I'm a LINE-X spray-on truck bedliner dealer and I find few people who know this info.
A couple of side notes just to confuse everyone: Polyester resins are better (more durable) than acrylic resins. Also, isocyanate linked with amine terminated resins (as opposed to hydroxl terminated resins) gives you polyurea.
|07-23-2005 08:38 AM|
Changed my mind.
|07-23-2005 08:03 AM|
|baddbob||I've seen some durability ratings in pencil hardness, what's this referring to? Impact resistance?|
|07-22-2005 08:38 PM|
1. Polyester urethanes are more durable than acrylic urethanes.
It may be helpful to define our terms here. When Cruzin9 refers to durability in this context, I'm sure he means impact resistance, flexibility, and toughness. I would agree that polyester urethanes generally have better impact resistance, flexibility, and toughness than acrylic urethanes.
The reason for my post is, when reading coatings literature, you'll often come across references to exterior durability referring to gloss and color retention on exterior exposure. So as not to cause any confusion, acrylic urethanes as a class will frequently exhibit better gloss and color retention than polyester urethanes. So, don't be surprised if you read statements to the effect that acrylic urethanes typically have better gloss and color retention, which may in some contexts also be referred to as exterior durability.
It's not that either statement is wrong, they are both right if the term durability is understood to be used in the correct context. I hope this might help clarify any possible confusion for interested readers.
|07-22-2005 01:50 PM|
I'm a LINE-X spray-on truck bedliner dealer. Our product is a blend of polyurethane and polyurea. A few points to make:
1. Polyester urethanes are more durable than acrylic urethanes.
2. There are two-part urethanes (polyol resin mixed with a isocyanate (a hardener) and there are one-part urethanes (also called solvent based urethanes) which is urethane suspended in a solvent. Long story short, two-part urethanes are typically harder and more durable than one-part urethanes.
3. There are aromatic urethanes and aliphatic urethanes (depends on the position of the hydrocarbon chains). Aliphatic urethanes are more UV resistant but usually are more expensive.
|07-08-2005 12:26 AM|
You can't always go by the names things are sold under. The foam boards I bought for some fiberglass work were called "urethane foam" in the advertisement. They were actually polyisocyanurate foam, a.k.a. rigid insulation without any facing material. Another example: ever bought vinyl siding or tore a vinyl top off a car? Those are not "vinyl" but rather a polymer, most likely polyvinylchloride or plain old PVC.
As a follow-up to powderbill's organic chemistry lesson (thanks for that, powderbill!), see http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/chemweek.../Polymers.html
|07-07-2005 07:20 PM|
Well, first off, it's much harder to make predictions about the quality of one formulation versus another if you don't have access to the formulas. Typically, one can get a few tidbits of information about the composition of the products from either labels or MSDS, but the information is typically very limited. For example, one who is familiar with the various commercially available isocyanates can typically pretty well guess what isocyanate curing agent is being used by looking at the solvent composition, VOC, and wt./gal. on an MSDS or even some labels. Information on the non-hazardous components such as acrylic resin solids is typically much more limited.
For a few broad generalizations, with all other factors being equal, mix ratios that use more isocyanate are typically higher in chemical resistance, and may often have an edge in gloss retention. However, comparison of higher solids (lower VOC) products to a lower solids product may make such predictions less reliable. The main factors that ultimately determine mixing ratios are the hydroxyl equivalent weights of the resins used and the quantity of resin solids present.
With respect to buffing behavior, I would expect that rate of hardness development would be affected by the molecular weight and monomer composition of the acrylic resin used, the solvent blend, and most especially by the accelerator package used in the formulation (eg concentration of certain metal salts). A tradeoff in this case is potlife versus cure rate.
Kenseth's experience using the isocyanate for a primer with a topcoat may work fine in some cases, and not in others depending on the individual formulations. There are some good reasons for a manufacturer to utilize a relatively small number of different isocyantes in a product line, and sometimes two entirely different products may use exactly the same isocyanate curative. Other times, they may be very different. Again, without access to the specific formulations or doing some analytical work, it would boil down to a calculated risk. Availability of good labeling information or MSDS info could definitely tilt the odds in your favor of guessing correctly, however.
With respect to toxicity of isocyanates, the ones used in 2K paints are typically selected to have much, much less toxicity than the monomeric isocyanates they were derived from due to their vastly reduced vapor pressure. Still, they should be handled with respect, particularly owing to the possibility of sensitization if an aerosol containing them is inhaled into the lungs.
I hope these comments are interesting to readers. Let me know if comments on a particular aspect are wanted.
|07-07-2005 05:37 AM|
|baddbob||I agree, the polyurethanes seem to stay green longer but when they do reach full cure they are harder to buff IMO. Like Barry has said a few times here, mix ratios can somewhat be an indicator of quality, 2-1 and 3-1 clears are usually higher quality than the 4-1 mixes. It's all rocket science IMO , but if anyone wants to shed some more light on the subject I'm all ears.|
|07-06-2005 11:24 PM|
now i remeber going over this with barry k a couple years ago and i remember him saying there were distinct differences. dont remember exactly what they were except that polyurethanes are more chemical resistant and more flexible. hopefully he will pop in here and remind me of our conversation.
kenseth17: thats funny about the buffing. i usually see just the opposite. most urethanes i see say to buff within a few days and poly's within 30 or so.
|07-06-2005 10:18 PM|
woah, don't think I understand most of that, but interesting. The ingrediant that catches my attention is the hardener with most of the ingredients being some kind of isocyanate in the name. Bad stuff menard. Now stuff like resin and mek and acetate I can understand, but all the complex chemical names I don't but they are probably a combination of chemicals. It was always my understanding that the most durable were polyurethanes, but don't know now that I read what powderbill wrote. But the clears labeled polyurethane say to buff within a certain time period in some tech sheets. The urethane clears I haven't seen say this. Seen powder bills occupation was a chemist. Who woulda thunk it.
I often see a lot of similar chemicals in the hardeners for urethane primers as the clear. One time I had a small part I had to clear and was out of hardener for the clear. Used some primer hardener so I didn't have to go spring for the hardener for the clear. I mixed a little up and let it sit overnight and the next day it was hardened up, so I used the primer hardener. Didn't see if there were any long term effects though.
|07-06-2005 09:34 PM|
|baddbob||Not boring at all, tell us more. I've done some ingredient comparisons from can to can and see a lot of component similarities, there are some ingredients in the higher end clears that start with the poly prefix which I always thought interesting. Are there any key ingredients to look for which would identify a quality product? Interesting stuff. Bob|
|07-06-2005 09:23 PM|
Just for the record, in the context of 2 component automotive finishes, the two terms urethane and polyurethane are synonomous and can be used interchangeably.
For those interested in learning more: A urethane linkage (-NHCO0-) is the reaction product between a hydroxyl group (-OH) and an isocyanate group (-NCO). The prefix poly- simply means that the product is a polymer containing the said linkages.
In most automotive topcoats nowadays, the hydroxyl component is an acrylic resin with pendant hydroxyl groups, and the isocyanate is a biuret or trimer of hexamethylene diisocyanate. However, other types of urethane finishes also exist in primarily non-automotive applications, such as polyester-urethanes, vinyl-urethanes, or alkyd-urethanes. One also can encounter the so-called oil-modified urethane varnishes in architectural applications, which are single component products which cure by oxidation (with the urethane linkage being present in the backbone of the polymer). Finally, there are moisture-cured products, which are multifunctional isocyanates that react with atmospheric moisture to crosslink and cure (eg POR-15).
I hope people don't find this boring or rambling.
|07-06-2005 08:14 PM|
Thanks for the clarification roger. My fault,thinking one and typing another. Multitasking is not my thing. Heck,singletasking is tough enough. Poly this and poly that,
Polly want a cracker?
|07-06-2005 06:08 PM|
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|