[celicaxx]

Because there are so many opportunities for paint film problems to occur due to operator application error and unfavorable environmental conditions, I've made it a point to at least follow recommended recoat times. It's a simple approach that doesn't allow haste to circumvent and dictate the outcome.


And the science accurately represents why paint films should complete the coalescing process.

I really only push it when I work with others, but on my own I try to follow dry times fairly well. If it's 4 hour recoat I might start the second cut at 3.5 or so, but not 1 hour.

The biggest things I think happen with not following dry times is offgassing, potentially the house smelling like paint for a long time, and adhesion issues. Some houses you go into and they just smell like paint forever and ever. The theory I've heard is that while the first layer is drying, if you recoat it, the solvents get trapped in and can never fully offgas. Then for adhesion, it's the same, if you recoat too quick, the first layer can never adhere 100% from not being able to offgas out the solvents quickly.

I think BM's short dry times are less because they love painters, and more because of liability for this reason. If there's an offgassing issue and someone gets sick from it, on a warranty claim they could potentially have to tear a room down to studs and start over. Shorter dry times imo do lead to more chances of flashing, but a lot of HOs don't even notice flashing, and throwing some more gallons at the painter to do it again costs them nothing compared to tearing a room down to studs.

I wish more people would at least follow the can recommendations on dry times, I do myself on my own jobs, but when you're subbing with others, you do what your "boss" tells you, even if it's dumb. And of course being young and looking younger, you get stupid lectures about "I've been painting 30 years blah blah blah shut up with your science ****."

 

[Woodco]

Because there are so many opportunities for paint film problems to occur due to operator application error and unfavorable environmental conditions, I've made it a point to at least follow recommended recoat times. It's a simple approach that doesn't allow haste to circumvent and dictate the outcome.


And the science accurately represents why paint films should complete the coalescing process.

Neat. Im not in a million years turning a five hour job into a two day job cuz the can says I should. In my 20+ years of painting this way, theres never been a single issue.

 

[CApainter]

Neat. Im not in a million years turning a five hour job into a two day job cuz the can says I should. In my 20+ years of painting this way, theres never been a single issue.

Neat? I'm just stating a fact. I could careless what others do. But any painter who claims to be a journey level professional and offers their expertise based on experience and coating knowledge, should also suggest to the audience the implementation of best painting practices. Otherwise, you're doing the industry a disservice.


Painters shouldn't simply dismiss science and warranty conditions just because they didn't allow enough time to follow the manufacturer's recommendations. And that's the problem with the liquid building product known as paint. There's such a wide range of what is considered acceptable in this industry, along with little to no over site and competitive bidding that enables haste , that it leaves it susceptible to dumbing down.

 

[CApainter]

...The biggest things I think happen with not following dry times is offgassing, potentially the house smelling like paint for a long time, and adhesion issues. Some houses you go into and they just smell like paint forever and ever. The theory I've heard is that while the first layer is drying, if you recoat it, the solvents get trapped in and can never fully offgas. Then for adhesion, it's the same, if you recoat too quick, the first layer can never adhere 100% from not being able to offgas out the solvents quickly...."

You're exactly right. The vehicle, or solvent, of paint has a couple of purposes as I understand it. One, it provides a means to carry the resin. Two, it aids in the film formation through the process known as coalescing, or evaporation. There are physics and chemistry that take place during coalescing that allow the resins and binders that remain on a surface, to perform to their optimum level. This includes adhesion, abrasion resistance, chemical resistance, UV control, etc.


Retarding the film formation compromises the properties and performance of the paint. Of course all of this is at a microscopic level that we cannot see. So for many painters, it doesn't exist. All that matters is that it feels dry which means the second coat won't smear it off, and the final resulting color and sheen looks great to a layman. typically the homeowner.


And since interiors are rarely subjected to the environmental conditions of exteriors, corners are often cut in the interest of time. After all, time is king in painting.

 

[Lightningboy65]

Neat. Im not in a million years turning a five hour job into a two day job cuz the can says I should. In my 20+ years of painting this way, theres never been a single issue.

I managed to get in about 40+ years and ran one of the most successful operations in my area. I really don't know how I managed that, adhering to the philosophy you outline above. Just lucky I guess.:surprise:

 

[CApainter]

I managed to get in about 40+ years and ran one of the most successful operations in my area. I really don't know how I managed that, adhering to the philosophy you outline above. Just lucky I guess.:surprise:

It's one thing to get by, by the seat of your pants and another to advocate it for others.

 

[Woodco]

Get by by the seat of your pants? Come on. We're talking about walls here. Its not rocket surgery. I maintain that recoat times are GUIDELINES. Thats why we dont hear about paint failures on walls due to recoating too quick, which I am willing to bet at least HALF the interior walls in the entire country were recoated too soon. waiting the correct time under normal conditions ensures 100% there wont be a failure, as opposed to the 99.99% if you recoat sooner. Call me crazy, but I like those odds.

I guess Im just not big on following rules unless theres a legitimate reason not too. I dont always drive with my hands on 10 and 2, I dont chew my food 32 times per bite, and I will recoat before the time. Im a loner Dotty.... A rebel.

 

[celicaxx]

Get by by the seat of your pants? Come on. We're talking about walls here. Its not rocket surgery. I maintain that recoat times are GUIDELINES. Thats why we dont hear about paint failures on walls due to recoating too quick, which I am willing to bet at least HALF the interior walls in the entire country were recoated too soon. waiting the correct time under normal conditions ensures 100% there wont be a failure, as opposed to the 99.99% if you recoat sooner. Call me crazy, but I like those odds.

I guess Im just not big on following rules unless theres a legitimate reason not too. I dont always drive with my hands on 10 and 2, I dont chew my food 32 times per bite, and I will recoat before the time. Im a loner Dotty.... A rebel.

How many jobs do you come back to and see years later? Just because you don't know something failed doesn't mean it didn't happen. A failure isn't always outright, but how many jobs have you been on where paint on the wall felt sticky or you could fingernail it off years later? It's usually not crappy paint, it's people not following dry times. (Though not cleaning/priming it is another big cause, usually they go hand in hand...) Of course people will blame the paint, but rarely it's the paint. Never mind the houses that permanently smell like paint. Of your 50% figure, probably a quarter of all houses have garbage like this going on, when it doesn't need to happen.

I think for profit, you can still follow dry times and be profitable. It just requires different job planning. You can pay the extra money for the products with shorter recoat times (BM) and deal with the possible drawbacks of them, for one. Or, if you're doing a whole house, you can start on first coats in other rooms while you're waiting for the room you did to dry. If you're doing one bedroom spending the money for a Regal or similar probably is ideal so you can be in and out.

I guess it comes down to how you think of the customer. "Do unto others..." and all. I personally would not want a contractor to do that in my own house, knowing the risks involved with it.

"Everyone else does this dumb thing, so I'll do it too" isn't a good excuse. In other trades this happens with a lot more disastrous results than paint peeling. For example, in tile, the TCNA (Tile Council of North America) basically found 90% of tiled showers were built wrong in some way. A proper tile job should be able to last without leaks, loose tiles, etc, for 50 years. That industry organization publishes a handbook that is used in lawsuits if a failure happens. Painting, luckily or unluckily is sort of an industry that kind of encourages or even intentionally tries to create failures to keep work going. They figure people will always buy paint. The tile industry meanwhile has competition with vinyl, cultured marble, etc, that people could buy instead of tile, so they proactively try much more than painting to educate people and prevent failures and come up with universal standards and methods and guidelines which really painting doesn't have. My problem with the paint industry is they're happy with the status quo of failure being basically the rule rather than the exception, and though the industry is growing, there are things like vinyl siding vs paint that have come up as competition to the industry.

 

[Lightningboy65]

I've been back to many (over 50%) of my jobs, as the majority of my customers were repeat business. Never once have I seen failure due to recoating before the prescribed dry time. And I have had some jobs where I had to wait longer to recoat than the prescribed time due to ambient conditions. PA is the humidity capitol of the world. It all comes down to common sense.

It certainly doesn't hurt to follow the recommendations, but if common sense and experience dictate otherwise....Those specs are written by people in a lab with little to no field experience. And they are drawn up to cover their a55.

Nor have I ever rolled a wall in a W pattern a day in my life . Still I managed to make it through 40+ years "by the seat of my pants". Just lucky I guess, because the odds were clearly not in my favor. I didn't follow the label directions.

 

[Lightningboy65]

Im a loner Dotty.... A rebel.

And there is no basement at the Alamo!:biggrin:

 

[CApainter]

I've been back to many (over 50%) of my jobs, as the majority of my customers were repeat business. Never once have I seen failure due to recoating before the prescribed dry time. And I have had some jobs where I had to wait longer to recoat than the prescribed time due to ambient conditions. PA is the humidity capitol of the world. It all comes down to common sense.

It certainly doesn't hurt to follow the recommendations, but if common sense and experience dictate otherwise....Those specs are written by people in a lab with little to no field experience. And they are drawn up to cover their a55.

Nor have I ever rolled a wall in a W pattern a day in my life . Still I managed to make it through 40+ years "by the seat of my pants". Just lucky I guess, because the odds were clearly not in my favor. I didn't follow the label directions.

It's not about how successful YOU were, circumventing product application recommendations, it's about offering the next generation of painters a set of best practices and standards that will ensure the industry's success.

 

[CApainter]

Get by by the seat of your pants? Come on. We're talking about walls here. Its not rocket surgery. I maintain that recoat times are GUIDELINES. Thats why we dont hear about paint failures on walls due to recoating too quick, which I am willing to bet at least HALF the interior walls in the entire country were recoated too soon. waiting the correct time under normal conditions ensures 100% there wont be a failure, as opposed to the 99.99% if you recoat sooner. Call me crazy, but I like those odds.

I guess Im just not big on following rules unless theres a legitimate reason not too. I dont always drive with my hands on 10 and 2, I dont chew my food 32 times per bite, and I will recoat before the time. Im a loner Dotty.... A rebel.

We all love a rebel! But that doesn't mean we should dismantle an entire structure built on best practices because a few cool cats don't like authority. So unless the majority of the industry's tradesman agree that the standards and recommendations we are currently encouraged to follow are hog wash and stifling to profit, these so called rebels are merely rogue painters. And that's Ok.

 

[Pete Martin the Painter]

Most of the SW line says 4 hours. I really don't understand why this woman got into such a tizzy over it!

I just assume most paints are four hours, and I am very happy when they are less. The one that I use the most on interiors is BM RS in eggshell and it has a 1-2 hour recoat time.

Sent from my SM-A600U using Tapatalk

 

[CApainter]

I just assume most paints are four hours, and I am very happy when they are less. The one that I use the most on interiors is BM RS in eggshell and it has a 1-2 hour recoat time.

Sent from my SM-A600U using Tapatalk

I remember when some interior latex paints recommended a sixteen hour cure time. And we waited the next day to apply the second coat.

 

[Lightningboy65]

It's not about how successful YOU were, circumventing product application recommendations, it's about offering the next generation of painters a set of best practices and standards that will ensure the industry's success.

You sir, are a noble man.:vs_cool:

 

[Brushman4]

Get by by the seat of your pants? Come on. We're talking about walls here. Its not rocket surgery. I maintain that recoat times are GUIDELINES. Thats why we dont hear about paint failures on walls due to recoating too quick, which I am willing to bet at least HALF the interior walls in the entire country were recoated too soon. waiting the correct time under normal conditions ensures 100% there wont be a failure, as opposed to the 99.99% if you recoat sooner. Call me crazy, but I like those odds.

I guess Im just not big on following rules unless theres a legitimate reason not too. I dont always drive with my hands on 10 and 2, I dont chew my food 32 times per bite, and I will recoat before the time. Im a loner Dotty.... A rebel.

Just call Wood, Johnny Yuma,

 

[Redux]

Many times the written specifications and application procedures on products’ TDS’s in the coatings industry are “incorrect”, requiring modification by the professional applicator based on experience and knowledge. One that comes to mind was a 2-part wood bleach I used. The TDS stated that it is self-neutralizing..since when do residual lye salts magically self-neutralize? They don’t. I was on a project where my company was finishing the first floor oak flooring, another company finishing the 2nd floor. The applicators on the 2nd floor didn’t neutralize because the TDS stated the product was self neutralizing...we neutralized...the client, architect, and builder were all concerned with the yellowing and discoloration on the 2nd floor oak due to the reactivation of the finish-eating residual lye salts during the finishing process.

Three weeks ago I was applying sealer to mahogany, the TDS stating a theoretical coverage rate of 250-400 sq ft/gal, the TDS stating not to deviate from the stated coverage rates. I knew the rates were incorrect based on experience and general finish knowledge. After calculating the theoretical coverage rates myself, knowing both the wet/dry film thickness and solid content, the correct coverage I came up with was 550 sq ft/gal..after locating an older TDS for the same product, all other things being equal, the stated theoretical coverage rates were 500-550 sq ft/gal. Had I followed the manufacturer’s instructions, I’d potentially be facing a costly strip/refinish due to the pore fill not matching the approved sample.

I sat in on an arbitration for an HO client of mine, the client seeking $350K in damages for catastrophic finish failure on a millwork package finished by others. I had provided neutral expert witness testimony during the arbitration, knowing that a critical step was missed during the application, the step not stated on the TDS. During the discovery process, I spoke to the importer/distributor, the distributor acknowledging the error/omittance on the TDS, telling me that there was an appended piece of literature being provided with any future shipments addressing the issue, with modified procedures.

Another one that comes to mind was the use of a sealer on limestone flooring, the applicators applying it according to spec. I pulled the contractor aside, indicating that the application was incorrect, the application needing to be drastically modified from the specified procedure and coverage rates stated on the TDS...I was told to mind my own business. I returned to the site the following morning, the finish being gummy like stepping on flypaper. I told the contractor that it could be easily remedied, but had to be done right then and there, requesting the opportunity to correct it, the correction being a simple fix...the sealing of the stone flooring not being my contract or responsibility. I was told to mind my own business, that the flooring was getting 2 more coats according to the TDS. After arguing with the contractor until I was blue in the face, two coats later, the floor couldn’t even be walked on, it was like stepping on chewing gum. The HO came out to the project and let out a shriek when she saw the floor. The floor needed to be stripped by a stone restoration company, costing upwards $10K for the removal of the finish. I was picking the brain of the restoration expert discussing the necessary deviation from the spec in order to achieve the desired result, the expert concurring with my methodology having used the product regularly in the modified fashion, the same sealer being applied against the manufacturer’s specification on the 2nd go, everything looking and performing as it should.

Another deviation example was experienced a few months ago, a wood finishing product not performing as expected, having to drastically modify the procedure against the manufacturer’s TDS. I pulled out my electronic pH tester as well as some litmus paper, suspecting the pH on the product was drastically off from the stated pH on the SDS. Sure enough it was off by 3. I contacted the manufacturer’s chemist, sending him pics of the pH tests, the manufacturer recalling all of the product and modifying the manufacturing process as a result. It turned out the chemist wasn’t a chemist...

Do you solely rely on manufacturers’ specifications? I don’t...

 

[Redux]

Following manufacturer’s specs can also save your A$$....

My first 2 years in business back in the 80’s I experienced what was thought to be catastrophic finish failure on upwards $600K (in 1980’s dollars) of maple cabinetry which was shop finished by myself over the course of 2 years, all with NC lacquer, and all constructed out 1/32” veneers. Every cabinet I finished over a 2-year period failed. Scary? You bet it was. The failure was ultimately determined to be the result of stresses in rotary cut veneers/lather checking, the finishes shattering along the stress lines. I was not held accountable by the design/build firm, having followed the finish manufacturer’s instructions on the TDS. Had I not applied the finishes to spec, I likely would have shared in the liability. Taunton Press’s Fine Woodworking Magazine did a multiple page spread on it and also served as mock-arbitrators in the discovery process, determining both the cause and accountability, as well as providing suggestions to prevent future failure.

 

[Vinyl 54X]

In our eco friendly world sometimes the formula's change faster than the specs.

 

[Lightningboy65]

Following manufacturer’s specs can also save your A$$....

Thanks for your last two posts, Mr. Redux. Excellent examples of how oft times experience trumps manufacture data sheets. And how experience allows you to know when adhering to these specs is critical and should be followed.