Darryl Keil Last Activity 2025-02-12 2:48 PM
10 replies, 4245 viewings

 
back
Navigate threads:
< Previous Thread :: Next Thread >
 
^ Top
GearHead

Posts: 9

Joined: 2006-04-13

User Profile
 
Subject : Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-03 10:53 AM
Post #33999

Hi,

I have a new problem with my in-car padouk project, but this time padouk itself doesn't seem to be the problem.
I managed to "tame" padouk's imperfections using nine thick layers of water based "Top Coat for Exteriors" with UV filter. On top of that I sprayed three layers of Hempel's boat lacquer high gloss, oil based. The two blended nicely (I thought Hempel would peel off the water based base). After each layer I gently sanded it with grinco finishing paper.

Now, here's the problem: on the three layers of Hempel little craters started to appear. The craters are up to half an inch in diameter and almost as deep as the new layer. When spraying the first layer I thinned the Hempel with it's dedicated thinner 1:10 as instructed. There were craters. Second layer I thinned 1:20 and there were craters again. The third one I sprayed without thinning, although it's very very thick - craters again. I tried different configurations for paint/air ratio on my spray gun, even tried various pressures (from 2.5bar to 4 bar), but to no result. Same thing when polishing sanding or no sanding between the layers.

I'm trying to achieve pianowood optics so it's very important that the surface is as perfect as possible.

Question: What creates the craters, how to eliminate them and how to apply the next layer (and final I hope) to get that Steinway look?

Thanks,

Nick


 
^ Top
Anton Gerner

Posts: 45

Joined: 2003-09-04
Location: Melbourne, Australia

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-03 5:55 PM
Post #34000 - In reply to #33999

sounds like some contamination on the surface.
Silicone or car polish cantamination can be a real pain.
I'd talk to the lacquer company technical people to see if they have an idea


 
^ Top
Don Stephan

Posts: 825

Joined: 2003-07-18
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-04 5:36 PM
Post #34001 - In reply to #34000

I agree with Anton - sounds like "fisheyes." Some finish manufacturers sell a special additive to deal with fisheyes. If yours doesn't, you might try sanding off the lacquer (back to the water borne), cleaning well with naptha, and a seal coat of dewaxed shellac. I wouldn't put on too thick a coat of dewaxed shellac, but it can be sprayed, brushed or padded. I think Zinser and/or Bullseye now sells a clear dewaxed shellac if you don't care to mix your own from solvent and flakes. You likely can follow the dewaxed shellac with your top coat, but it would be worth testing first on scrap.


 
^ Top
GearHead

Posts: 9

Joined: 2006-04-13

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-04 8:04 PM
Post #34002 - In reply to #33999

Fisheyes...I'll look for the additive, makes sense. Thanks. In the mean time I found Hempel's official store. I'm sure they'll know what is going on here. The lacquer and naphta thinner I have I got from a local hardware store.

Any other hints on achieving piano optics?


 
^ Top
Enrico Konig

Posts: 74

Joined: 2006-01-06
Location: Vancouver, BC

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-04 10:05 PM
Post #34003 - In reply to #34002

Yes, sounds like fisheyes due to some surface contamination. Just be aware that if you add "fisheye reducer" to your spray system once, you'll very likely have to keep using it as long as you use the system, as the "reducer" (which is silicon itself) will forever contaminate your gun.

I think you're better off following the advice about using shellac to seal it in.

Be aware that such common products as WD40, having silicon in its formula, can contaminate surfaces (as can, funnily enough, Pledge furniture polish), and great care must be exercised if using such products anywhere in your shop (and after my fisheye experience it is never anywhere near my shop).

As far as I understand, to achieve a piano-type finish involves many layers of lacquer and rubbing out the finish afterwards.


 
^ Top
GearHead

Posts: 9

Joined: 2006-04-13

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-05 11:18 AM
Post #34004 - In reply to #34003

That pretty much explains everything. The workshop I use I use for everything, from woodworking and repairing bicycles to fiberglass interior design. For paint jobs I made a plastic tent in the corner of my workshop. It looks like that quarantine from ET, but obviously it doesn't do much to keep contamination out.


 
^ Top
Don Stephan

Posts: 825

Joined: 2003-07-18
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-05 4:23 PM
Post #34005 - In reply to #34004

Hate to sound like a negative nancy, but why so many coats of water borne finish, and then why the additional coats of solvent finish? A car dash is probably one of the worst environments for finish, given the temp extremes and possible moisture levels. I'd worry about a thick build of one type of finish, and worry double about two different finishes which may have different coefficients of expansion.

Before doing anything further my suggestion would be to check with experienced car restoration person(s). Might be an antique car club in your area that can provide the name of a finisher with experience with car dashes, else try to find an Internet forum.


 
^ Top
GearHead

Posts: 9

Joined: 2006-04-13

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: Lacquering
Posted : 2007-08-06 11:49 AM
Post #34006 - In reply to #34005

Because padouk had pores wich gave texture to first 7 od 8 layers of finish, and the water borne was matte and hard to polish. The idea was to fill the pores with waterborne and give it a shine with a layer or two of some scratch resistant finish.

I've chosen waterborne because I wasn't able to find any other that had that level of UV protection that is vital for padouk (as it loses it's nice reddish tone and turns pale brown in the sun). The other reason for waterborne is that I hate thinners, acetone, naphta and other chemicals.


 
^ Top
craig tufankjian

Posts: 308

Joined: 2004-02-01
Location: syracuse ny 13208

User Profile
 
Subject : piano finish
Posted : 2007-08-06 2:19 PM
Post #34007 - In reply to #34006

i've read a lot of posting about the infamous piano finish so i thought i'd weigh in. first i agree with every body above. sound like fish eye to me. it could also be the amount of coats used to arrive a what's called a "full fill finish". the ultimate glass smooth top, and not looking like it was poured on.

sometimes a finish such as lacquer can be limited by how many coats can be put on before the finish starts to "crack" , small fissures start to show over time due to climate and moisture conditions. some manufactures have a maximum mil thickness for there products.

that said, i recently did a 30 foot bar top in quartered makore, box match with green abalone inlays, custom logo veneer inlays and about 70 feet of inlay bandings. not to mention the italian glass tile drink rails that were inlayed into the top. now came time for the finish.

i was fortunate to know several professional finishers, both at l&jg stickley and at several millwork shops . the idea ranged from conversion varnish to polyurethane.none provided what i was looking for a far as durability was concerned.

early in the course of the job i installed a metal door and metal door jamb. tha door came pre primed. i dont like painting metal with a brush, and having a hvlp system made spraying it very easy.. i went down to my local auto finishers supply house , pick out a color . the rep told me it was pretty much idiot proof to spray so you can imagine how pleased i was. for 123.00 per quart i was hoping he'd come along with me and do the job. didn't happen!

so, set the door on the horses, mixed the finish according to the directions and started spraying. two wet doubles was all that was needed. i set my gun down and looked at the wet finish and thought to myself, wow!!! thats shiny.knowing that the shine would be reduced once it was dry but hoped it would stay the way it was when i first sprayed it. it was late in the day so i cleaned out the gun , shut down the job and went home.

when i got to work the next day i looked at the door and thought" oh no i didn't add enough catalyst" because this door looks like i just sprayed it 5 minutes ago. this thing looked like a mirror finish, it was also cobalt blue. my reflection in the door was crystal clear not foggy but actually crystal clear.

thats when it dawned on me, BARTOP!!!. I know they make this stuff in a clear coat finish, and whats going to hold up better to water , beer, booze, acidic fruit juices and god knows what else.

so off i went back down to the auto finish supplier. personally i think the sales rep drinks his own product because this guy knew just about everything. he disappeared back into the warehouse and out he came with a gallon of PPG dc-180, a gallon of reducer and a pint of catalyst. proceeded to explain what to do, after he was finished i asked him the 64 thousand dollar question " is this stuff idiot proof?" he responded " are you an idiot?" i said "yes, yes i am". "then this stuff is for you" was his response.

so back to the job i went, taped of the glass tile, and the rest of the bar, mixed the finish and started spraying, again, two wet doubles. stepped back and said "theres no way this will stay this shiny" so once again cleaned out the gun shut down the job and went home.

next day, sweet mother of jesus it was shinier. not one single pore of wood showing. there were some highs and low from inlays and abalone dots but my finisher friend showed me how to level the surface for the next coat. he mixed up a very small amount of finish, and went down the whole bar top with a little detail brush, just filling in all the imperfections. once they were all filled we sanded the bar top with 400 wet dry , no water. this leveled all the little dabs of finish we put on there and level the whole top . this stuff sand in the same manner that lacquer does, producing a white powder. wiped the bar top down , and repeated the same process again, two wet doubles. next time we sanded we used 600 wet dry with water and a $1200.00 jitterbug sander. because each coat only used a quart of finish and this stuff has no mil restrictions as to how many coats you can use we expended the whole gallon. so in essence there were 8 coats of finish. each time i sanded i went up in grit size finishing out at 2000 wet dry. add a little dish detergent to the water to keep i from evaporating and provide the sander to move a little easier.

now i had a perfectly level, well protected bar top. it was of course satin in sheen. but thats where the buffer comes in. makita buffer and two kinds of 3M buffing compounds brought it up to a mirror finish in under 30 minutes. to be sure it was impervious we christened it with beer, absolute vodka, grey goose, and orange juice. and grape juice to see if it stained the top. didn't phase it at all.

so if you want a full fill mirror finish with fantastic uv durability try a clear coat for cars. it will work for any woodworking application.

the drawback, $$$$$$. total cost for 1 gallon of finish with one gallon of reducer and 1 pint of catalyst a whopping $455.00. the 3M compounds were $56.00, the end result ,priceless. i think your padouk project could of been better served with this product. you can buy it in quarts as well. unfortunetly, water based products lack the wiz, bang that solvent based products provide. i don't like the smell either but you cant sacrafice the end result.


like the sales rep told me. "mix, spray, walk away" and that's that.




craig





 
^ Top
GearHead

Posts: 9

Joined: 2006-04-13

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: piano finish
Posted : 2007-08-06 9:39 PM
Post #34008 - In reply to #34007

Car finish...I think I thought about every single shiny liquid there is. Actually when I came to the hardware store I spent about an hour or more creeping through various finishes. Salesman was some green guy, didn't know a thing about what he sells so I filed him off and spent some time alone with the cans, reading instructions and descriptions. The conclusion was Hempel's naphta based boat finish...the store didn't sell car finish.

I already sanded Hempel off, and started with a new layer on top of water based finish (turned filler) with a brush. I'll se how it turns out now.

What scares me is this: even if I sand everything down, there will be some water based finish left in the pores. And if I sand the pores I'll destroy the veneer, and if I don't sand them the next layer of whatever might not like the difference between water based spots in pores and naked wood around them.

In any case I can sand it to the bottom, glue another layer of padouk over the shape and start all over again.

I'm experimenting now. I like when I'm doing something to do it once so all this experiments should prevent the worst possible thing: The dashboard is upholstered in leather, wood comes into place, all the switches and decorations are done, and then the wood starts to do wathever I don't want it to do...I don't want to pull all that out again to fix something.

Here is the picture...this is waterbased with one layer of fisheyed Hempel:
http://img382.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p7140102dx4.jpg

I'll keep you posted


 
^ Top
craig tufankjian

Posts: 308

Joined: 2004-02-01
Location: syracuse ny 13208

User Profile
 
Subject : RE: piano finish
Posted : 2007-08-06 10:40 PM
Post #34009 - In reply to #34008

http://img473.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p1010089nw5.jpg

here's a photo of the small waitress section of the bar top.it's not the best picture in the world but you can get an idea from the light reflections


back
Navigate threads:
< Previous Thread :: Next Thread >

Legend      Notification  
Administrator
Forum Moderator
Registered User
Unregistered User
Toggle e-mail notification


Logo by MAZY
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software v1.5.14b public beta