Spray-Lock SCP 327?

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1524 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Tuesday, November 08, 2016 - 05:02 pm:    Has anyone had experience with Spray-Lock SCP 327 curing / sealing compound? David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC Edward J Dueppen, RA, CSI, CCS, LEED AP Senior Member Username: edueppen Post Number: 30 Registered: 08-2013 Posted on Wednesday, November 09, 2016 - 12:08 pm:    David, I have never specified or used it. The manufacturer's website is devoid of any 3rd party testing and ASTM standards. Either the system is proprietary and they are intentionally being coy to avoid revealing the special recipe, or it is just some chemical concoction and they don't have anything other than anecdotal proof that it works. I assume the latter. We had a developer client pushing us to use it about a year ago. Apparently they had successfully used it on several projects. I responded to the project architect as follows: "We should send a letter to the Owner stating our recommendation (tried-and-true epoxy systems) and our reservations. We should indicate we will not include the product unless they document in writing their request and their willingness to accept responsibility for the product selection." That was the last I heard about the issue. If it is used, the flooring adhesive and flooring manufacturers should document/certify it is an acceptable substrate. Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 307 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Wednesday, November 09, 2016 - 02:16 pm:    I just met with Seth Gladden from Spray-Lock Inc. at GreenBuild. I'm interested in their products for my LBC and LEED v4 projects, so I'm waiting for more information too. He says they have passed CA 01350 with the entire product line, but I haven't received third party certifications either. Seth also says they private label some adhesive products for finish flooring manufacturers, so we may be using it already. I hope to see more technical information soon. - ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1020 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Wednesday, November 09, 2016 - 05:17 pm:    Sounds like another silicate manufacturer trying to convince the world that they have just discovered the most wonderful thing on earth. There are no ASTM standards that they can meet regarding use as a curing compound because the ASTM standards specifically exclude silicates. Can it work? Yes, it might, some of the time. Is it reversible? No, once it's on, it's there for good. Is it a good or worthwhile product? Maybe, but it depends on what you think you're getting. I suggest contacting some of the more open and honest companies out there like Sinak, or Curecrete (the folks who brought you Ashford Formula), or Euclid, or Kaufman, or any of the dozens of other manufacturers who probably have the same or similar formulation and are willing to tell you what it is and what it does. I'm really getting fed up with snake oil salesmen. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI ,SCIP Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 1525 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, November 09, 2016 - 06:22 pm:    I too am concerned about Spray-Lock's lack of technical information. I cannot even determine the chemical composition of their magic formula. Spray-Lock's lack of MSDS sheets makes me very suspicious. David G. Axt, CCS, CSI, SCIP Specifications Consultant Axt Consulting LLC Ronald L. Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 1427 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Wednesday, November 09, 2016 - 06:51 pm:    There are MSDSs (under "Resources" and identified as "SDS"), but there is absolutely no chemical identification. Ron Geren, FCSI, AIA, CCS, CCCA, SCIP www.specsandcodes.com ken hercenberg Senior Member Username: khercenberg Post Number: 1021 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Wednesday, November 09, 2016 - 08:55 pm:    At least it dries transparent Cory Thomas (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Friday, November 11, 2016 - 04:36 pm:    My name is Cory Thomas, Technical Services Director for Spray-Lock, Inc. and Spray-Lock Concrete Protection. This conversation was brought to my attention by one of our agents and I thought it prudent to chime in. Happy to answer any questions or address any concerns. You will also have my email should you want to reach out to me that way. One thing I can guarantee is that we are absolutely not a silicate. We are classified as a Colloidal Nano Silica. We have testing summaries available for ASTM C157, ASTM C39, AS 1012.9 regarding our superior cure, increased compressive strength, shrinkage and cracking reduction as well as slab curl reduction when used at time of placement. We have a test summary available for ASTM 1543 that demonstrates significant chloride ion penetration reduction after application. We have test results available for ASTM C1583/C1583M / ASTM E303 showing how our product leaves a mechanical key at the concrete surface and accepts all coatings and coverings and has no statistical effect on concrete surface friction. We also have particle size analysis test results available for ASTM D4464 which demonstrates how our product is a colloid and not a solution. Some of the most dynamic information we have had proven by independent labs is how our product waterproofs concrete (results available from ASTM C1585, DIN 1048). We demonstrate how we greatly reduce water vapor transmission with our ASTM E96 test results. If your concerned about protecting embedded reinforcing steel in concrete, our test results from ASTM C876, combined with some of the tests listed above, will be very interesting to you. And if that wasn't enough we even challenged the University of Tennessee to test us in one of the most challenging environments we could think of: sulfuric acid exposure. Concrete treated with SCP demonstrated a 63% mass loss reduction when compared to identical but untreated concrete when exposed to the UTC-CEMRL Sulfuric Acid Exposure protocol. Ken's comments on silicates being excluded from ASTM standards is absolutely correct. I hope the information here is at least the start of a transparent dialogue that demonstrates the significant efforts our company has made to not only prove that we are not a silicate, but that we are an incredible solution for so many problems that plague the concrete industry right now. I'll give you one more thing: we fully warrant the installation of flooring / coatings 14 days after concrete placement when that concrete was treated with our SCP 327 product. I challenge you to find a silicate manufacturer that will do that. (A draft of the 327 warranty document is available should you want to review it.) Rafe Gibson (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Wednesday, June 07, 2017 - 05:55 pm:    Cory, Or anyone else who wants to chime in - I have been asked about the compatibility of this product with two resinous flooring systems. In the past, "silicates" have caused issues, so I was unsure to give the product the green light. I would like to see a published warranty document and review what it covers. As a flooring installer, the risk and responsibility usually falls on us when there is a failure. If the product crystallizes to block capillary action, how can it then claim to allow for a mechanical bond with epoxies and resins. In my experience, you cannot have it both ways. any thoughts? Justatim Senior Member Username: justatim Post Number: 99 Registered: 04-2010 Posted on Thursday, June 08, 2017 - 07:31 am:    May I suggest that Spray-Lock place PDFs of the test data described by Cory Thomas on the Company's website in an easily found location? Otherwise, specifiers like myself will merely pass the products by as "snake oil."