| Author |
Message |
Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: lazarcitec
Post Number: 555
Registered: 05-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 10:25 am: |    |
Anyone know what a "Second Generation Bonded Metallic" coating is for an aluminum grille? |
Tracy Van Niel, FCSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: tracy_van_niel
Post Number: 250
Registered: 04-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 12:29 pm: | |
The son or daughter of the bonded metallic?
Seriously though, I am not familiar with that term ... |
Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: lazarcitec
Post Number: 556
Registered: 05-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 01:57 pm: | |
Tracy, it is a comment from a fabricator regarding the finish on grillwork what has been submitted as a substitution for what is in the specs. the fabricator's case for approval includes that the coating he is proposing is a "second generation bonded metallic". I've never heard of this and those who I have asked in my circle also have no idea what it is....so I ask the group. |
Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI
Senior Member
Username: rliebing
Post Number: 845
Registered: 02-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 02:07 pm: | |
Jerome, did you spec "a bonded metallic" coating?
If so, this guy may be referring to an upgraded version [second edition, so to speak] that he may feel is "better" [you define that!]
Also, is his product from the same manufacturer as what you speced?
Last resort, ask for a zillion data sheets from him to verify the full equivalency of his product to your spec. |
Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: lazarcitec
Post Number: 557
Registered: 05-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 02:24 pm: | |
Ralph, we specified a liquid coating - PPG Acrynar, the substitution is a powder coat, Tiger Drylac, sort of comparing apples to oranges. The developer has already accepted the substitution, we are just assisting the architect to make heads or tails of what is being substituted. The biggest problem with Powder coats is whether or not they will stick to the aluminum, when we specify liquid we always specify a pretreatment and although it is taboo these days, we always spec chromium phosphate (in Florida thats the only pretreatment hat has a long track record of working). The substitution data was very sketchy on pretreatment. |
Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA
Senior Member
Username: don_harris
Post Number: 186
Registered: 03-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 02:45 pm: | |
A google search for "Second Generation Bonded Metallic" gave exactly one result.
http://www.retailenvironments.org/membersearch/search.cfm?t=companyProfile&l=5920&z=91761 |
Jerome J. Lazar, RA, CCS, CSI, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: lazarcitec
Post Number: 558
Registered: 05-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 04:27 pm: | |
Thanks Don |
James M. Sandoz, AIA, CSI, CDT, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: jsandoz
Post Number: 39
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 04:38 pm: | |
Here is some additional information I found using the link Don gave as a starting point. Apparently folks in the powder coating industry also have at least one discussion forum like this one.
http://www.powdercoatingonline.com/html/Bonded_Powders.html
Jerome, this still does not answer the question about "second generation" bonded metallic coating but I am sure if you contacted Mr. Golliver (author of the post in the link above) he could elaborate. I agree with Mr. Liebing that the term "second generation" might mean improved. |
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre
Post Number: 768
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 05:22 pm: | |
or "second generation" could mean "we took something out that no one will notice and hope we make more profit on it".
generally when I get a substitution that has a vague term like that, I ask the person submitting the substitution to explain what it is, what the "benefits" are, and how it differs from the other thing. if they can't explain it, then I ask for the senior technical person in their factory and get that person to explain it. it doesn't really matter what the "real" definition of "second generation bonded metallic " is -- what is important is what the manufacturer thinks it is... or portrays it to be. That's the information you need. |
Ronald L. Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: specman
Post Number: 649
Registered: 03-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 15, 2008 - 05:40 pm: | |
See their printed information (Tiger Drylac Powder Coatings) which provides a vague description as a one-step coating process over the traditional powder coating process. |
Bob Woodburn, RA CSI CCS CCCA LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: bwoodburn
Post Number: 247
Registered: 01-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 16, 2008 - 11:15 am: | |
The following answer is from (Ms.) Ute Wallner at Tiger Drylac USA:
2nd Generation Bonded Metallics refer to a unique proprietory manufacturing technology TIGER Drylac has, which bonds the metallic flakes/pigments to the base material in order to achieve the highest level of uniformity and consistancy for metallic coatings in the industry. This technology ovecomes common challenges like particle segregation during transport and storage and also greatly eases powder application. In addition it makes our metallic powder coatings into a recycling consistant material, meaning oversprayed powder (powder that passes by the part during application) can be reclaimed and then together with fresh powder be re-sprayed, virtually eliminating any waist.
Please feel free to contact us at any time if you have other questions.
Best Regards,
(Ms.) Ute Wallner
TIGER Drylac U.S.A., Inc. |
James M. Sandoz, AIA, CSI, CDT, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: jsandoz
Post Number: 40
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Friday, May 16, 2008 - 03:11 pm: | |
Thanks for the information, Bob. That still leaves open to speculation what Anne suggested: that "second generation" may mean a particular benefit to the manufacturer but not necessarily to the end user.
The take home lesson from powdercoatingonline.com was that bonded metallics are better about not segeregating than non-bonded. Perhaps Ms. Wallner is suggesting that the "second generation" bonding procedure enhances this quality even further. I'm just guessing here and trying to give the benefit of the doubt to the manufactuer (Tiger) as well.
I am interested in the concept of eliminating "waist" though. While I don't want to lose all my waist I can certainly stand to part with some of it.
I have left a message with Mr. Golliver of powdercoatingonline, my original resource for the information I have on bonded powders. When (or if) I hear from him I will pass on information he has to this thread. |
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: bunzick
Post Number: 905
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 16, 2008 - 03:29 pm: | |
It seemed straight-forward to me (from reading the links provided). The benefit, clearly stated, is that the metallic finish will look more uniform and consistent. This would seem to be a benefit to the user; though separate from whether there is any durability difference from previous metallic powder coats, which would presumably be no from the description. |
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre
Post Number: 769
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 16, 2008 - 04:28 pm: | |
from what I've been told regarding coatings, in order to get a more uniform "metallic" finish, its best to use no metallic at all -- the coatings have mica flakes in them. apparently the mica tends to be more uniform in dispersion, which therefore makes is more attractively "metallic" in appearance. |
James M. Sandoz, AIA, CSI, CDT, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: jsandoz
Post Number: 41
Registered: 06-2005
| | Posted on Monday, May 19, 2008 - 09:37 am: | |
Anne’s comment above jogged my memory (Thanks, Anne; jogging my memory these days is quite a feat and much appreciated) about something William Pegues wrote on April 8th in the Product Discussion thread titled "Aluminum Window Extrusions Paint Extent." His comments about powder coating are peripheral to the main question but would seem to be appropriate to this discussion. William wrote:
“[Y]ou can powderize just about anything. You can powderize acrylics, enamels, alkyds, urethanes, polyurethanes - you can even powderize kynar based systems (though currently it is not common).
What you get for lasting quality of the coating is totally dependent on the powderized material. Most window manufacturer's offering powder coatings, and most railing companies as well, use polyurethanes. Chalking, fading, and other aging of a powder coated material is somewhat better than a shop spray or coil coated version of the same material. Thus, most powder coated polyurethanes will have a standard warranty of 5 years, and you can often talk them into 10.
Most powder coated systems cannot do metallic colors.
There is an important difference in 2-coat and 3-coat powder coating systems. For example, PPG colors using the term 'Sunstorm' in the color name indicates one of their "2-coat" mica based 'metallic' colors.” That is, it’s not a true metallic 3-coat system that uses aluminum flake for the metallic look. It uses mica as the flake. Since the mica does not need the protection of a clear coat like the aluminum flake does, it’s referred to as a 2-coat system. It is less expensive than a true metallic 3-coat system but you can tell the difference. The Sunstorm coatings are not as sparkly looking as the same color in a true 3-coat metallic version.
Both 2 and 3 coat 'metallic' coatings can be had in a 20+ year warranty from PPG.”
What I understand from William's comment is this: If what is desired is a “sparkly” metallic look on our powder coat finishes we need to specify the 3-coat system. Otherwise, the 2-coat system is durable enough and less expensive. In either case (and especially with the 3-coat system) we need to specify and use a system and not just come back with a clear coat on top of whatever is the existing finish. Also, as Anne mentions above, mica (Tio2) has better dispersion but does not “sparkle” as much as the metallic oxides of aluminum, iron, and chromium.
By the way, I did hear back from Mr. Golliver last Friday. His answer to the "second generation" issue is that it is a term used in the industry to describe a process which results in better dispersion of true metallic particles. |
William C. Pegues, FCSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: wpegues
Post Number: 724
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 19, 2008 - 11:57 am: | |
James,
Since I got quoted, I wanted to follow up on some things.
The statement that currently powderizing kynar based systems is not currently common is still correct.
And for PPG's system, though you may have come across some references to experimental systems, it is only this July that they are introducing the "Duranar Powder Coating". I got this confirmation only a few minutes ago from their marketing manager for powder coatings. It will be targeted for extreme environments like seacoast applications - his wording.
They do have other powderized coatings, but not the kynar based systems like Duarnar yet...not officially.
PPG has a great "White Paper" that they produce on the benefits of liquid and powder and when to use each. Its available on their web site, but is not that easy to find. I have a pdf of it that I got from there. It is relevant to the issue, specifically it is titled...
"Architectural Applications for Liquid Powder Fluoropolymer Coatings: An Objective Review"
Copyright 2007, so its recent. It addresses that (at the time of the writing) true metallic colors (metal flakes not mica) are not available since there is no "3rd" coating for protection of the metal available in architectural grade powder coatings. It also highlights the differences between North American and European technology. Well worth the read.
Those interested, I can email it to you, its a small file. If you want it, send me an email to respond to....
wpegues@wdgarch.com
William |
John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP
Senior Member
Username: bunzick
Post Number: 906
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 19, 2008 - 12:11 pm: | |
The article William cites is very interesting, so I'll post the link:
Architectural Applications for Liquid and Powder Fluoropolymer Coatings. |
|
4specs.com Home Page