| Author |
Message |
Robert E. Woodburn
Senior Member
Username: bob_woodburn
Post Number: 39
Registered: 11-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 03:28 pm: |    |
Never heard of this company before, one of about 5 dozen manufacturers of water repellents; it apparently focuses on the highway market. Does anyone have any experience, pro or con, with SIL-ACT ATS-42 (alkyltrialkoxysilane) or any of the company's other products? |
Wayne Yancey
Senior Member
Username: wayne_yancey
Post Number: 585
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 03:56 pm: | |
Yes. Nothing negative to say. First used it on brick veneer masonry as a water repellent nearly 20 years ago in Canada. Specified again in 2011 for use on CMU and precast concrete. |
Lynn Javoroski FCSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski
Post Number: 1635
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 04:24 pm: | |
You know how you don't notice something and then once you see it once, you see it all over the place? Well, I was reviewing owners requirements for a project and this product is one of their requirements for water repellent coating on brick or masonry:
a. Chem-Trete BSM 40 as manufactured by Huls Inc., Edison, New Jersey.
b. SIL-ACT ATS-42 as manufactured by Advanced Chemical Technologies Co., Oklahoma City, OK.
c. Stifel as manufactured by Nox-Crete Chemicals, Inc., Omaha, Nebraska.
d. Klereseal 940-S as manufactured by Pecora Corporation, Harleysville, PA.
This is a rather large, well-known institute of higher education in the states, in the eastern part of the country. The other requirements I've read all make sense, so this one is probably a good requirement, too. |
Robert E. Woodburn
Senior Member
Username: bob_woodburn
Post Number: 40
Registered: 11-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 04:49 pm: | |
Thanks for the responses. I had been asked, "Any reason not to add these guys (to our specs)? and 1) I had never heard of this company; 2) their website's focus is on roads and bridges; 3) the product is about 60% VOC, and I think some similar products are much lower in VOC, or even VOC-free; 4) more than 60 water repellent manufacturers are listed on 4specs.com, including this one, and I would likely include others before this one. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 510
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 05:45 pm: | |
What is your application (what are you putting it on)? |
Robert E. Woodburn
Senior Member
Username: bob_woodburn
Post Number: 41
Registered: 11-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 06:13 pm: | |
I think the request was a general one--to add it to the "office master" (as opposed to a proposed substitution). If it were for a current project, it would likely be for Texas limestone, and the manufacturer appears to have another product (that its rep didn't mention) that would be more suitable for that. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 511
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 07:09 pm: | |
Keep in mind that silanes and siloxanes are a little better than snake oil in that there may be some good silanes.
I stay away from using them unless there is no other alternative and there is an active problem that the Owner does not want to fix permanently (sort of like pouring Bars-Leak into you engine so you can sell you car to some poor, unsuspecting buyer).
There are some good uses for silanes such as Protectosil by Evonik, http://www.protectosil.com/sites/dc/Downloadcenter/Evonik/Product/Protectosil/us/Technical-Datasheets/EV09009_CIT_datasheet.pdf, but again you need to have a very specific reason for using it.
If you're looking for a good product to use on limestone (that will be permanent), please check out Sinak HLQ 125. It's a hydrolyzed lithium quartz in 12.5% solution and typically works very well. What is especially nice about it is that it typically does not block vapor (no spalling), it's permanent, and it almost never changes the appearance of the stone (ALMOST NEVER!) Always do several test areas, especially if you have veining. Yes, it costs more than silanes initially but it should be a one-time application that will actually work. |
Robert E. Woodburn
Senior Member
Username: bob_woodburn
Post Number: 42
Registered: 11-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 07:42 pm: | |
Thanks, Ken. From the product data on these, they both appear to be for specialized purposes (other than just water repellency) on concrete--Protectosil to prevent reinforcing steel corrosion, and Sinak HLQ-125 to combat alkalinity in concrete floors (which the manufacturer claims is the real floor-adhesion problem, not the vapor drive). I typically specify water repellents on masonry walls simply to keep surface water from soaking into masonry (or possibly, stucco), not on c-i-p concrete, and not for those purposes. I remember seeing treated and untreated stucco walls side-by-side once (on two phases of a hospital). The untreated walls were discolored by irregular dark mildew-like stains; the treated walls were clean.
(I still remember a dramatic demonstration of penetrating water repellent in the mid-70s: When water was poured into a box of fine loose sand treated with (IIRC) Prime-a-Pell 200, it beaded up and rolled around on the surface!) |
Ronald L. Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP
Senior Member
Username: specman
Post Number: 1112
Registered: 03-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 07:56 pm: | |
I'm a strong believer of silanes. In our area where exposed single-wythe concrete masonry is the norm, you cannot rely on integral water repellants and film-forming products, which typically require periodic recoating (plus the color change that is characteristic of some film-forming products).
Ron Geren, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, SCIP
www.specsandcodes.com |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 512
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - 08:16 pm: | |
Ron, that's about the only time I would use a silane as a water repellant.
for cavity walls, I strive to avoid using sealers unless there is a real problem that appears after the wall is constructed and no one wants to tear it down and determine what went wrong. I know some folks like to put silanes on CMU backup instead of the asphaltic or coal tar damproofing products available. That does make some sense if you're not going to use a weather barrier (air, water, vapor, cha, cha, cha).
The Sinak literature is lacking compared to their products. I've use HLQ on stone and it has worked well. If it's something you're interested in, I'd call Bob or Craig Higgins at Sinak. They're the brains there. I'm not sure I'd resort to HLQ on floors; I'd probably opt for a real mitigation system (Sinak has, or had, one but it was expensive). |
J. Peter Jordan
Senior Member
Username: jpjordan
Post Number: 560
Registered: 05-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, May 02, 2013 - 10:28 am: | |
I have always consdered the silanes, siloxanes, and silane/siloxanes to water repellants that will assist in keeping the wall dry, but their primary value is to keep the surface clean (the urban grime doesn't penetrate the substrate) so the masonry doesn't have to be cleaned as often. I would never rely on these for any sort of water barrier or dampproofing. |
Robert E. Woodburn
Senior Member
Username: bob_woodburn
Post Number: 43
Registered: 11-2010
| | Posted on Thursday, May 02, 2013 - 10:47 am: | |
Peter, that's my view as well. There are other ways for moisture to get into the wall that these can't prevent. But they can make a noticeable difference in appearance, especially on more porous surfaces such as stucco.
I would never have thought to specify them for the corrosion prevention or alkali resistance this manufacturer claims. |
ken hercenberg
Senior Member
Username: khercenberg
Post Number: 513
Registered: 12-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, May 02, 2013 - 01:45 pm: | |
Actually the corrosion protection product from Evonik works well. Despite not being a big silane fan, I would use it before resorting to the DCI type products. I can't speak towards using the HLQ for alkali-resistance. These were some of the early silicate 'spray-and-pray' guys who pulled their products for that sort of work when they realized that it wasn't working the way the theory implied it should.
Back in the 80's in the Washington, DC area I recall hearing of failures on concrete and masonry walls where silanes and siloxanes were used. Apparently despite claims of vapor permeability, some products trapped moisture inside the walls, resulting in freeze-thaw spalling.
I guess we all have our prejudices. |
|
4specs.com Home Page