| Author |
Message |
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt
Post Number: 1229
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 04, 2011 - 04:51 pm: |    |
I am looking for a clear coating for a cold rolled steel counter top. This counter top will be used to serve food so the coating must be USDA approved. |
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski
Post Number: 1290
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 04, 2011 - 04:57 pm: | |
I've only used stainless steel for food service/lab counter tops. |
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt
Post Number: 1232
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Friday, August 05, 2011 - 12:36 pm: | |
The designer wants the cold rolled industrial type steel look. I don't ask why.
I am thinking that an epoxy coating, like what is applied to wood bar tops, will be the only way to go. However, the designer will probably not want the high gloss finish. |
Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS
Senior Member
Username: rlmat
Post Number: 435
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 05, 2011 - 01:00 pm: | |
If the use is commercial food service, it also has to meet NSF Standards which I think require stainless steel
Check www.nsf.org |
Gerard Sanchis
Senior Member
Username: gerard_sanchis
Post Number: 38
Registered: 10-2009
| | Posted on Saturday, August 06, 2011 - 01:50 pm: | |
Try a urethane varnish. They're hard, stay clear (transparent), but are difficult to touch-up. |
Marc C Chavez
Senior Member
Username: mchavez
Post Number: 417
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 08, 2011 - 10:32 am: | |
David, ask why.
In a food area it will have to be wiped down regulary - plain - unpainted steel is a bad choice and nick in the clear coat will rust the first time the janitor uses a cleaner on it. - sometimes designers are just wrong.
if you have to paint - call Torin at Tnemec he has a system of coatings that looks like clean steel (buff gray) but is really paint. other than that Gerard is on target - clear urethane can work.
the surface must be CLEAN first however and pH neutral - or it will peel off in sheets. |
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt
Post Number: 1233
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 08, 2011 - 02:34 pm: | |
Marc,
The designer wants that raw industrial deconstructivism (remember that from the 80's?) look.
Looks like I will have to start hitting the bars and nightclubs to find out what material is used at tables and bars. |
Wayne Yancey
Senior Member
Username: wayne_yancey
Post Number: 482
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Monday, August 08, 2011 - 02:43 pm: | |
Coats and coats and coats and coats of clear epoxy. |
Jim Sliff
Senior Member
Username: jim_sliff
Post Number: 77
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Monday, August 08, 2011 - 04:01 pm: | |
You can't get there from here.
or
You Can't Always Get What You Want.
First, there is no "USDA Approved" anything unless you're processing or eating it. They discontinued the approval process for coatings decades ago. That is now the FDA's territory, and in most...but not all...cases products that are in compliance with NSF 61 are OK for "direct food contact" (meaning it could end up on a plate). There is, however, no "certificate of compliance" or similar document from the USDA.
The USDA's guidelines are sort of backwards - now everything is OK unless they say it's not.
Ergo - the approvals for food contact surfaces, while dodged by the USDA and technically "ruled" by the FDA, are handled through the local Department of Health.
It's a very inconsistent "system". In the City of Los Angeles, for example, you may have an inspector approve use of a product and another inspector reject the same thing on another project, despite 10 pounds of documentation from the other job.
This is why most applicators will only apply NSF 61 compliant coatings - but only if they are also specified, and good ones put together very carefully worded submittals to ensure they aren't on the hook for removal should the health inspector on the job slap a "DENIED!" (grin) sticker on the stuff. I can't recall the last time I saw a coating specified for direct food contact.
That being said, from a purely technical standpoint NSF 61 compliant epoxies are one choice - but the surface will need abrasive blasting to get the proper surface profile per the manufacturer's (any of them) product data sheet.
They will also yellow like crazy. They will also not hold up to sharp objects like knives; abrasion is a problem, especially if anything hard is dragged across the surface (the big staples on some packing boxes will scratch any epoxy) and they are almost impossible to apply perfectly smooth. They are "protective coatings" and not formulated for "pretty" applications.
Urethanes probably won't pass the health department - offhand I'm not aware of any NSF-approved DTM urethanes. They are fine for floors (not direct food contact), but only if applied with just enough texture to pass the same inspector's "anti-skid" requirement (too rough and they'll reject it).
Tell them the steel has to be blasted, the coating will discolor in an inconsistent manner, it won't be able to handle any hard or sharp objects, will have an orange-peel finish and will require regular maintenance touch-up and/or recoating. That's the "technical" answer.
The "practical" answer is you won't touch it with a 10-foot pole. It's a guaranteed failure. |
Justatim
Senior Member
Username: justatim
Post Number: 20
Registered: 04-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 - 10:11 am: | |
Can someone explain the relevancy of NSF 61 to coatings?
According to NSF website, "ANSI/NSF Standard 61 covers indirect additives products and materials, including process media, protective materials, joining and sealing materials, pipes and related products, mechanical devices, and mechanical plumbing devices (including faucets). In essence, every material from the well or water intakes through to the faucet are covered." |
J. Peter Jordan (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 - 11:32 am: | |
One of the critial distinctions here is between food preparation surfaces (kitchen and back bar surfaces) and food serving surfaces (table and bar tops). The food serving surfaces don't have to meet the same standards as the food prep surfaces.
David, depending on the configuration of the "bar", you may not have to meet the same standards as the food prep areas. You should, however, look at resistance to heat, abrasion, cutting, impact (think slamming a dish down), and certain food-related acids (like citric). Although these will not be a health hazard, they will be a maintenance headache, possibly requiring frequent recoating (like every 3 to 6 months).
I once specified a urethane for a wood bar in Mexican restaurant in Honolulu (think frozen margaritas with lot's of lime juice, alcohol, and ice). The product was recommended in writing for use on bar and table tops (even for exterior use). The coating failed twice (in the serving area) before the restaurant opened, and the coating rep told the owner that product should not have been specified for that application.
If the serving bar is an extension of the food prep area, it may need to meet the same standards as the food prep surfaces. And it will depend on the local health department and inspector. |
David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI
Senior Member
Username: david_axt
Post Number: 1234
Registered: 03-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 - 01:59 pm: | |
Let me further clarify. The counter is in an higher end urban grocery store. Food will not be prepared on this counter but will be eaten on. People will spill all sorts of drinks and food on this surface. They will also place laptops, purses, briefcases, packages, etc. on the counter. Since this is not an official restaurant I wonder how the local health authorities will view it. The counter will be cleaned or not cleaned with whatever the store employees have at hand in the back room. |
J. Peter Jordan (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 - 03:31 pm: | |
I doubt that the health department will care about this, but your location may be different. I think you are free to use whatever you want, but prep will be critical and routine recoating every so often will be important unless you are after that rusty, Texas ice house look (especially if the counter stools are old bare metal tractor seats). |
Jim Sliff
Senior Member
Username: jim_sliff
Post Number: 80
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2011 - 11:36 pm: | |
In LA County they treat all such establishments (food prepared and eaten at the same location) as restaurants and "grade" them...meaning a health inspector *would* be involved at some point.
How are they eating there but it's not an "official" restaurant? Are they skirting the regs or is just not closely regulated at the location?
As far as the USDA and FDA go, counter or table coatings/coverings don't normally have to meet NSF 61 standards (Sushi bars usually an exception since the food is often prepared on the counter).
Since there's some question regarding exactly what the place will be classified as and what the local regs are I'd suggest contacting the health department with jurisdiction to find out what's acceptable first...then we can figure out whether it can be done or not.
Regardless, IMO a clear steel coating in that type of service will be a maintenance nightmare and look bad pretty quickly, plus the only way you'll get a smooth finish is probably having the pieces shop coated...again, depending on what can be used. And then maintenance recoating will not be smooth...
I can think of some heavy industrial coatings that might work for whaile, but as I mentioned before they're not formulated for appearance and it might not be legal to touch them up due to air quality regulations.
I'd really advise against it. But I'll do a bit of digging and see if I can find anything suitable - it still might hinge on what the health dept says, though. |
Justatim
Senior Member
Username: justatim
Post Number: 21
Registered: 04-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2011 - 07:56 am: | |
Never mind... after a bunch of searching, I found that the correct standard is NSF/ANSI 51, not 61. (I've never worked with this standard.) |
Jim Sliff
Senior Member
Username: jim_sliff
Post Number: 82
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2011 - 09:07 pm: | |
Neither have I - locally it's always been a default to NSF 61 compliant materials (even though the standard is actually applicable to potable water applications, health authorities used it as a benchmark).
NSF/ANSI 51 is described rather ambiguously, which may be why health departments don't try to apply it to serving counters, dining tables and related applications:
"NSF/ANSI 51-2009e
Food Equipment Materials
This Standard is applicable to the materials and finishes used in the manufacture of food equipment (e.g., broiler, beverage dispenser, cutting board, stock pot). The Standard is also applicable to components such as tubing, sealants, gaskets, valves, and other items intended for various food equipment applications. These components shall meet the relevant design and construction requirements of the NSF Standard applicable to the type of food equipment on which the component is used."
Delving into parts of the standard that were under consideration for revision in 2009 there were no direct references to counters/tables and the coating descriptions were primarily "organic" and "fluoropolymer".
Now I know what those mean - but I guarantee the average health inspector *might* have a light-bulb moment with "fluoropolymer" (i.e. Teflon) but "organic" will have them stumped. Organic/inorganic honestly stumps most applicators - the only common product data sheets I can think of that use those terms as a part of the description are those for zinc primers.
Sigh. Here goes another $100 on a standard I'll need once every two years (grin).
Seriously - I may have a source for a fluoropolymer DTM, but I don't know if clear is available. I'll check my source and if it is undoubtedly there will be more than one around.
Off to the Batcave...more to come... |
Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS
Senior Member
Username: awhitacre
Post Number: 1188
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2011 - 04:31 pm: | |
I had exactly this same condition -- and the San Mateo county guys considered it a "food service" location. if you consider that in buffet lines, the rails underneath the tray are stainless steel -- and they are two layers away from food on plates, it doesn't matter what you call it. its going to have to be stainless. Tell the designer to go talk to the code people him/herself and then you won't have to interpret for them. what they need to realize is that its not a negotiation, and they don't get to decide the answer. |
Jim Sliff
Senior Member
Username: jim_sliff
Post Number: 83
Registered: 08-2010
| | Posted on Monday, August 22, 2011 - 10:08 pm: | |
I agree.
I just received a reply from one of my resources, and they have never hit NSF 51 either...well, that's not QUITE right - they have but NSF 61 compliant products were approved since no one seemed to really understand the NSF 51 standard's scope.
On the product front, A fluoropolymer *might* work, but is going to be uglier than a bald dog walking backwards. The best bet from an aesthetic and maintenance standpoint would be a DTM Polyurethane...which I did locate, but which will not meet either (approved for incidental contact only) . Something to file away for future use.
On this one, though, Anne has the right approach - send them to the governing authorities. They'll figure out real quick that they don't get to choose - or they'll figure out there's no hope of getting a concrete answer!
If you want the DTM Polyurethane info please email me and I'll forward it. I was happy to discover one had been developed. |
Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEEDŽ AP SCIP Affiliate
Senior Member
Username: lynn_javoroski
Post Number: 1297
Registered: 07-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2011 - 11:14 am: | |
*concrete answer* - groan |
|
4specs.com Home Page