Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. I already tried this on some old treated pine deck boards I used to repair portions of an exterior porch stairs. I washed and rinsed the boards, then let them dry thoroughly. Then I painted them with an exterior acrylic latex porch paint thinned 50/50 with distilled water. This first coat had remarkable penetration. After it dried thoroughly (a couple of days in 85 degree weather in the garage) I put 2 more coats of the same product, unthinned, allowing thorough drying between coats. I used these boards to replace some worn exterior porch stair treads, but they've only been in place for a couple of weeks so far so I won't know the results for a couple of years. In the past, I've used an oil primer, followed by 2 coats of latex topcoat, but haven't had very good results. The latex bonded tenaciously to the primer, but the primer blistered and peeled away from the wood. This exterior application sees lots of sun, rain, snow, and foot traffic. |
#2
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
oil base paint dosen't breathe so any moisture will lift the paint. latex
does so some moisture will come through without any issues. I have used floetrol (sp) available at DD Lowes, and sherwin williams to thin it and extend drying time (on Latex) which lets it penetrate more and although some paints do not reccomend it I have not had a problem. Penetrol is for oil based paints but not as easy to find "Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. I already tried this on some old treated pine deck boards I used to repair portions of an exterior porch stairs. I washed and rinsed the boards, then let them dry thoroughly. Then I painted them with an exterior acrylic latex porch paint thinned 50/50 with distilled water. This first coat had remarkable penetration. After it dried thoroughly (a couple of days in 85 degree weather in the garage) I put 2 more coats of the same product, unthinned, allowing thorough drying between coats. I used these boards to replace some worn exterior porch stair treads, but they've only been in place for a couple of weeks so far so I won't know the results for a couple of years. In the past, I've used an oil primer, followed by 2 coats of latex topcoat, but haven't had very good results. The latex bonded tenaciously to the primer, but the primer blistered and peeled away from the wood. This exterior application sees lots of sun, rain, snow, and foot traffic. |
#3
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones writes:
Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? Isn't that ordinarily done with sprayers? |
#4
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. I already tried this on some old treated pine deck boards I used to repair portions of an exterior porch stairs. I washed and rinsed the boards, then let them dry thoroughly. Then I painted them with an exterior acrylic latex porch paint thinned 50/50 with distilled water. This first coat had remarkable penetration. After it dried thoroughly (a couple of days in 85 degree weather in the garage) I put 2 more coats of the same product, unthinned, allowing thorough drying between coats. I used these boards to replace some worn exterior porch stair treads, but they've only been in place for a couple of weeks so far so I won't know the results for a couple of years. In the past, I've used an oil primer, followed by 2 coats of latex topcoat, but haven't had very good results. The latex bonded tenaciously to the primer, but the primer blistered and peeled away from the wood. This exterior application sees lots of sun, rain, snow, and foot traffic. Thinning aggressively is a bad practice, you may get the color to move into cracks but you end up with mostly pigment and very little base to hold the pigment to the wood. If you look at most latex primers it says to not thin or to use a maximum of 10 percent thinning fluid. BTW, thinning with distilled water is overkill, any drinkable water would be acceptable. Latex paints don't really penetrate, they just lie on the surface. So your idea of penetrating doing something good is false. Paint won't fill in cracks effectively. What you want to do is lay on a coat that cover thoroughly to seal the wood by coating it. If there are cracks you should be sealing the cracks with a caulk before you paint. Or, preferably, use sound board with no cracks. A really good undercoat that dries on your hands takes a lot of work to get it off, even if you skin is oily. Your thinned paint will come off your hands relatively easily. What you need for a long lasting application is not aggressive thinning, but aggressive coating. The wood needs to be smoothed, cracks filled, and the surface coated with a high quality porch paint. |
#5
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
George E. Cawthon wrote: Thinning aggressively is a bad practice, you may get the color to move into cracks but you end up with mostly pigment and very little base to hold the pigment to the wood. Thanks for your lengthy response George. Some of your comments puzzle me so I'd like to ask a few questions. I don't understand your statement that I "end up with mostly pigment and very little base to hold the pigment to the wood". If I thin 50/50, doesn't the ratio of base to pigment stay the same? In other words, what happens to all the base? Isn't it still there, just like the pigment is? Or is there some sort of chemical reaction where the water destroys the base? I realize that by thinning, I don't get as thick a coat as I would otherwise, but I figure that "something" is better than "nothing", since the unthinned paint simply does not get down into the fine cracks in the wood. The cracks I am talking about are not large cracks that could be caulked. I'm talking about many fine splits in the wood; of the order of the thickness of a piece of paper. The unthinned paint simply cannot get in there thoroughly, no matter how aggressively I brush it. And, as it cures it leaves pinholes where the splits are; pinholes where water could get in. If I thin the paint 50/50, it's still fairly thick, but it is able to soak down into the splits instead of just bridging over them. Then when I let it dry and paint over it with unthinned paint, I get a continuous coating with no pinholes. I tried scraping and washing a portion of the porch floor, then letting it dry thoroughly and painting it with 50/50 thinned latex. You can see the paint soak in to the fine splits, and when it dries it absolutely doesn't rub off - it is very tenecious. I intend to cover this first thinned coat with 2 additional coats using unthinned latex. I'm not trying to go cheap on paint; I'm trying to get the wood coated. Also, there are nooks and crannies in the porch where it's very difficult to get the unthinned paint to go; a prime example is between the deck boards. If I use unthinned paint, it wants to "bridge over" adjacent boards instead of soaking down between them. Then, when you walk on the boards, the slight relative motion between adjacent boards causes the paint "bridges" to fail and expose bare wood. If I paint these areas with thinned paint, it penetrates between the boards and coats the hidden edges (where water drips down through). In this case, when putting the unthinned overcoats in these areas, I would be carefull to brush out any paint bridges. If you look at most latex primers it says to not thin or to use a maximum of 10 percent thinning fluid The label says "do not thin" but it does not say *why*. Since I intend to thin only the first coat, and then go over it twice with unthinned paint, I would like to understand if (and why) thinning is still objectionable. Or, preferably, use sound board with no cracks. I understand that this would be optimal. In another universe I'd love to do that. But I don't have the time or money to rip up my porch floor. I'm constrained to work with what I have, with the wood in place. There is no rot, but in many areas the wood is weathered, and the paint is blistering and peeling (actually, the latex topcoat is adhering to the primer, but the oil primer is peeling from the wood). It's because of my unsatisfactory experience with oil primer that I am exploring other approaches. the surface coated with a high quality porch paint. In the painful process of learning, I've had the "pleasure" of using several different paints, some of them awful. The one I am using now, and with which I am fairly impressed, is "Best Look Premium 100% Acrylic Latex Satin Porch & Floor Enamel" from the local hardware/paint store. It says on the fine print on the label that it's made by Sherwin Williams. It costs about 25 bucks a gallon. It is very thick and creamy, easy to apply, and coats very well. |
#6
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
clipped
In the past, I've used an oil primer, followed by 2 coats of latex topcoat, but haven't had very good results. The latex bonded tenaciously to the primer, but the primer blistered and peeled away from the wood. This exterior application sees lots of sun, rain, snow, and foot traffic. I think label instructions are good advice, and wouldn't recommend more thinning than the label advises, especially for high wear and outdoors. It might work, but why tempt fate for a tough condition? Primer should not blister unless applied to damp or dirty wood or in hot, direct sun. Start with clean, dry wood. Scrape and sand as needed. To fill cracks (which invite disruption of paint film and intrusion of moisture), apply paintable, flexible caulk after primer dries. Prime the caulk after it dries. Paint. Cover all sides of the boards. I don't buy cheap paint, and I hate paint prep work, but I am a fanatic about the prep when I paint or paper because I don't want to have to do it over. Why use poor quality paint, or ruin good quality paint? Paint stores have product specifically for thinning both types of paint and which don't weaken the film. The logic in not thinning too much is that you dilute to the point that you are applying little more than colored water. Of course, it would have "remarkable" penetration. Buy some new wood or Trex. |
#7
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
I use a product called Floetrol for thinning Latex paints. It also adds a
lot of good properties like helping the paint flow. This is good for doors when you want the paint to lay flat and not have brush marks. Available most anywhere. Steve |
#8
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Norminn wrote: Paint stores have product specifically for thinning both types of paint and which don't weaken the film. "doesn't weaken the film" is the part I want to understand better. Why doesn't this product "weaken the film" but water does? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to understand how it works. The logic in not thinning too much is that you dilute to the point that you are applying little more than colored water. So... it doesn't matter if I thin the latex 50/50, as long as I apply enough coats that the total amount of latex I use is the same as I would have used if I didn't thin it? For example, say I pour out two equal portions of unthinned latex into separate containers. I paint one board with 2 coats using the first portion (using it all up). I thin the second portion 50/50 with distilled water, and paint the second board with that, applying coats (and letting them dry) until the second portion is used up. Both boards now have exactly the same amount of pigment and binder on them. Will the paint on the second board fail because I thinned it? _Why_? (It's the "why" part I am seeking to understand). |
#9
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Norminn wrote: Paint stores have product specifically for thinning both types of paint and which don't weaken the film. "doesn't weaken the film" is the part I want to understand better. Why doesn't this product "weaken the film" but water does? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to understand how it works. Look at the two. The product is every bit as thick as latex paint. It has the consistency of latex paint. It has the same polymers and surfactants as latex paint. It has added polymers and surfactants to help the paint flow and "skin" properly. Pour a cup of it in your hand. Watch what it does. Feel it. Now do the same with a cup of water. Here's yer sign. Steve |
#10
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
George E. Cawthon wrote: Thinning aggressively is a bad practice, you may get the color to move into cracks but you end up with mostly pigment and very little base to hold the pigment to the wood. Thanks for your lengthy response George. Some of your comments puzzle me so I'd like to ask a few questions. I don't understand your statement that I "end up with mostly pigment and very little base to hold the pigment to the wood". If I thin 50/50, doesn't the ratio of base to pigment stay the same? In other words, what happens to all the base? Isn't it still there, just like the pigment is? Or is there some sort of chemical reaction where the water destroys the base? I realize that by thinning, I don't get as thick a coat as I would otherwise, but I figure that "something" is better than "nothing", since the unthinned paint simply does not get down into the fine cracks in the wood. Sure the ratio is the same but the base needs to be a certain concentration to provide a good a reasonable coat, that is why manufacturers caution against thinning. You don't need to get the paint down in those thin cracks, you just need to be sure that the paint seals over the cracks. I suggest that you take a good board, and paint small sections with 100%, 90%, 70%, 50% and 40% paint thinning with water. Then scrub a dub with water after 24 hours. That will show what the paint you are using will do with thinning. The cracks I am talking about are not large cracks that could be caulked. I'm talking about many fine splits in the wood; of the order of the thickness of a piece of paper. The unthinned paint simply cannot get in there thoroughly, no matter how aggressively I brush it. And, as it cures it leaves pinholes where the splits are; pinholes where water could get in. If I thin the paint 50/50, it's still fairly thick, but it is able to soak down into the splits instead of just bridging over them. Then when I let it dry and paint over it with unthinned paint, I get a continuous coating with no pinholes. If that is true then do it. However,you would be much better off filling the cracks with something other than paint, maybe glue thinned about 10 percent (use Elmers carpenter glue (the yellow stuff). Not only will you have the cracks mostly filled they will be glued together. I tried scraping and washing a portion of the porch floor, then letting it dry thoroughly and painting it with 50/50 thinned latex. You can see the paint soak in to the fine splits, and when it dries it absolutely doesn't rub off - it is very tenecious. I intend to cover this first thinned coat with 2 additional coats using unthinned latex. I'm not trying to go cheap on paint; I'm trying to get the wood coated. Also, there are nooks and crannies in the porch where it's very difficult to get the unthinned paint to go; a prime example is between the deck boards. If I use unthinned paint, it wants to "bridge over" adjacent boards instead of soaking down between them. Then, when you walk on the boards, the slight relative motion between adjacent boards causes the paint "bridges" to fail and expose bare wood. If I paint these areas with thinned paint, it penetrates between the boards and coats the hidden edges (where water drips down through). In this case, when putting the unthinned overcoats in these areas, I would be carefull to brush out any paint bridges. You are trying to fix a structural problem with paint. The board should not be moving in relation to each other. If the boards are moving a tiny bit you can seal with a flexible paint, but a paint you walk on is not flexible to any extent. If you look at most latex primers it says to not thin or to use a maximum of 10 percent thinning fluid The label says "do not thin" but it does not say *why*. Since I intend to thin only the first coat, and then go over it twice with unthinned paint, I would like to understand if (and why) thinning is still objectionable. Or, preferably, use sound board with no cracks. I understand that this would be optimal. In another universe I'd love to do that. But I don't have the time or money to rip up my porch floor. I'm constrained to work with what I have, with the wood in place. There is no rot, but in many areas the wood is weathered, and the paint is blistering and peeling (actually, the latex topcoat is adhering to the primer, but the oil primer is peeling from the wood). It's because of my unsatisfactory experience with oil primer that I am exploring other approaches. the surface coated with a high quality porch paint. In the painful process of learning, I've had the "pleasure" of using several different paints, some of them awful. The one I am using now, and with which I am fairly impressed, is "Best Look Premium 100% Acrylic Latex Satin Porch & Floor Enamel" from the local hardware/paint store. It says on the fine print on the label that it's made by Sherwin Williams. It costs about 25 bucks a gallon. It is very thick and creamy, easy to apply, and coats very well. Maybe you have the problem in hand. OTOH, the peeling may be due to moisture absorption from below, if the porch is over uncovered soil. |
#11
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Steve B wrote: Look at the two. I just looked at a container of Floetrol today. Until now, I'd never heard of it. The product is every bit as thick as latex paint. Very cheap latex paint maybe. Floetrol is nowhere near as thick as the latex paints I have been using. It has the same polymers and surfactants as latex paint. It has added polymers and surfactants to help the paint flow and "skin" properly. How do you know this? The label on the container lists no ingredients. The MSDS doesn't list any ingredients (it does say the boiling point is 212F though). Where did you get your information? Pour a cup of it in your hand. Watch what it does. Feel it. Now do the same with a cup of water. Here's yer sign. Do you personally find that to be a satisfying technical answer to the question? If I paint one board with 8 ounces of high quality latex paint, using as many coats as it takes to use up the paint, and I paint a second board with 8 ounces of the same high quality latex paint plus 2 ounces of distilled water, again using as many coats as it takes to use up the 10 ounces of thinned paint, are you saying the second board has a "weaker" film? And if so, _why_? OT, just heard on the news - Pluto has been stripped of its planet status. |
#12
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
George E. Cawthon wrote: I suggest that you take a good board, and paint small sections with 100%, 90%, 70%, 50% and 40% paint thinning with water. Then scrub a dub with water after 24 hours. That will show what the paint you are using will do with thinning. Good suggestion. I wasn't as scientific as you suggested with all the different percentages, but I did run a "sanity" test before I committed to using the thinned paint in my actual application. I took a representative sample board and power-washed it to remove the old blistering paint, then I let it dry and gave it a single coat of aggressively thinned latex (I would guess 50/50 although I didn't measure it). After letting it dry thoroughly I blasted it with the power washer (1700 psi) and it didn't budge. So I figured, on that basis, that using the thinned latex as a first coat, to be overcoated with 2 coats of unthinned latex, was a reasonable thing to do. My reason for posting here was to try to get some additional technical reasons, if there are any, why the process I described is bad practice. So far, to summarize what I am hearing, the gist of most of the counter-arguments is that thinning the latex causes a thinner coat to be applied, therefore resulting in a "weaker film". But no one so far has suggested (at least not in clear language) that adding too much water actually interferes with the paint's chemistry. Since I intend to overcoat the first thinned coat with 2 coats of unthinned latex, it seems to me that the "weakened film" argument is moot. you would be much better off filling the cracks with something other than paint, maybe glue thinned about 10 percent (use Elmers carpenter glue (the yellow stuff). Not only will you have the cracks mostly filled they will be glued together. This is very interesting because this is exactly the sort of thing I wanted to do initially, because it seems to make so much sense, but I couldn't find _anybody_ to confirm the idea, despite talking to contractors and paint-store people. Is this really a viable approach?? Would Elmers be the right stuff to use, or might there be something even better? It has to be water-based for this project. Is Elmer's really paintable? You are trying to fix a structural problem with paint. The board should not be moving in relation to each other. My deck, which I built myself with 5/4" deck boards on 2x10 joists 16" on center sitting on doubled-up 2x12 beams 6' on center supported by posts every 5' along the beam length, you could drive a tank on it and it wouldn't budge. The porch is a different story. It is certainly not built as sturdily as I would have done it myself, but it's not unlike many decks I have walked on. The boards DO move slightly relative to one another when you step on an area between joists. This absolutely kills the paint if there are "paint bridges" joining the boards, as I discovered the hard way. So when I re-paint it, I plan to avoid paint bridges between adjacent boards. peeling may be due to moisture absorption from below, if the porch is over uncovered soil. Yes, it's over uncovered soil. It is going to be very interesting to see what happens over time to the newly-refinished treads on the rear stairs. I discussed this in a separate post in this thread. I used a different process on each of the 11 treads and risers. |
#13
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
Norminn wrote: Paint stores have product specifically for thinning both types of paint and which don't weaken the film. "doesn't weaken the film" is the part I want to understand better. Why doesn't this product "weaken the film" but water does? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to understand how it works. Guess it contains the binder, so without as much heavy, ground up pigment your paint will be as strong but with less pigment per volume. Paint has three essential functional products (sometimes lots more chemicals): pigment, binder, vehicle. Pigment is the color you want. Usually ground up stuff. Binder is what holds it together when it is dry. Vehicle is what makes it liquid enough to get from the can to the brush to the surface, and makes it run out flat. The pigment, without the binder (or thinned too much) would make it like milk of magnesia, white dust on the siding ) The logic in not thinning too much is that you dilute to the point that you are applying little more than colored water. So... it doesn't matter if I thin the latex 50/50, as long as I apply enough coats that the total amount of latex I use is the same as I would have used if I didn't thin it? Quality paint rarely needs thinning. To thin it too much is to weaken it's ability to stay on securely. For example, say I pour out two equal portions of unthinned latex into separate containers. I paint one board with 2 coats using the first portion (using it all up). I thin the second portion 50/50 with distilled water, and paint the second board with that, applying coats (and letting them dry) until the second portion is used up. Both boards now have exactly the same amount of pigment and binder on them. Will the paint on the second board fail because I thinned it? _Why_? (It's the "why" part I am seeking to understand). Well, try this: take four boards, each 12" wide by four feet long. Cut them in one foot lengths. Lay the 16 pieces of cut boards in four rows of four. Should cover 16 square feet. Now pick them up, throw away 8 of them. Use the remaining 8 pieces to cover the same area. Your thinned paint has binder spread too thin, I'm thinking. Might work. Here is a link to additives, Floetrol (water base paint) and Penetrol (oil base). Penetrol is only one I have tried, for spraying. Works beautifully. http://www.o-geepaint.com/cgi-bin/Fr...ww.floodco.com |
#14
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
Steve B wrote: Look at the two. I just looked at a container of Floetrol today. Until now, I'd never heard of it. The product is every bit as thick as latex paint. Very cheap latex paint maybe. Floetrol is nowhere near as thick as the latex paints I have been using. It has the same polymers and surfactants as latex paint. It has added polymers and surfactants to help the paint flow and "skin" properly. How do you know this? The label on the container lists no ingredients. The MSDS doesn't list any ingredients (it does say the boiling point is 212F though). Where did you get your information? MSDS doesn't list the chemicals, but does say that it is 90% volatile. The other 10% is magic potion ) |
#15
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Norminn wrote: Quality paint rarely needs thinning. To thin it too much is to weaken it's ability to stay on securely. The question on the table is, *why*. See further discussion below: EtherJones wrote: For example, say I pour out two equal portions of unthinned latex into separate containers. I paint one board with 2 coats using the first portion (using it all up). I thin the second portion 50/50 with distilled water, and paint the second board with that, applying coats (and letting them dry) until the second portion is used up. Both boards now have exactly the same amount of pigment and binder on them. Will the paint on the second board fail because I thinned it? _Why_? (It's the "why" part I am seeking to understand). Norminn wrote: Well, try this: take four boards, each 12" wide by four feet long. Cut them in one foot lengths. Lay the 16 pieces of cut boards in four rows of four. Should cover 16 square feet. Now pick them up, throw away 8 of them. Use the remaining 8 pieces to cover the same area. Your example is flawed; it is in no way analogous to what I wrote. Please reread my example more carefully. In my example, there was no binder "thrown away". Both boards have exactly the same amount of binder (and pigment) on them. So what makes one "weaker" than the other? Are you claiming that the added water somehow prevents the binder from polymerizing properly? And if that is what you are claiming, where did you learn this? Could you please cite some technical references. |
#16
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Norminn wrote: MSDS doesn't list the chemicals, but does say that it is 90% volatile. .... and the boiling point of that 90% is, guess what? 212 degrees F. Does that number sound familiar? The other 10% is magic potion ) Apparently a tightly held secret? Steve B claims they're "polymers" and surfactants. I wonder where he got that info. Seems weird that they would put polymers in it. You'd think they'd use monomers, like the original latex, so it would boost the binder. |
#17
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
I took a representative sample board and power-washed it to remove the old blistering paint, then I let it dry and gave it a single coat of aggressively thinned latex (I would guess 50/50 although I didn't measure it). After letting it dry thoroughly I blasted it with the power washer (1700 psi) and it didn't budge. So I figured, on that basis, that using the thinned latex as a first coat, to be overcoated with 2 coats of unthinned latex, was a reasonable thing to do. It sounds like you've invented primer. The unknown is how long it'll last. Why not just use a real primer? Oil-based primer should sink in better, but even a latex primer will have a better chance of a long life. Both can be topcoated with latex. -- Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA |
#18
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Warren Block wrote: Ether Jones wrote: I took a representative sample board and power-washed it to remove the old blistering paint, then I let it dry and gave it a single coat of aggressively thinned latex (I would guess 50/50 although I didn't measure it). After letting it dry thoroughly I blasted it with the power washer (1700 psi) and it didn't budge. So I figured, on that basis, that using the thinned latex as a first coat, to be overcoated with 2 coats of unthinned latex, was a reasonable thing to do. It sounds like you've invented primer. The unknown is how long it'll last. Why not just use a real primer? ...even a latex primer will have a better chance of a long life. How is latex primer chemically different from latex topcoat paint? Does it have a different binder system than latex paint? Oil-based primer should sink in better, Why not oil primer for this job? Here's why: Many claim that oil-based primer penetrates better, but the caveat is that the wood must be BONE DRY. The least bit of moisture appears to greatly interfere with absorption and adherence. By contrast, latex seems to be fairly forgiving: to apply latex, the wood can't be wet or damp, but it doesn't have to be baked dry for a week. This is a significant issue for this outdoor project, especially at this time of year, when finding a whole week where there is no rain and the humidity is low and there is no dew in the morning is next to impossible. The area to be painted is a high-use area; it is a great inconvenience to take it out of service. If I power-wash it, I have to keep traffic off it until it dries or it will get dirty again. For oil primer, that means a full week of dry weather after washing. If it rains, I have to wait another week. Once the wood is dry and the oil primer is applied, it takes several days to dry properly so that it can be painted with latex. If it rains during this period it seriously compromises the primer. All during this period, the area must be off-limits to traffic. Once the latex is applied, I need another 24 hours of dry weather or the latex will be compromised. On the other hand, if I use latex: After power-washing, the wood is ready to accept a coat of latex within 24 to 48 hours. Within 4 hours I can apply a second coat. Within 24 hours it is rain-proof and ready for foot traffic. Done. Besides the significant inconveniences of oil (as detailed above), my experience will oil-based primer has been highly disappointing. See my other posts in this same thread for more details, but here is the gist of it. I tried using latex topcoat over oil primer previously and the system failed within one year. The latex topcoat bonded to the oil primer, but the oil primer started blistering and peeling away from the wood in large chunks. I tried to follow all the rules. I do not know if I somehow did something wrong, or if oil primer just isn't the right solution for this particular application (exterior, wood, horizontal, foot traffic, sun, rain, snow). Some boards were coated all six sides, and some were coated on the top and ends only. All of them failed prematurely. |
#19
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote in message ups.com... Steve B wrote: Look at the two. I just looked at a container of Floetrol today. Until now, I'd never heard of it. The product is every bit as thick as latex paint. Very cheap latex paint maybe. Floetrol is nowhere near as thick as the latex paints I have been using. It has the same polymers and surfactants as latex paint. It has added polymers and surfactants to help the paint flow and "skin" properly. How do you know this? The label on the container lists no ingredients. The MSDS doesn't list any ingredients (it does say the boiling point is 212F though). Where did you get your information? Pour a cup of it in your hand. Watch what it does. Feel it. Now do the same with a cup of water. Here's yer sign. Do you personally find that to be a satisfying technical answer to the question? If I paint one board with 8 ounces of high quality latex paint, using as many coats as it takes to use up the paint, and I paint a second board with 8 ounces of the same high quality latex paint plus 2 ounces of distilled water, again using as many coats as it takes to use up the 10 ounces of thinned paint, are you saying the second board has a "weaker" film? And if so, _why_? OT, just heard on the news - Pluto has been stripped of its planet status. Let me just say this. I have used it. I like it. It works for me. Your mileage may vary. Use it or don't. It's as good a solution as any proposed. Surely as good as water. Maybe even a little better. Steve |
#20
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
Norminn wrote: Quality paint rarely needs thinning. To thin it too much is to weaken it's ability to stay on securely. The question on the table is, *why*. See further discussion below: EtherJones wrote: For example, say I pour out two equal portions of unthinned latex into separate containers. I paint one board with 2 coats using the first portion (using it all up). I thin the second portion 50/50 with distilled water, and paint the second board with that, applying coats (and letting them dry) until the second portion is used up. Both boards now have exactly the same amount of pigment and binder on them. Will the paint on the second board fail because I thinned it? _Why_? (It's the "why" part I am seeking to understand). Norminn wrote: Well, try this: take four boards, each 12" wide by four feet long. Cut them in one foot lengths. Lay the 16 pieces of cut boards in four rows of four. Should cover 16 square feet. Now pick them up, throw away 8 of them. Use the remaining 8 pieces to cover the same area. Your example is flawed; it is in no way analogous to what I wrote. Please reread my example more carefully. In my example, there was no binder "thrown away". Both boards have exactly the same amount of binder (and pigment) on them. So what makes one "weaker" than the other? Are you claiming that the added water somehow prevents the binder from polymerizing properly? And if that is what you are claiming, where did you learn this? Could you please cite some technical references. I thought my example was pretty good, to illustrate that the diluted binder has fewer molecules to hang together and cover your wood. If you want a treatise on paint chemistry, go find one. You obviously understand factors that made your paint job fail, so why pursue methods that aren't recommended? I do exterior painting in the fall, when conditions are optimum for what I want to do. Dry, not too hot, not too cold, and comfortable enough to do all the right prep work. Have cleaned up lots of other people's sloppy work, so I consider that valuable experience. Common sense serves better than intimate knowledge of the chemical compounds, it seems. |
#21
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Norminn wrote: Ether Jones wrote: Norminn wrote: Quality paint rarely needs thinning. To thin it too much is to weaken it's ability to stay on securely. The question on the table is, *why*. See further discussion below: EtherJones wrote: For example, say I pour out two equal portions of unthinned latex into separate containers. I paint one board with 2 coats using the first portion (using it all up). I thin the second portion 50/50 with distilled water, and paint the second board with that, applying coats (and letting them dry) until the second portion is used up. Both boards now have exactly the same amount of pigment and binder on them. Will the paint on the second board fail because I thinned it? _Why_? (It's the "why" part I am seeking to understand). Norminn wrote: Well, try this: take four boards, each 12" wide by four feet long. Cut them in one foot lengths. Lay the 16 pieces of cut boards in four rows of four. Should cover 16 square feet. Now pick them up, throw away 8 of them. Use the remaining 8 pieces to cover the same area. Your example is flawed; it is in no way analogous to what I wrote. Please reread my example more carefully. In my example, there was no binder "thrown away". Both boards have exactly the same amount of binder (and pigment) on them. So what makes one "weaker" than the other? Are you claiming that the added water somehow prevents the binder from polymerizing properly? And if that is what you are claiming, where did you learn this? Could you please cite some technical references. I thought my example was pretty good, to illustrate that the diluted binder has fewer molecules to hang together and cover your wood. The thinned latex has exactly the same total number of molecules of binder as the unthinned latex. Read the example again. Adding water does not reduce the number of binder molecules, it just increases the number of molecules of water. Because the second portion has additional water, it is thinner and therefore more coats will need to be applied to use it all up. But once it's all used up, you've applied the same total number of binder molecules to the second board as you did to the first. If you want a treatise on paint chemistry, go find one. I've been looking. Haven't found one yet. You obviously understand factors that made your paint job fail, so why pursue methods that aren't recommended? Because I want to understand WHY they aren't recommended. I like to understand why I'm doing what I'm doing. If the label on the paint can says "Do not thin", I want to know why. By knowing "why", I can determine under what circumstances it might actually be permissible, even beneficial, to thin (even though the label says "no"). Common sense serves better than intimate knowledge of the chemical compounds, it seems. Common sense is good yes. But sometimes what passes for common sense is a collection of urban legends and anecdotal experiences. That's why it's good to ask "why". I'm not saying that's true in your case. You seem to have some substantial experience. |
#22
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
A thought just occurred to me which might be germane to this discussion. Perhaps someone familiar with how latex paint works could comment. My understanding is that latex paint binder consists of monomers in water solution. When you apply a coat of latex paint, and the water dries, the monomers come out of solution and begin to bond together into polymers. This bonding action forms the strong film. Once the polymers form, they are no longer water-soluble. That's why the film is water resistant, even though the original vehicle was water. Now, what happens when you apply a second coat of latex? Obviously the process repeats itself. BUT, in addition to bonding with EACH OTHER, do the monomers in the second coat ALSO bond EQUALLY EFFECTIVELY with the polymers in the first coat, to create one seamless film (assuming the first coat was kept clean) ? Or, is the bonding between the monomers of the second coat and the polymers of the first coat only PARTIAL, so that what you get is two SEPARATE films which are bonded together, but the bond BETWEEN the two coats is not as strong as the bond WITHIN each coat? If the latter is true, it would explain the difference between boards one and two in the example I gave in an earlier post. The first and second boards would have the exact same total film thickness, but the first board would have fewer, thicker layers; and the second board would have more, thinner, layers. What this means in practical terms as far as the quality of the paint job is still arguable I suppose. |
#23
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
A thought just occurred to me which might be germane to this discussion. Perhaps someone familiar with how latex paint works could comment. My understanding is that latex paint binder consists of monomers in water solution. When you apply a coat of latex paint, and the water dries, the monomers come out of solution and begin to bond together into polymers. This bonding action forms the strong film. Once the polymers form, they are no longer water-soluble. That's why the film is water resistant, even though the original vehicle was water. Now, what happens when you apply a second coat of latex? Obviously the process repeats itself. BUT, in addition to bonding with EACH OTHER, do the monomers in the second coat ALSO bond EQUALLY EFFECTIVELY with the polymers in the first coat, to create one seamless film (assuming the first coat was kept clean) ? Or, is the bonding between the monomers of the second coat and the polymers of the first coat only PARTIAL, so that what you get is two SEPARATE films which are bonded together, but the bond BETWEEN the two coats is not as strong as the bond WITHIN each coat? If the latter is true, it would explain the difference between boards one and two in the example I gave in an earlier post. The first and second boards would have the exact same total film thickness, but the first board would have fewer, thicker layers; and the second board would have more, thinner, layers. What this means in practical terms as far as the quality of the paint job is still arguable I suppose. I don't know anthing about monomers and polymers. By your description, thinning the paint too much with water keeps the molecules from bonding because they are spread too far apart. Reason I used the cut boards (molecules of paint binder) example - you can't cover the same area with half the material, whether microscopic or macroscopic. Capiche? The boards you refinished likely had some moisture in them, having been washed two days before. Not washed, but without impermeable finish, they would be damp from being outdoors. Boards fastened onto a deck, without being finished on all sides, would hold moisture. So, when finish is applied, sun hits the deck, the moisture expands and the paint film blisters or cracks. |
#24
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. The best technical explanation is simply that there are products made specifically to do that, and they are going to do a better job than using water. |
#25
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote in message ups.com... The cracks I am talking about are not large cracks that could be caulked. I'm talking about many fine splits in the wood; of the order of the thickness of a piece of paper. The unthinned paint simply cannot get in there thoroughly, no matter how aggressively I brush it. And, as it cures it leaves pinholes where the splits are; pinholes where water could get in. What you're looking for is a "block filler" paint/primer. |
#26
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Norminn wrote: Paint stores have product specifically for thinning both types of paint and which don't weaken the film. "doesn't weaken the film" is the part I want to understand better. Why doesn't this product "weaken the film" but water does? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to understand how it works. Because it IS film. i.e. part of the binder. But it flows better. Anyway, to fill cracks and other small imperfections, buy a paint specifically for the job. Sherwin Williams sells PrepRite High Build Primer/Surfacer, or even Block Filler (which is meant for concrete, I don't know how well it would work on wood). Other companies probably have similar things. |
#27
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
jeffc wrote: "Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Norminn wrote: Paint stores have product specifically for thinning both types of paint and which don't weaken the film. "doesn't weaken the film" is the part I want to understand better. Why doesn't this product "weaken the film" but water does? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to understand how it works. Because it IS film. i.e. part of the binder. No disagreeing with you, but where did you get this information? There is no information on the product label, and the MSDS lists no ingredients at all. But it flows better. Anyway, to fill cracks and other small imperfections, buy a paint specifically for the job. Sherwin Williams sells PrepRite High Build Primer/Surfacer, or even Block Filler (which is meant for concrete, I don't know how well it would work on wood). Other companies probably have similar things. I have looked and looked, and asked many contractors and paint store gurus, and no one has been able to recommend such a product for the application at hand. Remember, this application is for exterior, horizontal, previously painted, weathered, wood, exposed to sun, rain, snow, and heavy foot traffic. If anyone knows of a specific product name and manufacturer for a product like jeffc has mentioned, please post it. |
#28
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
jeffc wrote: "Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. The best technical explanation is simply that there are products made specifically to do that, and they are going to do a better job than using water. Well no offense jeffc, but that's certainly not a technical explanation and not very helpful. BUT... if you find answers like that satisfying, more power to you. Vive la difference. |
#29
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote No disagreeing with you, but where did you get this information? There is no information on the product label, and the MSDS lists no ingredients at all. Just do what I did. I wrote to the company and asked them to please send me the private patent information that contains all their ingredients and trade secrets. They sent them to me immediately. Steve |
#30
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... jeffc wrote: "Ether Jones" wrote in message oups.com... Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. The best technical explanation is simply that there are products made specifically to do that, and they are going to do a better job than using water. Well no offense jeffc, but that's certainly not a technical explanation and not very helpful. BUT... if you find answers like that satisfying, more power to you. Vive la difference. I guess I'm stupid. I totally understood what Jeff was saying. I do the same things when traveling by airplane, going over a bridge, or turning on the lights. I really don't have to understand everything that makes them work, and I sure couldn't explain it to a Piled High and Deep type of person in a conversation, but then, I'm just one of those stupid nontechnical types. Steve |
#31
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote:
jeffc wrote: "Ether Jones" wrote in message groups.com... Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. The best technical explanation is simply that there are products made specifically to do that, and they are going to do a better job than using water. Well no offense jeffc, but that's certainly not a technical explanation and not very helpful. BUT... if you find answers like that satisfying, more power to you. Vive la difference. This thread has a distinct odor of troll .. why don't you take your vast scientific conversation to a paint chemist at a paint company? The whole idea behind paint is to keep wood from getting split, cracked and weathered, so we yokels on ahr share our experience to try to help others. Paint products that I am familiar with say "don't thin more than 10%", "sand weathered wood", "apply to clean, dry surface", "prime bare wood", etc. Since painting is a good deal of work, the preparation being the most tedious, we haul out the brushes and tarps and get the job done before the item to be protected turns to crap. You have been offered good faith advice, but challenge everyone who replies. By the time you get around to doing the project, the house will be falling down. |
#32
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote: BUT... if you find answers like that satisfying, more power to you. Vive la difference. just paint the ****ing board and stop ****in around you coulda been done by now damn nickel holding up a dollar you sure don't ask for much for nothing do you you're a real pill "it puts the brush into the paint and paints the board" "PAINT THE ****ING BOARD" |
#33
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
You should be using Decking products, following instructions and not
making up your own with the wrong product. Your past failures might be the wrong product, prep or aplication on a hot or damp surface. Get and use products designed for the job and do what they say. |
#34
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
yeeha wrote:
Ether Jones wrote: BUT... if you find answers like that satisfying, more power to you. Vive la difference. just paint the ****ing board and stop ****in around you coulda been done by now damn nickel holding up a dollar you sure don't ask for much for nothing do you you're a real pill "it puts the brush into the paint and paints the board" "PAINT THE ****ING BOARD" I didn't want to be the first to use the "f" word, but, yeah. ) |
#35
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
"m Ransley" wrote in message ... You should be using Decking products, following instructions and not making up your own with the wrong product. Your past failures might be the wrong product, prep or aplication on a hot or damp surface. Get and use products designed for the job and do what they say. That may work for some here, but others insist that a person totally understand and comprehend what the paint is doing, why, and all the ingredients of said paint. IOW, they do more thinking than painting. Steve |
#36
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
m Ransley wrote:
You should be using Decking products, following instructions and not making up your own with the wrong product. Your past failures might be the wrong product, prep or aplication on a hot or damp surface. Get and use products designed for the job and do what they say. Most decking products are stains, not paint. Unfortunately, I'm constrained to use paint since the former owner painted the entire porch and I want it to match. Only the breezeway area (about 150 square feet) and steps need refinishing. Two years ago, I essentially followed the advice you recommended above. The result was unsuccessful, despite scrupulously following the label instructions. I think I posted the details elsewhere in this thread. The paint started to fail after one year. I still don't know why for sure, although many here have suggested possible reasons, and the oil primer seems to be the likely culprit, even though "latex over oil primer" is the conventional wisdom. Some folks say "paint all six sides", others say "no, leave the underside unpainted so the wood can breathe". I tried both ways and they both failed (six sides on the steps, only the top in the breezeway area). Some folks say "use oil", others say "no, oil is too brittle and moisture-impermeable and will crack and separate from the wood as the wood expands and contracts due to moisture". I used latex over oil primer, as recommended on the latex label. Perhaps the "oil is too brittle" folks are right. That's my current working hypothesis at any rate. So this summer I tried a different approach. One set of steps I pressure washed to blast off as much blistering paint as possible. Let it dry and sanded it, then applied the latex with no oil primer. The latex is a high quality 100% acrylic latex paint rated for exterior horizontal surfaces exposed to foot traffic and weather. On half the steps I applied the latex unthinned (as per label directions), on the other half I used thinned latex for the first coat (in order to penetrate better into hairline cracks and the spaces between the boards) and then 2 coats of unthinned. On the other set of steps I removed all the treads and risers, and completely removed all previous coating with a planer, edger, and belt sander. I used a different approach on each of the 12 boards, including replacing some of the boards with new wood; but in all cases I coated all six sides (that's why I removed the boards). For example, on one of the boards I applied the latex directly to the wood without a primer. On another I used thinned latex as the first coat, then 2 coats of unthinned latex over that. On another I stained the board first with Cabot semi-solid deck stain, then applied latex over that (yes, I know that conventional wisdom says don't do this). On another I used an oil-based water-sealing product which claimed it was paintable, then oil-primed and latex topcoat over that (letting each dry thoroughly of course). I kept a record of how each board was prepared. In a couple of years I'll see the results. Hopefully, at least one approach will endure. I haven't re-done the breezeway area yet, but the plan is to do it the same way as the first set of steps mentioned above (power-wash to remove blistering paint, then apply latex without oil primer). Removing the breezeway boards to paint the undersides and edges and ends is out of the question. Using oil in this area is extremely inconvenient - after power washing, the waiting period for proper drying would be a real problem. Oil requires absolutely bone-dry wood. Any moisture stops the penetration. Latex is far more forgiving in this regard. The one question that remains unanswered, and the one that has offended and/or angered some posters to this thread, is the issue of thinning latex paint with water. I was hoping there might be an old-timer or two here who understood this issue and could shed some light: Many latex paint labels say "do not thin". The question I was exploring is whether this "do not thin" exhortation is universally true, or whether there might be extenuating circumstances wherein in would be permissible, even beneficial, to thin just the first coat, to improve penetration into nooks and crannies and spaces between boards, as long as an unthinned second (or even third) coat of unthinned is applied. I tried to find a suitable water-based primer for this application but was unsuccessful. I looked at MANY paint stores and home-improvement centers, and spoke with a few contractors and painter friends. I have yet to find a water-based primer that is rated for horizontal wood surfaces exposed to rain and foot traffic. One guy swore by Zinser 123, so I bought a gallon, but when I got home and read all the fine print, it categorically stated "not for use on horizontal surfaces exposed to foot traffic and water". I've also read that you should always use a primer and topcoat from the same manufacturer to assure they are compatible. I'm not sure if this is true, or if true, why. If anyone knows of a water-based primer designed for use on previously-painted weathered wood which has been power-washed to clean it and remove loose paint, and which is compatible with Sherwin-Williams 100% acrylic latex exterior porch and floor paint, please post. |
#37
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Ether Jones wrote: Is it OK to aggressively thin latex paint with distilled water? My aim in doing so is NOT to increase coverage, but rather to improve the penetration into splits and cracks and rough areas. My intent would be to allow this first thinned coat to soak in and dry thoroughly, then apply two more coats of the same product, unthinned. If the answer is "no", could you please give some technical explanation why it is not a good idea. I think I've finally found a (partial) answer to my question; I'll post it here for the benefit of anyone else who might be interested: The major solvent in today's latex paints is water. But they also contain small amounts of organic solvents, such as 2-(2 butoxyethoxy) ethanol and trimethylpentanediol isobutyrate, which function as "coalescing solvents". These coalescing solvents play an important role in the film formation, and apparently the RATIO of organic solvent to water affects the film formation. At least that's what the technical discussion in the link below appears to be saying. SO... the reason why adding too much water could be a bad idea is NOT that there is "less binder" in the thinned latex, but rather that the thinned latex has the wrong ratio of water-to-organic-solvent... and this apparently affects the chemistry of the film formation process. more details at this link: http://www.dow.com/ucarlatex/coating...chive/0311.htm The proof is in the pudding, though, I suppose. Yesterday I blasted the breezeway area of the porch with the power washer. Large sheets and small flakes of old paint were flying everywhere. But the test patches where I had applied thinned latex to scraped-bare wood 3 days prior held fast and showed no sign at all of coming loose or wearing off. So the plan is to use thinned latex for the first coat to penetrate into hard-to-reach places (like between adjacent deck boards, and where railing posts sit on the deck boards, and hairline splits in the boards); and topcoat that twice with unthinned. I'll know by next year if this approach is better than the latex-over-oil-primer approach I used 2 years ago which failed in one year. Thanks to all those who contributed. |
#38
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
Just add some mineral spirits. Whats so hard about that.
Gasoline works too. |
#39
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
NickySantoro wrote: For your situation the most effective procedure is to use a slow drying oil based primer thinned slightly, allowing it to dry thoroughly, then topcoating with the finish of choice. Can you recommend a specific brand and model of primer, which is explicitly rated for exterior wood floor and steps? |
#40
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
aggressively thinning latex paint?
NickySantoro wrote:
On 29 Aug 2006 17:22:09 -0700, "Ether Jones" wrote: I'll know by next year if this approach is better than the latex-over-oil-primer approach I used 2 years ago which failed in one year. If it failed it was due to causes as yet unrevealed, likely improper application or inadequate surface preparation. Perhaps, but the application and prep were meticulous. All treads and risers were removed and thoroughly scraped, wire-brushed, sanded, and brushed. Primed with oil primer all six sides. Top-coated with 2 coats of porch and floor latex all six sides. So the other possibility is perhaps the conventional wisdom of latex topcoat over oil primer is not universally correct for all applications. FWIW, I spent 30 minutes in a paint store this afternoon reading the label of each and every different exterior primer, both oil and latex (8 or so different cans). Not a single one of them listed exterior wood floors or steps as an acceptable application. Some of the highly-touted brands such as Zinser 123 and Kilz explicitly excluded exterior wood floors and steps. It will take a couple of years, but my experiment with the backyard porch steps should be most interesting: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.h...&output=gplain |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Peel-A-Way Paint Remover For Latex Paint: Any Good ? | Home Repair | |||
latex paint mistake - can this be fixed without repainting entirewall? | Home Repair | |||
Questions on procedure for thinning exterior house paint | Home Ownership | |||
can I polyurethane over flat latex paint? | Home Repair | |||
Info on latex paint | Woodworking |