New antifoul discovery - 100% effective AND green

[brian eiland]

...courtesy of Sail World

A spectacular new study has shown there to be a natural fungus that, when added to hull paint, may completely solve the barnacle problem on the hulls of boats in the future.

The microscopic fungus called 'streptomyces avermitilis' lives in the ocean and is extremely poisonous to acorn barnacles and other crustaceans. When an extract from this fungus is added to paint for the hulls of vessels, the surface remains entirely free from barnacles. This has been recently demonstrated in a study from Göteborg University in Sweden.

'The fungus affects the nervous system of barnacles, and you only need a tiny amount of fungal extract to have an effect,' Hans Elwing, Professor at the Department of Cell and Molecular Biology at Göteborg University, announced yesterday.

Growths on the hulls of all vessels increase friction, which slows the vessel, requiring more wind power or a higher fuel consumption - which in turn causes more emissions.

At Göteborg University there have been several research projects conducted attempting to create environmentally friendly paints which prevent organisms from attaching to surfaces.

The discovery of how this microscopic fungus affects barnacles was made by a research team specializing in surface biophysics. As little as a 0.1 percent mixture of pure fungal extract in paint is sufficient to prevent any growth of acorn barnacles. Traditionally effective anti-foul paints have been problematic for the environment since the poison in the paint dissolves and spreads into the water.


Professor Hans Elwing - .. .
'A sensational finding is that the fungal extract is toxic only as long as the paint is on a painted surface. When the paint is dissolved in sea water, the activation of the poison appears not to take place, making the paint apparently harmless to organisms in the open sea,' says Hans Elwing.

The scientists are basing their work on a theory that the fungal extract makes the paint imitate the fungus's natural and environmentally friendly defense against being eaten. Hans Elwing also believes that many other organisms in the sea have developed this type of environmentally friendly protection.

'The discovery that this fungal extract counteracts the growth of barnacles will probably create quite a stir around the world. No naturally occurring substance has previously been shown to have such a dramatic effect on barnacles in combination with being so easily degradable in the environment and probably completely safe for humans,' says Hans Elwing.

Hans Elwing's research team has joined up with SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden in Borås and Stockholm to develop their ideas. It is hoped that innovations in nanotechnology will facilitate the creation of new anti-fouling paints for boats.

[PAR]

My ex-wife apparently washed her hair in a similar concoction . . .

[brian eiland]

My ex-wife apparently washed her hair in a similar concoction . . .
LOL :D :D :D :D :D

[DLM84]

This could be quite usefull to us in Missouri. Zebra clams (A invader species) are moving in and taking over the lakes and streams. They are apparently killing off traditional food sources and thus having an impact on our game species, and thus the problem.
The problem is so severe that they Missouri conservation dept. has begun imposing VERY stiff fines for any vessel put into any public body of water with Zebra clams on the boat.

[Boston]

Zebra clams are fresh water and streptomyces is salt, wouldnt work, but
there might be another fungus that would
great post Brian
those guys are going to make a killing soon as it hits the market
speaking of which
whens it due on the market ?
any ideas
B

[mark775]

"'A sensational finding is that the fungal extract is toxic only as long as the paint is on a painted surface. When the paint is dissolved in sea water, the activation of the poison appears not to take place, making the paint apparently harmless to organisms in the open sea,' says Hans Elwing."
...Or, they really want to market this stuff and designed tests to show how it is harmless. Diluted in enough seawater, anything is non-toxic. Sorry to be a sceptic but I have seen enough fantastic claims for various bottom paint concoctions that just don't proof as advertized that I will wait and see on this one.
And the moss - or is it just barnacles?
In a world where an abundant naturally occuring gas is deemed dangerous enough that we will sacrifice the Western world's economy on the chance that we may be adding some small percentage to the equation and should drag ourselves down to a third-world level so they can use their fair share, I can see future problems with ANY bottom paint that has a substance disageeable to some organism.

[Boston]

its not the naturally occurring part thats the problem
its the human mined and released fossil co2 that is the problem
thing to remember is that 95/100 fish over 1 foot long has been removed from the ocean and 80% of the coral in the Bahamas is dead 50% in the Atlantic not to mention the Culpera weed smothering the Mediterranean or any of the other human caused factors.
we are having a significant impact
and in the vast majority of cases its negative
so
every little bit helps
bottom paint included

best
B

[mark775]

I wonder if there have been studies to compare the net pollutions of using E-paint or or other stuff that doesn't work (for me) and burning more fuel because of it vs. using the good stuff with lots of heavy metal that actually keeps the bottom clean (Also, home heating oil vs. low-sulphur diesel with fewer BTUs, etc.).
Don't get me wrong, I like the ocean clean, just like the next guy - I'm just sceptical and don't like freedom reducing regulations (all) unless the benefit is damn well demonstrable and verifiable.
I won't go far on a tangent of trying to verify "95 of 100" and other such sensationalisms that are impossible to prove but I will say that at half a century of age with over 7,000 days at sea, I see it a much cleaner place than it used to be (mostly through peer pressure and education) and the finfish in my area are much bigger and more abundant than they were in the seventies and eighties (though crab and shrimp are down due to environmental factors including warm water - like the Bahamas and their reefs).

[Boston]

you might want to watch this

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/-ZkwewR69w8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/-ZkwewR69w8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[brian eiland]

Interesting video Boston. I felt it deserved to head up a subject thread of its own:
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/open-discussion/our-oceans-under-attack-27446.html#post275091

[Petros]

just because it is "natural", or occurs in nature, does not mean it is not highly toxic, or not harmful. Everything we have and are made of, came out of the ground, and back to the ground it will go eventually. So all of it is "natural", not all of it is beneficial.

[Boston]

an interesting philosophical argument
you are right but its a mater of semantics
define natural

thing is that the toxin is not produced once the organism is free of the surrounding paint
so the natural cycle of the toxic response of the organism is being used to turn off the effect

Im sure a study will be done on the concentration of the toxin and its duration in the environment

B

[Zed]

I'm told that constantly filtering air over the hull surface keeps it quite clean. Like a fish tank aerator, requires power or say wave action to drive a pump. It maybe more helpful for commercial vessels that are in constant use than for private, I guess that depends on the % of time that the flow is required to keep things clean. Anyway there is supposed to be a patent under way and some commercialization of the process happening, probably for shipping I'd guess. Watch this space?

[philSweet]

I used to work at a fiberglass shop that kept a couple gallons of bottom paint on hand for small repairs. we sold the stuff by the ounce. About ten times a year someone would ask me "Why don't they make bottom paint out of coconuts, they can float around for years and nothing grows on them." I always figured I'd stumble across the answer; but I never have. Anyone have any info on this maritime legend?

[Lt. Holden]

philsweet,

This is totally off the wall but I knew someone with the same name when I was a kid. Did you live in Miami (more specifically Perrine)? Were you a Boy Scout?
John, Troop 39, later Troop 206? I think.

[philSweet]

Boy scout -yes. Not from Miami though. Grew up North of the Mason-Dixon. There aren't too many Sweets, except I stumbled across an entire town full in Michigan many years ago. The only other Phil Sweet I've heard of also lives here in Monroe county Fl. The local library gets us confused sometimes.

[Boatpride]

The Swedish have been the first country to put a ban on certain toxins in antifouls. The research sounds great and clearly of benefit to the oceans.

Fascinating that the toxin deactivates upon leaving the paint. Now let's see what the take up from the anti foul industry is....

[yipster]

ultrasonic antifouling from www.shipsonic.com/english.html may be dutch but sounds toooo good to be true, any thoughts or experience here ?

[yipster]

before youall ask, here their cut and pasted FAQ's list:
=========================================================


SHIPSONIC ULTRASONIC - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS


Why haven't I heard of the Ultrasonic antifouling system before if it has over 100 installations and is so good?
This new shipsonic antifouling system has been in development and testing for the past three years. Only now, when we are certain that we can prove our claims, have we decided to fully market the product more widely. We are now fully confident in the effectiveness of the system which enables us to fully guarantee the system for two years.


I understand there has been an analogue version available in the past, but this is digital. Why is digital better than analogue?
There has been an analogue version of this technology which has been half-heartedly introduced to the marine market historically. It is very different to the new Ultrasonic Antifouling system that we are introducing. With the new Ultrasonic Antifouling system, we provide the very latest digital technology, which has a multitude of benefits. The main differences are:

? Analogue uses up to 40% more power than digital and when power is at such a premium in the boating world, this is a big issue.

? This system can use an increased number of different frequencies together, which means it can destroy more strains of algae. Algae develop in slightly different ways, so bombarding them with several frequencies will have a much greater effect than using fewer frequencies.

? Digital produces a much clearer ultrasonic sound wave and has a much greater scale of frequency possibilities.


What happens when technology advances? Will I have to replace my system with a more up-to-date version?
The very best thing about our Ultrasonic Antifouling system is that it is programmable. When the first GPSs were launched, they had 2 channel receivers and now multi channels are the norm. As the Ultrasonic Antifouling technology advances, you will be able to simply replace a chip at a nominal postage cost and continue to benefit from the most up to date system, without buying a new one every few years


I have heard about such a system many years ago. What happened to that?
There have been many attempts over the years to achieve the "Holy Grail" of keeping boat hulls free from weed, algae, barnacles and other forms of growth. Each of these has had their problems and indeed many have simply not worked. Even those which have had some success have other drawbacks eg. The need for multiple and complex resonator set-ups, intrusive and expensive adaptations to the hull. The Ultrasonic antifouling system inventors have fully investigated each of these problems in turn and have arrived at a system which is simple to install, needs no invasive attachments and works from the minute you switch it on.


Can I install the unit myself?
The system is simple to install and full instructions are given. If you have any doubts about your ability to carry out the installation contact us and we will try to advise you about installers.


My boat has a skeg hung rudder. Will it keep this clear of fouling?
Yes the Ultrasonic antifouling system has been tested on boats with skeg hung rudders and found to be fully effective but positioning of the resonator is very important.


My boat has a complex prop arrangement. Will it keep this clear of fouling?
Yes. However it is advisable to clean these prior to setting up the Ultrasonic antifouling system system which should keep them free of weed from then on. The positioning of the resonator is very important.


I have a ferro-cement boat with a hull thickness of 1 inch. Will the Ultrasonic system work on this hull?
Yes but the effect will be reduced compared to that of a GRP boat of equivalent size. The system works best on hull thicknesses up to 35mm. The thicker the hull the greater the resistance and there will be an attenuation of the ultrasound so this should be borne in mind. It is possible to have a more specifically designed unit if your hull is particularly thick.


I have a bilge-keel yacht. Will the Ultrasonic antifouling system keep both fins clear of fouling?
Yes. the Ultra System has been tested on bilge keeled boats and found to be effective. You should be aware that the keels may cause a "shadowing" effect which could reduce the effectiveness slightly on the outside of the keels. In such cases we may recommend that extra resonator rings are fitted so that the resonator can be moved periodically so that the whole hull is exposed to the ultrasound over time.


What is the life expectancy of the system?
The control unit is fully sealed and the resonator is encapsulated to ensure a long life. Only such things a chafing of cables or poor installation would prevent the system from operating fully effectively for many years. We confidently and fully guarantee the system for two years from the date of purchase.


Does the system require any maintenance?
There is no actual maintenance required for the operational life of the system. It would be prudent to make periodic checks on cables and connectors to make sure that no chafing or corroding has taken place. It is also a good idea to check the resonator for tightness from time to time.


My boat is in a mud-berth will Shipsonic be effective here?
No! The Ultrasonic antifouling system will keep clear only that part of the hull which is immersed in water. The part that sinks into the mud will attract weed in the usual way since the ultrasound will not penetrate the mud.


I understand that the system works best when powered from a marina mains electrical system. My boat is on a swinging mooring. Will it work for me?
The Ultrasonic antifouling system is totally effective whether it is powered by AC or DC. The unit uses very little power and will operate in exactly the same way. The units are available in 12volt, 24volt and 220 - 240volt.


If I buy a larger boat can I transfer the system to my new boat?
The resonator ring which attaches to the inside of the hull is fixed with strong epoxy and not easy to remove. New rings are available from us and you can simply fit new rings to your new boat and transfer the rest of the system to your new boat. Remember that for a larger boat of over 10 metres you will need further resonators.


I have a motor boat with a deep displacement hull. Will the Ultrasonic antifouling system work for me?
Yes provided that you choose the correct model for your boat it will be completely effective.


What effect will the Ultrasonic antifouling system have on my fuel consumption?
A clean hull will have a dramatic effect on the speed and smoothness through the water and will improve fuel consumption considerably. Consumption usually increases dramatically during the season as weed and algae accumulate on conventional anti fouled surfaces. Speed is also affected. This is prevented by your Ultrasonic antifouling system therefore you should save considerable sums on fuel alone and your boat speed should be increased.


I have a racing yacht without engine or electrics can I still use the Ultrasonic System
The Ultrasonic antifouling system keeps the hull free from growth it is ideal for a racing yacht. You will, however, need to fit batteries. We recommend that the system operates on a 12 or 24 volt system. You may wish to consider the optional solar source to keep the battery topped up,


I have a centre-board yacht will it be effective on this?
Yes, the Ultrasonic antifouling system will work on centre board boats and should keep the board aperture free from barnacles and weed.


How long does installation take?
Fitting should be carried out over two days. The system unit and the hull rings should be fitted on day-one. The epoxy should be left for one day to set. The resonators can be fitted the next day. The total time taken should not be more than a few hours.


How quickly will I see an effect after installation?
This will depend on a number of factors. If the boat is in the water and heavily polluted when the system is installed the algae and barnacles will begin to die off after only a few days. They will only be shrugged off by passage through the water. If the boat is regularly used then the hull should clean itself in a matter of a few weeks. Ideally though, you should start from a freshly prepared and clean hull for best results.


Does this mean I need never take my boat out of the water?
You will never need to slip your boat for anti fouling purposes. This does not mean that checks for mechanical inspection can be avoided. Annodes need the usual periodic replacements and rudders and running gear require the normal maintenance. The prudent boat owner will make their own choice on these matters.


Is the location of the resonator critical?
Yes, absolutely. In a motor boat, where there is more sterngear to protect, the resonator needs to be as close to this point as possible for best effect. In a sailing yacht the resonator should be sited within a metre of the propshaft and along the centreline of the boat. Full instructions are supplied with the unit.


How many resonators do I need?
For boats up to 10 metres a single resonator will suffice. This means an Shipsonic 10. For boats of 10 to 20 metres you will require two resonators so choose an Shipsonic 20. For boats of over 20 metres please ask us and we will advise advise on particular requirements.


Do internal bulkheads affect the system?
Internal obstructions will not affect the working of the system since the resonance is set up on the outside of the hull and permeates from there.


Will the Ultra System work on stern drive units?
Where there are large hull fittings such as stern drives it is advisable to clean these prior to setting up the Ultra system which should keep them free of weed from then on.


Will it work on my trim tabs?
Yes, trim tabs will be covered by the resonance set up by the Ultra system providing that the transducers are positioned correctly.


Does the unit need to be turned on all the time?
It is preferable to have the unit in operation 24 hours a day. We advise that it operates for a minimum of 6 to 8 hours a day to maintain a clean hull.


Does the system make a noise?
Not that you will hear without your ear very close to the unit. The unit pulses and there are lights to tell you that the unit is on.

======================================================


offcourse there are a few questions left like eigenfreqentie, cost and what not but one can ask

[gonzo]

I first heard of those systems in the mid 80's. They dissappeared and now someone is selling as if they were new. I wonder what happened to the old units and how well they worked.

[yipster]

did not know it was try'd before, just read a reply (http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/open-discussion/emperors-apparel-29960.html#post311961) on your question how good the old sonic cleaners worked, i am more curious to the newer systems tho as it "sounds" good

[dskira]

Again :o

[Boston]

sounds like a great idea
would be nice if someone came along and perfected it

B

[Frosty]

I was talking to a super yacht cheif engineer about this in the bar. He had had experience of it,--it did'nt work he said.

I guess he means it didnt work well enough to continue with its use.

I read also that when it goes wrong it "can" do serious damage.

I would say that alone would make it unsuitable.

[Boston]

hmmmm
if the frequencies formed a resonant feed back it would amplify itself
could definitely result in some real issues
but the basic stereo amplifier uses a harmonic frequency tracking system in order to add amplitude a to amplitude b and end up amplifying the original wave
they could use the same type system in reverse as a kind of safety switch
kinda like sound cancellation but in the ultrasonic range
shouldnt be that expensive although Im sure some fool would charge an arm and a leg for it

sad that it didnt work
I kinda liked the idea

hey looky there
Im about to turn a thousand posts
do I win a burger and beer or anything

[masalai]

Nah, you just become that little bit more cynical :D:D:D

[gerard baladi]

Out of curiosity and some interest, I tried contacting them twice through their website for info and pricing, They did not bother to reply.

[masalai]

As in a microwave, the stuff does not usually bend around corners so is "line of sight" and to deliver a "knock out blow" to all the ships surface, many transducers are needed, the high frequency stuff needs to be hung in the water, some distance from the hull and pointed at the hull to kill/discourage the growth where not wanted... Does that mean lots of devices hanging in the water working around the hull to be effective? and how do you achieve this? - at least it will not be needed whilst in motion as it is usually conceded that they attach when the boat is stationery (tied up at a berth or anchored) in the water... - - For my boat, I think I will use copper, antifoul-paint and a 'gurney' to waterblast the marine growth off every-so-often...:D:D:D

[Boston]

I really like the idea though, these guys may not have been able to make it work but it seems like eventually someone will. These things work well enough although adapting one to a boat might be a trick.

http://www.allproducts.com/manufacture9/joywinner/jwp-311.html

this article covers a wide range of such devices and how they work

http://www.pestproducts.com/electronicpestcontrol.htm

on the other hand there is this I found that makes a good case for it not working at all

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/403/do-ultrasonic-bug-repellers-work

Im thinking of something not in the ultrasonic range when I say a resonant frequency, not sure what but not that high in range. Maybe something even significantly lower thats just enough to rattle a potential home enough to discourage plants and insects from wanting to stay
seems like it should work, even if it hasnt so far.

[Dave Gudeman]

Ultrasonic sound, magnetism, ionization, pyramids ... these are the magic potions, the charms, and the snake oil of the modern world -- the tools of the charlatans. People today "invent" cures and protections from these elements today relying on the same sort of magical thinking as the people who invented voodoo dolls and love potions in the past. The human race as a whole may have acquired great knowledge over the last few centuries, but the human animal has changed not at all.

I can't say for certain that this particular sonic application is a fraud, but it deserves considerable skepticism. Ask how it is that sound from these devices is so much more deadly than all of the sound that barnacles are exposed to in the natural environment. Ask how it is that this sound is only destructive to the things we want destroyed and not to the things that we want left intact. Ask for the test results from an independent laboratory, and preferably the test should be double-blind to reduce the tendency for a laboratory to find results that its employer would like it to find.

I was going to write more, but it's late and my horoscope says that I have a big day tomorrow so I'd better sign off.

[Boston]

imagine yourself out for the evening with just the perfectly wrong girl on your arm and your looking for a nice place to stop and get a bite. you stop in front of a place and then you notice the music, its awful, some punk band with that screaming distorted grunge sound, you move on; eventually finding just the right spot with something easy playing inthe background.

[capt vimes]

thats not how it works... but only the way we humans tend to look at things...

we know that crustaceans have some sort of audio senses - small hairs along different parts of their body - but it is not quite clear in what frequenciy-range these senses are working or to what accuracy... to my knowledge the scientific research on this is very limited not being of any interest to anybody...

but that supersonic stuff is actually only focusing on barnacles - what with all the other stuff which likes to get a trip on a ships hull as well?
weed, sponges, algae etc - those creatures and plants do really have no sense for audio signals at all, do they?

[Boston]

thats funny
no thats not how it works but it was a fun analogy
earlier today I had a chance to talk to a physicist friend of mine with the DOD and this subject came up. She works with radar so she's got a pretty good grip on the subject. essentially it would require identifying each effective wave form that most adversely effects each particular animal. Its a complex problem but eventually someone with solve it and make a killing.

[masalai]

Literally of otherwise:?: Gee Boston I thought your story had a good start there and I was looking forward to the titilating bits so where did you go to get a "bite" - your place or hers?:D:D:D

I was thinking more like being zapped in a microwave and becoming slime soup - just gently cooked and detached from that inedible piece of fibreglass, followed by an entrée of something like "Kirkpatrick barnacles" for the excited fish looking for a fast food takeaway from the "copper-bottom" restaurant near the marina... - main course is of course to avoid the shark looking for some fine foods...

Actually I have been on the lookout for some "cat recipes" and "live-cat-in-a-microwave" could gain some support until RSPCA found out - all in the name of removing the wild population of this undesirable and introduced species that is DEVASTATING the natural wildlife of Australia - frickin-doo-gooders should bugger-orf so good Australians can give the small native animals a chance of survival by killing the wild introduced cats....

[yipster]

lots of wise sceptiscism eh? and strange there was no e-mail reply
when i pass one of their, respectable, outlets i will ask what state of art its in

[SamSam]

I don't know what other unintended critters might be affected by ultra sonic noise, but dogs and dogfish might not like it.

[Boston]

a gentleman never kisses and tells Mass
although

[Dave Gudeman]

It would be great if various pest species reacted to various frequencies by avoiding them. But it should make you suspicious that this behavior is completely unknown by biologists who spend their lives studying these creatures in agonizingly minute detail, and was luckily discovered by some random guy who, even though he has made this startling discovery, can't get any major corporation to pick up the technology to develop and sell it for him.

Until this behavior is documented by independent researchers it is best to be skeptical of such claims by people who want to sell you something.

[capt vimes]

incidentially now that i recall - biologists actually found out years ago how to ATTRACT reef-building species to a metal construction...

apply a weak DC-current to it....
what was the technology in one of the other green-antifouling-threads here again? ;)

[Frosty]

Its not that they cant ,--its that they dont want to and why should they, the anti fouling industry keeps people employed and of course tax is paid on every gallon.

Im sure they can keep nasties off your boat if they wanted to.

And this bit about it killing marine life is bull. We still use cuprious oxide and TBT, we actually buy it and mix more in.

The fish in the marina are thriving, theres more fish in here than outside. we have to chase fishing boats out nightly,--and I eat mussels of the pilings.

[masalai]

What:?: with all that cat **** and piss about? or did the cat get sold as rabbit to that corner discount eatery?

[Boston]

the use of sonic deterrents by military, police and private security agancies is pretty clearly documented. The devices are developed and in use today. Its just a mater of time before someone does actually get it right for an anti-fouling agent. Yes there may be a bunch of quacks involved at the moment but that doesnt mean much. Hell they laughed at the guy who invented toilet paper, not only that but also the guy who invented the toilet

[Frosty]

What:?: with all that cat **** and piss about? or did the cat get sold as rabbit to that corner discount eatery?

A cat is a very small animal and besides they have all gone missing.

A whale on the other hand is a very big animal much bigger than a cat infact a cat could get lodged in the whales teeth without injury.

A whales feaces is enormous, dumping a ton per day and in statistical terms is not to be sniffed at.

[masalai]

How foul - No wonder we need more anti-foul agents - does it work on "poultry" type foul?

[Frosty]

Its just a mater of time before someone does actually get it right for an anti-fouling agent.

Yes we will have to wait, they have only been trying 400 years.

The Shuttle nearly melts when entering the atmosphere from a space mission and they managed to get round that problem easy.

Stopping barnacles from attaching themselves to a boat Hmmm (rubs chin) now thats a bit difficult.

[Boston]

if they can find a way to capture anti-mater
they can find a way to make a barnacle go away

[Dave Gudeman]

the use of sonic deterrents by military, police and private security agancies is pretty clearly documented. The devices are developed and in use today. Its just a mater of time before someone does actually get it right for an anti-fouling agent.

The conclusion is not supported by the premise. Just because some creatures (such as humans) show avoidance reactions to certain sounds does not suggest that all creatures do. And if they do, it might be only for sounds that are so loud that they cost too much in energy to be practical or that they cause structural damage or that the intensity level becomes painful for people.

Yes there may be a bunch of quacks involved at the moment but that doesnt mean much. Hell they laughed at the guy who invented toilet paper, not only that but also the guy who invented the toilet

I doubt that either is true. In my experience, unsourced anecdotes about inventors who suffered scorn and ridicule from their peers and then were vindicated by history are mostly either exaggerated or entirely fabricated. Especially when those unsourced anecdotes come from someone who believes in decades-long conspiracies of corporate heavies, government agents and hundreds of university academics.

[masalai]

guy who invented the toilet - - some Greek or Indian about 5000 years ago... - - 3250BC in the Indus Valley Civilisation (The origins of the Tamil Civilisation)... Prof Mathivanan...)

[Boston]

I doubt that either is true. In my experience, unsourced anecdotes about inventors who suffered scorn and ridicule from their peers and then were vindicated by history are mostly either exaggerated or entirely fabricated. Especially when those unsourced anecdotes come from someone who believes in decades-long conspiracies of corporate heavies, government agents and hundreds of university academics.

a brief history of crap ( with references )

In his book The Culture of the Abdomen published in 1924, Dr William Welles quoted leading medical authorities of the time who were very outspoken about the toilet's faulty design and ensuing health consequences.

This was what he wrote: "It would have been better if the contraption had killed its inventor before he launched it under humanity's buttocks."

Constipation, hernias, varicose veins, haemorrhoids and appendicitis were also attributed to the use of the toilet.

A solution to the dilemma was offered in the form of a footstool used to elevate the feet to the approximate squatting posture. At one point, the footstool was so popular it was being sold at Harrod's of London.

Sources:

1) Ross Horne, 'History of The Pedestal Toilet'

2) William Welles, DC, 'The Importance of Squatting', Natural Health Society Journal, Penrith NSW


now must I really go and detail the historical acceptance or lack thereof of moving the "outhouse" indoors

come from someone who believes in decades-long conspiracies of corporate heavies, government agents and hundreds of university academics.

if anyone's interested in unsupported undocumented fabrications please read the above quote

[Dave Gudeman]

That does not support your statement. The person who invented the toilet was long dead and no longer around to be scorned and ridiculed in 1924. Furthermore, we don't know what these "leading medical authorities" actually said or exactly what they were criticizing. All you have given us is a second-hand account of some doctor who once (long after the toilet was accepted technology) worried about the health effects of the toilet and made some inflammatory remarks aimed at the anonymous inventor.

If the only think you meant by your remarks was to pick out two random technologies and say that someone at some time has criticized that technology, then this can hardly be disputed (or interesting). There is no human practice at all that someone at some time has not criticized.

if anyone's interested in unsupported undocumented fabrications please read the above quote

You are right. I was confusing you with Mr. Frosty. I apologize for the error.

[Frosty]

David ,--can I suggest that when you say "you' then it becomes open. No one knows for sure who you mean. It is better if you use the quote facility then we know what you are talking about.

Your input is valued and accuracy is all important as you seem to be upset at others inaccuracy.

This forum is basically a bunch of boating guys, some threads are tongue in cheek, im sure that soon you will recognize them as what they are.

Some member demand staunch faced accuracy in the briefest possible form. You will soon recognize those too after a while.

However you look at it no one here should be stood against the wall for inaccuracies as you seem to expect.

A little clue would have been that the conversation was about a toilet.

[Dave Gudeman]

Sorry, Frosty, I'm not usually humor-impaired, but I don't know you and there are a number of people on this forum who seem to be serious cranks.

I don't, by the way, automatically classify someone who has hopes for untra-sonic pest control as a crank. The evidence is against it, but the idea is not as outlandish as, for example, perpetual motion.

I do, however, have something of a pet peeve about cranks making up stories about historic geniuses being scorned. The implication, of course, is that the crank in question is a new Edison or Einstein. It is not only the casualness with truth that annoys me, it is the hubris.

The only person I've ever known in that category is myself.

[troy2000]

As a hardcore gun owner and collector, I used to believe gun forums were populated by the most opinionated and stubborn people on the internet. But I'd have to say I owe them an apology. Since I started wandering around this place, I've decided gun nuts are just amateurs....for really hardheaded and opinionated people, you just can't beat boat owners, designers and builders.:D

I'm not complaining; I happen to enjoy the give-and-take I've found all over boatdesign.net. It's an incredible learning experience. As someone else commented, sometimes I feel like I'm under the table, listening to the grownups talk.

[Boston]

Dave your going to be sorely disappointed if your expecting folks to be all that serious all the time in this thing.

one thing you had no way of knowing is that your talking to the inventor of "teem" toilet paper

ya go ahead and just picture that for a minute

maybe while you go check on the sources previously mentioned ( my most humble apologies if they were not up to standard as "first" sources )

what team toilet paper is was an attempt to get the various football leagues to authorize there logos for use on toilet paper.
that way you could throw it at the game when your team won or scored or whatever or wipe your ass with your favorite team
whatever suet's your fancy I guess just as long as you paid a premium for it is all I cared about
can you imagine what the Superbowl would look like if they sold that stuff at the games
the foot ball leagues refused to authorize it ( at least for me ) saying it would be thrown at the field of play
bought ten years after that and someone payed them enough to convince them otherwise. Although they dont allow the stuff in the stadium.
one more good idea down the drain so to speak

thing is I got a pretty good grip on history and in this country at least things like sears roebuck catalog were the accepted norm in TP for so long the idea of buying paper specifically and only to throw away was not all that well accepted at first.

if you want each and every little thing documented
go to the global warming page and be prepared to loose your mind
and be continually ridiculed and randomly insulted for exposing the agnotism
now thats a travesty of misinformation and industry lies if there ever was one
oh by the way
they have some industry reps over there that will fill you so full of **** your eyeballs will be floating
enjoy
if your on the side of reason science and sanity your in for a treat
if your on the side of the energy industry your going to be singing Kumbaya in no time
either way the level of documentation, presentations of detrended graphs as being visual representatives without noting there detrended nature, use of industry generated phony science and endless quotes from industry Pr firm publications. should amuse you no end.
I sertainly got a good laugh out of it.

[masalai]

Hey Boston you forgot "Global economics... WTF, and you also pass judgement there and not a word of promotion, go stand in the corner and sing 3 verses (UNDER YOUR BREATH) of Kumbaya in ancient Latin... :D:D:D:D

Who changed the topic to toilets? - I have a little "porta-potti" for sale.... - just slightly used...

Apart from picking my nose and complaining about your spelling and failure to promote the "best" threads, a nice and welcoming post - pat yourself on the back Boston:D:D:D:D

See I did say the tone and mood has changed to one that is more conciliatory and open to others views... and I maintain that I was correct (for a change)

[Boston]

sorry I was on the "crapper"

change the subject
nah
we were after all talking about anti-foul weren't we

besides Im pretty sure some folks in here are clearly doing there thinkin while firmly planted on the Lou anyway

the invention thats just waiting to hit the market is the black water holding tank breeder gas production anti-fouling bubble release system. ( just thought of it actually ) takes a methane producing bacteria and seeds the holding tank with it then has a preasure release valve that bubbles excess gas under the hull, my bet is that pelagic barnacles dont like methane

what do you think
should I move the idea over to the economics page and see about promotin it round the world

ps
something tells me we would have the bar tender laughing her ass off should we ever actually meet up for a few pints

[masalai]

seems like a good idea...

[Frosty]

Teflon-- the non stick coating that frying pans use!!! its not my idea its been tried put they cant make a paint apparently.

I understand teflon has to be applied with some heat treatment involved, hardly suitable then!!

Copper bot- copper coat what ever they call it now after numerous bankruptcies and name swops still remains the best from my experience of seeing all kinds of anti fouling in a marina environment.

Trouble is in my opinion it is basically copper powder mixed into an epoxy binder/ carrier. This brings a new meaning to hard anti foul.

Personally I use an ablative over a hard and of different colours, a tip I was given by hardy sailors and it is a wonderful idea.

A couple of coats of hard red followed by ablative black. The just top up the black. I also add about 5% of TBT into the paint as well. if you go more than 10% it gets glutinous and the roller wont roll it just slides until it gets tacky and then you dont get a good finish, so 5% is tops

This is of course on top of a good multi layer series of appropriate primers of the manufacturer of you choice. All are good as long as you stick to one manufacture all the way. Hempel Jotun etc etc.

Booked to haul in a Thailand ship yard mid January, 2,5 year since last haul.

[brian eiland]

Out of curiosity and some interest, I tried contacting them twice through their website for info and pricing, They did not bother to reply.
Here is one promoter who did reply to a request to explain their anti-fouling product:
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/barnacle-prevention-30066.html#post313704

[pamarine]

Teflon-- the non stick coating that frying pans use!!! its not my idea its been tried put they cant make a paint apparently.

I understand teflon has to be applied with some heat treatment involved, hardly suitable then!!

Copper bot- copper coat what ever they call it now after numerous bankruptcies and name swops still remains the best from my experience of seeing all kinds of anti fouling in a marina environment.

Trouble is in my opinion it is basically copper powder mixed into an epoxy binder/ carrier. This brings a new meaning to hard anti foul.

Personally I use an ablative over a hard and of different colours, a tip I was given by hardy sailors and it is a wonderful idea.

A couple of coats of hard red followed by ablative black. The just top up the black. I also add about 5% of TBT into the paint as well. if you go more than 10% it gets glutinous and the roller wont roll it just slides until it gets tacky and then you dont get a good finish, so 5% is tops

This is of course on top of a good multi layer series of appropriate primers of the manufacturer of you choice. All are good as long as you stick to one manufacture all the way. Hempel Jotun etc etc.

Booked to haul in a Thailand ship yard mid January, 2,5 year since last haul.

Interlux makes a couple of PTFE coatings.

TBT is illegal in several countries, and will probably continue to show up in new-clean water laws elsewhere. So while it is a better anti-foul than copper, for many of us it's not an option.

[Boston]

and yet were told its completely safe to cook on?

thats perfect

B

[pamarine]

and yet were told its completely safe to cook on?

thats perfect

B

Um, not sure I know anybody that has ever made TBT Cookware.

[Boston]

maybe I missed the abbreviation, Mass was talking Teflon

[FAST FRED]

Back in the 70's ther was a product from BF Goodrich called No Foul.

It was like 3/16 or 1/4 inch scuba divers wet suit material , epoxied to the hull.

10 Year guarentee , only problem was the active material was Mercury, and the tree eaters didn't like that very much.

I believe it still exists , for submarines , guess the Navy's of the world would rather stay alive than not.

FF

[boat fan]

sorry I was on the "crapper"

change the subject
nah
we were after all talking about anti-foul weren't we

besides Im pretty sure some folks in here are clearly doing there thinkin while firmly planted on the Lou anyway

the invention thats just waiting to hit the market is the black water holding tank breeder gas production anti-fouling bubble release system. ( just thought of it actually ) takes a methane producing bacteria and seeds the holding tank with it then has a preasure release valve that bubbles excess gas under the hull, my bet is that pelagic barnacles dont like methane

what do you think
should I move the idea over to the economics page and see about promotin it round the world

ps
something tells me we would have the bar tender laughing her ass off should we ever actually meet up for a few pints


Damn.....I`ve just crapped myself laughing.......:D Have some crappy points Boston :D

[masalai]

My black water tank has that capacity, but production is so small I cannot even sustain a small pilot light to burn off the smell:D:o - - - but had ti install an anti-flash-back-device, as tank explosion is not a pleasant event...

[brian eiland]

Back in the 70's ther was a product from BF Goodrich called No Foul.

It was like 3/16 or 1/4 inch scuba divers wet suit material , epoxied to the hull.

10 Year guarentee , only problem was the active material was Mercury, and the tree eaters didn't like that very much.

I believe it still exists , for submarines , guess the Navy's of the world would rather stay alive than not.

FF
Actually that material No-Foul was developed for use on the submarine sonar domes, and as such metal based antifoulatants were discouraged. It was the organic TBTF (antifouling agent, tributyltin fluoride) (http://www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/tributyltin.fluoride.abstra.htm) agent that was impregnated into the elastic rubber material. It worked.

Hey Fred, I just discovered we had this discussion before:
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/propulsion/new-propulsion-sytems-ships-9630-19.html#post127133
Maybe some of those impregnated materials were metallic...sure would surprise me.

[boat fan]

Kevlar Scatter Cage Mas........

[hoytedow]

Actually that material No-Foul was developed for use on the submarine sonar domes, and as such metal based antifoulatants were discouraged. It was the organic TBTF (antifouling agent, tributyltin fluoride) (http://www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/tributyltin.fluoride.abstra.htm) agent that was impregnated into the elastic rubber material. It worked.Even that doesn't protect it from cookie-cutter sharks, which have a nasty habit of attacking the leading end of anything they might find delectable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cookiecutter_shark

[jonr]

What happened to arc sprayed copper or zinc? Supposedly can be applied to anything (doesn't heat the surface significantly) and is fine for the environment.

[brian eiland]

Since the fall of '07, this writer and her husband's boat has been part of a bottom paint study to test the efficacy of the biocide Econea, an eco-friendly product produced by Janssen Pharmaceutica and sold to different paint companies. Three paints were applied to the bottom of our Crealock 37 — one control paint containing 67% copper, one solvent-based test paint and one water-based test paint. After a year, the water-based paint, in our opinion as boat owners, was not only the best among the three, but the best paint we'd ever used. There was zero hard growth on all three — which made them equally 'successful' in the eye of study coordinator Jack Hickey, as that is the study's primary focus — but the water-based paint had very little slime or grass. The other two were mini-ecosystems unto their own

...photos and more of the article here:
http://www.latitude38.com/lectronic/lectronicday.lasso?date=2010-12-10&dayid=515#Story4

[Boston]

thats pretty slick Brian

thanks

[FAST FRED]

"They dissappeared and now someone is selling as if they were new. I wonder what happened to the old units and how well they worked.",
__________________


About as well as magnets stuck on the fuel line , to kill alge and get 45% better fuel mileage.

FF

[michael pierzga]

Imagine introducing BIOCIDE into the ecosystem !..Heavy metals are bad enough...what was the Biocide ? Top secret.

[sdowney717]

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/news/news/2045/

medetomidine causes barnacles to get hyperactive and they dont attach to the surface.

[sdowney717]

currently, I am testing this substance.
So far all it has grown is slime and some algae
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5204/5258245276_d41a0128a4_b.jpg

[cthippo]

Without control data the results don't mean much

[Boston]

ya I think a number of products would need to be treated side by side as well as a number of subjects left untreated in order for the results to be evaluated properly.

that said if this product really did keep those surfaces clear of appreciable growth since 1993 or aprox 16 years then you really have something there

or am I misunderstanding something here

anyway cheers and thanks for the info
I'd be interested in a greener better form of antifouling as would most people

[sdowney717]

It looks like they ran that test for 3 years.

I actually coated the whole boat bottom with several coats of sani-tred permaflex as a sealer and later heard about the possible anti foul.
So in it went. Within a week it grew that slippery slime layer with some green algae (on the stern exhaust port close to water line, perhaps that gets more sunlight) a few weeks later later, but no barnacles yet. If I rub my hand across the underwater surface, the slime comes off easily.
Permaflex is a hard glossy rubber surface that when wet feels like an extremely slick oiled surface. It also is pretty strong when layered on thick.
It would be very nice to find out it works, since if it works, it is a permanent solution, never needing to be recoated.

they had uncoated controls that they say grew 2 inch thick encrustations.

I will definitely keep this updated over the next year.
Boat is in Hampton VA in the Chesapeake bay near Langley AFB.

[sdowney717]

Here is what it looked like with 2 coats
The boat is totally dry, no sea water comes in and the hull is totally sealed on the inside as well as outside. It was a total rebuild with many new frames, screws and each frame and plank piece I individually coated before assembly with permaflex.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/32/45405402_8db397e433_b.jpg

[bulk-head]

Tell us how the paint holds up and be careful with how you block your boat up. . Looks to be too much weight on the center block.

[Boston]

ya that keel looks like it needs some work to
sprung looking to my eye from way over here
whats up with that
did that open up as it dried out or was it like that when you pulled her out

[sdowney717]

that was midway thru the process. When it finally went in it was completely sealed.
Yeah the blocking I did not like a lot, should have been 4 blocks under the keel.
but it worked out ok. It sat there for 4 years like that as I worked on the hull.

Keel was tight when pulled out but over the years dried out and the wood shrank.
Before I sealed up those cracks, I tightened up the keel bolts which are bronze. These large bronze bolts run from the inner keel all the way
to the bottom of the outer keel.

Going in and having it float with no leaks was a great feeling.

[BigCat]

Streptomyces avermitilis is not a fungus!

[rwatson]

true - they are bacteria

Domain: Bacteria
Phylum: Actinobacteria
Margulis
Class: Actinobacteria

Roughly 550 species of Streptomyces are recognized at present

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streptomyces


How they use it in this product is unclear, but the bacteria produce spores, (like Fungi do), so maybe this is why the concept of Fungi found its way into the discussion. Perhaps the product uses their Metabolites ( poo ) which may be unpleasant for marine growth.

[nikezz]

Here's another technology that mimics the scales of sharks. It utilizes nanotechnology but it has limited success other than for medical purposes. However, the inventors claim that it can be used to create a hull surface that would limit the fungal growth. Link is below.

http://www.sharklet.com/wp-content/themes/sharklet/pdfs/archive/Florida_Trend-Sharkskin_Technology_Inhibits_Germ_Growth.pdf

[brian eiland]

Here's another technology that mimics the scales of sharks. It utilizes nanotechnology but it has limited success other than for medical purposes. However, the inventors claim that it can be used to create a hull surface that would limit the fungal growth. Link is below.

http://www.sharklet.com/wp-content/themes/sharklet/pdfs/archive/Florida_Trend-Sharkskin_Technology_Inhibits_Germ_Growth.pdf

Very interesting...thanks for that submission

[brian eiland]

....from a Trawler forum (http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/trawlers-and-trawlering)

What should be used on "running gear" for best barnacle protection?
Leonard

You want the really stiff paste.
Apply to a thoroughly clean and dry running gear. Lasts ten months to a year
in PNW waters. Likely less in warm water. Cost: $4.
Richard

When I have my bottom painted, I coat the running gear with anhydrous lanolin. It really helps a lot.


Richard, I've just gotta meet you! We too use anhydrous lanolin, and I so seldom hear of anyone else using it that I've felt lonely for so long. We need to start an Anhydrous Lanolin club.

I do run into many folks who claim pretty much the same results that we get with anhydrous lanolin with waterproof teflon grease.

In the hottest weather here in Florida, even when we are farther south, we seem to get around 4+ months without needing to scrape our prop, and thereafter, we need to start scraping it more and more frequently.

Eventually, when I get tired of scraping it, I remove the prop, clean it, reapply the anhydrous lanolin and reinstall it and we're good for another 4+ months.

When I try bottom paint, I seem to seldom get more than this and often less; plus anhydrous lanolin is much simpler to use and kinder on my hands.

This is one reason that I made that inexpensive prop puller that was mentioned a few months ago... even if I couldn't pull the prop myself, having the puller means I could probably find someone around who would be willing to do it for me, since the puller is readily available.

As far as the more costly approaches, for our circumstances, the cost/benefits ratio don't make sense to me, though I hear that if you're willing to spend the money and the time, you can go longer without having to scrape the prop.


Oops, it must have been a typo, doubtful that I'd make a mistake... although don't discount that explanation either.

We usually get 8+ months with anhydrous lanolin, not the 4+ that I stated in my post, though for those who are analytical will realize that that statement isn't really wrong either.

This last year, we got 8 months, scraped 6 weeks later, then again 4 weeks later. Temperatures were dropping and didn't want to get in the water after Nov. 30, so mid-Nov. pulled the prop and recoated it.

Cost for 1 lb of anhydrous lanolin, from a pharmacy, $15-$20, at least it was 5 years ago. 1 lb will last years, but less so for me, since I use it for so much more... grease shackle threads and turnbuckle threads, slather it on spliced eyes before they are served, rub on my hands to soften them up, rub it on the tops of our lifeline stanchions to keep the water out of the end-grain of the wood posts, rub it on tools before I store them away when we are goin' a cruisin' or just to pull it out and smell it, since it smells nifty.

If your hair is recalcitrant, wouldn't be surprised if it could be used to tame it some or at least to form it into some interesting shapes.


If you're willing to pay the freight, PropSpeed works. If you apply it
properly, and keep the prop out of the bottom, it will last, I got over
2 years on one application. The surface must be prepared and the coating
applied exactly as recommended, if not, you'll have disappointing
results. The better the conditions, the longer the application will
last, e.g. dry, no wind, scrupulously clean surface. I made the mistake
of coating in gusty conditions, the prop was covered in grit. The worst
wore off in use, but the surface wasn't as smooth as prior times. I use
it on the main prop and thruster blades. The thruster blades are
composite material, but the coating held up perfectly. No barnacles.
Toward the end, a few attached, but came off easily.

Costs about $250 for application, so it's not cheap.
as always.


I've looked into prop speed but found it too expensive.
I've tried the major marine brand "underwater metal kits", but wasn't
pleased with results for the cost/effort to apply.
I found the best performance (Chesapeake bay) to be spray zinc - either
Pettit ($20/spray can) or Rustoleum cold galvanize ($5/can) - either worked
the same, required 3 cans for twin running gear and lasted a season. But
protect your lungs!

I tried something new the last time I bottom painted. I looked at
propspeed but decided the cost and somewhat tricky application was not
worth it to me. What I have noticed in the past is not that anti foulant
doesn't seem to work on running gear, but that it doesn't stay on the
gear for any length of time, I thought maybe if could "seal" the metals
in some way I could get the anti foulant to stay on and do its job. What
I tried was to paint the gear (including aluminum trim tabs) with a
product called POR 15 (http://www.por15.com/POR-15/productinfo/1GB/) and
then with anti foulant, I used the same ablative paint that went on the
rest of the hull, but I think a hard paint might be a better choice.
After the first summer I had virtually no barnacles an the gear itself,
however the trim tabs were covered in barnacles, so something failed there.
The last time I was under the boat was in September of 2010 and there
were still not too many barnacles on any of the gear, though the rudders
seemed a little worse than the wheels and of course the trim tabs were a
complete mess. I will haul this spring and am very interested in seeing
how much of the POR 15 is still in place, I will recoat with it if I
think its needed and try a hard paint this time, probably Trinidad as I
had good results with it on my last boat.


I have done a similar trick - Polished the wheel really well with angle
grinder and 120 grit, then put on 2 coats of unthickened epoxy (System
Three) followed by my regular bottom paint. This gave me two seasons in
the PNW. Probably not as severe a test as the south, but a satisfactory
result, I think, for up here.

[brian eiland]

Here's another technology that mimics the scales of sharks. It utilizes nanotechnology but it has limited success other than for medical purposes. However, the inventors claim that it can be used to create a hull surface that would limit the fungal growth. Link is below.

http://www.sharklet.com/wp-content/themes/sharklet/pdfs/archive/Florida_Trend-Sharkskin_Technology_Inhibits_Germ_Growth.pdf

Set your DVR! This Wednesday, February 9, Sharklet will be making big news!!

We're excited to be featured on the world-renowned program PBS NOVA as part of a special series called Making Stuff. Hosted by New York Times technology reporter Davide Pogue, Sharklet will be featured among other innovative technologies that are 'Making Stuff: Smarter.' Watch a preview on YouTube! (http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yT_bEth_zSI&feature=youtu.be&a)
Here's what PBS says about Making Stuff: Smarter
"Making Stuff: Smarter" looks at materials that respond to their environments and even learn, such as an airplane wing that changes shape as it flies. Scientists are turning to nature in developing such "smart" stuff. Sharkskin, for instance, has inspired a substance that, when applied in hospitals, could eliminate antibiotic-resistant bacteria. David Pogue visits a scientist who has even created a material that can render objects invisible. "Smarter" concludes with a vision of the ultimate in "life-like" stuff: programmable matter that could create a duplicate of a human being.

We hope you'll tune in to see the program. Visit the PBS website and enter your local ZIP code to view your local listings.

[brian eiland]

I felt there should be a cross-reference here.

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/metal-boat-building/rubberised-paint-steel-decks-36414.html#post437700 (http://http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/metal-boat-building/rubberised-paint-steel-decks-36414.html#post437700)

[brian eiland]

...correction to that link above

http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/metal-boat-building/rubberised-paint-steel-decks-36414.html#post437700

[brian eiland]

....I actually coated the whole boat bottom with several coats of sani-tred permaflex as a sealer and later heard about the possible anti foul.
So in it went. Within a week it grew that slippery slime layer with some green algae (on the stern exhaust port close to water line, perhaps that gets more sunlight) a few weeks later later, but no barnacles yet. If I rub my hand across the underwater surface, the slime comes off easily.
Permaflex is a hard glossy rubber surface that when wet feels like an extremely slick oiled surface. It also is pretty strong when layered on thick.
It would be very nice to find out it works, since if it works, it is a permanent solution, never needing to be recoated.

they had uncoated controls that they say grew 2 inch thick encrustations.

I will definitely keep this updated over the next year.
Boat is in Hampton VA in the Chesapeake bay near Langley AFB.

sdowney....How is your testing coming along so far??

[brian eiland]

Recently ran across this forum discussion....guy is pretty happy with it as a deck sealer on a wooden 55 Chris Conni, but apprehensive about using it on the bottom:
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f55/sani-tred-bottom-job-47243.html

[brian eiland]

http://www.astrayspray.com/our-story/farewell-yes-now-we-have-left-
"We hadn't physically left! We had to re-sandblast the hull and recoat with conventional anti-fouling as the Sani-tred stuff just didnt want to stick!"


http://www.astrayspray.com/the-hull.php
"We used paint from USA, shipped here at great cost - more than the paint itself, but hopefully worth it. We have been told by the company that as long as we apply it to their specifications, they will guarantee the product for the life of the vessel. So we painted it on as specified. The first coat of grey Permaflex was applied in a little over a couple of hours and then when it was touch dry, about 3 hours later, the second coat was applied."


http://www.astrayspray.com/hull-maintenance.php
"OCTOBER 2010
At the end of this month, it will be Astray's 1st birthday from launching. In that time we have had to slip the boat twice because of problems with the paint on the bottom of the hull. Unfortunately the rubber product we bought at great cost from the USA, which was guaranteed to stick and required no anti-fouling, has failed. When we removed it the first time it had extensive growth on the hull and we assumed that it was because of our location, as we were in extremely warm water (up to 40 degrees C at times) which had softened the rubber and allowed the organisms to grow and water to seep between the rubber coating and the hull. We water blasted the hull and the paint peeled off in sheets in most places below the water line but on the keel, in patches, stuck incredibly. The steel underneath was pristine, as if we had just grit blasted it! We contacted the manufacturers and, according to their instructions and specifications, cleaned the hull and recoated. Regretfully after only a few months, it started peeling and did not bond with the previous coating as it should have. Slipped it again with the same result. We have been racking our brains to find a cause, let alone a solution but in the end decided to return to the 'tried and true' method of blasting, and coating. James and Dennis did a great job, it took James 2 days to get all the rubber off! In some places it stuck so well! It was then coated in two layers of primer, a tie coat and then 30 litres of antifoul paint. As you can see in the pictures below, we are now ready to go back into the water and hopefully will not need to slip her for at least another 2 years. Above the water line, no complaints!"


NOTE: I have written the Sani-Tred company an email and asked for an explaintion.

[brian eiland]

Some boat use in Cyprus...photo album

http://www.sanitred-europe.com/photogallery.php?album=12

[brian eiland]

NOTE: I have written the Sani-Tred company an email and asked for an explaintion.
I got an answer, and a pretty complete one at that. Here is what I ask of them:
I'm interested in your product for both general reasons, and likely a specific application I may have in mind. I come from the boating industry, and I have entered in to several forum discussions referencing your product's application. In one instance today I discover a pretty negative experience someone had with your product in an application onto a steel hull vessel. ...posting #94

Can you explain what may have happened here??

Sani-Tred Technician's Reply
I was able to pull up the customer’s info. The web page/blog you referred me to had the name “Kerry & Claudia South Australia” on it so I searched for those names and cross referenced to that location (Australia).

We show one order for Kerry and that is all.

I was able to find the customer’s email address in our records so I searched our previous correspondence. I found several emails from this customer regarding their application and the source of their problem. They stated that they sand blasted the steel, deliberately let it sit for days to form a powdery rust film then began applying the PermaFlex over top of the powdery rust. THAT is precisely why they had delamination issues over the majority of the hull. Sani-Tred products come with application instructions and the customer deliberately chose to NOT follow them. The customer even specifically asked us about the sand blasting and we sent them a step-by-step tutorial. What they did was follow some other written specification from another company that recommends applying over top of a powdery rust film. Our customer did NOT contact us to ask if this is recommended or what would happen if they prepared their substrate in the manor that they chose (which contradicts with the tutorial and application instructions we supplied.

When we explained to the customer what they did wrong and why they are experiencing this delamination they became very upset. They became bitter, slanderous and their blog is in no way accurate.

Based on what their own blog states, and I quote, “We contacted the manufacturers and, according to their instructions and specifications, cleaned the hull and recoated”. They used the words “manufacturers” meaning plural. They were still in contact with the other company that supplied them with the information regarding the method of preparation that caused their problem to begin with (not us)! We can only assume that this other company supplied them with info regarding HOW to reapply. We have absolutely NO correspondence with our customer regarding any ‘reapplication’. Keep in mind that they only placed ONE order and that order was NOT for twice the amount that they originally needed. In their blog they claim that their ‘reapplication’ delaminated as well. We have never received a single complaint, photo, email, letter or any contact regarding a reapplication.

Just for fun I’ll assume that a ‘reapplication’ was performed. Where did they purchase the materials? What materials did they use? How was the reapplication performed? How did they prepare the substrate for the reapplication? I have a theory about that … and keep in mind that this is just a theory based on what I see in their photos. I bet that they sprayed the PermaFlex on the hull for their original application. Notice how the boat was masked in the photos in the blog. They used sheet plastic and it appears to have been sprayed. I do not see any brush or roller marks, I just see overspray

56849

56850

56851


If they sprayed the PermaFlex, it is highly likely that they sprayed ‘airless’. We spray ‘air assist’ and have abandoned spraying airless many years ago. When spraying PermaFlex using most common airless units it is typically necessary to thin the PermaFlex to a very low viscosity or you cannot obtain a spray pattern. When any material is of very low viscosity that material WILL lack vertical cling. In other words the material will be very runny and lose its ability to be applied at the proper rate to a vertical or inverted surface in a single application. Additional coats MUST be applied in order to compensate for the lack of vertical cling. If this is in fact the case then this is another mistake they made during the application and by spraying PermaFlex in this manor it would stand to reason that they would have lots of PermaFlex leftover (by being applied way too thin and not at the proper rate/thickness) in order to have enough material on hand for a reapplication. If they reapplied by spraying it in the same manner as the first time then this could very well explain the problem they had with their alleged ‘reapplication’.

If a customer does not call and ask questions before the application and assumes something other than what the application instructions state to do will work, we cannot assume responsibility for what he does and how the application turns out.

[sdowney717]

just responding to brian on the permaflex and barnacles.

The boat does not weep or leak in any seawater.
The hull is still solid has not cracked, shifted, distorted etc... It is a wooden Egg Harbor 37
And I rebuilt it very well apparently. there has been no delamination of the permaflex.
Always wash between coats of permaflex using dish soap and spray it off with water because permaflex may form an oil during the cure. I coated about 5 coats on the bottom. And I had off every bottom plank and each plank and underwater piece was individually coated with permaflex, including the running gear.

The bottom after a week was growing slime, very slippery slime.
After 2 months had a small amount of green algae in various places.
Right now after 10 months, there are a very few barnacles if you run your hand over the surface. They are small.
I basically put the boat into the slip and it has not moved in 10 months. I have been working on the interior.
Looking along the waterline you see nothing. the color I used was sand.
The boat is in Hampton VA, the Chesapeake bay near Langley AFB.

I read a report on barnacles from the 1930's that mentioned lighter colored bottom paint grew less growth then darker colored paints. The study compared white paint to black.

[sdowney717]

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/content/news/news/2045/

medetomidine causes barnacles to get hyperactive and they dont attach to the surface.

http://www.marinepaint.se/program/marinepaint/marinepaint/results.4.aeea46911a312742798000103062.html

so far they say it is working.

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=medetomidine#pq=medetomidine&hl=en&cp=15&gs_id=16&xhr=t&q=medetomidine+barnacles&qe=bWVkZXRvbWlkaW5lIGJh&qesig=LzE9X2jxG2x_mzA1ErdVZw&pkc=AFgZ2tkcCVTsH1CUoh4EKNfgWprOQOAd_Bs_vACTLoLdtzx9i39Gk1RWK6e9EqxmDp1bIzo0db5syQt0AlxgCgKDAckB0Tek4g&pf=p&sclient=psy&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=medetomidine+ba&aq=0v&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=eae32d00b8f22fb0&biw=1333&bih=884

In marine paint
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medetomidine
Medetomidine can be used as an antifouling substance in marine paint. It is mainly effective against barnacles, but has also shown effect on other hard fouling like tubeworms. When the barnacle cyprid larva encounters a surface containing medetomidine the molecule enters the octopamine receptor in the larva. This makes the larva legs start kicking and it cannot settle to the painted surface. When the larva swims away from the surface, the effect disappears (reversible effect).The larva regain its function and can settle somewhere else.

so far looking positive
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100816095822.htm

The substance medetomidine has proved effective in preventing fouling of ship bottoms. Researchers at the University of Gothenburg have now identified the gene that causes the barnacle to react to the substance, opening up the possibility of an antifouling paint that is gentle both on barnacles and on the environment.

[sdowney717]

Low levels enough
"We have found that medetomidine activates special receptors in barnacle larvae. The receptors emit a signal that causes the larva to swim away from the boat surface, instead of attaching to it. As the receptors are already activated at very low concentrations of the substance, this means that very low levels are also needed to be effective," says Professor Blomberg.
Environmental friendly
The results, which are published in the scientific journal Molecular Pharmacology, explain how it is possible to develop an environmentally friendly and effective antifouling paint which instead of killing barnacles acts as a "deterrent."
"Understanding how the substance works when it binds to the receptor also makes it possible to develop selective agents that only affect barnacles and not other marine organisms," says Professor Blomberg.

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/can-a-dog-tranquiliers-help-clean-the-high-seas/

“We don’t kill the organisms. We just scare them. We change the behavior of the barnacle larvae,” said Lena Lindblad, I-Tech’s R&D manager who discovered the properties. “It [medetomidine] inhibits secretion of a substance that gets them to stick.”

[brian eiland]

Lots of interesting research there Sdowney. I will have to read more about it when I have a bit more time.

Is the Sani-Tred product a Polyurea, ...or a bit different ??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGlMK0KWOJ4

[sdowney717]

it is a polyurethane similar to a polyurea but not the same.
The permaflex is pretty tough, you could not rip it if it is thick like 1/8 inch, but you can cut it with a sharp knife.
The boat yard manager-owner thought I was crazy but after seeing how strong it made the boat is using it on his boats and also a steel barge.
Permaflex is easy to use. It takes a while to setup. While it is curing, it just gets thicker and more viscous till it cant flow anymore. I have seen it set in a half hour or as long as overnight. If it is hot and humid it sets up quick. I found you can preserve mixed batches in the FREEZER. Then pull it out and paint again. Keep xylene on hand since if your batch is setting up, pour in a little xylene, stir and keep going.
You mix it with an accelerant-catalyst but even without it will harden, just not as quick.
just remember if you recoat while the permaflex is still not fully cured, that is best. If you wait till the surface is cured, then you need to wash it off with dish soap and water because of an oil that 'may' form on the surface which will interfere with the next coat binding to the prior coat.

Permaflex also is an excellent glue. I glued in a lot of plugs when repairing the frames for new screws. Another great glue is PL Premium Polyurethane Construction adhesive. With that you can mix in a little sawdust and make an excellent filler. Press it down using cereal box plastic bags and it wont stick to them. that glue swells up as it sets. Sand it with 40 grit random orbit and it even looks pretty good stained.

Here is an inside view of the shaft log showing permaflex on the inner hull. For that I used sika flex concrete caulk which runs like a honey. I found that great for sealing up seams prior to coating with permaflex. Another great filler is the PL premium polyurethane roof and flashing sealer. That does not run and hardens into a tough rubber.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4121/4773159938_1a671b4192_b.jpg

With permaflex painting upside down it is a pain since the stuff tends to sag drip and form little drooling streamers till it sets. It was not too much trouble until I got to the broad flat area at the mid section to stern. And I would get it all over me. If it gets in clothes it is permanent. Only thing takes it off is xylene or immediately wash with dish soap water and a scrunge. I have seen end wood grain soak permaflex up like a sponge. The wood likes the stuff, if it is not oily.

One think I like about these polyureas are you spray it on and it sets very fast.
What I wonder is how well layered coats stick to each other after the prior one is cured. I would think ok.

[sdowney717]

another advantage of these coatings on wood is you will never get any gribbles or worms eating your hull.
The disadvantage is conventional wood boats leak and weep salt into the bilge which help keep the fresh water rot dead. BUT, my old woody had extensive frame rot from rain. The planks were in good shape, but the rain gets between plank and frame and the frames suffered rot.

I did a very good job coating the inside and replaced many frames and use arsenic PT wood even on bottom frames. So I am pretty confident I wont get any rot issues. The boat has oak floors and under that bent oak frames. I gave up trying to repair old frames and simply cut them out and cut new ones out of carefully selected PT wood. Bronze screws held just fine. The turn of the bilge on an Egg Harbor is smooth and round and a lot were cracked. I glued, screwed, made gussets to fit the curves behind the frames and put my old egg back together stronger than new.
I dont think bent wood frames is a good way to make long lasting boats. Sawn frames are much better.

[yipster]

not reading ALL this good news here but came across more on "green" wood antifoul here (http://www.gizmag.com/seed-inspired-anti-fouling-surface/19094/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=d20a8a2491-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email)

[brian eiland]

And related to that posting of yours Yipster, I found this:
http://www.gizmag.com/go/6905/

Biofouling of marine organisms on ship hulls has been a global problem since man crafted the first boat. These days, many marine enterprises suffer the problem and the cost of reducing it, in aquaculture, offshore industries and harbours. In shipping alone, marine biofouling and its most significant organism, the barnacle, increase drag, adversely affect fuel consumption, increase pollution (via the workload on the machinery and downtime due to dry-docking. The annual global cost of cleaning alone is in the billions of dollars. Toxic paints are the most prevalent current anti-fouling strategy but they cause severe environmental disturbances due to the emission of toxic substances into the marine environment. Currently used toxic paints based on Tributyl tin oxide (TBT) are the first target as they generate unwanted effects at non-target organisms and will be banned by 2010, but this ban may be followed by the prohibition of other substances in marine paints.

Now a new type of paint has been developed which uses an extract from the microscopic fungus Streptomyces avermitilis to poison barnacles. The fungus lives in the ocean and is extremely poisonous to acorn barnacles and other crustaceans, a feature based on the environmentally friendly defense of the fungus against being eaten. A new study from Goteborg University in Sweden has found that when this fungus is added to paint for ship hulls, the surface remains entirely free from barnacles. As little as a 0.1-percent mixture of pure fungal extract in paint is sufficient to affect the nervous system of barnacles and prevent any growth and the fungal extract is toxic only as long as the paint is on a painted surface. When the paint is dissolved in sea water, the activation of the poison appears not to take place, making the paint apparently harmless to organisms in the open sea.

A sustainable and long-term solution to the persistent problem of toxic emissions resulting from anti-foulants, must be based on methods which are adapted to the environment. At Marine Paint, the objective is to develop anti-foulants which are environmentally acceptable, as well as economically and technically efficient. The catemines provide the basis for the development of environmentally sustainable anti-foulants.

The scientists are basing their work on a theory that the fungal extract makes the paint imitate the fungus’s natural and environmentally friendly defense against being eaten. Hans Elwing also believes that many other organisms in the sea have developed this type of environmentally friendly protection.

“The discovery that this fungal extract counteracts the growth of barnacles will probably create quite a stir around the world. No naturally occurring substance has previously been shown to have such a dramatic effect on barnacles in combination with being so easily degradable in the environment and probably completely safe for humans,” says Hans Elwing, professor at the Department of Cell and Molecular Biology at Göteborg University.

Hans Elwing’s research team has joined up with SP Technical Research Institute of Sweden in Borås and Stockholm to develop their ideas. It is hoped that innovations in nanotechnology will facilitate the creation of new anti-fouling paints for boats.

“The fungal extract is probably both cheaper and, above all, more environmentally friendly that the paints based on copper compounds available on the market today,” says Hans Elwing.

[sdowney717]

“The fungal extract is probably both cheaper and, above all, more environmentally friendly"

it certainly ought to be.
wonder if we could grow our own fungus and mix it in some paint?
you know if this works well that they will market at whatever price the market can stand. The cheaper part is likely on the manufacturing side of the balance.

so what this could mean is bottom paint makers can make even more money and still sell at a premium price.

[rablack]

Sdowney, can you give us an update on how the permaflex is preforming as an antifouling paint?

[sdowney717]

Sure, It is not an effective antifoul coating If you dont brush them off when small.
I have lots of barnacles. The coating is undamaged, barnacles dont affect it.
I think it has been a couple of years now.
This was a test and the boat mostly sits.
At first the barnacles were small easily removed simply with my hand, meaning no sticking. Easily brush everything off using my hands.

I just left everything alone to see what hapens and now some barnacles are about an inch and stuck on but can be scraped off with some effort. I was thinking of getting in when the water warms up and use a WOOD scraper made from oak to clean the hull and see what happens. what ever you use to clean with cant be sharp metal or you likely would cut the permaflex rubber.
Permaflex is acid proof so If I haul the boat, I will power wash, scrape, then spray HCL muriatic acid to dissolve anything left.


A sheet piece of permaflex I had in the water as a test grew some barnacles.
When they got to about a half inch I pulled the sheet and when I rolled it they popped off completely intact. Sort of peeled them off. So the barnacle's bottom was there and it is slightly concave. I think these things are sticking to the surface like a suction cup, but they dont harm the coating.

So If you were prepared to get in the water and scrub the boat once a month this would work ok. The bottom is basically dirty. This coating would require someone to periodically expend some effort to keep the surface clean.

pictures showing intact peeled off barnacle
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-6USTpJId0Fc/Tv4gOogGFUI/AAAAAAAAApI/lD6kyagZxRI/s800/image%2520%252824%2529.jpg

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-padpNZ2l418/Tv4gOcZvu0I/AAAAAAAAAo4/HtNXESY8sgs/s640/image_3%2520%25283%2529.jpg

Undamaged surface of permaflex where barnacles had set.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-W9mBWKJ0kKY/Tv4gOte6kRI/AAAAAAAAAo8/osqlizdDUac/s800/image_2%2520%25284%2529.jpg

Some more barnacles with bottom intact. They all just pop off with some effort from a sheet. The bottom when scraped they will likely leave their bottom rings behind.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-dd4tzuxjeUE/Tv4gO_F7G0I/AAAAAAAAApM/5nSiRGjFAQw/s800/image%2520%252823%2529.jpg

[rablack]

Thanks for the update. Looks like great stuff, but not for anti-fouling. Do you like it on your deck?

[sdowney717]

If you put it on the deck exposed to sun UV, you need to use the permaflex-al version.
I like it well enough to have used it to help in rebuilding the hull of this 37 egg harbor 1970 boat.
PL Premium construction adhesive is also excellent for gluing caulking sealing.

Makes it stronger and seals everything. The antifoul was a test to see what would happen.

some pics. painting upside down is an awful mess as it drips and drools.
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4121/4773159938_1a671b4192_z.jpg
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4097/4772521069_994b3306a0_z.jpg

[mydauphin]

How does this stuff attach to epoxy?

[Frosty]

Its just thinned Sikaflex that you can paint on!!

[MikeJohns]

I've seen builders polyurethane sealant thinned with petrol and painted on a wooden boat and it has lasted very well. But not as an antifoulant.

All the "slick surface" antifoulings need a water velocity of over 15knots to self clean. Otherwise they foul.

I did see a very clean rudder and prop a month ago when inspecting a 70' commercial fishing boat. The owner had been given a bucket of a waterproof product called "ClearGlide lube" that's used in the oil industry here for protecting pipe threads and also apparently for coating cables in ducts so they can be pulled out in a few years.
He'd applied it around 6 months before to the prop and then to the rudder for a trial, both were spotless ! If you are interested in tough low friction waterproof coatings it might be worth looking at.

[sdowney717]

It sticks to epoxy or fiberglass resin fine.
It is a mechanical attachment like paint or anything else, a rougher surface is good.

this is a polyurethane hard rubber like material that is quite shiny and feels slippery when wet.

[Silver Raven]

I've seen builders polyurethane sealant thinned with petrol and painted on a wooden boat and it has lasted very well. But not as an antifoulant.

All the "slick surface" antifoulings need a water velocity of over 15knots to self clean. Otherwise they foul.

I did see a very clean rudder and prop a month ago when inspecting a 70' commercial fishing boat. The owner had been given a bucket of a waterproof product called "ClearGlide lube" that's used in the oil industry here for protecting pipe threads and also apparently for coating cables in ducts so they can be pulled out in a few years.
He'd applied it around 6 months before to the prop and then to the rudder for a trial, both were spotless ! If you are interested in tough low friction waterproof coatings it might be worth looking at.


Gooday bloke. Nice post Mike Johns. 'London to a brick' very few people - pick-up on this - - shame that. Way back when 1960's - I used a product called "Hydron' as a final coat after antifouling - on about 30 or more sailing (race) boats in Sydney. Was just the 'ducks-guts' - slipperier than - smoother than, especially when wet - just so smooth to touch - extended the 'life' of antifouling by at least 60% & even at racing quality finish. I've just 'google'd' it & they have lots of varities - even 1 @ 6% solids. I'd wager that is what the 'Hydron' was or very close to it. I sprayed it on - ever so thin but it sure did do the trick. Yachts with it on - improved at least 2 to 3 positions. It sure was a race winner & made me lots of money as well.

Thanks for that - - VERY VALUABLE KNOWLEDGE - - I'll sure be using it on my tri when I get to SE Asia to pick it up. Thanks again - Ciao, james

PS A chilly 14* @ 0920 hrs up here in the mountains above Cairns, FNQ.

[mydauphin]

When you apply does apply smooth or do you have work it smooth.

[Silver Raven]

When you apply does apply smooth or do you have work it smooth.

Gooday 'mydauphin' - if you're asking me - then - as I said - I sprayed it on. When I purchased it from NZ - it was the right viscosity to spray - - it didn't have a lot of thixotropy though - so it runns easily - that's why we put it on very thin. Having said that - at that time - that's the business I was in & ther were lots of very good spray painters that worked for me. Easy-peasy but all the gear was professional equipment. If spraying - do remember to have a - better than good - water filter in the spray line. That's a must have for a top quality job. Ciao, james

[Frosty]

I just experimented in a bucket an hour ago rubbing grease onto alluminiuml under sea water.

I did not think it would have been easy , in actual fact it was no different than above water dry.

My prop bags are ready for replacement and are hanging with barnacles. It is only the props and shafts I have trouble with and they are big 4 bladers.

Tomorrow I intend to drop the bags off and clean and polish,--then rub on grease. I don't feel a pre test of grease on props is necessary as I don't think any sea creature would want to adhere itself to thick axle grease nor would it be able to.

[sdowney717]

"ClearGlide lube" made by Ideal.
http://www.idealindustries.com/prodDetail.do?prodId=31-385
5 gallons must be a lot cheaper than bottom paint.
A prop and rudder is going to get more force of water flowing than on a hull.

You could coat the entire boat hull. Why not do a test, put a board in the water coated with it and see what happens.
If they grow see how easy they are to brush off. With the permaflex when they were tiny they brushed off easily with the hand.
I let the boat sit for a year without moving the hull. They got bigger and are more tightly stuck.

Could be the clear glide lube they might stick but brush off easily same idea as permaflex.

There is one with Teflon, so a large variety of various products could be tested.
http://ideal.datacomtools.com/idealcatalog/wire-lubricant.htm

[SheetWise]

Some of the proposed solutions seem to violate environmental laws in some jurisdictions -- such as grease coatings -- should I assume the commercial solutions mentioned are compliant?

[John Galt]

I plan to try it. thankyou

[Boston]

yah I'm not so sure grease is exactly legal in most places, or at least not as antifouling

two things i've always thought might help. One would be to occasionally electrify the underside of the boat with an alternating current. If a conductive grid where present under the paint, and that paint not an insulator, then a fairly strong current every once in a while might just put a dent in the growth process. Anyone ever try that ? or something like it, maybe a sponge or brush thats got a couple of leads and fries the little darlings as you move it over the underside of the hull ?

another I though of was if your in predominantly salt water and your growth is barnacles and sea weeds, then wouldn't you kill off most of it by simply moving up a freshwater river a few miles and let the fresh water kill off the stuff. Making more easily removed ?

[Frosty]

Grease works --it is not illegal-- the barnacles do not grow on grease.

[whitepointer23]

yah I'm not so sure grease is exactly legal in most places, or at least not as antifouling

two things i've always thought might help. One would be to occasionally electrify the underside of the boat with an alternating current. If a conductive grid where present under the paint, and that paint not an insulator, then a fairly strong current every once in a while might just put a dent in the growth process. Anyone ever try that ? or something like it, maybe a sponge or brush thats got a couple of leads and fries the little darlings as you move it over the underside of the hull ?

another I though of was if your in predominantly salt water and your growth is barnacles and sea weeds, then wouldn't you kill off most of it by simply moving up a freshwater river a few miles and let the fresh water kill off the stuff. Making more easily removed ?

you can buy electric antifouling kits, don't know if they work or not.

[Frosty]

Infact its old technology, works well but usually for larger vessels.

[Silver Raven]

Infact its old technology, works well but usually for larger vessels.

Gooday 'pipe' & others - What is it about this subject - that I don't understand.

Read post # 1 1 4 What's up with the difficulty here. Steal mom's 'teflon' ironing spray - 4 coats - let dry - 2 years - no barnies.
Use teflon - silicon, etc, lots of new (only been out for the last 40 years) stuff on the market & cheep as chips (or horse, pig, roo, wallaby - see cooking section) easy-peasy - user friendly. Electric systems would cost more in 1 year than I've spent in the last 25 years.

Ciao & go eat good food complete with 'sundowners' X 6 (kiwi speak), james

[sdowney717]

if thinking of grease use a lithium based grease. Lithium greases are not easily washed away with water. Something like a sticky marine axle grease designed for trailer bearings.

[powerabout]

as long as it doesnt leave any trace you can see in the water

[brian eiland]

Gooday bloke. Nice post Mike Johns. 'London to a brick' very few people - pick-up on this - - shame that. Way back when 1960's - I used a product called "Hydron' as a final coat after antifouling - on about 30 or more sailing (race) boats in Sydney. Was just the 'ducks-guts' - slipperier than - smoother than, especially when wet - just so smooth to touch - extended the 'life' of antifouling by at least 60% & even at racing quality finish. I've just 'google'd' it & they have lots of varities - even 1 @ 6% solids. I'd wager that is what the 'Hydron' was or very close to it. I sprayed it on - ever so thin but it sure did do the trick. Yachts with it on - improved at least 2 to 3 positions. It sure was a race winner & made me lots of money as well.

Thanks for that - - VERY VALUABLE KNOWLEDGE - - I'll sure be using it on my tri when I get to SE Asia to pick it up. Thanks again - Ciao, james

PS A chilly 14* @ 0920 hrs up here in the mountains above Cairns, FNQ.

Interesting, thanks for that Silver Raven

I just heard a bit on the radio about this super slippery product called LiquiGlide.
http://www.liqui-glide.com/

Wonder if we can find some uses for this in our marine world?

Just noticed this:
Q: Can the coating be put on anything else?

A: We’ve been able to put it on just about everything we’ve tried so far: glass, plastic, metal, ceramic…

[brian eiland]

Created at MIT with their help

A research group at MIT has developed LiquiGlide, a slippery, non-toxic coating that makes sure every last drop of any condiment flows right ...

http://www.gizmag.com/liquiglide-coating/22660/