New antifoul discovery - 100% effective AND green

...correction to that link above

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

 

Sani-Tred testing

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

 

Deck Sealing

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

 

Unhappy Steel Boat Application

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.

 

Some boat use in Cyprus...photo album

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

 

Unhappy Steel Boat Application

I got an answer, and a pretty complete one at that. Here is what I ask of them:

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








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.

 

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.

 

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

so far they say it is working.

http://www.google.com/search?source...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.

 

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

 

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

 

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.



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.

 

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.

 

not reading ALL this good news here but came across more on "green" wood antifoul here

 

Fungus in hull paint may solve barnacle problem

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.

 

“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.