nixmatters wrote:How about bias stretch?
It would make it stronger, as to reducing stretch I don't know but I would guess an improvement.
nixmatters wrote:
I checked the other threads on this topic and noticed that E6800 is UV resistant, while ShoeGoo TDS clearly states it is not.
http://eclecticproducts.com/e6800-indus ... esive.html
Yes and there is some other versions that are "UV" resistant too. I believe they would like most products add something like maybe zinc to make it "UV" resistant. It is questionable given how thin this is applied to the kite fabric if there is much protection effect left. I would think as the depth of material increases so too does UV absorption. Due to a factor of the anti UV material concentration/dispersion. Molecular changes for UV resistance to the polymer would be better in many ways I think, but they would likely affect the other material properties.
nixmatters wrote:
By chance that you know what the polymer base of ShoeGoo is? PU or synthetic rubber?
It should have been in that thread, plus all the answers to the other question being asked here now. It is SBR or styrene-butadiene rubber.
nixmatters wrote:
E6800 - the marketing B/S statement "Tough – 2X stronger and 60X more flex than Polyurethane!", should mean it's not PU based. thanks
It is mostly correct and not BS. It must depend on what PU you are comparing too, but SBR is a quite strong and flexible material. It's main disadvantage is UV deterioration. PU is not good with UV either but silicone is excellent. There is many versions of these polymers. There is likely ones that are much better for kites than others, the one in shoe goo does seem good, but I have not used my kite long enough to give an answer of it's life time. For that PU is quite poor, silicone is good and what ever flysurfer is using now they are very confident of it's long lifespan. One big disadvantage of silicone is nearly nothing with stick to it. On my Pansh kites that all use silicone I can not glue small patches to it, which is a bit of a bummer. But silicone has lovely properties of no sand or water sticking to it. SBR is much the same but you can stick patches on it and it does seem to seal the fabric better and is stronger and more flexible, well at least till UV gets to it.
The E6000 has engineering data in that picture you posted so you can do any comparison you want...
nixmatters wrote:
apollo4000 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:37 pm
What do the factories use before they ship, is that not available? Tom Court’s always down the factory on his skateboard or Demi M. They’re on here...let’s ask em.
Oi Demi old son...Court Marshal...can we have a video on this stuff
2K solvent base PU coating. And/or silicone for foil kites nylon ripstop. Cured at ~120-140°C. And it's done by the cloth manufacturer (Teijin, etc), not by the kite factory. I'm just curious which of the aftermarket solutions people have tried come close to the original coating chemistry
Yes the main ones are PU and Silicone, there has been others ,and saying that there is many variations to those polymers. I have often thought it would be better to coat foil kites in particular after they have been sewn up, but mass production does allow for coating easier after weaving the cloth. There could even be an option to coat the yarn and then bake the coating to spread it.
SBR far exceeds PU and silicone's material properties, except for silicone's UV resistance.
PugetSoundKiter wrote:
Xylene evaporates slower than Toulene (evaporates quick) so once it is in solution, you have more time to apply it
I believe this has been covered before, they are both quite toxic. There is differences in pathways to absorption I think. You are wise to read up on them both and be cautious. Evaporation is highly dependent on temperature as well.
merl wrote:
nixmatters wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 2:50 pm
E6800 is UV resistant, while ShoeGoo TDS clearly states it is not.
"Amazing GOOP Marine has the same toughness, strength and versatility as our other GOOP products but is specially formulated to be UV resistant. "
http://eclecticproducts.com/amazing-goop-marine.html
I suspect that the only difference between the GOO versions and the E6 versions is that the latter is a bit runnier (more solvent). but that is just a guess.
From what I could work out yes E6000 is just more thinned Goo. All the goo,goop and e6000s are essentially the same end product, some have an anti UV additive, some are thinner and some are thicker to apply. You can thin down shoe goo to be the same or thinner than e6000, I have and use it for some repairs.
nixmatters wrote:
Interesting stuff. Marine and Shoe Goo use Toluene as a solvent, E6000 and E6800 - Perchloroethylene. Some of the E6 formulations come in different viscosities.
It may contain both. There are a few solvents for this stuff.
nixmatters wrote:
"fully cured adhesive can withstand temperatures from 40 to 180 °F (-40 to 82 °C) intermittently" none of these is synthetic rubber (like SBR what someone mentioned earlier here or in one of the other threads on this topic).
I am certain it is SBR, I can find the documentation if you would like.
nixmatters wrote:
E6000PLUS is solvent free and looks very different from the rest. I would guess a different polymer.
E6000 has been used to brand a variety of things which are not e6000 as far as I can tell. This is common marketing BS 101.
nixmatters wrote:
Nor that I need to coat my kites, but I'm keen of getting several different ones and running some tests.
Some one did that already, if you do some reading. User Axel_lotta
viewtopic.php?f=197&t=2392469&start=30 download/file.php?id=75009 search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&sr=posts&auth ... 0&start=10.
More data is usually always welcome though
Especially if you take more care for quality control than some "climate" "scientists"...
I would suggest anyone reading this thread to maybe read or skim through
viewtopic.php?f=197&t=2392469 as most of this stuff has been covered before.
Thanks.
