Barrier coating?

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Mon May 31, 2004 8:47 am

Okay now.... this quiet on the boards is starting to weird me out. Where is everybody? I suspect having too much fun sailing.

In an effort to keep the board alive, I woke up this morning with this question on my mind. One of my first projects when I get my new boat (Triton) is to take all of the old bottom paint off and re-paint. It looks like it is about to fall off and I am hoping it will go quick and easy... but I digress. With the paint off, what do you all think of applying a couple coats of epoxy (or polyester if that works) as a barrier coat? I haven't heard of any problems with Triton hulls and blistering/water intrusion but the opportunity would be there and I thought it might be ... well ... prudent (the original name of the boat is Prudence; an attribute I could use more of!) Any thoughts?

I hope the New Englanders are enjoying the great sailing weather this holiday weekend.

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Mon May 31, 2004 1:34 pm

My opinion is: forget the barrier coat. Strip and repaint.

Barrier coats are for repair of gelcoat damaged by blistering. As a preventative device, they are an unnecessary expense, and frequently cause blister problems where none previously existed.

Your time, effort, and money are better spent elsewhere.

George ( C&C 40 ) · Post by **George ( C&C 40 )** » Mon May 31, 2004 2:36 pm

Hi Guys,

With a Triton in N.E. I would be tempted not to bother. Although I probably would barrier coat any boat produced after the mid 1970's no matter where it was. South of Rhode Island I would go with three coats of Interlux epoxy barrier coat ( the gray stuff ) no matter what. I've used this to good effect and it is MUCH easier to work with than the West System stuff. If you apply it with one of those 4" or 7" foam trim rollers you can get an almost smooth finish. ( much better than even a marine epoxy roller )

George

George ( C&C 40 ) · Post by **George ( C&C 40 )** » Mon May 31, 2004 2:46 pm

Hi Again,

One thing I forgot. If you do decide to do a barrier coat, the hull needs to be dry dry dry! I would haul it, then powerwash it down every two weeks with clean fresh water for a couple of months. The fresh water treatment will help remove any blister forming soloutions out of the top layer of gelcoat where you can powerwash them away. This will allow any goop that is deeper in a way to work itself to the surface where it, in turn, can be powerwashed away. It's just the osmosis process in reverse. Over time this tends to produce a much drier hull in a much shorter time than just leaving it out in the sun over the whole summer ( where it may never fully dry out ).

Note: The above info is from a cruising world article I read a couple of years ago. Take it for what it's worth.

George

The Good Goose · Post by **The Good Goose** » Mon May 31, 2004 7:30 pm

I agree with Tim. I think the bottom of a boat like a triton is a poor place to spend alot of time money and effort. I barrier coated mine with copper-poxy and if I had to do it over again I would sand off the loose bottom paint , fair it in, paint and go sailing. I still have a few spots that ooze on my bottom even after I barrier coated after drying out for six months. Once your boat is in the water as long as your bottom is relatively smooth and protected with paint A few little spots of water under the gelcoat are not going to make much difference. Buy a new sail or a chartplotter you'll get alot more out of them then a barrier coated bottom.

Brock Richardson

Post by **Tim** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:43 am

Just a quick note:

George is correct in his above statement that, counterintuitive as it might be, flushing a fiberglass boat with copious amounts of water on a frequent and regular basis is a key to the best overall drying and fastest dryout times. The water flushes will draw out many of the styrene byproducts that remain in all polyester hulls--they are water soluble, after all, which is why they cause problems in the first place.

Still: no blisters = no barrier coat. And not all blisters are created equal, so the appearance of an occasional blister may be indicative of completely different processes than boats that suffer severe boatpox.

I think the whole osmosis and hydrolysis issues are, frankly, about the most overblown "concerns" making the rounds today. It sure sells a lot of epoxy products and keeps boatyards busy, though. Do you want to be part of the next consumer confidence index, or do you want to enjoy your boat?

Find me a boat that sank because of blisters--or, better yet, because of the "potential" for blisters. It's only a problem if it's a problem.

For that matter, even bottom paint stripping is one of those things that is more for your own peace of mind and satisfaction than any truly tangible purpose. Sure, a bumpy, lumpy, layered-on bottom is less slick and fast than a perfect one, but how much real difference does that make, truly? Mostly, it's about making yourself feel better about the boat--as bad a job as it is, it is intensely satisfying to strip all that old bottom paint off. Out with the old, in with the new, right?

My point is this: if schedule/time does not allow bottom stripping to take precedence, then don't worry about postponing it till later. Yes, over time the heavy layers of paint will flake off, making repainting a frustration. But does it really hurt anything? No.

(I still like to strip it off, but only because I know I don't have to.)

So much for the "quick note"!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:35 am

Hi Guys,

"Sure, a bumpy, lumpy, layered-on bottom is less slick and fast than a perfect one, but how much real difference does that make, truly? Mostly, it's about making yourself feel better about the boat--"

It's true! But as a racer I do have a high need to make myself feel better about the boat :-)

George

P.S. - Tim, you were right -- the "C&C 40" has proved to be a very very fun boat to sail!

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:26 pm

Find me a boat that sank because of blisters--or, better yet, because of the "potential" for blisters. It's only a problem if it's a problem.

Sounds like some good advice to me. I like working on a boat, I don't love working on a boat :-)

So why are fiberglass boats more susceptible to blistering down south? Is it a temperature thing or maybe the longer season?

Now, where can I spend all that money you' all just saved me...

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 7:58 pm

bcooke wrote:So why are fiberglass boats more susceptible to blistering down south? Is it a temperature thing or maybe the longer season?

Yes. Both are factors, particularly the fact that the boats never get a chance to dry out. Here in the sunny northeast, our poor boats have ample opportunity (to the tune of 6-7 months) to dry out each year. All boats absorb moisture when in the water; one of the keys to blister avoidance is the opportunity to dry out sometime.

Post by **dasein668** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 8:52 pm

bcooke wrote:Now, where can I spend all that money you' all just saved me...

I would suggest a Garhauer rigid boom vang.... if you are asking... which you are! ;-P

Or better yet, just send me a check. Make it out to Nathan Sanborn....

Post by **Tim** » Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:17 am

I second that. Few additions to your sailing rig will give you more pleasure, more sheer usefulness, and more utility and control than the Garhauer vang. And for the bargain (truly) price of $225 or thereabouts, to boot. Plus you can get rid of one of the true annoyances of any sailboat: the topping lift.

As "they" say, you can't afford not to have one!

Bottom work is kind of like roofing on your house. No one chooses to put any money there until it is completely and absolutely necessary; there's simply no satisfaction and even less return.

Meanwhile, the Garhauer vang is kind of like getting a new entertainment system, or some such. Except more useful. Garhauer should pay me.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:27 pm

A boom vang. Now why didn't I think of that. I could just pick one up the next time I am driving by the local West Marine. I must have a few of their coupons around here somewhere...

Seriously though, that does sound like a good idea and coming from a couple of veteran Triton owners how can I go wrong? Could you point me towards any information on said vang?

The boat is scheduled to arrive next Tuesday and I plan on a thorough cleaning and the start of some very big lists. Should be fun to poke around at my leisure with the buying decision behind me.

More questions coming soon...

-Britton

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Fri Jun 04, 2004 9:47 pm

Actually I got off my duff and found the info myself.

Thanks.

-Britton

Post by **Tim** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 7:07 am

You won't find it at West Marine, or anywhere else. Go to the Garhauer Marine website: Click Here

Be sure to specify that you want the type that allows you to lead the control line aft. You don't want the control line at the mast base--too inconvenient. The only difference is that one has a cam cleat at the base, the other has only a turning block to allow the line to lead aft.

From the site:

Rigid Boom Vangs
RV 20-1 28-33 ft length: Custom width: weight: shackle:
boat size 28 - 33 ft.

RIGID BOOM VANG MEASUREMENTS Each boom vang is custom made for each boat. The measurements we would need are as follows: 1) The distance from the underside of boom straight down to the lowest point of the mast where the mast bracket can be mounted. 2) Templates of the aft part of mast and the underside of boom. A simple way of doing this is to take a piece of soldering wire and bend it around the aft part of mast, then trace the shape onto a piece of paper. Repeat the process on the underside of boom. 3) Size and make of boat. To order you may fax or mail templates to Garhauer Marine. Please include your full name and phone # on ALL pages you submit to Garhauer If you have any further questions please contact us at (909)985-9993.

$253.00

Check out my installation at this link. I need some current pictures on there, but you get the idea.

A word of warning: these put large stresses on the original sliding gooseneck (which you must fix in place somehow). I continue to have problems with my gooseneck arrangement. It first broke 2 summers ago, and I put together a good temporary repair that I thought would last. Well, it's coming apart again. More to come: read my site over the next couple days for more info...I'll be posting some updated information soon.

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:28 pm

Well now I have gone ahead and done it. The bottom is stripped and ready to begin another thirty years of paint accumulation. At least I thought so...

One of the advantages of stripping the bottom is that I uncovered several old repairs to the hull. About five feet of the forward edge of the keel had a large patch epoxied in. I also found significant buildup up bondo like substances covering smaller dents and nicks along the bottom - some quite deep and into the roving. The boat has spent at least thirty years in Maine so I am not surprised it has found a few uncharted rocks.

Unfortunately, last night as I jacked up the boat and grinded the last bit of paint from under the forward blocks I struck water. It was getting dark and the water was just oozing so I left it for today. I got more aggressive today until the amount of water coming out made it impractical to see what I was grinding. After twelve hours it is still dripping though thankfully the drips are getting slower.

My thoughts are to grind away any signs of damage and lay in layers of cloth to build it back up. My hopes are that the water was sitting between the repair and the original hull material because most of what I am grinding through is a thick (I mean THICK) coat of epoxy and some cloth (plus lots of bondo). I did find roving at one point which I am inclined to believe is part of the original hull layup. Does anyone know if cloth was used on the outer layups by Pearson? If so then I perhaps have a bigger problem as that would put the damage deeper into the original material.

Now I really have no idea what I am doing. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Is sailing this fall a possibility or do I need a significant amount of time to allow the hull to dry out?

Thanks as always,

-Britton

Dave, 397 · Post by **Dave, 397** » Tue Aug 10, 2004 10:33 pm

What is the hull number of your boat, as in, do you have internal or external ballast? On internally ballsted keels it is not uncommon to have a ballast cavity full of water, and the water (which entered from the bilge) tried to exit thru the laminate.

Dave

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:39 pm

#680, internally ballasted.

I didn't get out to the boat today as the weather was rather wet and I had plenty of projects around the house.

Water draining down from the ballast cavity can't be good. That would mean a complete path from inside to outside exists. There are signs of extra goop added around the top forward end of the ballast. I am not sure if that was put in at manufacture or whether the boat really hit something hard enough to shake the encapsulation loose.

Tomorrow I hope to grind a bit further. If the water is originating from the bilge then what would be the fix?

I also noticed that the repair was not covered with anything. Bottom paint was simply painted over the epoxy and bondo. Wouldn't some sort of barrier coat be useful there?

-Britton

Dave, 397 · Post by **Dave, 397** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 7:28 pm

The barcoat would be a good thing, but only if the boat was good and dry.

It turns out, as I have dug around about it, that water in the keel cavity is not uncommon in older boats of this construction regardless of maker. You didn't have to have hit anything to compromise the encapsulation...since it doesn't mean sink-or-float to the boat, don't expect that it is or ever was watertight inside. Even if it was, after enough time of water sitting in the bilge it could start letting water pass.

I am not sure I understand what you are saying about a barrier coat over epoxy AND bondo. Epoxy is not permeable by water...and an epoxy barrier coat is generally just resin with thickening additives and fillers to help workability. Perhaps someone used bondo and then put epoxy over it to seal it from water not realizing that the blister they had just repaired came from the inside.

My Pearson Commander, BTW, had a spot low on the forefoot where it weeped for days and days on the hard. Coincidentally, there was a 3" or so diameter where the boat had apparently been dinged and then bondoed...until the bondo fell out.

T397 had several decent-size blisters on her, and all were in the ballsat area. If the boat has had a wet bilge for a long time, it's more likely to see this.

I would not take any great alarm or worry about the state of my whole keel or anything like that, OK?

That much said, you do need to fix it.

First thing to do is to drill a few 1/4" or so diameter holes into the cavity along either side of the keel, down as low as you can. While you are at it, drill similarly into the trailing end of the keel, too...this area is not exactly part of the keel proper even on the internal ballast boats, and can end up with water in it vis-a-vis the mountings for the gudgeons.

Out will come the water.

Here's the big thing...this has been written about somewhere else on this forum, but I will go at it again here for expedience. The way--and I have verified this for a fact--that the deal was put together was by dumping sawdust from the carpentry shop floor into the bottom of the keel cavity to avoid point-loading and breaking it with the lead, then lowering in the lead and wedging it in place with scraps of core balsa (no kidding) before laying a bunch of glass over the top of it. This was hastily done as was everything else, being it is a production boat. The main support that keeps the ballast from shifting is those lifting eyes in the top of the pig sticking thru the overglassing material. Nothing keeps it from shifting at the bottom, really.

A friends's Renegade actually went "thunk!" when brought about smartly. He drilled thru the overglassing material and poured the cavity full of cheap poly resin...search thru the forum and find the rest of the discussion on this.

Actually, I think the solution I decided on using is in the same thread. Suffice to say that if you are not adding lead shot in there...which you really don't need to...you would probably do best to just chop up a bunch of 3/4 ounce mat into fluff and distribute it evenly into the cavity, then pour up the resin. Rem,ember that the resin can't be poured in all at once unless you like fires. Also that the resin needs to be poured in evenly, and that in order not to upset things the boat needs to be rather carefully levelled both fore-aft and athwartships. You do not need to pour the whole cavity full, just enough to trap the bottom of the pig adequately. The you can fill in the remaining void space with a high-density ("minimal expanding") polyurethane foam...other type foam like the infamous "stuff" will turn to goo if water get to them.
Finally, redo the overglassing job...do it well and heavily so as to still provide the stabilizing force on top of the pig.

I've been doing just about everything BUT doing mine, but I will be there rather shortly and can then post pics and commiserate.

Tim will be probably the best person to council on drying the laminate in terms of how, how long, how dry. You need to open this up well, though...as in sole out for access and grind out that whole overglassing joint...in order for it to dry well. You definitely do not want to barrier coat a wet laminate! If you can get it properly dry to whatever spec Tim suggests, you would do well to barcoat the inside of the bilge, too.

There is disagreement among people on this, but I see no problems with using a good-quality, reinforced polyester filler below the waterling, as long as it is covered well in epoxy. At the same time, glass that has been real wet or had lamination issues...may not give a super-duper secondary bond, and in those situations I think epoxy is the best material for repair...of course, that's just one opinion.

Best I can say...drill those holes, level the boat, read back on that thread, take out the sole, grind open the cavity, and wait for word from Tim on the moisture content.

Best,
Dave

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 8:13 pm

Does that mean I am not sailing to the Bahamas next week?!

Really though, thanks for the detailed reply and I will search the list for that description. Now that you mention it I seem to remember something about a talk on the placement of the ballast. I am glad to hear that the it is not an insurmountable problem.

As I run back and forth in the cabin I keep saying to myself that I really need to replace the sole as it shifts around under my feet. Now I just found a reason to move that project higher up the priority list.

I think what I was trying to say about the bondo was that there was nothing covering the bondo except the bottom paint - and the bondo was laid directly over roving. I am not sure how well bondo seals the water out and thought I might have picked up some water that way. That would have been a simpler fix.

-Britton

Dave, 397 · Post by **Dave, 397** » Wed Aug 11, 2004 10:02 pm

Well, bondo doesn't seal water out at all. Paint does, as long as it is fairly new. After a couple years, bottom paint becomes pretty permeable, though. Maybe that IS where the water came from--hope springs eternal. You'll need to get that laminate really well driied out, though.

Go ahead and drill a hole or two... if water (or any kind of wet goop) comes out, you'll know what you have to do.

Dave

Post by **Tim** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 11:23 am

Yup. What Dave said.

Note that your problem is exceedingly common, not only in Tritons but in nearly all internally-ballasted (encapsulated) keel designs. It's not the end of the world even if you left it as is, but obviously now that you know about it for sure, it's best to address it somehow.

One thing always leads to at least one or two others in these projects. And so it goes...

bcooke · Post by **bcooke** » Sat Aug 21, 2004 1:53 pm

Actually I did drill several holes and they all came up dry. I have been too distracted with other projects to grind away though and I thought the more drying time the better. I will report back when I have cleaned up that repair.

I knew when I had half a dozen "topic reply" messages in my inbox that someone had returned from their cruise. Did you get enough good weather?

-Britton