Thanks, Mark, for your clarifications. Of course you're right -- HVLP generally refers to a "sprayer" or a "system." However, as you say, you can get guns for the compressors. Your comments are helpful in that I didn't adequately head off possible confusion with my terminology. I started with an inexpensive setup and eventually purchased one from Webb. It's much better, but problems remain. I've assumed it's the water base stuff just having some inherent shortcomings. The best stuff I've seen is lacquer or catalyzed lacquer. Even Webb's best stuff that he shows is nitrocellulose. And I still welcome comments about product and process. Wally Wilson, RPT Ravenswood, WV Columbus, OH Chapter At 06:44 PM 1/22/01 -0500, you wrote: >HI Wally - > >I think a little clarification is in order.... > >When you say "Webb Phillips recommends HVLP because of the warming >benefit", I am certain you are actually referring to turbines as a source >of air, as opposed to "HVLP" itself. HVLP guns (high-volume, >low-pressure) come in 2 different models, one getting its air from a >turbine, the other from a compressor. The guns themselves are >different, but they are both using the same HV-LP principle. > >The turbine does produce a warm air, the compressor does not. There are >certainly issues with both, positive and negative, but I think most would >agree that the compressor set-up is a bit advantageous over the turbine. >There is much better control over the atomizing air and the fluid >pressure, and since most of the waterbased materials are high in solids, >this can be a very significant consideration. > >What is also true, though, is that a professional-level finish CAN be >applied by either. You must be certain that the set-up you choose has >the ability to provide enough air to properly atomize the material you >are spraying. > >Mark Potter >bases-loaded@juno.com > >On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 09:29:08 -0500 Wilsons <wilson53@marshall.edu> >writes: >> What is PSL? Where do you get it? and I think an academic question >> for >> this list is one regarding spray method mentioned below vs brand of >> waterbase topcoat. Webb Phillips recommends HVLP because of the >> warming >> benefit. It is suggested here that the warm air in HVLP may be a >> hindrance >> to good finish. Comments? >> >> Wally Wilson, RPT >> Ravenswood, WV >> Columbus, OH Chapter >> >> At 07:54 AM 1/22/01 -0500, you wrote: >> >Well, yes, the PSL is waterbase - at least that is what the can >> says. I'm no >> >expert with any of this stuff, but the >> >others I tried did all sorts of weird things and this one just >> seems to go >> >on easy and sands so very easy (I have no doubt that some of the >> problems >> >were directly associated with my lack of spray experience). I put >> six coats >> >on one day and six the next >> >(wanted to be sure I did not sand through!). Let it dry a week and >> it sanded >> >so very easily (I hit it with 600 grit, then 800 and then >> hand-rubbed for >> >the satin - for the gloss I went to 1000 wet-sanding, then 1500, >> and then >> >buffing). >> > >> >The Oxford PSL is not the only thing that is new for me in this >> process. I >> >did not have a good experience with water base grain fillers and >> stains. I >> >went back to the oil-based paste wood grain filler/stain that I >> have used >> >for years refinishing mahogany yachts. I am also using the new 3M >> 216U >> >Production Fre-Cut Gold sandpaper that Mark Potter posted on. >> Fabulous >> >stuff. I also got a new spray gun, an Asturo ECO/S - its an >> Italian, gravity >> >feed, HVLP conversion gun (runs off air compressor - I guess >> turbines tend >> >to heat spray up and can cause problems). So, yes I changed topcoat >> product, >> >but I also changed some other major components of the process. But >> I finally >> >feel confident that I can reliably put a finish on a piano that is >> fully the >> >equivalent of that found on any new high-end piano. >> > >> >Terry Farrell >> >Piano Tuning & Service >> >Tampa, Florida >> >mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com >> > >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >From: "Greg Newell" <gnewell@ameritech.net> >> >To: <pianotech@ptg.org> >> >Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 11:04 PM >> >Subject: Re: Refinishing Success at Last! >> > >> > >> >Terry, >> > Being this happy as you are, are you sure this is water based >> stuff? >> >:') >> > >> >Greg >> > >> >Farrell wrote: >> > >> >> I have posted several times regarding troubles I had been >> experiencing >> >> trying to lay down a decent topcoat on a piano. I just thought I >> would >> >> briefly post that I have finally had success. >> >> >> >> I prepared several test panels of mahogany, walnut and birch >> veneered >> >> plywood and did several different stain colors (red, brown, etc.) >> with >> >clear >> >> topcoats and two panels in ebony (black). Sprayed them with >> Oxford PSL >> >> (Premium Spray Laquer), rubbed them out and made a couple >> hi-gloss and >> >> several satin. The ebony is good, but in good light I can see >> that I need >> >to >> >> adjust my sanding schedule just a bit (hey - it was my first >> try!) - in my >> >> home, I can't tell the difference between it and my ebony Boston >> grand. >> >The >> >> satin stained and clearcoated pieces came out fabulous. Perfectly >> flat, no >> >> imperfections, NO WINDOWS BETWEEN SPRAYED LAYERS, no pinholes, no >> nuttin' >> >> but beautiful red mahogany/brown walnut grain and a warm satin >> finish. And >> >> it all sanded very, very easy - I know now I will have no >> difficulty >> >getting >> >> consistent good results! >> >> >> >> Thanks Mark Potter for a lot of help from you! >> >> >> >> I am sooooooooooooooooooooo happy! :-) :-) ;-) >> >> >> >> Terry Farrell >> >> Piano Tuning & Service >> >> >> Tampa, Florida >> >> mfarrel2@tampabay.rr.com >> > >> >-- >> >Greg Newell >> >Greg's Piano Forté >> >19270 Harlon Ave. >> >Lakewood, Ohio 44107 >> >216-226-3791 >> >mailto:gnewell@ameritech.net >> > >> >
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC