SailNet Community banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
One thing you have to do on boats is bed hardware. This has to be done on a regular basis, especially with hardware that is under heavy cycling loads, like cleats. However, using the right sealant can make this task much simpler.

Most people are familiar with silicone caulk, since it is the most commonly used type of caulk in normal household repairs. However, while certain Silicone-based bedding compounds are excellent for bedding ports, most of the time, silicone caulks really serves no useful purpose on a boat beyond bedding ports and covering the ends of cotter pins.

In most cases, on a boat, you want a sealant that will adhere to the two surfaces being joined—whether it is a through-hull and the hull or a cleat and the foredeck. The sealant should have a fair bit of elasticity so that it can stretch when the hardware moves or shifts under load without detaching from either side and breaking the seal.

For deck hardware and through-hulls, countersinking the fastener holes is probably one of the best things you can do, since it gives the sealant a natural place to form an o-ring like seal.

There are four major classes of bedding compounds/sealants used on a boat.
  • Polyurethane-based sealants like 3M 4200 and 5200, SikaFlex 291, 292, 295, 296
  • Polysulfide-based sealants like LifeCaulk and 3M 101
  • Silicone-based sealants, like Dow 295
  • Butyl Rubber Glazing tape—this is not butyl rubber caulk
Each of these sealants has specific pros and cons.

Polyurethane-based sealants are basically adhesives with sealant properties. They are often very permanent and have very strong adhesion strength, and can be used both above and below the waterline.

3M 5200, a polyurethane sealant commonly found in marine chandleries, is basically for all intents and purposes a permanent adhesive and should not be used on boats for the most part. 3M 5200 has a bonding strength so high that it can often cause delamination or damage the gelcoat when you try to remove hardware bedded with it.

However, polyurethane sealants have some of the best materials compatibility, so the less aggressive ones, like 3M 4200 are very useful. SikaFlex 291 and 292 are probably better choices, but usually more difficult to find. For bedding ports, Sika 295 or 296 can be used in place of Dow's 795 Silicone.

Be aware that using a polyurethane sealant can make removing hardware much more difficult than using other sealants. There is a solvent, called DeBond 2000, which can be used to weaken the bond if you need to remove hardware that was bedded with 5200. One other issue with the polyurethane sealants is that they have a relatively short shelf-life, once opened. This is due to their being moisture curing compounds, and once exposed to the moist sea air... they start to cure...and you eventually end-up with a solid tube of cured sealant.

Polysulfide-based sealants are the best general purpose sealants for marine use. They are not as aggressively adhesive as polyurethane-based sealants and generally a bit more elastic and flexible. They can be used both above and below the waterline, like the polyurethane sealants, and are better than polyurethane-based sealants for hardware that has to be re-bedded more frequently.

Polysulfide-based sealants are excellent for bedding wooden items, like rubrails and cockpit coamings, since it adheres fairly well to teak. The fact that these items often need to be removed for periodic re-finishing makes it ideal IMHO.

The main drawback of polysulfide-based sealants is that they tend to attack many common plastics—most commonly acrylic and polycarbonate. They are safe to use on acetal, delrin, nylon, and marelon fittings though. If you’re not sure what the fitting is made of, don’t use polysulfide-based sealants with plastic fittings.

Silicone-based sealants aren’t really sealants IMHO. They’re really gasket materials, and need to have a minimum thickness and be kept under compression to work properly. Silicone-based sealants should only be used in above-the-waterline applications.

The only structural silicone sealant that I generally recommend is Dow 795. This is a structural adhesive which is generally recommended for bedding ports. It is not your common silicone caulk. However, beyond the very specific use of bedding acrylic* ports, it should not be used on boats.

Aside from bedding acrylic and polycarbonate ports, and certain plastic parts, like Beckson ports, and covering the exposed ends of cotter pins—it really has no place on a boat—primarily due to the residual silicone contaminants silicone can leave behind. These contaminants are almost impossible to remove thoroughly, and will prevent other sealants and paints from adhering to the surface properly. Even strong adhesives, like epoxies, have trouble bonding if the surface has silicone contaminants on it.

One other use of silicone is for sealing potable water tanks. However, I highly recommend that you use only NSF approved silicone sealants for potable water tanks and systems. These will not have any toxic components, unlike some of the other marine-grade sealants which may contain isocyanates.

Some silicone sealants are acid-curing and should never be used on metal. These are generally easily detectable by the strong vinegar smell caused by the acetic acid that is contained in them.

The last sealant is butyl rubber glazing tape. This may be one of the most versatile sealants you can use on a boat. However, it has the weakest adhesion and tensile strength and highest elasticity of any of the sealants. It is also the most easily affected by other chemicals, as it doesn’t cure like the other sealants do.

Unfortunately, many petrochemicals and common solvents will dissolve or damage it. Because of its sensitivity to petrochemicals, I generally don’t recommend it be used below the waterline.

It is great for bedding deck hardware, especially things like chainplates, where a certain degree of movement is unavoidable. It has the greatest materials compatibility of all the sealants and is also probably the least expensive of them.

One major advantage of butyl tape, since it doesn’t cure, is the working life. This makes it ideal for bedding things like traveler and genoa fairlead tracks. The lower physical strength of butyl tape generally isn’t an issue due to the large number of fasteners generally used on these tracks.

Other Sealants

Two other sealants of note for marine use are 3M 4000 UV and BoatLife’s LifeSeal.

3M 4000 UV is a polyether based sealant, and as such is generally fairly well suited for use with plastics. However, it is not recommended for below-the-waterline uses. It cures relatively quickly, as it is tack-free in under half-an-hour and cures in 24 hours or so.

BoatLife’s LifeSeal is a hybrid polyurethane/silicone sealant. As such, it isn’t as permanent as a pure polyurethane sealant, but is more an adhesive bedding compound than a pure silicone material. However, it still has many of the contamination issues that any silicone based sealant will have. It also is fairly inelastic, and IMHO, 3M 4000 UV is a better choice.

*Most marine ports should be made of cast acrylic, rather than polycarbonate, due to several physical characteristics that make polycarbonate less suitable. First, polycarbonate tends to deform under load, which can cause it to shear the adhesion of the glazing to the underlying sealant. Second, it is less scratch and UV resistant than acrylic. Third, it is more difficult to find polycarbonate in UV/scratch resistant versions in sizes thicker than 1/4″.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
That's why I write the nutshell posts... a lot of info in a single location to make doing stuff easier. :) I'm trying hard not to overlap with what Maine Sail is writing, since his are more narrowly focussed and deeper in depth... mine are more of a broader overview... :)

Thanks SD! This would make an awesome sticky. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
WM wrote something EVERY similar and it is available at their stores for free as a handout. They also have documents which discusses a myriad of other topics including ropes, hardware, clothing, anchor choices, head/holding tank treatments, etc., some of which get plagarized here from time to time.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Yes, they have a lot of information available in their older catalogs too, usually as "West Advisor pages" or something like that. I don't care for the implication you're making that I "plagiarized" my OP from anyone—since I didn't. I'd also point out that not everyone on sailnet has access to West Marine stores, since they are predominantly a North American based-business.

WM wrote something EVERY similar and it is available at their stores for free as a handout. They also have documents which discusses a myriad of other topics including ropes, hardware, clothing, anchor choices, head/holding tank treatments, etc., some of which get plagarized here from time to time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
Yes, they have a lot of information available in their older catalogs too, usually as "West Advisor pages" or something like that. I don't care for the implication you're making that I "plagiarized" my OP from anyone—since I didn't. I'd also point out that not everyone on sailnet has access to West Marine stores, since they are predominantly a North American based-business.

Only intended to point out (constructively) the resource available for a wide range of topics such as this in hard copy form, not just the brief overview contained in the Advisor section of their web page. These docs are intended as training aides to new hires but anyone can read/copy them or obtain them through the internet.

Everyone should avail themselves of the opportunity as many of us go where internet service may not be available.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
While you may have intended to point something out constructively, it certainly seemed to me and several others who have PM'd me, that you were accusing me of plagiarism. If that is not the case, you should probably apologize and edit your post to reflect that...

Only intended to point out (constructively) the resource available for a wide range of topics such as this in hard copy form, not just the brief overview contained in the Advisor section of their web page. These docs are intended as training aides to new hires but anyone can read/copy them or obtain them through the internet.

Everyone should avail themselves of the opportunity as many of us go where internet service may not be available.
 

·
Tartan 27' owner
Joined
·
5,242 Posts
SD,
Thanks for the thoughtful and well organized write up. I also found a similar comparison charts of these compounds in the Hamilton Marine catalog but the problem I have with that (and the ones in the WM catalog) is that they are largely filled with the mfr's recommendations (marketing) rather then with first hand 'user' information. For that reason I asked MaineSail to do something similar but he has obviously been busy with other projects.
This really should be a sticky - even if we have to pay for it!
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
CalebD—

Glad to help. Most of us, who post on these sailing forums, do so for no reason other than trying to help out our fellow sailors, even if some of them are boors that don't deserve the help...
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
It is actually copyrighted on my blog. :) Which is what I wrote the article for originally.
Maybe SD should add a copyright notice <ducking flames!!!!!!=""> :D
</ducking>
 

·
Super Fuzzy Moderator
Joined
·
17,137 Posts
Hey, look, I think the use of the word 'plagiarism' was unseemingly harsh.

Even if, and I do say if, SD got some of his material from a sellers blurb, I doubt very much indeed that it was lifted hollus bollus from WM or anywhere else for that matter. I don't believe he was attempting or intending to pass someone elses work off as his own.

SD is as straight as they come in my opinion. I cannot see him ever simply doing a cut and paste. His honour would not allow that.

That 'k1vsk' points to the fact that WM has even more info that's available in hard copy does those of you with access to WM a favour. His use of the word 'plagiarising' was unfortunate yet he didn't specifically accuse SD of plagiarism as such. If that was his intention then he does owe SD an apology, cos most certainly such an accusation would offend me mightily.

This is after all an informal forum, where ideas are thown around and information is passed on, most often in an ad hoc manner. We are not talking a scientific journal here.

ps - Dog, the link to your blog is not in your User CP. You should put it there and/or post the link here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
While you may have intended to point something out constructively, it certainly seemed to me and several others who have PM'd me, that you were accusing me of plagiarism. If that is not the case, you should probably apologize and edit your post to reflect that...
I wrote nothing for which an apology is either required or appropriate. What you wrote is similar to that published by WM. May be coincidence or not - it makes no difference to me either way. Again, I post here and in this case specifically to tell folks there are many such reference guides available for the asking written NOT by marketing people but rather by experts.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
TDW—

My objection is quite simple. This is what K1VSK wrote:

WM wrote something EVERY similar and it is available at their stores for free as a handout. They also have documents which discusses a myriad of other topics including ropes, hardware, clothing, anchor choices, head/holding tank treatments, etc., some of which get plagarized here from time to time.
It says that WM has a similar document to what I wrote available for free. It says they have documents on other topics as well. It says that the documents get plagiarized here. To me, that pretty much smacks of an accusation of plagiarism, any way you look at it.

Hey, look, I think the use of the word 'plagiarism' was unseemingly harsh.

Even if, and I do say if, SD got some of his material from a sellers blurb, I doubt very much indeed that it was lifted hollus bollus from WM or anywhere else for that matter. I don't believe he was attempting or intending to pass someone elses work off as his own.

SD is as straight as they come in my opinion. I cannot see him ever simply doing a cut and paste. His honour would not allow that.

That 'k1vsk' points to the fact that WM has even more info that's available in hard copy does those of you with access to WM a favour. His use of the word 'plagiarising' was unfortunate yet he didn't specifically accuse SD of plagiarism as such. If that was his intention then he does owe SD an apology, cos most certainly such an accusation would offend me mightily.

This is after all an informal forum, where ideas are thown around and information is passed on, most often in an ad hoc manner. We are not talking a scientific journal here.

ps - Dog, the link to your blog is not in your User CP. You should put it there and/or post the link here.
 

·
Telstar 28
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
So, you don't really care that you've basically implied that I plagiarized something, when I did not. That shows that you're basically an a**hole.

I wrote nothing for which an apology is either required or appropriate. What you wrote is similar to that published by WM. May be coincidence or not - it makes no difference to me either way. Again, I post here and in this case specifically to tell folks there are many such reference guides available for the asking written NOT by marketing people but rather by experts.
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top