CoatingsPro Magazine

MAY 2016

CoatingsPro offers an in-depth look at coatings based on case studies, successful business operation, new products, industry news, and the safe and profitable use of coatings and equipment.

Issue link: https://coatingspromag.epubxp.com/i/672103

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 68 of 84

68 MAY 2016 COATINGSPROMAG.COM it. Poor adhesion, a hot sun, and an excessive flm thickness all combined to cause the coating to blister. Follow Up Gone Bad A fter rev iew ing the or igina l quote from the contractor, the product data sheets, the close-out letter from the contractor, and a ll of the supplied emails, it was decided that the contractor's claims regarding the dr y film thickness of the coating were fa lse. To achieve the DFTs stated by the contractor, an additiona l 300 ga llons (1,135.6 L) of mater ia l would need to have been applied; this should have been a red f lag to the manufac- turer and propert y ow ner. T he contractor stated in his quote that the exter ior wa ll coating had to be applied properly or you would end up w ith blisters from trapped moisture. A nd that's exactly what happened! Te contractor also identifed in his quote that the existing coating was loose and failing, which would have needed to be cleaned and prepped to prevent premature coating failure. Te contractor's quote also identifed failed mortar joints, which would need to be repaired prior to the coating being applied. Tese problems were both clearly identifed and ignored when it came time to perform the work. Te contractor's close-out letter stated that the coating had been applied at 11.25 to 11.75 mils (285.8–298.5 microns). Obviously, it wasn't. To correct the problem, I recom- mended that the contractor: 1. Completely remove all of the coatings from the south facing wall. 2. Perform all masonry and caulking repairs prior to coating application. 3. Ensure that the CMU was thoroughly dry before applying exterior wall coating. 4. Adhere to the manufacturer's product data sheet. I further recommended three inspection hold points for the project: 1) after the surface preparation, 2) after the primer application, and 3) at the fnal inspection. T he proper t y manager prov ided a copy of the inspection repor t to the coating contractor. T he contrac- tor's reply was that his quote was to apply the elastomer ic wa l l coating for aesthetics only, and that he had not been a l lowed to apply it as a water proof ing system. He said that no repairs were inc luded in his quote, and if the proper t y manager wanted this work to be per for med, there Figure 3. Excessive pinholes Figure 4. Coating removed with fingernails shows excessive blistering of mortar joints The contractor stated in his quote that the exterior wall coating had to be applied properly or you would end up with blisters from trapped moisture. Elastomeric Wall Coating

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of CoatingsPro Magazine - MAY 2016