Detailing World Forum banner

Wax and Sealant thicknesses

43K views 56 replies 32 participants last post by  Flakey 
#1 ·
Continued from a previous thread on thickness of wax layers. Note, I don't make any claims about effectiveness, I am only measuring the thickness!

Thanks to Caledonia, I have a large selection of waxes and also sealants to test, so I have started a new thread. Here are a few results from the last three days.

Testing as before, applying coatings to clean 6" silicon wafers.
20 random spots were measured to give some statistical significance to the results.
Below I quote the average thickness and the standard deviation (sd). The standard deviation gives an indication of the spread in the results.
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
***** Vintage (4 coats applied at 24 hours intervals)

Wax applied with microfibre, hazed and lightly buffed with clean microfibre cloth.
Thickness after first application = 25.6 nm; sd = 2.5 nm
Thickness after second application = 26.3 nm; sd = 3.2 nm
Thickness after third application = 24.9 nm; sd = 1.9 nm
Fourth layer applied by hand.
Thickness after fourth application = 27.4 nm; sd = 1.7 nm

Because of the spread in the results, as given by the standard deviation, you can't read anything into the small differences in thickness.
This seems to show, once again, that you can't layer wax.
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Opti-seal

This gave me some problems at first, not having used the product before, because of the difficulty in applying a thin enough initial layer to the relatively small 6" wafer (compared to a car panel).
First attempts were definitely too thick, giving strong interference fringes on the smooth silicon wafer that changed rather dramatically as the product dried (very slowly).
The end results were very patchy. After advice from Caledonia, I then cut down the amount of product to no more than one drop, applied with a 1" square of microfibre cloth.
This easily spread over the whole surface of the wafer and dried to a haze-free finish in a few minutes. Again, 20 random spots were measured.
Coats applied at 24 hours intervals

Thickness after first application = 17.3 nm; sd = 1.2 nm
Thickness after second application = 16.6 nm; sd = 1.1 nm

Again, no evidence of layering being possible.

An even smaller amount applied to a different wafer:-

Thickness after first application = 21.9 nm; sd = 2.3 nm


.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Z8

This was applied lightly with a 1" square of microfibre cloth but it did not spread evenly over the wafer surface.
Whereas the Opti-seal obviously wetted the surface, this almost seemed to be like trying to rub water into the surface.
I wasn't too surprised by the results below (as yet, only one layer applied).

Thickness after first application = 4.9 nm; sd = 1.4 nm

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Red Mist

This product was much more like Opti-seal, wetting the surface and spreading easily. Not easy to wipe off, so maybe too much applied.

Thickness after first application = 22.1 nm; sd = 0.7 nm (a very uniform film!)

.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
 
See less See more
#4 ·
Thanks for taking time to meet myself and a very interesting tour of your labs.

I came away with a very good understanding of the technology and research you carry out on a daily basis.
During the conversation that follow also gave me a get insight to finding and as you rightly said this has now been proven once again. With regards to layering products.

I am also glad the the conversation that I have had with Dave has not gone to waste, and has given us a better insight as to what an LSP does to certain paint finishes. With regard to there initial reflective rating compared the the LSP rating.

Once again thanks F.

Gordon.
 
#5 ·
I'm rather liking this project

so developmental elements may be

if Red Mist leaves a layer 75% thicker than Z8 yet in my testing i've found them both to give a good six weeks of visable protection, is the product left behind harder wearing in Z8 or could th thickmness be down to the fully cure of the redmist leaving more solid intact etc

Thanks again for your time
 
#6 ·
I'm rather liking this project

so developmental elements may be

if Red Mist leaves a layer 75% thicker than Z8 yet in my testing i've found them both to give a good six weeks of visable protection, is the product left behind harder wearing in Z8 or could th thickmness be down to the fully cure of the redmist leaving more solid intact etc

Thanks again for your time
i may be wrong here,

but i think the layer thickness of Z8 in this test is only because it wouldnt spread right on the sillicone
 
#10 ·
Sealant like Z - Two

Hello there Fin:

I would like to know if you are layering the Zaino Z 2 in one of your tests.
Especially because I have read several topics about the Z 2.

Some people claim to layer 7 times - 20 times and even 50 and 51 times.
I think a sealant is something completly different then a wax. I think it can be layered. But it would be great if you layered them in your tests.

Z - two and FK 1000 P for instance. Well, thanks so far. Usefull threads.

Holland - Your votes please: 10 - 10 - 10 - 10 - 10:D:D:D
 
#12 ·
Id love to know what mine measures up at :p

Id also like to know about z2pro because if layering is not changeing thickness wise is there a possibility that these microscopically are sinking over time like paint does? I ask because to me visibly i see a difference after 4 or 5 layers on specific paints so if they are not gaining thickness almost like focals bi focals why do i sense that metallics and hues are being pronounced?
 
#13 ·
good questions Marc - would like to see some tests on these.

The answer to 'why' of course might just be your brain. It knows you put multiple layers on so it is 'seeing' differences that you would be expecting. Its a powerful old thing in there (for most of us anyway :lol:)

The other tests done by these guys showed ALL products reduced the reflectivity of the surface, so it would lead us to think that multiple layers have an even bigger impact on the 'look' in a NEGATIVE way!
 
#14 ·
Durability is a very hard thing to gauge - measuring the protection in the first instance is not easy, relying on water behaviur for such measurements is a good way to get misleading results - a product can be protecting but loose its water properties due to bonded contaimination in the paintwork that would affect all LSPs for example.

I see notably better durability from two layers of a wax - but, I wonder if this is because my first layer I spend a lot of time now "working the wax in", try rather than simply wiping on and wiping off, to work the wax into all the voids of the paintwork, setting up a better base with layer two there to ensure fully even coverage and further "working in".

Something still not clear for me here is the density of the wax layer, do multiple coats perhaps change the density of the wax layer but not the thickness, this would start to go some way to explaining the changes in looks some are claiming to see - but then again, are there really differences or simply psychological effects. One thing's for sure and thats the effect is so small, its hard to differentiate between the two!

More food for thought though on what is a highly interesting thread with claims actually being backed up with hard science, something from which there is nowhere to hide ;):D
 
#16 ·
Dave.
From the conversation that I have had with the OP. I am inclined to agree with what you have said. The first layer levels out the imperfections within the painted surface and bonds to these. Once cure regardless of the waxes total thickness is buffed of level with the surface layer. The second layer in turn fills and bonds to the voids left in the prior layer after the solvents ans oils have evaporated. So in turn leaving a very true and consistent surface.
There is some evidence that compaction of the layer the wax layer is there. But this cannot be built upon. Any form of wiping washing or in general friction removes this layer to the same thickness. The only true way to measure a waxes durability though adding extra layers would be a none friction wash or none contact. This way the friction would not affect the layer of wax.

But down side is the lack of cleanliness on the wax layer where this in turn could effect the layer with contamination on the surface.
Gordon.
 
#17 ·
There is some evidence that compaction of the layer the wax layer is there.
Mainly this is one of the real problems in the "world of detailing". At least, that is what I think. There is some evidence, but when you really start looking for the evidence, nothing really can be found. In my profession (medical & sports) I am used to work with evidence-based ''tools". In the world of detailing there is no such thing as R.C.T. ( double-blind tests ).

Would be great if this thread can make some difference or start some changes in thinkin' ... !
 
#23 ·
The wax used on old furniture is nearly 100% bees wax, which is completely different to the 40% or less carnuba wax mix car wax.

Furniture wax is also A: applied very very generously and not buffed off to the same standard as car wax B: Designed to stick around, it main purpose is to protect not to shine.

Car wax is designed to be reapllied and make the car look nice, aswell as protect.

Also your car gets washed in a way your furniture doesnt.

Hope that clarifies for you:thumb:
 
#24 ·
I am delighted to see that the research is continuing! The results for the Opti-Seal provides initial evidence that even synthetic sealants do not really layer, yet as others have suggested, it would be very helpful if some classical sealants (Zaino Z2 and/or FK 1000p) were also tested. If the tests on these products were to also disconfirm layerability, then this would be revolutionary for detailing. Everyone believes that sealants are layerable. A lot of energy is invested in applying multiple sealant coats in the belief that one is actually building up a thicker layer of protection. The manufacturers tell us that sealants are layerable. What will happen if the empirical testing suggests otherwise?

Science is all about measuring. If sealants are layerable, as commonly claimed, then the thickening of the sealant coat should be measurable.
 
#26 ·
Where both are right to an extent.
Furniture wax is totally different than a car wax. This is true and so is the fact that these are buffed off. The big difference is most furniture waxes are applied warm as in a melted state and can be thinned by the use of solvents. Methylated spirits and the like.


So this way the wax is applied a lot thicker and cures very rapidly due to the cooling stage. Before bringing up the gloss. But as the layer increase the wax content is diluted down and refined to leave a flawless finish.

Now thats sorted can we get back to the matter in hand.
Gordon.
 
#27 ·
I found this statement online by TOGWT maybe you could prove it or disprove it with measurements?


"Polymers- most contain a mineral or silicone oils that are use as a lubrication system, in a solvent based carrier system (these may also be in the form of an oil / water emulsion) and by the nature of this product they need to vaporise / dissipate and then its needs to cross-link (this is time dependant (unless a catalyst is added) and is quite separate from the drying process. To my knowledge, all polymer sealants are based on an emulsion system containing silicone oils. Zaino Show Car Polish is the only polymer sealant that I'm aware of that is not based on the element silicone (its lubrication system is a polymer) it contains reactive resins that cross-link and provide long-term durability and can therefore be successfully layered (a new application of Zaino Show Car Polish does not remove previous applications). Zaino also has an ultra violet (UV) protection added."
 
#29 ·
Interesting results - I think the act of applying more than a couple of layers has always been about human physcology as opposed to actually creating an improvement, ie, it makes you feel better and your brain tricks your eyes into seeing an improvement.

I know that on my cars I probably apply wax more because I feel the need / want to apply it rather than needing to
 
#30 ·
Absolutely great thread! Would want to thank FinstP, but it seems, he has vanished for some reason??

My personal thoughts are:

- Wax layers are roughly 20 nm thick
- There is no use for more than two layers (except one assumes an uneven surface on the paint, which slightly becomes more uniform probably)
- Buffing should happen at a time, where all wax has dried but not caked in, so it goes off easily
- also sealants seem not really to be "sheetable"

Now this has been a very worthwile reading, if I come across the "How much microns are taken away through polishing", my scientific hunger in detailing is satisfied :))
 
#33 ·
Sorry folks, I haven't been here for a while due to a conference in China etc.
Also the equipment I have been using suffered during a power surge and I am waiting for a replacement. Since it is very expensive and built to order it probably won't be here until mid-January. I'll get back to the tests then!

PS I don't suppose anybody from the Glasgow area saw the ****** who dented my wife's Lexus last Sunday in the Costco car park!?
 
#34 · (Edited)
A really fascinating thread this.

From reading on this forum, I've always taken the "2 layers of wax only" as gospel, so I've never applied more than 2 (dont want to waste RG55 especially at 65 quid a tin!). Nice to see someone's taken the time to acutally measure the thicknesses to prove (or disprove) something that's been taken as a given on here!

Dave KG's made and interesting point about density. Could it be that the wax left behind is re-liquified by the solvents when applying the second layer only this time when it cures there's a higher concentration of wax product left- and maybe that this concentration is the highest it could be so when adding more layers it has no effect in the increase in concentration? I'm no scientist, so I'm just trying to qualify the results in my own twisted way!

If it is a case of "working in" the wax then maybe I should change my technique slightly and spend longer applying the wax to a panel rather than just making sure the panel is covered!

Maybe we can swab the wafer and run it through some analyser CSI style! Maybe I've been watching too much TV :lol:

I have to admit I've not really got into the sealant thing, I'm a sucker for good tight wax beading, but I am giving some serious thought for trying out the Duragloss range after seeing some of the reviews on here (especially after seeing bigpikle's audi :argie:) and I've always been confused about the number of layers you apply to a sealant. For example i read this thread recently:

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=139734

And on here they are applying anything up to 6 layers to get good beading on werkstat. Now I'm not saying they're wrong, they are getting better beading with more layers so surely if the layer thickness is roughly the same regardless of the number of applications, then it must be the density of the product and therefore an increase (in this case beading) in performance of the product.

My head hurts :lol:
 
#35 ·
I have answered the question about increasing density before - a changing density would increase the refractive index, which is one of the quantities that I measure - and I haven't seen any such changes.

It would be crazy to say that no product can be layered - if you apply paint and let it dry you can layer it as much as you like! There is a big difference between 6 applications and 6 layers though. It will be interesting to try the Werkstat product.

The problem with layering is, if you were able to build up 6 or more layers of a sealant type product then you would eventually reach a thickness where optical interference effects would be seen (like oil films on water) and I have yet to see this from waxes or sealants. This is the reason that I started to measure the film thicknesses in the first place! You can see the same effect if you over-polish a clear coat until you are down to sub-micron thicknesses (holograms).
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top