I write to express My opinion that I do not think highly of Boston Whalers suggested repair methods. The entire idea of filling a buoyancy tank with any type of foam is to prevent the sudden ingress of water
as a result of an accidental hull
breach. As it temporarily prevents the hull
from sinking immediately, Thus that gets you home and saves your life.
When it comes to discussing what is waterproof I think polyester is about 98% perhaps epoxy
resin is better. To say that closed cell foam is waterproof is a misnomer, Yes it is at least water
resistant. However marina docks that use it for floatation eventually sink so low they have to be replaced. Foam filled road vehicle tires last a little bit longer especially if sealed at the bead.
As for injecting Polyester resin as a repair, It is heavier than water So adding ballast material to a buoyancy tank does not make logical sense? However telling your client to dispose of your product IF they damage it is probably not a good marketing
plan? Thus it could be seen by some as truth in their mind? that offering suggestions of any type of repair as being something of a face saving measure. After all; a foam filled buoyancy tank is marginally safer than an inflatable
It is undeniable that is is possible to hang and drain a shell filled with foam: up to a point. and no doubt solar
heat would be the most effective as would the time factor. but as for returning to as built weight condition? absolutely not economical.
When ever I worked in boat works that used foam. It was pumped into the open hull shell and allowed to complete unrestricted expansion. The cured excess would then be removed with a saw. board sanded if needed and then the deck
liner was bonded on.