Test new kind of antifouling, silicone based

[propmaster]

I'm glad to know you chose to use a fouling release system, the current antifoulings are very toxic and release microplastics filled with biocides into our oceans, not to mention they don't last very long, the 5-10% better fuel efficiency and speed increase when using fouling release systems is another good incentive to use them.

As far as I know, the fouling release happens when a soft polymer deforms and high interfacial tension is introduced between the polymer and the foulant, there is a limit on how soft the silicone must be in order to have good fouling release, if it's any softer than that the various organisms penetrate it so fast there's no time for it to release them, if the silicone is soft enough just regular water movement will release some foulants. Even when the softness is right, if the polymer is not durable enough cyprids will settle on it and penetrate the surface forming barnacles (like propspeed). Hard silicone coatings have only one fouling resistance mechanism and that's the low surface energy of the silicones, barnacles don't like these surfaces but algae doesn't care at all. Some silicone coatings contain an amphiphilic additive giving them both low and high surface energy properties but this additive can't do much on its own.

[Al Walker]

I don't know enough about how the different materials interact with water movement ( to be honest, as a consumer I don't really care too much), and had always just been working on the assumption that foul release was just working in a similar manner to the likes of a non-stick frying pan. But, when you explain it like that, it makes sense.

We do find that if our ultrasonic driver is off for a prolonged period some reason, barnacles and longer weeds do establish themselves, at which point I will take the boat out of the water and give her a quick clean. The barnacles and weeds just make it harder to get up to a speed sufficient to start the self cleaning. Neither of the products I have used have shown any sign of restricting establishment by themselves on a stationary boat.

As far as fuel consumption goes, I have figures for clean conventional antifoul, clean Aquacote, and clean Seaspeed. The Seaspeed is streets ahead there with close to 19% better than antifoul. Aquacote was close to 10% better than antifoul. Same longish 400 odd miles trip in similar conditions, hours motored and fuel used both logged.

Like I said, each to their own, foul release won't suit everyone, but we're happy enough with the performance and the diminished detrimental effect on the environment.

[Tornadosailing]

Originally Posted by propmaster

Sorry to hear this, if this coating is so brittle how did you launch your boat, wouldn't lift slings, bunk slides or support pads rip through this coating?

Slings don't have an edge to initially get under it. YouTuber Zatara used it as well and ended up removing the majority of it with a pressure washer. Just get under it and blast it off in chunks.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by propmaster

..,the current antifoulings are very toxic and release microplastics filled with biocides into our oceans…

“Microplastics filled with biocides”? Please elaborate upon this statement because to put it bluntly, it sounds like BS.

[propmaster]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

“Microplastics filled with biocides”? Please elaborate upon this statement because to put it bluntly, it sounds like BS.

Just google "antifouling microplastics" , antifouling is not going to change soon, there's a lot of money behind it.

With the rise in the shipping industry, I expect this microplastic issue to be hidden under the carpet for at least another decade.

Let's be honest unless you're drinking seawater, you're not going to absorb these through your skin, the problem is with the fish you're eating, the fish do actually drink the seawater and we eat the fish, do the math.

[lateral]

Varying degree of water soluble paint binders = micro plastics?
All in the semantics.
If it doesn’t smell like sh*t or taste like sh*t, yeah go ahead, dump it in the ocean no one will notice.
Or just dump (tow) it out of the environment.
Everyttime I wipe my hull a little of the justification for having it comes off with the slime and hard ablative.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by propmaster

Just google "antifouling microplastics" , antifouling is not going to change soon, there's a lot of money behind it.

With the rise in the shipping industry, I expect this microplastic issue to be hidden under the carpet for at least another decade.

Let's be honest unless you're drinking seawater, you're not going to absorb these through your skin, the problem is with the fish you're eating, the fish do actually drink the seawater and we eat the fish, do the math.

Water makers?

[propmaster]

Originally Posted by Chotu

Water makers?

I don't know if these microplastics pass through the filters.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by propmaster

I don't know if these microplastics pass through the filters.

They wouldn’t, but if they are filled with biocide, I assume they are meant to rupture and release that biocide, right? Well, they will be hanging out on your membrane or pre-filters and rupturing. A watermaker, I more recently fount our, does not protect you from a lot of toxins and questionable things Ike that in the water.

So if these exist, which I have no idea about, it’s definitely an issue for all of us.

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by Chotu

They wouldn’t, but if they are filled with biocide, I assume they are meant to rupture and release that biocide, right? Well, they will be hanging out on your membrane or pre-filters and rupturing. A watermaker, I more recently fount our, does not protect you from a lot of toxins and questionable things Ike that in the water.



So if these exist, which I have no idea about, it’s definitely an issue for all of us.

Boy that’s an interesting thought, incredibly common to have ablative paints with biocides surrounding the input of your water maker, right?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by propmaster

Just google "antifouling microplastics" , antifouling is not going to change soon, there's a lot of money behind it.

OK, well anti fouling paints releasing microplastics from their binder components as the paint degrades is a far cry from "Microplastics filled with biocide."

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Chotu

They wouldn’t, but if they are filled with biocide, I assume they are meant to rupture and release that biocide, right?

So if these exist, which I have no idea about, it’s definitely an issue for all of us.

They don't exist because that's not how anti fouling paint works. Further, it doesn't even make sense. Tiny indestructible "balloons" filled with biocide? How is that biocide supposed to get into the water? Ridiculous.

[Manateeman]

My manatee crew now reports their results in antifouling testing.
They applied to each other the following: wheel bearing grease, STP, Tef-Gel and surfboard Sex Wax . They attain an average speed increase of of 1 knot per 24 hours which is the mean speed increase most monohull like themselves will love to see. Forces from gas production were included in the calculations.
Surfer Sex Wax improved their hook up chances but not reproductive success.
They report the complete failure of barnacle attachment when they coat each other with Tef-Gel. This has the added benefit of repelling idiots from writing trump on them.
Billgewater said it all. We’ll never outsmart marine organisms.
Happy trails to you.
Captain Mark

[propmaster]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

They don't exist because that's not how anti fouling paint works. Further, it doesn't even make sense. Tiny indestructible "balloons" filled with biocide? How is that biocide supposed to get into the water? Ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous? It's a fact. Do you think the biocide inside the binder of the antifouling magically disappears? The biocide is trapped inside the binder, it leaches out by interacting with the surrounding water and water ions, the typical biocide used in antifoul depletes for only a few microns from the surface of the binder-water interface in a period of 2 years. The binders used in ablative antifouling degrade and form tiny microparticles filled with biocide very fast, the microplastics will continue to leach biocides and further degrade to smaller and smaller particles depending on the molecular weight of the binder each manufacturer uses since chain scission happens only at reactive sites, the biocide is not magical it can only stay in one place.
Just do a google search

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...528?via%3Dihub

If you're patient you can even identify the brand by analyzing the biocides inside the microparticle and this is experimental evidence not just some internet talk.

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by propmaster

Why is it ridiculous? Do you think the biocide inside the binder of the antifouling magically disappears?

At the very least your posts have been misleading. The "microplastics" identified in the link you just posted are actually flakes of anti fouling paint. So of course it is reasonable to assume these flakes also contain biocide. But your previous post made me (and others, obviously) believe what you were referring to were biocides trapped inside of a coating of plastic. What is missing from your treatise is a definition of "microplastics" which certainly covers a wider range of pollutants than the average reader is aware of.