Send your email for a copy of the Glass Smart Insider to henrygroverjr@gmail.com
I have started a Facebook Group called Glass Smart Products for anyone who would like to become a Beta Tester of the products I am developing for the Window Cleaning Industry. All you need to do is email me your shipping address and I will get back to you about the sample and how much I need to ask for it. It does cost me for shipping and takes time out from my work cleaning windows so I have to ask for some compensation. When you recieve the sample please test and write about your experience on my group. Also you can write about it on the WCR Forum at www.windowcleaningresource.com
The link for my facebook group is
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1730279803903497/
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
Just send me an email request for a copy of the Glass Smart Insider.
Glass Smart Consulting
If you would like to recieve these posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Friday, August 19, 2016
A Glimpse of the Ghost Particle?
For decades now it has been the belief of the Window Cleaning Industry that fabrication debris or microfines are the reason for defective glass surfaces which are rough and are very easily scratched during the cleaning process. It is in fact still the belief of many that this happens in the tempering factories where it is said the glass picks up the particulates of glass resulting from the cutting process before the sheets are tempered. Then these particulates and possibly other particulate debris are by means of the rollers in the tempering oven, driven into the semi viscous flat glass surfaces. Where they essentially fuse once the glass cools down to room temperature. Is this the truth or is it a misguided lie? If you ask most Window Cleaners you will learn very fast that they don’t care. They simply would like it stopped, and have some means of working with the defective glass that has already made it into buildings all over the world. They have become totally exasperated by the lawsuits that have resulted and the burden of dealing with this problem. Which by the way is absolutely not limited to the use of metal razor blades. I have personally witnessed defective surfaces scratched by plastic 'blades', and 0000 steel wool. I have also heard reports of scratching resulting from soft cotton cloths!
For many years now the Glass Committee of the International Window Cleaning Association (IWCA) has been focused on learning what the real answer to this problem is. It couldn’t be more obvious to everyone within the Window Cleaning Industry and the Glass Industry that this is a problem. What we all would like to know is precisely what it is, and how can it be stopped? Also, can the damaged surfaces which are already installed actually be repaired? The IWCA deserves the full support of every single window cleaner in this world. Simply because they have taken on the challenge and the burden of getting the scientific answers to these questions. Spearheaded by Paul West and Paul Duffer, along with the help of others, they have spent many hours and dollars setting up special tests to learn the truth. The last series of tests just finished involved attempting to embed and fuse glass microfines into a semi viscous plate of glass during the tempering process. In this they failed miserably. Yet they succeeded in my opinion in proving that the old idea about microfines and tempered glass is quite wrong. There is something else at work here. Now I know this is absolute heresy to many people. So I am not going to win their applause. But let me present you with some very interesting ideas. Some of which you might not be aware of.
The only other process to look at is the float process. It is called the float glass process because the glass actually floats down a river of molten tin called the ribbon. This is where flat glass is actually made. The float glass line was originally developed back in 1959. One year after I was born.
Each line/factory will produce 300 to 600 tons of product a day. It begins by heating the batch of silica, limestone, soda ash, dolomite, and cullet to about 2900 degrees Fahrenheit. In a matter of minutes! So far so good. Next the melted glass goes through the fining process. During this 'fining' process bubbles that result from the melting of the batch actually rise ‘to the surface’ and escape into the atmosphere of the furnace. In fact it was stated in one of the videos I watched that the processes within the furnaces are managed from the control room to ensure that the glass is homogeneous and free of bubbles. This is interesting. I could ask several questions at this juncture. Another interesting statement made was that heating in the float bath is carefully controlled to ‘melt out’ any roughness in the glass. In fact to produce excellent quality glass one must control its cross ribbon temperature and associated viscosity.
When the glass passes onto the liquid tin bath it is around 1900 degrees Fahrenheit. It leaves the float bath at about 1,000 to 1,100 degrees and enters the annealing oven or lehr. It then comes out of the other end of the annealing oven at between 200 and 350 degrees. I know some of you are mouthing the words rollers at this point. But the manufacturers state that once the glass comes out of the float bath chamber at 1,000 degrees it is hard enough so that the rollers that move it through the annealing oven cannot do damage to it.
When the glass passes onto the liquid tin bath it is around 1900 degrees Fahrenheit. It leaves the float bath at about 1,000 to 1,100 degrees and enters the annealing oven or lehr. It then comes out of the other end of the annealing oven at between 200 and 350 degrees. I know some of you are mouthing the words rollers at this point. But the manufacturers state that once the glass comes out of the float bath chamber at 1,000 degrees it is hard enough so that the rollers that move it through the annealing oven cannot do damage to it.
Annealed glass should not be allowed to vary more than five degrees. So the rate of cooling as it passes through the annealing lehr must be very closely controlled. If you check out the control room on the Pilkington video I have embedded here you will notice it looks more high tech than the Bridge of the Enterprise in Star Trek. Not for no good reason! Sure it is just a ribbon of glass. But all of the processes involved in controlling the flow rate, temperature, and the chemistry of the barrier gas in the float bath chamber;...must be very carefully and precisely controlled.
Oh yes. I haven’t mentioned anything about the chamber gas of pressurized hydrogen/nitrogen yet. Very simply put, the reason for the use of this gas in the float chamber is to prevent oxygen from contaminating the liquid tin. This however does have a direct effect on the glass surface. There is actually an exchange that goes on consistently between the chemistry of the tin and that of the glass surface. Such that even the mechanical hardness of the tin side is greater than that of the air side. Which has been proven by a very accurate scientific test. A harder surface is not necessarily a bad thing which it isn't, but consider this statement made by Weissmann Rudolf in a paper called Fundamental Properties of Float Glass Surfaces;
So there you have it. Are you beginning to get a glimpse of the Ghost Particle? Did you know that the UK and other Countries are very familiar with defective ‘float glass’ surfaces? Why they even have a classification system for the different individual defects/inclusions. This box was created by a company called Dark Field Technologies.
Leica sells many different types of microscopes, also polarized microscopes which are favored by glass inspection companies that specialize in detecting surface defects/inclusions. Which can also be seen when they are just below the surface using a polarized microscope. As in this colorful picture above.
This next picture is a Scanning Electron Microscopic image of a nickel sulfide inclusion. It came from the website of a company in the UK called Glass Technology Services.
Stones, knots, cord, ream, blisters, seeds, airlines, metallic inclusions, and raw material contaminants. These are all terms JTF Microscopy Services uses to identify various glass defects. They also use Polarized Microscopy. Checkout this somewhat scary picture below. It is an SEM (scanning electron microscope) image at 3,000x of a wafer defect taken with the e-RAM. Taken by a company called SEM Tech Solutions.
I would like to quote Kathryn Gromoski of Penn State 2010 in an article she wrote entitled, "Glass Breakage-Nickel Sulfide Inclusions". "It is at the very beginning of the life of the glass that inclusions are introduced. Inclusions are microscopic particles that are incorporated into the structure of the glass in the initial heating process. According to the Glass Association of North America (GANA), there are approximately 50 different types of dirt or other inclusions recognized, but almost all of them are completely harmless (Johnson 2008). Nickel sulfide is the only exception, and even then it is only a problem in tempered glass.".
Here is the link to the entire article
Notice that she states that these particles are introduced at the very beginning of the ribbon. Not during the tempering process. She also does NOT call them defects but rather inclusions. Although as inclusions they are still 'microscopic particles'. Of which there are about fifty different kinds. That is a virtual zoo of particles! But even so they are still quite harmless. By whose standards? By the glass manufacturers of course. Unless these happen to be nickel sulfide inclusions they won't cause glass breakage. Even nickel sulfide is considered harmless unless it ends up in tempered plates down the line. Only then can it cause breakage. Simply put glass manufacturers do not want to see these inclusions or microscopic particles as a defect. The microscopic quality of the surface of float glass (which is recognized by different industries as the tin side) is not really very important. As long as the glass isn't going to spontaneously explode or the window implode, the glass manufacturers are cool with it. There might be a problem here if it was not so easy to coat the air side of float glass. The air side which faces up is coated right on the tin bath. This brings me to another interesting thought.
It is the practice of the glass manufacturers to NOT coat the tin side. Also the coated (Low E) side is usually facing in on IG (insulated glass) units. That is either the 2nd or 3rd surface. Which means the tin side will be facing out. There is a special UV lamp which is used to locate the tin side. This is significant because if the tin side were facing in we likely would not have many defects (or inclusions) to deal with. Although it is good to remember here that it is possible for 'specs' to fall onto the air side of float glass in the float glass chamber. This happens when the chamber air becomes contaminated by the tin.
Now lets take a look at what the IWCA has been up to.
Now lets take a look at what the IWCA has been up to.
Under the direction of Paul West, the chairman of the Glass Committee, there were several different samples of windows with and without scratches taken from different parts of the country, and submitted to Penn State University as a summer project. The purpose of this project is to learn why some glass surfaces appear to be more rough than others. Also what are the actual features of such "rough surfaces" that cause window cleaners to make this claim? At one facility it was learned that some glass scratched and other glass on the same building did not scratch. The obvious question is what are the underlying surface properties that could account for this? Another question would be, is there something unique about certain glass surface properties that make it easy for amorphous silica and silicate particles in the environment to scratch such a surface? Also, might these surface properties be responsible for the variety of scratched windows mentioned earlier? Further, are these questionable surface properties connected only with heat strengthening and tempering of glass? Or are such rough problematic surfaces formed on the tin side of the float glass ribbon early in its life?
This very specialized field of glass defect/inclusion analysis and inspections is a technology that I will continue to explore. There will be more articles that I will be writing on the 'Ghost Particle' that will be posted in this blog. This is just the beginning. I think you all have realized by now that this problem is here to stay. As Window Cleaners we need an accurate understanding of exactly what the Ghost Particle is. We know at this juncture that it absolutely is not a ghost. It is in fact quite real. It is also likely that it will have multiple identities. I truly do not believe in ghosts anyhow. We also desperately need to be better equipped to accurately identify the condition and quality of the surface of the windows we are working on. Those which are prone to scratches should be discovered before installation of course. However if such problematic windows have already been installed, we also need to have methods for working on them as safely as possible with the best tools and green chemicals. Lastly I have heard that it might be possible to perfect a system/method for restoring these surfaces by grinding, polishing and sealing with a scratch resistant silane. More on this later.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the IWCA Glass Committee and all its members for taking the last eight years to explore this very important issue. It has a direct impact on every window cleaner in the world. For this reason everyone should become members and support the educational work of the IWCA.
International Window Cleaning Association
Mr. Paul West / Chairman
Glass Education Committee
1100-H Brandywine Blvd
Zanesville, OH 43701-7303
800-875-4922 / www.IWCA.org
Stewart Engineers
11640 NorthPark Drive, Suite 100
WakeForest, NC 27587
(01)-919-435-9100 / www.StewartEngineers.com
Dark Field Technologies
70 Robinson Blvd.
Orange, CT 06477
203-298-0731 / www.darkfield.com
Walker Textures
9551 Ray Lawson, Montreal QC
Canada H1J1L5
888-320-3030 / walkerglass.com
Leica Microsystems
1700 Leider Lane
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
800-248-0123 / leica-microsystems.com
Glass Technology Services
9 Churchill Way, Chapeltown
Sheffield, South Yorkshire
S352PY United Kingdom
44-(0)-114-290-1801 / www.glass-ts.com
JTF Microscopy Services
9064 Wixson Rd
Hammondsport, NY 14840
607-731-8863 / jtfmicroscopy.com
SEM Tech Solutions
6 Executive Park Drive
North Billerica, MA 01862
978-663-9822 / semtechsolutions.com
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Just send me an email request for a copy of the Glass Smart Insider.
To recieve these posts directly in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
International Window Cleaning Association
Mr. Paul West / Chairman
Glass Education Committee
1100-H Brandywine Blvd
Zanesville, OH 43701-7303
800-875-4922 / www.IWCA.org
Stewart Engineers
11640 NorthPark Drive, Suite 100
WakeForest, NC 27587
(01)-919-435-9100 / www.StewartEngineers.com
Dark Field Technologies
70 Robinson Blvd.
Orange, CT 06477
203-298-0731 / www.darkfield.com
Walker Textures
9551 Ray Lawson, Montreal QC
Canada H1J1L5
888-320-3030 / walkerglass.com
Leica Microsystems
1700 Leider Lane
Buffalo Grove, IL 60089
800-248-0123 / leica-microsystems.com
Glass Technology Services
9 Churchill Way, Chapeltown
Sheffield, South Yorkshire
S352PY United Kingdom
44-(0)-114-290-1801 / www.glass-ts.com
JTF Microscopy Services
9064 Wixson Rd
Hammondsport, NY 14840
607-731-8863 / jtfmicroscopy.com
SEM Tech Solutions
6 Executive Park Drive
North Billerica, MA 01862
978-663-9822 / semtechsolutions.com
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Just send me an email request for a copy of the Glass Smart Insider.
To recieve these posts directly in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
The Cause of Scratched Glass-A Quest for Answers By Paul West
Send your email for a copy of the Glass Smart Insider to henrygroverjr@gmail.com
For decades now, window cleaners have reported encountering glass with a “rough surface” that has a “drag sensation” and exhibits a “tinkling sound” when a razor blade is passed over the surface. This type of surface has historically been described as fabricating debris in varying amounts. Historically, “fabricating debris” has been described as particles that were not adequately washed off prior to entering the tempering oven, thus getting fused or “baked” onto the surface. However, research by the IWCA in recent years has shed light on some inconsistencies in that theory.
For decades now, window cleaners have reported encountering glass with a “rough surface” that has a “drag sensation” and exhibits a “tinkling sound” when a razor blade is passed over the surface. This type of surface has historically been described as fabricating debris in varying amounts. Historically, “fabricating debris” has been described as particles that were not adequately washed off prior to entering the tempering oven, thus getting fused or “baked” onto the surface. However, research by the IWCA in recent years has shed light on some inconsistencies in that theory.
First, lab tests that attempted to fuse glass particles and sand to flat glass failed. After heating and cooling glass contaminated with particles failed to produce the fusion.
Second, powerful microscopes attempted to detect fused particles on actual samples of offensively scratched glass from the field. No such particles could be identified.
Third, after more than five years of searching, no actual physical specimens of glass tainted with fused fabricating debris have been delivered to the IWCA. However, we were able to gather scratched glass samples from actual construction sites in all parts of the country. Sure enough, these scratched glass samples exhibited a “rough surface” whereas many times similar glass windows on the same job site exhibited a smooth surface and did not scratch even though the same cleaning methods were used.
Fourth, at last years IWCA Convention we introduced the idea that the rough surface of glass that appears more likely to scratch could be due to a change at the micro or nano level, and the term nanoscale roughness was introduced. There is an entire field of science that discusses how surfaces with a nanoscale roughness may be more prone to physical damage. The question remained however - how do the “rough surfaces” that are encountered in the field originate? Do they develop during the tempering process? Or are there other considerations? Could the development of such nanoscale roughness go back to the actual float glass process where glass is made on a bed of molten tin - producing what is known as an “air side” and a “tin side”?
It is interesting to note in the IWCA collection of scratched glass with “rough” surfaces the tin side usually corresponded with the rough side, which corresponded with the scratched side. Should this surprise us? Is it possible that the tin side of float glass can develop a "random roughness"?
To begin to understand this, I direct your attention to the paper “Statistical Analysis of the Metrological Properties of Float Glass” by Brian W. Yates and Alan M. Duffy. This paper speaks of a “surface roughness” that develops on the tin side of float glass and reports “It can be seen that the overall tin side surface roughness average is indeed rougher on average than the air side”. The conclusion reads: “Statistically significant differences were found between the tin and air side surface roughness values for both untreated and acid treated, with the tin side being significantly rougher than the air side.”
Is there a definite link between the rough tin side of some glass surfaces and surface scratching? Does post production heat treatment of glass exacerbate the roughness of some glass surfaces? These questions will be closely examined as you are about to see.
Armed with this knowledge, questions and the collection of scratched glass samples, the IWCA has embarked on the first of its kind scientific research during the summer of 2016. Dr. Paul Duffer has led the way for the IWCA to participate in a special research program at the world class Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Pennsylvania State University. Professor Seong Kim, phd is dedicated to materials science and has much experience with glass surface studies. He will oversee the IWCA research of scratched glass at Penn State.
The IWCA is dedicated to helping window cleaners better understand the glass surfaces that window cleaners work on daily. Armed with knowledge as an industry we can develop cleaning methods and practices that will assist us in maintaining the integrity and beauty of glass, reduce possible damage, and adequately protect ourselves should aggressive cleaning techniques and restoration become necessary on a job site.
Please, stay tuned.
Paul West
IWCA Glass Committee Chair
kohalapaul@gmail.com
To recieve these posts directly in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
To recieve these posts directly in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Saturday, July 23, 2016
Know Your Glass !!!
The focus of this post is just glass. I am not talking about coatings of any kind. Glass itself (even when it is perfectly clean without any mineral deposits) can have different surfaces. Over the years I have found that razor blades will either slide across a surface with incredible ease, or drag like you were moving across a hard wooden surface. Then there is anything in between. So I have got into the habit of first listening to see if the surface is defective tempered glass. Henceforth I am NOT going to use the term Fabrication Debris. Cuz I simply don't know if this is indeed NOT a lie. Fabricated by very smart minds over many years. With the best of intentions, and a very noble agenda. One reason is, because believe it or not, I have also come across very rough annealed glass that did produce scratches. Which were only visible in the direct sunlight at just the right angle. These did come out with a light polish using cerium oxide slow. I have also developed the habit of feeling clean dry surfaces with a dry fingertip. Another favorite tool has been a simple penny. Lightly dragging it across a clean dry surface will produce a sound. It will even drag at certain points revealing the glass has patchy areas of roughness. Next I might use pure water on a clean paper towel and wet the entire window. First I will clean the window and wipe the edges. This will show up the "chemistry" of the surface. If there are any invisible chemical contaminants present this will show them up. A much more definitive test using water is to cold steam the surface so that you create microdroplets or a fog. If you look at any fogged glass surface with a 30 power hand held lighted microscope you will see the microdroplets. These will form a pattern on the glass showing very precisely how "clean" it is.
I was talking to a fellow Window Cleaner a month ago who works in my area and made the point that not all glass is the same. Then before I even started to explain myself he said absolutely! He has been doing this work for 10 to 15 years and has experienced firsthand exactly what I was referring to. I know we all have talked about the "old" glass. It is usually very hydrophobic. No sealants. Feels super smooth to the touch. Razor blades just glide across it with extreme ease. I mean it is just a beautiful surface. One hundred years later! Now how is it that brand new glass is coming out so different? Another interesting point about tempered glass. We are always talking about defective surfaces regarding this glass. But it is possible to find tempered surfaces that are as I put it really "tight"! Super smooth to the fingertip or the razors edge. I can ask the same exact question regarding these wonderful surfaces as I do regarding the wonderfully smooth surfaces of some very old glass;...WHY!
Obviously something is afoot here that wasn't so much a hundred years ago. Also there is something going on in the factories today that either no one knows about, or are very reluctant to let us in on. I do believe that whatever it is we can figure it out. This is a material world. Not talking about mad Donna here. We have a good understanding of chemistry. We know about physics. We can "see" individual atoms and watch as they blink on and off. We have transmitting electron microscopes to show us nano surfaces using electron waves. So I propose this. I do believe Paul Duffer, Paul West, and the IWCA will indeed get to the bottom of it all in time. Waiting for the end of summer people. There are several basic reasons why glass surfaces today and yesterday can be very different from one another. Also, these reasons can be explained using chemistry and physics. So while I certainly don't have your bux, knowledge, or contacts, I will just sit here, wait, watch, and write. HAVE AT IT GUYS!!!
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing the Product Development Review
35 dollars per issue per month
To receive these posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top "Follow by Email".
I was talking to a fellow Window Cleaner a month ago who works in my area and made the point that not all glass is the same. Then before I even started to explain myself he said absolutely! He has been doing this work for 10 to 15 years and has experienced firsthand exactly what I was referring to. I know we all have talked about the "old" glass. It is usually very hydrophobic. No sealants. Feels super smooth to the touch. Razor blades just glide across it with extreme ease. I mean it is just a beautiful surface. One hundred years later! Now how is it that brand new glass is coming out so different? Another interesting point about tempered glass. We are always talking about defective surfaces regarding this glass. But it is possible to find tempered surfaces that are as I put it really "tight"! Super smooth to the fingertip or the razors edge. I can ask the same exact question regarding these wonderful surfaces as I do regarding the wonderfully smooth surfaces of some very old glass;...WHY!
Obviously something is afoot here that wasn't so much a hundred years ago. Also there is something going on in the factories today that either no one knows about, or are very reluctant to let us in on. I do believe that whatever it is we can figure it out. This is a material world. Not talking about mad Donna here. We have a good understanding of chemistry. We know about physics. We can "see" individual atoms and watch as they blink on and off. We have transmitting electron microscopes to show us nano surfaces using electron waves. So I propose this. I do believe Paul Duffer, Paul West, and the IWCA will indeed get to the bottom of it all in time. Waiting for the end of summer people. There are several basic reasons why glass surfaces today and yesterday can be very different from one another. Also, these reasons can be explained using chemistry and physics. So while I certainly don't have your bux, knowledge, or contacts, I will just sit here, wait, watch, and write. HAVE AT IT GUYS!!!
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing the Product Development Review
35 dollars per issue per month
To receive these posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top "Follow by Email".
Thursday, July 21, 2016
Is Fabrication Debris a Lie?
The following is an article I wrote for the WCBO some time ago. Which is a publication of the Window Cleaning Resource. Chris and Alex Lambrinides have allowed me to write it again here and to make ammendments in light of more recent discoveries and theories. The research of the two Pauls has also very recently been expanded in a very powerful way. Which I will be writing about shortly. But not in this post. Here is the article I originally wrote for the WCBO including an addendum that was never published anywhere.
The Ghost Particle Amended
After discussing with Paul West the results of the tests performed for their presentation at the last IWCA convention entitled “A Search for the Invisible Intruder”, I couldn’t resist giving this article the title “Ghost Particle”. When Paul West and Paul Duffer (henceforth to be referred to as the two Pauls) embarked on this mission of eminence, I don’t think they had any concept of where it was going to take them. Into a bright light that was going to shine on everyone of us bringing the kind of glory that we certainly wouldn’t run from. Or into a dark cavern of inexplicable horrors. I can now see that it was the latter. No one could have been more surprised then the two Pauls.
Since they quite lucidly explained everything at the convention using exceptionally high quality slides for visual impact and education, any reference to their discoveries here will be simple reiteration. Yet for an intended purpose. That being to refresh our memory of what was discovered and discussed, in order to assist in leading us out of the dark cave. To get there however we will have to continue what was started many years ago. As have the two Pauls. That being namely an in depth study of the physical and possibly chemical mechanisms involved in the issue of scratches on architectural flat glass surfaces. This will bring us the glory that none will want to run from.
All scientific studies begin with a question. This was no different. The question was very simply, “Can we absolutely identify the invisible intruder?”. In other words (these being my own), is it indeed possible to prove beyond question that fabrication debris does become fused to a glass surface during the tempering process? Sufficiently so that when broken away or dislodged with a metal scraper and dragged across the glass surface, that Ghost Particle would create a scratch. They were also in high hopes of being able to very specifically characterize scratches caused by such a particle for easy identification in future field cases. Unfortunately their experiments while shedding light on these questions, did not give them the absolutes they were hoping for. Instead their test results raised more questions. Which I believe must be answered before we can progress in our understanding.
While I do not believe in ghosts, I do believe in what I will call here the Ghost Particle. It is in fact invisible. Or is it? The two Pauls did prove that sand particles (which are very abundant in the field) can be harder than glass. These particles can easily cause scratches on glass. Such as when dragged under a squeegee rubber, steel wool, cloth, or even a metal razor. Glass particles/fabrication debris/microfines can also scratch. A metal stylus can scratch. Along with other different particles and objects that are as hard as or harder than glass. The question again was, is it possible to determine exactly what caused the scratch with a microscope? Was it a metal stylus, a particle of sand, or a glass particle/microfine? Paul West told me that it is only possible to determine whether it was a blunt object or a rather sharp one such as a particle of sand or glass. During the IWCA presentation slides of scratches all caused by hard sharp particles were shown. Everyone was asked if they could tell exactly what caused these scratches. No one was able to offer a definitive conclusion. No one knew. Even the point of indentation (where the scratch begins) showed no apparent difference. In fact the total scratch morphology (point of indentation, track, and finish) gave us no clue as to exactly what sharp particle caused the scratch.
Here is another question. We have always believed that microfine particles released by flat glass when it is scoured and broken, are pushed into and fused to the glass surface during the tempering process. Actually bonded to the glass surface. So the two Pauls set up a few different experiments hoping to duplicate this effect. While they did have limited success, the results were much less than favorable in proving our previous beliefs beyond a question or doubt. What they did reveal were some very interesting results. Which in my opinion, will force us to reconsider/rethink and develop more powerful analytical techniques. What we absolutely need is a full color video showing the face of our Ghost Particle wearing a sneer. But with the high tech analytical tools of this century, I don’t see that as being very difficult. Just expensive.
Simply put, when they did their tests they were not able to permanently fuse glass particles to the surface. They used different sized particles of glass and sand. These could be pushed into the glass, but would not bond or fuse once the glass cooled. Every particle was quite easily removed. When glass is heated in the tempering process the surface becomes rather soft. And so as has been stated they were able to impinge glass and sand particles into it. However both the glass and sand particles just ‘popped out’. Most times they just blew away. According to Paul West it was very difficult to get sand or glass particles to stick to glass. Even when the particles were sandwiched between two pieces of glass and put through the tempering oven, as much as 95% of the particles could be easily brushed off.
What is truly fascinating about these results is that they seem to run contrary to my own personal experience. In the last 33 years of cleaning windows I have uncovered many window glass surfaces that seemed to have very small hard particles permanently embedded. When I scraped I could hear that tell tale sound. Then when I soaped, squeegeed, soaped again with clean water, and scraped again;...I could still hear the same sound. The Ghost Particle was seemingly still there. It was also seemingly embedded in the glass surface. Further, I ended up creating scratches when I scraped these windows. At times the scratches could only be seen in the direct sun because they were so small. Even microscopic. But they showed every pass of the razor.
I concluded that I was dealing with embedded particles because of my experience and what we as window cleaners have believed for many years. Which still might be the absolute truth. However it is good to consider something at this juncture. That sound is not necessarily proof of a particle. We might be dealing with a collection of depressions with microscopic chips removed, or indentation fractures, or something else completely unknown. The Ghost Particle might not even be a particle at all. I still do believe nonetheless that it wears a sneer. I also believe that the only real absolute we currently own is the fact that all surfaces are not created equal.
Here is one very interesting experience I would like to relate. I was called out to a new commercial building. There were many very noticeable heavy scratches on the glass. The windows were so bad I figured I couldn’t do any more damage. But I tried. With the permission of the contractor/builder I soaped up the window and tried real hard to create more scratches with ‘my’ razor. I ran it in a different direction than the existing scratches so I could easily tell the difference between my scratches and those already there. Yes I could hear that characteristic sound like scraping sandpaper. The surface was seemingly loaded with very hard embedded particles. But I just could not create scratches. Why? To this day I don’t know. All I can do is guess. One thing is sure however. I definitely saved one poor window cleaner. If that isn’t twisted I don’t know what is!
I am sure we can locate and expose the Ghost Particle. Even if it isn’t a particle at all. We need to first find a window that is easy to scratch with a blade. Or any other tool of choice. Create scratches with a unique pattern. Then put a microscope right on it. We might need to remove the window from the sash and bring it into a lab. But either way, we need to implement much more advanced analytical techniques in order to more accurately identify the true nature of this problem/condition. We need to continue this study which we began many years ago. Lets work along with the two Pauls on this quest of eminence. Out of the cave and into the light.
I have also proven just the opposite of this test. By running the razor in the opposite direction I did indeed create more scratches. So this defective tempered surface did produce scratches with the use of a razor. The apparent FD was very heavy. The resulting scratches were rather deep and very easy to see. I have also produced very light scratches on tempered glass. Further;... I have even produced very fine scratches on annealed glass. This is absolute heresy! Such that could never be forgiven. I am sure the masses will dam me to eternal pits of molten tin for writing this! But I was told by Paul West today that he has actually obtained a sample of just this. I would like you to consider some interesting questions.
First have you ever wondered why FD is evenly spread across the entire window? Shouldn't it be patchy? It is also not just evenly spread but is either very fine, very course, or anything in between. But it is never mixed. As if all the particles were all the same exact size. "Dirt" is made up of many different sized particles. Also. If the same exact process is used for scouring and breaking to size all sheets of glass before tempering, wouldn't these microfines be the same exact size in every situation? This would mean that all of the scratches produced on every window should be the same. But they are not. As I have explained here some are very deep, and others are microscopic resulting in what looks like streaks.
In my last post "Stop Scratching Glass" I used the term Fabrication Debris or FD. We have been taught that this is an unquestionable truth. I used the term for lack of another. In our industry there is no other term. But I believe there should be. Consider that there might be no FD. Consider that our understanding of this entire issue could be completely wrong. Not that glass surfaces are not many times defective. Why;... they are getting worse with every passing day. But exactly what is happening? I really believe that even the glass industry doesn't know the answers. So again I have to say, lets support the two Pauls on this quest of eminence. Out of the cave and into the light.
The next post I write will shed light on this issue/topic, and discuss a research project that will run for the next three months until the end of the summer of 2016. You will not want to miss any of these posts.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing the Product Development Review
35 dollars per issue per month
To receive these posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
The Ghost Particle Amended
After discussing with Paul West the results of the tests performed for their presentation at the last IWCA convention entitled “A Search for the Invisible Intruder”, I couldn’t resist giving this article the title “Ghost Particle”. When Paul West and Paul Duffer (henceforth to be referred to as the two Pauls) embarked on this mission of eminence, I don’t think they had any concept of where it was going to take them. Into a bright light that was going to shine on everyone of us bringing the kind of glory that we certainly wouldn’t run from. Or into a dark cavern of inexplicable horrors. I can now see that it was the latter. No one could have been more surprised then the two Pauls.
Since they quite lucidly explained everything at the convention using exceptionally high quality slides for visual impact and education, any reference to their discoveries here will be simple reiteration. Yet for an intended purpose. That being to refresh our memory of what was discovered and discussed, in order to assist in leading us out of the dark cave. To get there however we will have to continue what was started many years ago. As have the two Pauls. That being namely an in depth study of the physical and possibly chemical mechanisms involved in the issue of scratches on architectural flat glass surfaces. This will bring us the glory that none will want to run from.
All scientific studies begin with a question. This was no different. The question was very simply, “Can we absolutely identify the invisible intruder?”. In other words (these being my own), is it indeed possible to prove beyond question that fabrication debris does become fused to a glass surface during the tempering process? Sufficiently so that when broken away or dislodged with a metal scraper and dragged across the glass surface, that Ghost Particle would create a scratch. They were also in high hopes of being able to very specifically characterize scratches caused by such a particle for easy identification in future field cases. Unfortunately their experiments while shedding light on these questions, did not give them the absolutes they were hoping for. Instead their test results raised more questions. Which I believe must be answered before we can progress in our understanding.
While I do not believe in ghosts, I do believe in what I will call here the Ghost Particle. It is in fact invisible. Or is it? The two Pauls did prove that sand particles (which are very abundant in the field) can be harder than glass. These particles can easily cause scratches on glass. Such as when dragged under a squeegee rubber, steel wool, cloth, or even a metal razor. Glass particles/fabrication debris/microfines can also scratch. A metal stylus can scratch. Along with other different particles and objects that are as hard as or harder than glass. The question again was, is it possible to determine exactly what caused the scratch with a microscope? Was it a metal stylus, a particle of sand, or a glass particle/microfine? Paul West told me that it is only possible to determine whether it was a blunt object or a rather sharp one such as a particle of sand or glass. During the IWCA presentation slides of scratches all caused by hard sharp particles were shown. Everyone was asked if they could tell exactly what caused these scratches. No one was able to offer a definitive conclusion. No one knew. Even the point of indentation (where the scratch begins) showed no apparent difference. In fact the total scratch morphology (point of indentation, track, and finish) gave us no clue as to exactly what sharp particle caused the scratch.
Here is another question. We have always believed that microfine particles released by flat glass when it is scoured and broken, are pushed into and fused to the glass surface during the tempering process. Actually bonded to the glass surface. So the two Pauls set up a few different experiments hoping to duplicate this effect. While they did have limited success, the results were much less than favorable in proving our previous beliefs beyond a question or doubt. What they did reveal were some very interesting results. Which in my opinion, will force us to reconsider/rethink and develop more powerful analytical techniques. What we absolutely need is a full color video showing the face of our Ghost Particle wearing a sneer. But with the high tech analytical tools of this century, I don’t see that as being very difficult. Just expensive.
Simply put, when they did their tests they were not able to permanently fuse glass particles to the surface. They used different sized particles of glass and sand. These could be pushed into the glass, but would not bond or fuse once the glass cooled. Every particle was quite easily removed. When glass is heated in the tempering process the surface becomes rather soft. And so as has been stated they were able to impinge glass and sand particles into it. However both the glass and sand particles just ‘popped out’. Most times they just blew away. According to Paul West it was very difficult to get sand or glass particles to stick to glass. Even when the particles were sandwiched between two pieces of glass and put through the tempering oven, as much as 95% of the particles could be easily brushed off.
What is truly fascinating about these results is that they seem to run contrary to my own personal experience. In the last 33 years of cleaning windows I have uncovered many window glass surfaces that seemed to have very small hard particles permanently embedded. When I scraped I could hear that tell tale sound. Then when I soaped, squeegeed, soaped again with clean water, and scraped again;...I could still hear the same sound. The Ghost Particle was seemingly still there. It was also seemingly embedded in the glass surface. Further, I ended up creating scratches when I scraped these windows. At times the scratches could only be seen in the direct sun because they were so small. Even microscopic. But they showed every pass of the razor.
I concluded that I was dealing with embedded particles because of my experience and what we as window cleaners have believed for many years. Which still might be the absolute truth. However it is good to consider something at this juncture. That sound is not necessarily proof of a particle. We might be dealing with a collection of depressions with microscopic chips removed, or indentation fractures, or something else completely unknown. The Ghost Particle might not even be a particle at all. I still do believe nonetheless that it wears a sneer. I also believe that the only real absolute we currently own is the fact that all surfaces are not created equal.
Here is one very interesting experience I would like to relate. I was called out to a new commercial building. There were many very noticeable heavy scratches on the glass. The windows were so bad I figured I couldn’t do any more damage. But I tried. With the permission of the contractor/builder I soaped up the window and tried real hard to create more scratches with ‘my’ razor. I ran it in a different direction than the existing scratches so I could easily tell the difference between my scratches and those already there. Yes I could hear that characteristic sound like scraping sandpaper. The surface was seemingly loaded with very hard embedded particles. But I just could not create scratches. Why? To this day I don’t know. All I can do is guess. One thing is sure however. I definitely saved one poor window cleaner. If that isn’t twisted I don’t know what is!
I am sure we can locate and expose the Ghost Particle. Even if it isn’t a particle at all. We need to first find a window that is easy to scratch with a blade. Or any other tool of choice. Create scratches with a unique pattern. Then put a microscope right on it. We might need to remove the window from the sash and bring it into a lab. But either way, we need to implement much more advanced analytical techniques in order to more accurately identify the true nature of this problem/condition. We need to continue this study which we began many years ago. Lets work along with the two Pauls on this quest of eminence. Out of the cave and into the light.
I have also proven just the opposite of this test. By running the razor in the opposite direction I did indeed create more scratches. So this defective tempered surface did produce scratches with the use of a razor. The apparent FD was very heavy. The resulting scratches were rather deep and very easy to see. I have also produced very light scratches on tempered glass. Further;... I have even produced very fine scratches on annealed glass. This is absolute heresy! Such that could never be forgiven. I am sure the masses will dam me to eternal pits of molten tin for writing this! But I was told by Paul West today that he has actually obtained a sample of just this. I would like you to consider some interesting questions.
First have you ever wondered why FD is evenly spread across the entire window? Shouldn't it be patchy? It is also not just evenly spread but is either very fine, very course, or anything in between. But it is never mixed. As if all the particles were all the same exact size. "Dirt" is made up of many different sized particles. Also. If the same exact process is used for scouring and breaking to size all sheets of glass before tempering, wouldn't these microfines be the same exact size in every situation? This would mean that all of the scratches produced on every window should be the same. But they are not. As I have explained here some are very deep, and others are microscopic resulting in what looks like streaks.
In my last post "Stop Scratching Glass" I used the term Fabrication Debris or FD. We have been taught that this is an unquestionable truth. I used the term for lack of another. In our industry there is no other term. But I believe there should be. Consider that there might be no FD. Consider that our understanding of this entire issue could be completely wrong. Not that glass surfaces are not many times defective. Why;... they are getting worse with every passing day. But exactly what is happening? I really believe that even the glass industry doesn't know the answers. So again I have to say, lets support the two Pauls on this quest of eminence. Out of the cave and into the light.
The next post I write will shed light on this issue/topic, and discuss a research project that will run for the next three months until the end of the summer of 2016. You will not want to miss any of these posts.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing the Product Development Review
35 dollars per issue per month
To receive these posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Stop Scratching Glass!
I know I am going to get some negative feedback from this post. But I really feel it needs to be written. There are too many innocent Window Cleaners who have fallen victim to the indifferent attitude of glass manufacturers. Tempered glass surfaces are almost always defective these days. The tempering fabricators simply don't care cuz the defects cannot be seen. It is only the Window Cleaners that end up suffering the repercussions of such poor surfaces. And what are we to them? Pimples on the butt of a bug on someones butt. Tempered glass will likely get worse. So we need to be prepared with knowledge. And pass this knowledge to everyone we can. Especially General Contractors. We might never win the war. But we can win a few wars along the way if we can turn some tempered glass BACK to the factories. For this to happen we need to start testing tempered glass BEFORE it is installed. To accomplish this we MUST educate, educate, educate. Lets start with our own companies.
First we need to know that all fabrication debris issues are not the same. The sound alone will tell you that. Sometimes when you use a metal razor on tempered glass it wants to drag. The glass is not smooth. No scratches can be seen however. But when you look at the window in the bright sunlight, at just the right angle you will see waves of zillions of almost microscopic scratches. This condition can bring on a lawsuit. Or. The scratches might be very light, easily seen, and cover the entire plate. Other times the scratches can be very light but not great in number. Then too they might be rather heavy and deep. Covering the entire plate. They could also be deep but very few in number. Also there could be anything in between what I have described here. The sound of fabrication debris when scraped is always different if the scratch ID pattern is different. It is difficult to know when we are working on defective tempered glass most times because the sound is different. It is also true that many times larger Window Cleaning companies do not have the advantage of using employees that are educated well enough regarding defective tempered glass.
Another misunderstanding I believe has to do with the fact that metal razor blades are NOT the only tool that will dislodge the fabrication debris which is what leaves the scratches. I have seen scratches caused by Fab Debris moved by 0000 steel wool, plastic scrapers, and other tools and processes. So many Window Cleaners believe that if they are NOT using razor blades they are safe. This is simply NOT true. Again this fact brings us back to what I believe is the true reason for scratched glass. That being defective surfaces and fabrication debris on tempered glass.
I used to believe that a blind window cleaner had a serious handicap. Most of you would probably agree with me. Now I also believe that a deaf Window Cleaner is seriously handicapped. We must train our ears, and our fingertips. Thank you Chris and Alex Lambrinides for this video.
I know from my 35 years cleaning windows that I am relatively safe when working on tempered glass. Although I have made mistakes from poor judgement. As tempered glass becomes more problematic the challenge of cleaning it will become greater. And the burden will likely always be on the Window Cleaner. In my opinion.
So. I am first of all in favor of the waiver. I am also in favor of self education. Also educating every employee in the company. Also educating all of our customers and potential customers. Especially General Contractors and anyone who sells or installs windows. I am very much in favor of looking for alternatives to the use of anything that could potentially remove and drag FB creating scratches. Such alternatives might include composition abrasives with a hardness much less then glass. Or certain very powerful organic solvents. Or special chemicals, maybe acids that will safely remove concrete and or stucco. These alternatives are one thing I am working on as I research commercial products and develop my own transformer products. My findings will be reported on in my e-newsletter the Product Development Review. All chemicals, ingredients, formulas, and product names, and addresses will be given. Along with regular email updates/reports throughout the month. The PDR is available for 35 dollars per monthly issue. Just send me an email. And I will send the PDF by email attachment. Then a PayPal bill in another email. The August issue is entitled Orange Power. It is focused on naturally occurring green organic solvents.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
To receive these posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right "Follow by Email".
First we need to know that all fabrication debris issues are not the same. The sound alone will tell you that. Sometimes when you use a metal razor on tempered glass it wants to drag. The glass is not smooth. No scratches can be seen however. But when you look at the window in the bright sunlight, at just the right angle you will see waves of zillions of almost microscopic scratches. This condition can bring on a lawsuit. Or. The scratches might be very light, easily seen, and cover the entire plate. Other times the scratches can be very light but not great in number. Then too they might be rather heavy and deep. Covering the entire plate. They could also be deep but very few in number. Also there could be anything in between what I have described here. The sound of fabrication debris when scraped is always different if the scratch ID pattern is different. It is difficult to know when we are working on defective tempered glass most times because the sound is different. It is also true that many times larger Window Cleaning companies do not have the advantage of using employees that are educated well enough regarding defective tempered glass.
Another misunderstanding I believe has to do with the fact that metal razor blades are NOT the only tool that will dislodge the fabrication debris which is what leaves the scratches. I have seen scratches caused by Fab Debris moved by 0000 steel wool, plastic scrapers, and other tools and processes. So many Window Cleaners believe that if they are NOT using razor blades they are safe. This is simply NOT true. Again this fact brings us back to what I believe is the true reason for scratched glass. That being defective surfaces and fabrication debris on tempered glass.
I used to believe that a blind window cleaner had a serious handicap. Most of you would probably agree with me. Now I also believe that a deaf Window Cleaner is seriously handicapped. We must train our ears, and our fingertips. Thank you Chris and Alex Lambrinides for this video.
I know from my 35 years cleaning windows that I am relatively safe when working on tempered glass. Although I have made mistakes from poor judgement. As tempered glass becomes more problematic the challenge of cleaning it will become greater. And the burden will likely always be on the Window Cleaner. In my opinion.
So. I am first of all in favor of the waiver. I am also in favor of self education. Also educating every employee in the company. Also educating all of our customers and potential customers. Especially General Contractors and anyone who sells or installs windows. I am very much in favor of looking for alternatives to the use of anything that could potentially remove and drag FB creating scratches. Such alternatives might include composition abrasives with a hardness much less then glass. Or certain very powerful organic solvents. Or special chemicals, maybe acids that will safely remove concrete and or stucco. These alternatives are one thing I am working on as I research commercial products and develop my own transformer products. My findings will be reported on in my e-newsletter the Product Development Review. All chemicals, ingredients, formulas, and product names, and addresses will be given. Along with regular email updates/reports throughout the month. The PDR is available for 35 dollars per monthly issue. Just send me an email. And I will send the PDF by email attachment. Then a PayPal bill in another email. The August issue is entitled Orange Power. It is focused on naturally occurring green organic solvents.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
To receive these posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right "Follow by Email".
Monday, July 18, 2016
Crossover Technologies
Glass is not only a construction material. It is also a very unique and unusual material used in creating fantastic works of art. Although I will grant you that so many of these high rise buildings that have thousands of windows are also very artistic creations. Take for example Jack Storms. Here is a young man that has developed a form of artwork using cold leaded glass and dichroic coatings. Some individual pieces go for as much as 150,000 bux! Check out this video. I am very certain you will be amazed.
Also check out some of the beautiful blown glass pieces done by many hot glass artists over time. I recently took a trip down to the Sandwich Glass Museum in Mass. Here is a little video I made showing the wonder of blown glass. At the end I took some video clips of a very young man making a lamp. This is a 30 minute show that the museum puts on every hour throughout the day. The full video is only five and a half minutes long.
Working with either hot or cold glass as an art form requires a great deal of hands on experience. It also requires an understanding of a different technology or science. For example. In working with cold glass there are different grinding and polishing techniques to cut the glass to shape and then return it to a perfect luster. Jack Storms uses a special "glue" that has the same refractive index as glass to bond the different pieces or slices together. When working with hot glass temperature is critical to whether the glass will literally break into several shards and fall to the floor. When a piece is done it must be put in the back burner at a temperature of around 950 degrees for a full day. Because it must cool down to 950 from 2300 over the course of a full day. Otherwise it might break. When working with it at maximum heat it must be maintained at this temperature. Because this is how the air that is blown into it expands the vase. You will notice in the video how Alex keeps putting the work piece back in the glory hole. Temperature also has a lot to do with fusing two different glass pieces together also. This directly relates to how glass fines become part of the surface when the glass plates are passed through the oven and over the ceramic rollers. Does the temperature of the glass fines make a difference as to whether or not they will become part of the glass?
So you can get a glimpse of the crossover technology. I am very sure the deeper I look the more similarities I will discover. And when I do they will be published here on this blog. So keep reading.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
If you would like these posts to appear in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Also check out some of the beautiful blown glass pieces done by many hot glass artists over time. I recently took a trip down to the Sandwich Glass Museum in Mass. Here is a little video I made showing the wonder of blown glass. At the end I took some video clips of a very young man making a lamp. This is a 30 minute show that the museum puts on every hour throughout the day. The full video is only five and a half minutes long.
Working with either hot or cold glass as an art form requires a great deal of hands on experience. It also requires an understanding of a different technology or science. For example. In working with cold glass there are different grinding and polishing techniques to cut the glass to shape and then return it to a perfect luster. Jack Storms uses a special "glue" that has the same refractive index as glass to bond the different pieces or slices together. When working with hot glass temperature is critical to whether the glass will literally break into several shards and fall to the floor. When a piece is done it must be put in the back burner at a temperature of around 950 degrees for a full day. Because it must cool down to 950 from 2300 over the course of a full day. Otherwise it might break. When working with it at maximum heat it must be maintained at this temperature. Because this is how the air that is blown into it expands the vase. You will notice in the video how Alex keeps putting the work piece back in the glory hole. Temperature also has a lot to do with fusing two different glass pieces together also. This directly relates to how glass fines become part of the surface when the glass plates are passed through the oven and over the ceramic rollers. Does the temperature of the glass fines make a difference as to whether or not they will become part of the glass?
So you can get a glimpse of the crossover technology. I am very sure the deeper I look the more similarities I will discover. And when I do they will be published here on this blog. So keep reading.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
If you would like these posts to appear in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Sunday, July 10, 2016
Orange Power and the Science of Organic Solvents
Organic solvents are simply put hydrocarbon liquids that break up and dissolve other hydrocarbon based substances. Some other elements other than carbon and hydrogen that OS molecules use are oxygen, chlorine, and nitrogen. The OS molecules will move through and surround the molecules of the solute (that which is being dissolved) forming a solution.
Now there are two very basic types of organic solvents;...polar and nonpolar. OS liquids with a dielectric constant of less than 15 are said to be nonpolar. Those with a very high dielectric constant are said to be polar. This is important to us because it helps us to choose the best OS for the job. Since like dissolves like, deposits that are very polar require very polar solvents to dissolve them. The opposite is also true. Most oils and waxes are very nonpolar. Hence they require very nonpolar liquids such as hexane to dissolve them. It follows from this that it is important to determine exactly what the polarity of the substance being removed is. Then match that with the right OS with the same polarity. A quick search on the net will reveal the dielectric constant, and therefore the polarity of both the substance to be removed and the OS needed to dissolve it.
There are also protic and aprotic polar solvents. Protic solvents work well with negatively charged solutes. While aprotic solvents work well with positively charged solutes. The solute being the substance in need of being removed/ dissolved. You can find quick lists of protics and aprotics on the net. Remember any OS with a dielectric constant in excess of 15 is polar. Less than 15 is nonpolar.
Some other properties we might want to look at are melting point, boiling point, autoignition temperature, and water solubility/miscibility. The melting point is also the temperature at which the OS will become rigid or form a solid. Which is difficult if not impossible to work with. So a melting point of zero Fahrenheit would be nice since the solvent will be in a liquid state from zero and up. The boiling point is the temperature at which the OS becomes a vapor or gas. Since there are times we are working on very hot glass it would be good to have an OS with a relatively high boiling point. Anything above 250 Fahrenheit would be perfect. So a solvent with a melting point of zero and a boiling point of 250 means that our OS will be liquid from zero to 250 Fahrenheit. Next a solvent with a very high autoignition
I am in the consulting business of developing what I call custom transformer products for the window cleaning industry. The turnkey for these products is the PDR.
The Product Development Review on "Orange Power" gives all the information of the ingredients and where to purchase them. Along with the formulas of how to put it together. This is a two to three page PDF electronic newsletter sent by email attachment for 35 dollars.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
If you would like to automatically receive these posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Now there are two very basic types of organic solvents;...polar and nonpolar. OS liquids with a dielectric constant of less than 15 are said to be nonpolar. Those with a very high dielectric constant are said to be polar. This is important to us because it helps us to choose the best OS for the job. Since like dissolves like, deposits that are very polar require very polar solvents to dissolve them. The opposite is also true. Most oils and waxes are very nonpolar. Hence they require very nonpolar liquids such as hexane to dissolve them. It follows from this that it is important to determine exactly what the polarity of the substance being removed is. Then match that with the right OS with the same polarity. A quick search on the net will reveal the dielectric constant, and therefore the polarity of both the substance to be removed and the OS needed to dissolve it.
There are also protic and aprotic polar solvents. Protic solvents work well with negatively charged solutes. While aprotic solvents work well with positively charged solutes. The solute being the substance in need of being removed/ dissolved. You can find quick lists of protics and aprotics on the net. Remember any OS with a dielectric constant in excess of 15 is polar. Less than 15 is nonpolar.
Some other properties we might want to look at are melting point, boiling point, autoignition temperature, and water solubility/miscibility. The melting point is also the temperature at which the OS will become rigid or form a solid. Which is difficult if not impossible to work with. So a melting point of zero Fahrenheit would be nice since the solvent will be in a liquid state from zero and up. The boiling point is the temperature at which the OS becomes a vapor or gas. Since there are times we are working on very hot glass it would be good to have an OS with a relatively high boiling point. Anything above 250 Fahrenheit would be perfect. So a solvent with a melting point of zero and a boiling point of 250 means that our OS will be liquid from zero to 250 Fahrenheit. Next a solvent with a very high autoignition
temperature will not automatically ignite without notice. It will not flash in our face without warning. If our OS were soluble or easily emulsified in water it will be easy to remove from the window once it has done its job. Lets next take a look at an OS that comes from the rind of an orange. It is gaining much attention in the cleaning industry because it is relatively nontoxic yet powerful enough to dissolve many hydrocarbon based substances. It has a boiling point of 349 Fahrenheit. A melting point of -140 Fahrenheit. (So it is a liquid between -140 and 349) A flashpoint of 110 degrees. Autoignition temp of 458. Although it is not soluble/miscible in water it can be blended with certain synthetic detergents so that it is easily emulsified by water. The dielectric constant is 2.3 as it is an aprotic nonpolar solvent. It is used as a paint stripper and a cleaner. It is actually possible to add it directly to water if it has been emulsified with the correct nonpolar solvent. It is easy to remove from glass with any cleaning solution. And is very effective at dissolving most non polar aprotic organics. It will soften water based paints making them very easy to remove with a plastic compositional abrasive. This way we can get away from using a razor on bad tempered glass. Just apply the product, wait a few minutes, and rub the paint. Then soap up the window and squeegee it off. It also softens fully cured silicone caulk (this is not a hydrocarbon but is rather based on an Si-O repeater backbone chain). When blended with a plastic compositional with a particle of about 100 microns it will dig through silicone caulk. Also it can be added directly to a microcrystalline silica for removing every last molecule of silicone from glass. Further it will soften fully cured oil based paints. And works on many other hydrocarbons.
I am in the consulting business of developing what I call custom transformer products for the window cleaning industry. The turnkey for these products is the PDR.
The Product Development Review on "Orange Power" gives all the information of the ingredients and where to purchase them. Along with the formulas of how to put it together. This is a two to three page PDF electronic newsletter sent by email attachment for 35 dollars.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
If you would like to automatically receive these posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Monday, July 4, 2016
Micro-Crystalline Silica for Glass Restoration
At less than 50 cents per pound micro-crystalline silica certainly is in competition with cerium oxide and many other polishing superabrasives. Cerium is up to eighty bux a pound. But don't be fooled. micro-crystalline silica does have its drawbacks. The biggest is cancer. It is a carcinogen. In powder form that is. For this reason silica powder is not sold by many companies. Instead they sell colloidal suspensions of micro-crystalline silica. Whether that be a powder made by crushing naturally occuring minerals/rocks. Or a man made amorphous silica. When silica particles are suspended in fluid dispersions it is hard to breath them in. Which is the primary way they cause cancer.
Some guys will polish glass dry. This releases a glass dust. It is not crystalline. But the particles are microscopic. Usually around 3 microns in size. Because the size of the silicon carbide or SiC used in the polishing pad is close to this size. If you do this type of work you should absolutely wear the best protection possible. That being a face mask that will block a particle of this size. Such a face mask should also be used if you are creating a slurry, colloidal suspension, or compound based on a micro-crystalline particle of this approximate size.
Micro-crystalline silica as was mentioned here is found in nature. It usually includes other minerals too. These are what give the rocks different colors. Such as rose quartz. The silica that is closest to being just SiO2 is the most transparent. It is the most pure. Micro-crystalline silicas will have different crystal structures and different shaped particles. Hence they will have different hardnesses too. The purity rating is based on an average particle size. This is shown on a line graph. Say for example that the product is 95 percent 2.4 microns. That means that the other 5 percent is slightly less than and greater than 2.4 microns. You will also see the spread of elements such as iron, aluminum, and carbon that likely will be present. There should be a percentage for each of these listed. The crystal structure will be given, and the morphology of the particle.
It can be very dangerous how a slurry, colloidal suspension, or compound based on a micro-crystalline silica is used on glass for light stain removal. If a safe technique is not followed it is too easy to leave what I call a "scratch haze". In theory it is much more easy to do this with micro-crystalline silica rather than cerium oxide. Cerium is used to create a superior surface. A general rule to follow is to keep your felt flat on the window at all times, keep it moving slow (maybe only around 1,000 rpms), and watch your pressure. You absolutely NEVER want to lift up the edge of the polishing pad and rip into the glass moving up and down, left to right. This will most certainly create a scratch haze that will be totally invisible in the shade or on a cloudy overcast day. It will however be quite visible on a bright sunny day. Especially on the second story glass. To help with this technique I have shown how a "wobble wheel" can be built and used with various pads such as those made of felt.
Sometimes you might be working on specialty coatings on glass such as low e reflective first surface products. Some low e first surface coatings are hardly noticeable at all. As this technology gets better it will be even more difficult to quickly identify them by sight alone. It is not possible to use some of the more aggressive stain removal techniques for removing mineral deposits from such coatings. The "lighter touch" is absolutely critical for working with these problem situations.
The first newsletter called the Product Development Review focuses on light stain removal. These issues come out once a month. The second issue I have produced is on a product I call Soap N Seal. It seals glass when you clean the window. No extra time is required. These issues are 35 dollars each. They contain the formulas for making these products yourself. And list the sources for all the ingredients. If you want to subscribe just send an email to henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
Producing the Product Development Review
If you want to recieve the posts written here in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Some guys will polish glass dry. This releases a glass dust. It is not crystalline. But the particles are microscopic. Usually around 3 microns in size. Because the size of the silicon carbide or SiC used in the polishing pad is close to this size. If you do this type of work you should absolutely wear the best protection possible. That being a face mask that will block a particle of this size. Such a face mask should also be used if you are creating a slurry, colloidal suspension, or compound based on a micro-crystalline particle of this approximate size.
Micro-crystalline silica as was mentioned here is found in nature. It usually includes other minerals too. These are what give the rocks different colors. Such as rose quartz. The silica that is closest to being just SiO2 is the most transparent. It is the most pure. Micro-crystalline silicas will have different crystal structures and different shaped particles. Hence they will have different hardnesses too. The purity rating is based on an average particle size. This is shown on a line graph. Say for example that the product is 95 percent 2.4 microns. That means that the other 5 percent is slightly less than and greater than 2.4 microns. You will also see the spread of elements such as iron, aluminum, and carbon that likely will be present. There should be a percentage for each of these listed. The crystal structure will be given, and the morphology of the particle.
It can be very dangerous how a slurry, colloidal suspension, or compound based on a micro-crystalline silica is used on glass for light stain removal. If a safe technique is not followed it is too easy to leave what I call a "scratch haze". In theory it is much more easy to do this with micro-crystalline silica rather than cerium oxide. Cerium is used to create a superior surface. A general rule to follow is to keep your felt flat on the window at all times, keep it moving slow (maybe only around 1,000 rpms), and watch your pressure. You absolutely NEVER want to lift up the edge of the polishing pad and rip into the glass moving up and down, left to right. This will most certainly create a scratch haze that will be totally invisible in the shade or on a cloudy overcast day. It will however be quite visible on a bright sunny day. Especially on the second story glass. To help with this technique I have shown how a "wobble wheel" can be built and used with various pads such as those made of felt.
Sometimes you might be working on specialty coatings on glass such as low e reflective first surface products. Some low e first surface coatings are hardly noticeable at all. As this technology gets better it will be even more difficult to quickly identify them by sight alone. It is not possible to use some of the more aggressive stain removal techniques for removing mineral deposits from such coatings. The "lighter touch" is absolutely critical for working with these problem situations.
The first newsletter called the Product Development Review focuses on light stain removal. These issues come out once a month. The second issue I have produced is on a product I call Soap N Seal. It seals glass when you clean the window. No extra time is required. These issues are 35 dollars each. They contain the formulas for making these products yourself. And list the sources for all the ingredients. If you want to subscribe just send an email to henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
Producing the Product Development Review
If you want to recieve the posts written here in your inbox as they are written just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Saturday, July 2, 2016
Soap N Seal is out!
The Product Development Review for July 2016 is ready. I have wrote it on my latest product Soap N Seal. If you are looking to make glass easier to clean for you and your customers all you have to do now is soap up the window and squeegee it off. No extra time or work required. Seal as you clean.
This is a transformer product. No manufacturer will ever carry it. You must buy the PDR and make it yourself. But that is really easy to do. Just take a quick look at a fun video of me making up a batch.
The PDR is not just a printed formula of these new transformer products. It is an introduction to a new way of thinking about products in general. Which will give you the edge over your competition. In between issues I will be sending out regular updates by email also. These "addendums" are free to my regular subscribers. You will also be introduced to chemical companies that are loaded with information on ingredients that will push you forward in your work. Making your company truly Glass Smart. You will become part of an insider community.
To purchase this issue of the PDR and any other, just send an email to henrygroverjr@gmail.com and I will immediately send you a PDF of the PDR as an email attachment. Then in another email I will send you a bill by Pay Pal.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing the Product Development Review
To receive these blog posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
This is a transformer product. No manufacturer will ever carry it. You must buy the PDR and make it yourself. But that is really easy to do. Just take a quick look at a fun video of me making up a batch.
The PDR is not just a printed formula of these new transformer products. It is an introduction to a new way of thinking about products in general. Which will give you the edge over your competition. In between issues I will be sending out regular updates by email also. These "addendums" are free to my regular subscribers. You will also be introduced to chemical companies that are loaded with information on ingredients that will push you forward in your work. Making your company truly Glass Smart. You will become part of an insider community.
To purchase this issue of the PDR and any other, just send an email to henrygroverjr@gmail.com and I will immediately send you a PDF of the PDR as an email attachment. Then in another email I will send you a bill by Pay Pal.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing the Product Development Review
To receive these blog posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Sunday, June 26, 2016
My Life Cleaning Windows
It started back in 1981 when I returned from a working vacation in Greer South Carolina. Not wanting to deal with another NH winter I left to stay with a friend at the end of October. On arrival I dropped my old Charger at the local junk yard where my friend worked, bought a bicycle for the seven mile commute to work, and got a job at a cotton mill carting bobbin sleds back and forth for overweight women on piece work. When I returned in May I was in need of a job. An old friend of 70 years invited me to work for him cleaning windows. He taught me the trade and how to live. We always started work at the crack of dawn;...10 am. And worked late, quitting time was about 3. One hour lunch breaks lounging on private beaches. Boat rides to private islands. This was just the beginning.
My friend Noah Richardson died of a heart attack in his sleep at 72 leaving me to fare for myself. At 22 I took over his residential and commercial accounts, and began my own route twenty miles away. My own company was formed which I called Sunshine Window Cleaning. Five years later around 1987 I met my second mentor Ed Sullivan. He introduced me to the swirl and Sansco Window Cleaning concentrate. It took me some time to master. I remember actually dreaming about different maneuvers. This was something new and esoteric. I loved it. I didn't love the 27 degree ammonia we used to buy in 15 gallon black pails. One day I sniffed some by accident. Fifteen minutes of dance and I was as good as ever. I am surprised after that I still grew nose hairs later on in life.
The soap Sansco took on a mystique for me. I remember hearing the lore that it was based on silicone. So I called the manufacturer and badgered them to divulge the secret ingredient. I was not overjoyed when they absolutely and fervently denied that it had any silicone in it. This left me with only one alternative. Find a true silicone soap. So I did. Then added it to the Sansco so I could use it for advertising purposes. My slogan was my cleaner would not just clean but leave a super shine from the silicone. Sounds like my Soap N Seal product now. This is based on an organo-silane. The purpose being a hydrophobic rain repellancy, and an easy clean surface.
My next technical hurdle was understanding hard water spots and how to effectively remove them. This led me to the library and polishing powders and various compounds. I set up a lab in my kitchen and bought all kinds of acids, alkalies, and solvents. I had about 2,500 chemicals with an entire file full of MSD Sheets. And 3 fifty five gallon drums of 100% pure methanol on the back porch. This great learning almost drove me to madness. It did drive me to want to share what I was learning.
I remember walking the streets of Dover looking for the library there. Cuz I believed I would find a collection of phone books for many different cities in different states. From these I was going to get a list of window cleaning companies. Then I was going to start a newsletter. I ended up meeting Rich Fabry in California over the phone. He told me that he and Rod Woodward had started the American Window Cleaner (AWC) magazine by buying a mailing list. Then mailing the first issue with an offer for a subscription. The money they got for this came from selling the patent for the Super System to Ettore. Unfortunately several years later Rod died from complications from a transplant operation. Rich took over the mag and did really well with it. He always supported his past friend by mentioning him in the magazine as the founder.
I told Rich about my research and how I wanted to also begin a newsletter. Not a magazine. I didn't want advertisers. So that I could be very plain. And I wanted to write about technical subjects. So Rich made me an offer. Write for his publication. An article every issue six times a year. He would give me an ad at the end of the article in exchange. After a couple years writing for the AWC the IWCA discovered me and brought me to Texas and Florida to give seminars on Glass Stain Identification and Removal Techniques. My first newsletter was born. People started waking me up in the morning with phone calls from as far as Japan, Australia, and England. I started traveling for consulting jobs. I remember trips to Cincinnati, Canada, Florida, DC, Virginia, NYC, PA, Connecticut, MA, and my home state NH. Some buildings I looked at were the Met Art, Grande Hyatt, and WTC in NYC. Also the chiquita banana office high rise in Ohio. Many fascinating and enjoyable memories. I will never forget one warm summer day eating out at a pavilion in Virginia watching about fifty guys play kickball. So much of what I learned about stained windows and the problems that result from bad restoration techniques didn't come from books. I met with window cleaning companies that did the damage, companies that were looking to fix it, and lawyers who were called in to litigate. Most of all I got to see real problems up close and personal.
The newsletter I developed was called Technically Speaking Per se. Or TSP. Unger Enterprise bought a subscription. Henry Unger read the first issue on a plane trip to Germany. When he got back he gave me a call. I met him and his son Dane at the convention in Lubbock TX. One thing I wanted to show off then was a hard water spot remover I had developed in my kitchen. So I took about twenty guys outside in front of the motel and demonstrated. Dane was watching too. Immediately after they took me into a vacant room and made an offer. Ettore also wanted to work with me. I chose the company close to home. And so began a very enjoyable adventure with Henry and his family. His goal was to develop a signature line of products using my personal name. The only trade off was I had to end the newsletter. Simply because we couldn't market a product if the formula of such had been disclosed to even a very limited group of subscribers. So in search of the bigger buck I did this.
I can remember Henry inviting me to a small convention. To his personal home in CT. An inventors show. And pizza with all the employees at the factory. The hospitality of Henry and his family was much appreciated. It was a very enjoyable time in my life. Unfortunately after about a year Henry died and the contract was dissolved. His three sons were busy moving into other Countries. They had all they could do now just managing the business. This is what I figured. I had other interests too. In a couple years I was married in 1997. I moved out of my lab. The chemicals had to go. I had kids now. Too young to know that sulfuric acid will burn through your skin. It was necessary to refocus.
Rich had sold the mag at some time also. I drifted away from writing and was just busy with survival. Then about sixteen years later something happened. The internet had developed into something much larger. There were window cleaning forums now. After trying out a couple I discovered Chris and Alex Lambrinides. Chris just said;... write. No stipulations. Rich had told me start but you can't stop. So several years later here I am. Still writing in the WCR forum. Writing not for Chris and Alex, but for all of us. The net made it possible for me to connect with our community in ways that I never imagined possible. It also has made it possible for me to start a newsletter again. This time it is a purely electronic newsletter. It is created, marketed, sent, and sold electronically. The focus is on developing and testing new products. Much of this information is totally free on my blog and over the WCR forum in my posts. I am developing videos to demonstrate the products I am developing. Which is probably the most fun part of it. But the simple idea that I can use social media to market the information I am creating is the most amazing thing. Thirty years ago I bought a five hundred dollar typewriter to produce TSP. Then I had to print the pages and send them out by mail. I received payment by checks also sent by mail. That old typewriter went to the local dump. Now with my somewhat old computer I can do everything without any use of snail mail. I don't even have to travel to the bank. As long as I remain focused this will continue to work. I have an IPhone, a Mini IPad, and a desktop computer. Next I need to get another laptop computer for the road. I can record video on my phone, tablet, and digital camera. Then transfer the clips via WiFi to the computor. String them on my timeline where they can be edited, uploaded to You Tube, and published in the WCR Forum and my blog. Along with other digital social media. So much advancement in so little time. Relatively speaking!
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing The Product Development Review and Addendums
Just 35 dollars for each monthly issue of the PDR. Addendums are free for regular subscribers..
To automatically receive these posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top, "Follow by Email".
My friend Noah Richardson died of a heart attack in his sleep at 72 leaving me to fare for myself. At 22 I took over his residential and commercial accounts, and began my own route twenty miles away. My own company was formed which I called Sunshine Window Cleaning. Five years later around 1987 I met my second mentor Ed Sullivan. He introduced me to the swirl and Sansco Window Cleaning concentrate. It took me some time to master. I remember actually dreaming about different maneuvers. This was something new and esoteric. I loved it. I didn't love the 27 degree ammonia we used to buy in 15 gallon black pails. One day I sniffed some by accident. Fifteen minutes of dance and I was as good as ever. I am surprised after that I still grew nose hairs later on in life.
The soap Sansco took on a mystique for me. I remember hearing the lore that it was based on silicone. So I called the manufacturer and badgered them to divulge the secret ingredient. I was not overjoyed when they absolutely and fervently denied that it had any silicone in it. This left me with only one alternative. Find a true silicone soap. So I did. Then added it to the Sansco so I could use it for advertising purposes. My slogan was my cleaner would not just clean but leave a super shine from the silicone. Sounds like my Soap N Seal product now. This is based on an organo-silane. The purpose being a hydrophobic rain repellancy, and an easy clean surface.
My next technical hurdle was understanding hard water spots and how to effectively remove them. This led me to the library and polishing powders and various compounds. I set up a lab in my kitchen and bought all kinds of acids, alkalies, and solvents. I had about 2,500 chemicals with an entire file full of MSD Sheets. And 3 fifty five gallon drums of 100% pure methanol on the back porch. This great learning almost drove me to madness. It did drive me to want to share what I was learning.
I remember walking the streets of Dover looking for the library there. Cuz I believed I would find a collection of phone books for many different cities in different states. From these I was going to get a list of window cleaning companies. Then I was going to start a newsletter. I ended up meeting Rich Fabry in California over the phone. He told me that he and Rod Woodward had started the American Window Cleaner (AWC) magazine by buying a mailing list. Then mailing the first issue with an offer for a subscription. The money they got for this came from selling the patent for the Super System to Ettore. Unfortunately several years later Rod died from complications from a transplant operation. Rich took over the mag and did really well with it. He always supported his past friend by mentioning him in the magazine as the founder.
I told Rich about my research and how I wanted to also begin a newsletter. Not a magazine. I didn't want advertisers. So that I could be very plain. And I wanted to write about technical subjects. So Rich made me an offer. Write for his publication. An article every issue six times a year. He would give me an ad at the end of the article in exchange. After a couple years writing for the AWC the IWCA discovered me and brought me to Texas and Florida to give seminars on Glass Stain Identification and Removal Techniques. My first newsletter was born. People started waking me up in the morning with phone calls from as far as Japan, Australia, and England. I started traveling for consulting jobs. I remember trips to Cincinnati, Canada, Florida, DC, Virginia, NYC, PA, Connecticut, MA, and my home state NH. Some buildings I looked at were the Met Art, Grande Hyatt, and WTC in NYC. Also the chiquita banana office high rise in Ohio. Many fascinating and enjoyable memories. I will never forget one warm summer day eating out at a pavilion in Virginia watching about fifty guys play kickball. So much of what I learned about stained windows and the problems that result from bad restoration techniques didn't come from books. I met with window cleaning companies that did the damage, companies that were looking to fix it, and lawyers who were called in to litigate. Most of all I got to see real problems up close and personal.
The newsletter I developed was called Technically Speaking Per se. Or TSP. Unger Enterprise bought a subscription. Henry Unger read the first issue on a plane trip to Germany. When he got back he gave me a call. I met him and his son Dane at the convention in Lubbock TX. One thing I wanted to show off then was a hard water spot remover I had developed in my kitchen. So I took about twenty guys outside in front of the motel and demonstrated. Dane was watching too. Immediately after they took me into a vacant room and made an offer. Ettore also wanted to work with me. I chose the company close to home. And so began a very enjoyable adventure with Henry and his family. His goal was to develop a signature line of products using my personal name. The only trade off was I had to end the newsletter. Simply because we couldn't market a product if the formula of such had been disclosed to even a very limited group of subscribers. So in search of the bigger buck I did this.
I can remember Henry inviting me to a small convention. To his personal home in CT. An inventors show. And pizza with all the employees at the factory. The hospitality of Henry and his family was much appreciated. It was a very enjoyable time in my life. Unfortunately after about a year Henry died and the contract was dissolved. His three sons were busy moving into other Countries. They had all they could do now just managing the business. This is what I figured. I had other interests too. In a couple years I was married in 1997. I moved out of my lab. The chemicals had to go. I had kids now. Too young to know that sulfuric acid will burn through your skin. It was necessary to refocus.
Rich had sold the mag at some time also. I drifted away from writing and was just busy with survival. Then about sixteen years later something happened. The internet had developed into something much larger. There were window cleaning forums now. After trying out a couple I discovered Chris and Alex Lambrinides. Chris just said;... write. No stipulations. Rich had told me start but you can't stop. So several years later here I am. Still writing in the WCR forum. Writing not for Chris and Alex, but for all of us. The net made it possible for me to connect with our community in ways that I never imagined possible. It also has made it possible for me to start a newsletter again. This time it is a purely electronic newsletter. It is created, marketed, sent, and sold electronically. The focus is on developing and testing new products. Much of this information is totally free on my blog and over the WCR forum in my posts. I am developing videos to demonstrate the products I am developing. Which is probably the most fun part of it. But the simple idea that I can use social media to market the information I am creating is the most amazing thing. Thirty years ago I bought a five hundred dollar typewriter to produce TSP. Then I had to print the pages and send them out by mail. I received payment by checks also sent by mail. That old typewriter went to the local dump. Now with my somewhat old computer I can do everything without any use of snail mail. I don't even have to travel to the bank. As long as I remain focused this will continue to work. I have an IPhone, a Mini IPad, and a desktop computer. Next I need to get another laptop computer for the road. I can record video on my phone, tablet, and digital camera. Then transfer the clips via WiFi to the computor. String them on my timeline where they can be edited, uploaded to You Tube, and published in the WCR Forum and my blog. Along with other digital social media. So much advancement in so little time. Relatively speaking!
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
henrygroverjr@gmail.com
Publishing The Product Development Review and Addendums
Just 35 dollars for each monthly issue of the PDR. Addendums are free for regular subscribers..
To automatically receive these posts in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top, "Follow by Email".
Saturday, June 18, 2016
Sealing Glass for EZ Clean Maintenance
I have a window cleaning route of about 200 commercial storefronts. They are cleaned weekly, twice a month, monthly, every other month, and quarterly. I have marketed glass sealant application to certain accounts with good success. That being how easy it made their routine cleaning of small mirrors. Like at a salon. I have about fifteen of these on my route. So this IS one of the benefits of applying a glass sealant. It makes it rather difficult for certain things to adsorb onto the glass surface. That is adsorb with a D not a B. This is the Wikipedias definition of the word,
Adsorption is the adhesion of atoms, ions, or molecules from a gas, liquid, or dissolved solid to a surface.[1] This process creates a film of the adsorbate on the surface of the adsorbent. This process differs from absorption, in which a fluid (the absorbate) is dissolved by or permeates a liquid or solid (the absorbent), respectively.[2] Adsorption is a surface-based process while absorption involves the whole volume of the material. The term sorption encompasses both processes, while desorption is the reverse of it. Adsorption is a surface phenomenon.
I will not necessarily apply a sealant to the inside of windows because it makes it very easy to see any film that develops on the inside. Such as smoke, or fryolater oil, or car exhaust. This effect becomes much more pronounced as the weather becomes colder. Such that there is a temperature differential between the outside air and the inside.
Another concern when applying a sealant to mirrors is they must be cleaned with pure water after. Such as with a microfiber cloth. If any type of detergent based cleaner such as Windex is used it will streak;...badly.
For the EZ clean effect I might offer to apply the sealant to the outside of windows. There are two concerns here. One is in the heat of the summer. Then the outside is warmer than the inside. And I have had difficulty with that filming effect I just spoke of. Mirrors do not experience this because they are always at the same temperature on both surfaces, front and back. You might test your sealant on a large spot in the middle of a window during the hottest month of the year with the AC blasting inside. If the EZ clean effect IS the reason you are applying the sealant, you will want one that is water based such that it can be applied with little to no extra time. This way too if it wears off in one to three months you can just up your window cleaning/maintenance cost say 20% and make more money. Now the application of the sealant becomes an integral part of your cleaning maintenance. And the employees MUST use microfiber towels to take off fingerprints in between your visits.
Another application of such an EZ Clean sealant/coating is Water Fed Pole (WFP) work. My Soap and Seal product is more of a Contact Angle adjustment for window glass. It is hydrophobic but not as much as Rain X or the Invisible Shield, or Aquapel, etc. The beauty of this is water tends more to "sheet off" the glass rather than "bead up". This means there will be less water drops on the glass to dry in the hot sun. So if there happens to be a certain amount of silica in the water that doesn't show on a TDS meter it will not be left behind. This problem is greatly reduced. The SS product is also water based. So you can apply it to the glass with an applicator then rinse it off immediately after. I will be doing some videos of this technique. My idea is to show the results we can get from a surface that has been "modified" by a sealant. Which make WFP work much easier and quicker. Cuz you see. The so called hydrophylic glass that guys say is so wonderful for WFP work is really not truly hydrophylic. It is indeed hydrophobic. But just enough to change the rinse properties of window glass.
The PDR on the new Soap and Seal water based glass coating will be out in July. Check out the first video I made of this product.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
My newsletter The Product Development Review is available for 35 dollars a month. It is published electronically on a monthly basis. Just send me an email if you are interested. henrygroverjr@gmail.com
And if you want to recieve these free posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Adsorption is the adhesion of atoms, ions, or molecules from a gas, liquid, or dissolved solid to a surface.[1] This process creates a film of the adsorbate on the surface of the adsorbent. This process differs from absorption, in which a fluid (the absorbate) is dissolved by or permeates a liquid or solid (the absorbent), respectively.[2] Adsorption is a surface-based process while absorption involves the whole volume of the material. The term sorption encompasses both processes, while desorption is the reverse of it. Adsorption is a surface phenomenon.
I will not necessarily apply a sealant to the inside of windows because it makes it very easy to see any film that develops on the inside. Such as smoke, or fryolater oil, or car exhaust. This effect becomes much more pronounced as the weather becomes colder. Such that there is a temperature differential between the outside air and the inside.
Another concern when applying a sealant to mirrors is they must be cleaned with pure water after. Such as with a microfiber cloth. If any type of detergent based cleaner such as Windex is used it will streak;...badly.
For the EZ clean effect I might offer to apply the sealant to the outside of windows. There are two concerns here. One is in the heat of the summer. Then the outside is warmer than the inside. And I have had difficulty with that filming effect I just spoke of. Mirrors do not experience this because they are always at the same temperature on both surfaces, front and back. You might test your sealant on a large spot in the middle of a window during the hottest month of the year with the AC blasting inside. If the EZ clean effect IS the reason you are applying the sealant, you will want one that is water based such that it can be applied with little to no extra time. This way too if it wears off in one to three months you can just up your window cleaning/maintenance cost say 20% and make more money. Now the application of the sealant becomes an integral part of your cleaning maintenance. And the employees MUST use microfiber towels to take off fingerprints in between your visits.
Another application of such an EZ Clean sealant/coating is Water Fed Pole (WFP) work. My Soap and Seal product is more of a Contact Angle adjustment for window glass. It is hydrophobic but not as much as Rain X or the Invisible Shield, or Aquapel, etc. The beauty of this is water tends more to "sheet off" the glass rather than "bead up". This means there will be less water drops on the glass to dry in the hot sun. So if there happens to be a certain amount of silica in the water that doesn't show on a TDS meter it will not be left behind. This problem is greatly reduced. The SS product is also water based. So you can apply it to the glass with an applicator then rinse it off immediately after. I will be doing some videos of this technique. My idea is to show the results we can get from a surface that has been "modified" by a sealant. Which make WFP work much easier and quicker. Cuz you see. The so called hydrophylic glass that guys say is so wonderful for WFP work is really not truly hydrophylic. It is indeed hydrophobic. But just enough to change the rinse properties of window glass.
The PDR on the new Soap and Seal water based glass coating will be out in July. Check out the first video I made of this product.
Written by Henry Grover Jr.
My newsletter The Product Development Review is available for 35 dollars a month. It is published electronically on a monthly basis. Just send me an email if you are interested. henrygroverjr@gmail.com
And if you want to recieve these free posts directly in your inbox just type your address in the box at the top right, "Follow by Email".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)