Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
Moderator: Jim Walsh
-
Sue Bradford
Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
Last fall I posted a message here about our plight, and got some helpful responses- I'm back for more. We pulled our newly purchased and surveyed and sailed home boat only to find purple ooze. Got it surveyed again courtesy BOAT US. The recommendation was to peel the gel coat- and the chop strand, to the tune of $10,000 to 15,000.00 as the moisture in the hull was off the scale. We got in touch with the original surveyor, who eventually said gosh, how about $2500.?, then disclaimed all responsibility in his letter. We had a fiberglass person from a boatyard nearby that has a mechanical peeler come by and tell us it's not the worst he's seen and there doesn't appear to be high moisture in the interior. The only way to tell for sure is to have it peeled and see the condition of the woven roving. This is obviously a new boat buyer's nightmare, and we are heartbroken, and feeling trapped. We have spoken with a marine lawyer, who says there may be a case, would take years, lots of money (we are far from rich), and the legal fees are likely to approach a significant proportion of the cost of repairs. So, back to the trapped feeling- any ideas as to how to keep this little dream alive? Does anyone have experience with a double peeling? (Gel coat and chop strand). Or how to tell if the woven roving is too far gone to be worth it? And what then? We are truly sad...
-
Dana Arenius
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
Hi Sue,
I have seen a couple of boats (never any Cape Dorys) peeled by planers. It is a rather drastic approach if the condition is unknown. Where I have seen it used is only on hulls where the blisters are so numerous or so large that almost every square inch of the bottom was ethier a big blister or mass of blisters. Those hulls looked like they had been in a fire and the entire surface had "melted". One could not grind away at any of the blisters without getting into the next blister thus all the gel had to come off.
The low moisture level reading on the INTERIOR is very important. That is a more important reading of what is happening in the laminate than if outside surface readings were taken just after you pulled the boat in the fall. I would have expected high readings if I had visible blisters. Come spring time, if I had not opened those blisters and let those little guys dry over the winter, that space between the gel and laminate will still be very, very wet. I suspect it is this moisture that the meter is picking up. The meter could be seeing a "lake" just between the gel and laminate.
The "offer?" of about $2500 is somewhat near the going price of a complete hull stripping, use of a pneumatic blister finding/poping "multi-pin" hammer over every square inch of the bottom with barrier coats, etc. I have heard numbers like about $125/ft when the "yard" does it this way. For most of us, this is about as radical as we would choose to do. I, personally, would never choose to remove the entire gel coat on a "bug hunt". If I was very concerned with the condition of the laminate, I would choose to have the yard grind off a small section of the gel coat in a area (under the waterline, of course) which the highest readings were seen and blisters were abundant. The yard could then clearly see the condition of the laminate and measure the moisture of the laminate. If the laminate is not affected, the small area can be repaired, gel coated, exact color match not important below the waterline. Blister repair could then be accomplished using less radical means.
What you have described is the space suit clad guys with the gel coat planer. That high cost is associated with the special enviromental gear you need and the reconstruction of the entire gel coat surface, etc. They generally plane right down into the laminate in order to get a good surface to rebuild on. I would bet that these folks do not give any warrantee on the work. If I did everything that a boat yard or car dealer "suggest" I do, I would be very poor indeed.
Anyway, help us visualize the extent of your blisters. What is their diameter, how far apart are they, where are they located on the bottom and how many? How old is the boat and what were the water conditions? Freshwater? Are you in water southern waters?
We would like to compare your condition with those we have seen on CDs. My experience has been about dime to quarter diameter size,
6 inches to a foot apart, in long "stips" usually just 6 inches to a foot under the waterline. Forward leading hull surface can also have large number. Blisters can occur under the aft "overhang".
Dana
arenius@jlab.org
I have seen a couple of boats (never any Cape Dorys) peeled by planers. It is a rather drastic approach if the condition is unknown. Where I have seen it used is only on hulls where the blisters are so numerous or so large that almost every square inch of the bottom was ethier a big blister or mass of blisters. Those hulls looked like they had been in a fire and the entire surface had "melted". One could not grind away at any of the blisters without getting into the next blister thus all the gel had to come off.
The low moisture level reading on the INTERIOR is very important. That is a more important reading of what is happening in the laminate than if outside surface readings were taken just after you pulled the boat in the fall. I would have expected high readings if I had visible blisters. Come spring time, if I had not opened those blisters and let those little guys dry over the winter, that space between the gel and laminate will still be very, very wet. I suspect it is this moisture that the meter is picking up. The meter could be seeing a "lake" just between the gel and laminate.
The "offer?" of about $2500 is somewhat near the going price of a complete hull stripping, use of a pneumatic blister finding/poping "multi-pin" hammer over every square inch of the bottom with barrier coats, etc. I have heard numbers like about $125/ft when the "yard" does it this way. For most of us, this is about as radical as we would choose to do. I, personally, would never choose to remove the entire gel coat on a "bug hunt". If I was very concerned with the condition of the laminate, I would choose to have the yard grind off a small section of the gel coat in a area (under the waterline, of course) which the highest readings were seen and blisters were abundant. The yard could then clearly see the condition of the laminate and measure the moisture of the laminate. If the laminate is not affected, the small area can be repaired, gel coated, exact color match not important below the waterline. Blister repair could then be accomplished using less radical means.
What you have described is the space suit clad guys with the gel coat planer. That high cost is associated with the special enviromental gear you need and the reconstruction of the entire gel coat surface, etc. They generally plane right down into the laminate in order to get a good surface to rebuild on. I would bet that these folks do not give any warrantee on the work. If I did everything that a boat yard or car dealer "suggest" I do, I would be very poor indeed.
Anyway, help us visualize the extent of your blisters. What is their diameter, how far apart are they, where are they located on the bottom and how many? How old is the boat and what were the water conditions? Freshwater? Are you in water southern waters?
We would like to compare your condition with those we have seen on CDs. My experience has been about dime to quarter diameter size,
6 inches to a foot apart, in long "stips" usually just 6 inches to a foot under the waterline. Forward leading hull surface can also have large number. Blisters can occur under the aft "overhang".
Dana
arenius@jlab.org
-
Barry
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
Sue, don't panic. We bought a CD33 in 1994 (Ches bay). The boat was in the water 13 years straight, only came out for bottom paint. When the boat was surveyed there were blisters of every sort and likewise the moister meter just laughed. We had 10 blisters an inch or larger that got into the matt, the rest were small and confined to a few areas a couple of feet square and were only in the gel. We also had the purple ooze. It was explained that the color is added to the resin so that all of the air bubbles can be seen and smoothed out during the lay-up of the glass (the resin is clear otherwise). As part of the purchase the previuos owner paid $5K towards the bottom job (the total was $6K). The yard (in VA) ground all the gel off with a common disc grinder and then ground into the matt were the larger blisters were. The boat set for nearly a year (I live in NY, so just left it for my first winter) then was epoxied. In some areas of the hull it still showed some moister. We haven't seen any thing yet.
Fiber glass is a very porous material and will often be completely moisture saturated with little effect on it's strength or rigidity, you need to let it dry for several weeks before you can assess the "real" water content. I wouldn't worry about it too much, the formation of a blister is simply the resin reacting with water, when it oozes it should be purple. I would consider having the bottom sand blasted romoving all of the gel, then let it sit over the winter and just role on the barrier coat next spring. A friend had an Alberg 37 blasted in Kingston Onterio very inexpensively. It just needs to be cleaned extremely well and possibly faired before the epoxy goes on - definately a do-it-yourself job.
Don't worry, this is common.
Barry
Fiber glass is a very porous material and will often be completely moisture saturated with little effect on it's strength or rigidity, you need to let it dry for several weeks before you can assess the "real" water content. I wouldn't worry about it too much, the formation of a blister is simply the resin reacting with water, when it oozes it should be purple. I would consider having the bottom sand blasted romoving all of the gel, then let it sit over the winter and just role on the barrier coat next spring. A friend had an Alberg 37 blasted in Kingston Onterio very inexpensively. It just needs to be cleaned extremely well and possibly faired before the epoxy goes on - definately a do-it-yourself job.
Don't worry, this is common.
Barry
Sue Bradford wrote: Last fall I posted a message here about our plight, and got some helpful responses- I'm back for more. We pulled our newly purchased and surveyed and sailed home boat only to find purple ooze. Got it surveyed again courtesy BOAT US. The recommendation was to peel the gel coat- and the chop strand, to the tune of $10,000 to 15,000.00 as the moisture in the hull was off the scale. We got in touch with the original surveyor, who eventually said gosh, how about $2500.?, then disclaimed all responsibility in his letter. We had a fiberglass person from a boatyard nearby that has a mechanical peeler come by and tell us it's not the worst he's seen and there doesn't appear to be high moisture in the interior. The only way to tell for sure is to have it peeled and see the condition of the woven roving. This is obviously a new boat buyer's nightmare, and we are heartbroken, and feeling trapped. We have spoken with a marine lawyer, who says there may be a case, would take years, lots of money (we are far from rich), and the legal fees are likely to approach a significant proportion of the cost of repairs. So, back to the trapped feeling- any ideas as to how to keep this little dream alive? Does anyone have experience with a double peeling? (Gel coat and chop strand). Or how to tell if the woven roving is too far gone to be worth it? And what then? We are truly sad...
-
Paul Grecay
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
I had a similar problem with my cape dory 28...high moisture. A few points to consider. The art of measuring moisture is skill, luck, voodoo etc. When I spoke with those doing the measuring (I had several) the readings ranged from off scale to negligible!!!! And not one of the people measuring could tell me how, what, why, or whatever about the measurement. Bottom line: I let her sit for a year and a half and then put on barrier coat after sanding off bottom paint. And she's dry! DON'T let anyone at your money...yards etc. are in the business to make money...you need to take time with this. Get other readings...get them done after the boat has been sitting up for a few weeks in DRY weather. If you are thinking about putting in a thru hull anywhere, do it now and save the plug...take a look at the resin, glas ratio. My boat is in fine shape...dry, barrier coated...and sailing...and I got similar doomsday scenarios. Email me and I can tell you more....but I predict this won't cost you anything beyond sanding, bottom coat, etc...in short...normal maintenance.
rfurman@dmv.com
rfurman@dmv.com
-
Bill Bain
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
The number one issue I hope all who read this is to remember that you should never let anyone do work for you who is not insured unless you are willing to accept that you may never recover any damages.Sue Bradford wrote: One of the problems I find is that people have work done on their boats and homes for that matter without having the person doing the job provide a certificate of insurance. Too late now but perhaps this will help those who follow. Remember, if you are having somethig done to your boat that could lead to disaster, either monetary or physical, you should have the tradesman or professional provide you with a certificate of insurance. This is available free of charge and will give you come important data such as 1. Is this person insured, 2. Are the limits adequate for the exposure and 3. The insurance carrier who ils insuring this person. If any dispute arises then all you have to do is file a claim with the insurance carrier.
You should be able to work with the carrier without using an attorney; however, if you find that litigation is needed, find the meanest dog on the block.
Last fall I posted a message here about our plight, and got some helpful responses- I'm back for more. We pulled our newly purchased and surveyed and sailed home boat only to find purple ooze. Got it surveyed again courtesy BOAT US. The recommendation was to peel the gel coat- and the chop strand, to the tune of $10,000 to 15,000.00 as the moisture in the hull was off the scale. We got in touch with the original surveyor, who eventually said gosh, how about $2500.?, then disclaimed all responsibility in his letter. We had a fiberglass person from a boatyard nearby that has a mechanical peeler come by and tell us it's not the worst he's seen and there doesn't appear to be high moisture in the interior. The only way to tell for sure is to have it peeled and see the condition of the woven roving. This is obviously a new boat buyer's nightmare, and we are heartbroken, and feeling trapped. We have spoken with a marine lawyer, who says there may be a case, would take years, lots of money (we are far from rich), and the legal fees are likely to approach a significant proportion of the cost of repairs. So, back to the trapped feeling- any ideas as to how to keep this little dream alive? Does anyone have experience with a double peeling? (Gel coat and chop strand). Or how to tell if the woven roving is too far gone to be worth it? And what then? We are truly sad...
bbill@mail2.quiknet.com
-
sam
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
The other fact that comes out of this discussion is that there are a lot of 'surveyors' out there who know less than you do about boats. I have had a number of boats surveyed over the years. I have yet to find a surveyor that I think is truely outstanding. I now go around with the surveyor and 'help' him do his job. After all it is I who will have to live with the boat!
-
Sue
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
To Dana, and other interested and helpful folks:
Further detail on our dilemma:
Our boat is a 1985 Cape Dory 28, kept until this year in Rhode Island, supposedly pulled each winter. The blisters, 14 active ones, are located mostly within 12" either way of the turn of the bilge, and are between dime and quarter size. They are randomly spaced.
4 surveyors have run their moisture meters all over the hull below the waterline. The first was the prepurchase surveyor who had "no adverse comments" on the condition of the boat, and suggested that the one blister he found be addressed individually by grinding, etc. The next two, one hired by our insurance carrier and the other hired by the original surveyor, were called in when the purple ooze started when the boat was hauled in November. Both said oopie, you have a problem- and their meters read off the scale all over the hull below the waterline. The only moisture meter that had sporadic readings was the one used by the fiberglass peeler person. And the readings he got were only sporadic in the sense that they did not set off the alarms- the readings were still quite high, especially around the keel. These readings were taken a few days after the third surveyor's. The fiberglass guy was also the person who said the interior was not reading high moisture, with the exception of some places around the bilge. The moisture content 3 weeks ago was the same as in December. We do live in Maine, and it has been quite a winter, and started early. Boats near ours did not read excessive moisture. The 14 ground out blisters continue to ooze purple around the perimeter of the ground out area.
The original surveyor is insured, to address a comment by Bill. However, after his initial offer, he has disclaimed any responsibility. He says he could only have determined that something was wrong after the boat had been hauled for awhile and the ooze started, although he ignored his own moisture readings, saying it was normal for a boat to read that high when
Further detail on our dilemma:
Our boat is a 1985 Cape Dory 28, kept until this year in Rhode Island, supposedly pulled each winter. The blisters, 14 active ones, are located mostly within 12" either way of the turn of the bilge, and are between dime and quarter size. They are randomly spaced.
4 surveyors have run their moisture meters all over the hull below the waterline. The first was the prepurchase surveyor who had "no adverse comments" on the condition of the boat, and suggested that the one blister he found be addressed individually by grinding, etc. The next two, one hired by our insurance carrier and the other hired by the original surveyor, were called in when the purple ooze started when the boat was hauled in November. Both said oopie, you have a problem- and their meters read off the scale all over the hull below the waterline. The only moisture meter that had sporadic readings was the one used by the fiberglass peeler person. And the readings he got were only sporadic in the sense that they did not set off the alarms- the readings were still quite high, especially around the keel. These readings were taken a few days after the third surveyor's. The fiberglass guy was also the person who said the interior was not reading high moisture, with the exception of some places around the bilge. The moisture content 3 weeks ago was the same as in December. We do live in Maine, and it has been quite a winter, and started early. Boats near ours did not read excessive moisture. The 14 ground out blisters continue to ooze purple around the perimeter of the ground out area.
The original surveyor is insured, to address a comment by Bill. However, after his initial offer, he has disclaimed any responsibility. He says he could only have determined that something was wrong after the boat had been hauled for awhile and the ooze started, although he ignored his own moisture readings, saying it was normal for a boat to read that high when
-
Matt Cawthorne
Re: More info please.
Sue,
How much did they grind away? How deep? How wide? The reason that I ask is that my 1982 CD36 had blisters, but no purple ooze. When I ground them out locally with a small ball-ended rotary rasp ($3 at the local hardware store) the surface usually looked flat in color and remained dry. On a few, local spots would immediatly re-wet with a brownish goo. I followed these 'veins' of moisture bearing glass with the grinder until I stopped getting moisture. Use common sense on this one and don't go through the laminate. One of the reasons for this is the sizing (spelling?) used on the glass fiber. The sizing is made to help in processing and in the adhesion of the fiber to the resin. Most sizing's used actually wick moisture along the fiber and help carry it around the laminate. This gets complicated if there are voids, that is where the moisture can pool. Some glass manufacturers make sizing that will minimize this effect, but I doubt that most boat manufactures knew enough in the 80's to ask the right questions. If you grind deep it is best to do a more general grind-out and feather the edges of the ground area to reduce the shear stresses in the bond line of the patch that you fill back the hole with.
Our CD36 had what sounded like a much worse problem than your boat has. Each time you use a different resin system with a different additive or a fiber with a different sizing you have a new chemistry experiment. In most cases the degredation in the strength of the laminate associated with moisture is not enough to "pooch" the hull. In fact with many resin/glass/sizing combinations the strength returns when the moisture is gone. When a blister forms there is structural damage to the hull, but just at the blister, and that is usually minor for a small blister.
One of the reasons for the problem with the whole process starting is that polyester resins (most boats are made of this because it is cheap) are like sponges. They slow the water down alot, but don't stop it. Epoxy resin is orders of magnitude better at slowing water down.
See my previous message about how we treated the hull. This year I did notice what might be a few blisters at the water line. When I cleaned the paint off I found that the only areas with problems were where we didn't barrier coat quite up to the water line (dumb, but we had just bought the boat and didn't realize that all of the extra goodies keep it sitting about an inch below it's original water line) This spring I extended the barrier coat up 5 inches above the waterline. Where we put barrier coat we have not had a single re-occurrance of blisters.
My recommendations:
1: document the problem in case that you do wish to take legal action.
2: Open up all of your known blisters
3: Scrape the paint off, sand with an orbital sander until the hull is all nice and white. Wash the hull every month or two.
4: Be patient. let it dry. It will mean loosing the spring sailing season. You are allowed to be depressed during this time. Go sailing with friends, charter, or enjoy non-boating activities.
5: Barrier coat the hull. West system worked fine for us, but that is your call. Read as much as you can.
6: Sail for a few years and see if the problem re-appears. I doubt that it will. Re-assess your finances and your situation then, if it does.
7: If you still feel that the hull is somehow pooched, give the boat to me.
good luck, and keep us posted.
Matt
mcawthor@bellatlantic.net
How much did they grind away? How deep? How wide? The reason that I ask is that my 1982 CD36 had blisters, but no purple ooze. When I ground them out locally with a small ball-ended rotary rasp ($3 at the local hardware store) the surface usually looked flat in color and remained dry. On a few, local spots would immediatly re-wet with a brownish goo. I followed these 'veins' of moisture bearing glass with the grinder until I stopped getting moisture. Use common sense on this one and don't go through the laminate. One of the reasons for this is the sizing (spelling?) used on the glass fiber. The sizing is made to help in processing and in the adhesion of the fiber to the resin. Most sizing's used actually wick moisture along the fiber and help carry it around the laminate. This gets complicated if there are voids, that is where the moisture can pool. Some glass manufacturers make sizing that will minimize this effect, but I doubt that most boat manufactures knew enough in the 80's to ask the right questions. If you grind deep it is best to do a more general grind-out and feather the edges of the ground area to reduce the shear stresses in the bond line of the patch that you fill back the hole with.
Our CD36 had what sounded like a much worse problem than your boat has. Each time you use a different resin system with a different additive or a fiber with a different sizing you have a new chemistry experiment. In most cases the degredation in the strength of the laminate associated with moisture is not enough to "pooch" the hull. In fact with many resin/glass/sizing combinations the strength returns when the moisture is gone. When a blister forms there is structural damage to the hull, but just at the blister, and that is usually minor for a small blister.
One of the reasons for the problem with the whole process starting is that polyester resins (most boats are made of this because it is cheap) are like sponges. They slow the water down alot, but don't stop it. Epoxy resin is orders of magnitude better at slowing water down.
See my previous message about how we treated the hull. This year I did notice what might be a few blisters at the water line. When I cleaned the paint off I found that the only areas with problems were where we didn't barrier coat quite up to the water line (dumb, but we had just bought the boat and didn't realize that all of the extra goodies keep it sitting about an inch below it's original water line) This spring I extended the barrier coat up 5 inches above the waterline. Where we put barrier coat we have not had a single re-occurrance of blisters.
My recommendations:
1: document the problem in case that you do wish to take legal action.
2: Open up all of your known blisters
3: Scrape the paint off, sand with an orbital sander until the hull is all nice and white. Wash the hull every month or two.
4: Be patient. let it dry. It will mean loosing the spring sailing season. You are allowed to be depressed during this time. Go sailing with friends, charter, or enjoy non-boating activities.
5: Barrier coat the hull. West system worked fine for us, but that is your call. Read as much as you can.
6: Sail for a few years and see if the problem re-appears. I doubt that it will. Re-assess your finances and your situation then, if it does.
7: If you still feel that the hull is somehow pooched, give the boat to me.
good luck, and keep us posted.
Matt
Sue wrote: To Dana, and other interested and helpful folks:
Further detail on our dilemma:
Our boat is a 1985 Cape Dory 28, kept until this year in Rhode Island, supposedly pulled each winter. The blisters, 14 active ones, are located mostly within 12" either way of the turn of the bilge, and are between dime and quarter size. They are randomly spaced.
4 surveyors have run their moisture meters all over the hull below the waterline. The first was the prepurchase surveyor who had "no adverse comments" on the condition of the boat, and suggested that the one blister he found be addressed individually by grinding, etc. The next two, one hired by our insurance carrier and the other hired by the original surveyor, were called in when the purple ooze started when the boat was hauled in November. Both said oopie, you have a problem- and their meters read off the scale all over the hull below the waterline. The only moisture meter that had sporadic readings was the one used by the fiberglass peeler person. And the readings he got were only sporadic in the sense that they did not set off the alarms- the readings were still quite high, especially around the keel. These readings were taken a few days after the third surveyor's. The fiberglass guy was also the person who said the interior was not reading high moisture, with the exception of some places around the bilge. The moisture content 3 weeks ago was the same as in December. We do live in Maine, and it has been quite a winter, and started early. Boats near ours did not read excessive moisture. The 14 ground out blisters continue to ooze purple around the perimeter of the ground out area.
The original surveyor is insured, to address a comment by Bill. However, after his initial offer, he has disclaimed any responsibility. He says he could only have determined that something was wrong after the boat had been hauled for awhile and the ooze started, although he ignored his own moisture readings, saying it was normal for a boat to read that high when
mcawthor@bellatlantic.net
-
Dana Arenius
Re: Potentially pooched CD28 hull-moisture
Sue,
I've read your latest posting. Your observations are indicating cosmetic not structural blisters. We have employed only standard repair techniques for the conditions you are describing.
First...The number of visible blisters, size, and location are no different than those which were experienced by many of the site CD owners. (My boat is also a 1985 model which developed hundreds after the second season in Rhode Island and being pulled each season). Your mention that the blisters continue to ooze from the perimeter is actually a mostly good sign. It is my experience that this is coming from ajoining wet chopped mat which lies between the actual laminate layer and gel coat. We have all experienced wet purple mat. When it occurs here the blister is only cosmetic. The fact that the ooze is not coming from the center of the gounded out area is good. That's the laminate, hence, your comments indicate that the laminate has not be affected. However, it appears that the gelcoat has not been gound back far enough (have to make the gounded out area larger in diameter, not deeper). One needs to get to an area of dry clear mat. If one were to just patch the gound area you have now, a new blister will form just immediately next to the repair next year.
It is too bad about the early winter. It means that the liquid ooze froze for most of the months and there was little time for it to dry out. That's why the hull is still reading a high water reading and it is "still oozing" now.
My guess is that the boat has had a modest amount of blisters each year and the previous owner had repaired them each year as they have appeared. This is what I term as "pay as you go" blister repair technique.
For cosmetic blisters, most of us have found there are two choices.
The first is to repair the blisters that can be found. Grind only the gel coat and its layer of mat back far enough to get into good clean clear mat. Clean the ground blister area with acetone. I then like to paint in a layer of West epoxy resin onto the exposed laminate to seal it. Fill the void with a good two part epoxy filler (Interlux 415 part A and B) or Red Hand two part. After drying 24 hours or overnight, the filled blister area then needs to be sanded (palm sander) with 150 grit paper and faired with the surrounding surface. Remove the sanding residue. I like to then coat the outside of the blister repair with West epoxy. Then it is bottom paint time as usual. It is possible that a few new blisters will appear the next year. I have never had a blister occur twice in the same location.
The second choice is to remove the entire bottom paint. Find every blister and void under the gel. Open them up, grind as above, fill as above. Put a good barrier coat system on. "I like the West System".
BUT TO DO THIS THE HULL MUST BE MADE DRY. This means multiple months out with blisters opened and grounded out in warm, not humid, weather. That works great for our winters here in Virginia where is is mostly above freezing, but bad for your type of winter. You only have the spring/summer/fall months. That's sailing time!
A good surveyor (who is familiar with CDs) should have been able to tell you that the problem is in the chop mat, not the laminate. I'm surprised but NOT SURPRISED.
I believe Cape Dory had a real problem in their application of the mat. In my boat I found clear mat with no resin, void space with no mat or resin, and mat whose resin may not have had enough catalyst. A chopper gun is usually used which is supposed to automatically mix chopped mat with resin and catalyst. Timing is critical to get this layer in at the right time so that the laminate layer can start.
Anyway, I do not believe from your description that you have a structural problem. The boat will remain quite solid. It is just a question if you want to use the "pay as you go" or try to seal the entire boat with a barrier.
Dana
arenius@aol.com
I've read your latest posting. Your observations are indicating cosmetic not structural blisters. We have employed only standard repair techniques for the conditions you are describing.
First...The number of visible blisters, size, and location are no different than those which were experienced by many of the site CD owners. (My boat is also a 1985 model which developed hundreds after the second season in Rhode Island and being pulled each season). Your mention that the blisters continue to ooze from the perimeter is actually a mostly good sign. It is my experience that this is coming from ajoining wet chopped mat which lies between the actual laminate layer and gel coat. We have all experienced wet purple mat. When it occurs here the blister is only cosmetic. The fact that the ooze is not coming from the center of the gounded out area is good. That's the laminate, hence, your comments indicate that the laminate has not be affected. However, it appears that the gelcoat has not been gound back far enough (have to make the gounded out area larger in diameter, not deeper). One needs to get to an area of dry clear mat. If one were to just patch the gound area you have now, a new blister will form just immediately next to the repair next year.
It is too bad about the early winter. It means that the liquid ooze froze for most of the months and there was little time for it to dry out. That's why the hull is still reading a high water reading and it is "still oozing" now.
My guess is that the boat has had a modest amount of blisters each year and the previous owner had repaired them each year as they have appeared. This is what I term as "pay as you go" blister repair technique.
For cosmetic blisters, most of us have found there are two choices.
The first is to repair the blisters that can be found. Grind only the gel coat and its layer of mat back far enough to get into good clean clear mat. Clean the ground blister area with acetone. I then like to paint in a layer of West epoxy resin onto the exposed laminate to seal it. Fill the void with a good two part epoxy filler (Interlux 415 part A and B) or Red Hand two part. After drying 24 hours or overnight, the filled blister area then needs to be sanded (palm sander) with 150 grit paper and faired with the surrounding surface. Remove the sanding residue. I like to then coat the outside of the blister repair with West epoxy. Then it is bottom paint time as usual. It is possible that a few new blisters will appear the next year. I have never had a blister occur twice in the same location.
The second choice is to remove the entire bottom paint. Find every blister and void under the gel. Open them up, grind as above, fill as above. Put a good barrier coat system on. "I like the West System".
BUT TO DO THIS THE HULL MUST BE MADE DRY. This means multiple months out with blisters opened and grounded out in warm, not humid, weather. That works great for our winters here in Virginia where is is mostly above freezing, but bad for your type of winter. You only have the spring/summer/fall months. That's sailing time!
A good surveyor (who is familiar with CDs) should have been able to tell you that the problem is in the chop mat, not the laminate. I'm surprised but NOT SURPRISED.
I believe Cape Dory had a real problem in their application of the mat. In my boat I found clear mat with no resin, void space with no mat or resin, and mat whose resin may not have had enough catalyst. A chopper gun is usually used which is supposed to automatically mix chopped mat with resin and catalyst. Timing is critical to get this layer in at the right time so that the laminate layer can start.
Anyway, I do not believe from your description that you have a structural problem. The boat will remain quite solid. It is just a question if you want to use the "pay as you go" or try to seal the entire boat with a barrier.
Dana
arenius@aol.com