REFLECTOR: Coarse/Fine BID

[Jorge Bujanda]

keithhallsten at quiknet.com wrote:

>I think the use of peel ply make far more difference in whether or not you have a leak than which weave of glass.  The weight of fine bid and course bid is almost identical, so I wouldn't worry too much about substituting one for the other.  However, it's easier to get air bubbles out from under course bid than fine bid, so there is some difference.  When I asked the factory guys about this issue they said that they are not using fine bid anymore, and course bid could be substituted.  
>
Thanks.  That's what I thought after Scott's response.  I like to use 
peel ply, so I am covered there.

>For fuel sealing surfaces, you definitely don't want to get carried away with weight reduction - go ahead and make sure you have sufficient epoxy to fill any voids, then use peel ply to give you a finished surface and pick up any excess. 
>
>Keith Hallsten, XLFG
>
>
><Jorge Bujinda wrote:>
>The manual calls for fine BID to reinforce the vertical and horizontal 
>seams of bulkheads and baffles (Fig. 9-16. Fuel baffle and bulkhead 
>location.).  Although up until now I have used coarse BID almost 
>exclusively, I ran out of fine BID glassing the Divinicel for the fuel 
>tanks and I am about to start glassing the baffles and bulkheads.
>1.  Can coarse and fine BID be used interchangeably?
>2.  Can I use coarse BID to reinforce the horizontal and vertical seams 
>of bulkheads and baffles without increasing the risk of leaks?  Seems to 
>me like the fine BID would seal better due to a tighter weave.  Am I 
>wrong?
>4.  Is there a difference in weight between the two?
>_______________________________________________
>To change your email address, visit http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
>Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
>user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
>Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
>
>  
>