GF UV stabilizer...

  • Advertise with us

« back to Finishing forum

Forum topic by LumberJocksGuest posted 05-04-2017 12:11 AM 510 views 0 times favorited 3 replies Add to Favorites Watch
View LumberJocksGuest's profile


6 posts in 1409 days

05-04-2017 12:11 AM

Regarding General Finishes High Performance Water-Based Top Coat:
”...It contains UV Stabilizer’s to protect the finish from breaking down in sunlight….”
”...contains a UV Stabilizer to protect the underlying stains from fading….”

So does UV stabilizer in the High Performance Top Coat BOTH prevent the underlying stain from fading AND prevent the topcoat itself from breaking down? Does that mean the topcoat will help protect a GF dye from fading?

3 replies so far

View pontic's profile


801 posts in 1456 days

#1 posted 05-04-2017 12:27 AM

I think it prevents the underlying dye or stain from UV penetration. It does this by converting UV radiation to lower wavelength radiation mostly infrared. This means more heat. This heat is transferred into the underlying finish and will effect it. This is why UV coated Glass windows have a film heat dissipater applied between the UV coating and the glass. So if your finish is sensitive to heat then UV coatings should be applied on top of a dissipating coat.; such as a similar varnish without the UV coating in it.
That’s my opinion. I could be wrong.
Maybe Fred knows.

-- Illigitimii non carburundum sum

View Fred Hargis's profile

Fred Hargis

6415 posts in 3340 days

#2 posted 05-04-2017 11:19 AM

My understanding of UV protections in a finish are that they are “absorbers” (this may be the same thing pontic described) and they do turn it into heat for dissipation. that is why they wear out over time in a finish; that might be slightly different than glass UV, my optometrist tells me that sunglass UV protection never wears out. That said, the finish should protect what’s under it, at least from the UV. The top coat with UV will have a longer life than those without it, but will still deteriorate over time….so yes, it helps with both (again, my understanding). Be aware, some comp[anies claim UV protection and may be stretching the truth (not GF). Flexner wrote of a UV test he did and Helmsman performed so poorly he concluded that while it was labeled as having UV inhibitors, it most likely had none….or so little it didn’t matter.

-- Our village hasn't lost it's idiot, he was elected to congress.

View pontic's profile


801 posts in 1456 days

#3 posted 05-04-2017 11:40 AM

Thanks Fred. Helpful as always.

-- Illigitimii non carburundum sum

Have your say...

You must be signed in to reply.

DISCLAIMER: Any posts on LJ are posted by individuals acting in their own right and do not necessarily reflect the views of LJ. LJ will not be held liable for the actions of any user.

Latest Projects | Latest Blog Entries | Latest Forum Topics