It's obvious that poor Armond doesn't understand percentages.

He seems to think that diluting his bottom paint with solvent (thinner) is
going to result in the percentage of copper when the paint is dry to be less
than it would be if he had not thinned it.

Wrong! As a percentage of the wet paint, of course, the amount of copper
will be a smaller percent. But, when the paint dries and the solvent
evaporates from it the percentage of copper will then be the same as it was
before he added the thinner. In other words not to worry, Armond.

Wilbur Hubbard

"Wilbur Hubbard" wrote in
anews.com:

It's obvious that poor Armond doesn't understand percentages.

He seems to think that diluting his bottom paint with solvent
(thinner) is going to result in the percentage of copper when the
paint is dry to be less than it would be if he had not thinned it.

Wrong! As a percentage of the wet paint, of course, the amount of
copper will be a smaller percent. But, when the paint dries and the
solvent evaporates from it the percentage of copper will then be the
same as it was before he added the thinner. In other words not to
worry, Armond.

Wilbur Hubbard




.....this coming from someone who thinks diesel engines have spark plugs....


--
-----
Larry
You can tell there's very intelligent life in the Universe
because none of them have ever tried to contact us.....

It's obvious that poor Wilbur either doesn't understand percentages, or
didn't read the post carefully.

Armond is taking two and a half quarts worth of copper and spreading it out
where he used to spread three quarts worth. So he's definitely putting less
copper on the bottom than he was before.

Tom Dacon

"Tom Dacon" wrote in message
diainc...
It's obvious that poor Wilbur either doesn't understand percentages, or
didn't read the post carefully.

Armond is taking two and a half quarts worth of copper and spreading it
out where he used to spread three quarts worth. So he's definitely putting
less copper on the bottom than he was before.

Tom Dacon



But still, though the total coat thickness will be less the percentage of
copper will remain the same. He's talking about one year's worth of
protection. He shouldn't be concerned.

Wilbur Hubbard

On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 14:51:05 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

It's obvious that poor Armond doesn't understand percentages.

He seems to think that diluting his bottom paint with solvent (thinner) is
going to result in the percentage of copper when the paint is dry to be less
than it would be if he had not thinned it.

Wrong! As a percentage of the wet paint, of course, the amount of copper
will be a smaller percent. But, when the paint dries and the solvent
evaporates from it the percentage of copper will then be the same as it was
before he added the thinner. In other words not to worry, Armond.

Wilbur Hubbard

You're sounding like an Irish Traveler driveway sealer.
Scam talk. Since he's spreading it farther your argument is
meaningless.
Armond will find out if thinning works.
There may very well be a "cushion" in the paint's essentials that
he doesn't *effectively* diminish by thinning.
And maybe not.
Dicey, and I wouldn't do it because the labor possibly lost exceeds
the money saved.
Unless I was "experimenting." Which is what he's doing.

--Vic

On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:31:40 -0400, "Wilbur Hubbard"
wrote:

But still, though the total coat thickness will be less the percentage of
copper will remain the same. He's talking about one year's worth of
protection. He shouldn't be concerned.

I think maybe the coat will not only be somewhat thinner, but somewhat
porous. If the film cannot shrink enough you get pores. Concrete
doesn't shrink, and any excess water makes it porous. In any case,
porous should translate to less life and more copper in the water
while it lasts.

I figure the real concern is consistancy. Thin it too much and it will
drip and run won't it?

Casady