Why?
Sent from my iPhone using Window Cleaning Resource mobile app
One restore can react with the tin side of the glass. You can test for the tin side using a blue light.
Read more than a few discussion about the tin sideā¦
Mark tanner and others use ācerium oxideā as he sayās the professional way verses, the lazy,non-eduacted window cleaner.
More than a few discussion in the group about the need to be sealing glass after etcā¦ Many products will only seal for 6-12 months.
As Henry saidā¦
" I am not in favor of using acids that will chemically attack silicas and silicates. Otherwise silicon based minerals/chemicals. Glass is based on a silica/silicate matrix which is also chemically attacked by the same acids used to remove mineral deposits/hard water spots. "
And ā¦
" This is ONLY because in MOST cases the ONLY acids that will chemically break down the spots are the same ones that will chemically break down the optical surface of the glass. The acids I always avoid are those that chemically react with glass."
Hit up Mark Tanner in the window cleaners group. He will give ya an ear full of the subject.
Have a great weekend mike! Get some rest!!
Thanks for all that info John. I donāt do much hard water stain removal . I do want to learn about it though .
When you say window cleaners group where do I find that ?
Thanks !
You have a good weekend also !
Sent from my iPhone using Window Cleaning Resource mobile app
Mike
Facebook groups
Both are run by. Alex, Chris
Professional window cleaners
Open group and not privateā¦
Private group ā¦ Window cleaners
Sent from my iPhone using Window Cleaning Resource
Mike I can help answer any question for youā¦You know how to reach me.
Sorry I have not had time to respond. I generally use A-1 for small stains on one or two windows. On big jobs where there are lots of windows with a large surface area I use cc550 for all the windows that donāt have the tin side exposed and a low variable speed buffer with a polishing compound with those that have the tin side exposed. CC550 works much faster and very little labor as apposed to the buffer and a compound that is more labor intensive and take longer.
The idea that acids chemically attack the silicaās and silicates, affecting the optics of the glass, while true, is not a valid reason to exclude their use for 2 reason. One, both of the only two methods available, acids or abrasives, affect the optics of the glass. With the abrasion method you are removing layers of glass. Unless done perfectly even across the entire surface of the glass, impossible by hand with a variable speed buffer (at best you can only minimize distortion), you are going to affect the optics of the glass.
The second and most important reason is that the optics of the glass is already damaged by the stains on the glass. Even if you āeffect the optics of the glassā, if you know what you are doing, it will only be an improvement on what currently exists, which is a ruined piece of glass. This is an important issue because it is key to being successful with glass restoration. if you feel like itās your job to make the ruined glass perfect you will never succeed in glass restoration, because it is not possible. Not to mention this is assuming the glass was originally perfect to begin with, which is easily questionable with the lack of care taken to insure no fabricating debris issues with tempered glass put out on the market.
What we need to understand is that we are not there to make the customers glass perfect, but rather we are there to improve the condition of the glass to a level and cost that is desirable compared to replacing the glass. If you choose the first option you will only get really frustrated with yourself and most every restoration product on the market today.
Neither the chemical method (acids), nor the abrasion method (abrasives pads or compounds) yield perfect results 100% of the time. They both have drawbacks and challenges. Anyone who tells you otherwise does not know what they are talking about, is lying, or both. Most manufactures of glass restoration products on the market donāt know the ins and outs of their own products and how they fare in the field. I have spoken with plenty of them and they could not answer simple questions about glass restoration (or what should be simple for someone producing a glass restoration product who should be an expert on the subject if they are putting out a product and making claims on it).
If a customer has an unrealistic expectation about the results produced with restoration it is important to educate them on the problem that they have and the solution you can offer them to solve their problem. We need to be realistic about the results that are possible with restoration and that includes communicating the drawbacks and potential risks. It is important not to assume the risks involved. It is not our problem but theirs. We are offering a solution that has drawbacks and risks that do not produce a brand new window but a window that has the appearance of new with the potential of some side affects. Does it work? Yes. But occasionally there are problems. We do our best to eliminate those risks but there are risks and we donāt assume those risks. Why? because your glass is already ruined. I am attempting to restore it but that process does not always work perfectly. Not all glass is restore able. The customer needs to make that decision not you.
I understand that is not always what the customer wants to hear. Which is why you need to develop your own method on how to best communicate that without losing the customers confidence and the sale while not assuming the risk either. Why should you be responsible for replacing the customers glass with brand new when they had a damaged window before they gave it to you. We need to stop thinking that we are responsible for producing miracles. We need to use waivers to protect ourselves. We do not manufacture the products we use and we canāt always assume the risks. Yes there is a balance there. We should have a certain level of experience with he products and procedures we use. But there are no perfect products on the market. They all come with some level of draw backs and risks. We should not assume the liability for those risks. The customer should be required to. At the very least we should not have to replace the glass. At the very least have a no charge for negative outcome upon attempt without replacement liability.
1 Like
