Re: Hairspray as PCB Laquer

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 02:37:01 -0700, Robert Stevens <rste...@tsci.edu>
wrote:

>
>I like to keep the underside of my Veroboard projects from tarnishing.
>
>In terms of effect on compnents and resoldering, does anyone know if
>hairspray is an acceptable substitute for commercial PCB spray
>laquer?
>
>It is sure a lot cheaper.
>
>Robert Stevens

Polyurethane varnish is a good conformal coating, brushed or sprayed.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 02:37:01 -0700, Robert Stevens <rste...@tsci.edu>
wrote:

>I like to keep the underside of my Veroboard projects from tarnishing.
>In terms of effect on compnents and resoldering, does anyone know if
>hairspray is an acceptable substitute for commercial PCB spray
>laquer?

PCB spray does not use lacquer. I suspect you're thinking of acrylics
or acrylates copolymer, which is what hair spray contains. It's
somewhat suitable for PCB's because it protects, but also can be
dissolved off with MEK or acetone. However, hair spray does not
contain any fluorescent dye, which is necessary for proper inspection
of the PCB using a cheap UV flashlight.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=acrylic+pcb+coating+inspection+uv&tbm=isch>
That's also why you don't want to use Krylon clear acrylic.

The other JL mentioned using urethane conformal coating. Urethanes
are better for protecting the PCB, but more difficult to deal with
when doing rework. Urethane is fairly resistant to most solvents. The
best you can do is sorta soften the stuff and then try scrape it off:
<http://blog.paryleneconformalcoating.com/blog/bid/281002/Acrylic-vs-Urethane-Conformal-Coating>
One disadvantage of urethanes is the difficulty of rework.
Because urethanes have such a high tolerance against solvents,
removal of the coating to rework components or the coating
itself can be quite a lengthy process involving harsh strippers.
Often times, during the removal process, the PCB itself or the
components soldered to it can be damaged.
You can try to solder through the layer of urethane (or acrylic). If
the coating is too thick, you'll get a smelly carbonized mess. The
good news is that you can probably brush it off with a wire brush.
However, if left in place, it will wreck any attempts at soldering.

As for the effect on components, anything that moves (variable
resistors and capacitors) will be glued in place and not be easily
moved. They'll need to be protected with removable solder mask goo:
<https://www.chemtronics.com/c-252-solder-mask.aspx>
Same with dip switches, edge connectors, connectors, test points, fuse
holders, and other components that are expected to make an electrical
connection after conformal coating.

>It is sure a lot cheaper.

$10-$15 for a bottle or spray can for acrylic. Unless you're using
lots of the stuff, I think you can handle it. Also, get a cheap UV
LED flashlight for inspection for about $10.

--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Dave Platt]

>I like to keep the underside of my Veroboard projects from tarnishing.
>
>In terms of effect on compnents and resoldering, does anyone know if
>hairspray is an acceptable substitute for commercial PCB spray
>laquer?
>

>It is sure a lot cheaper.

I have used Krylon Crystal Clear acrylic spray for this purpose. You
can get it in colorless transparent form (as the name suggests) and
also in a clear green... which looks surprisingly like traditional
solder mask.

It "burns off" cleanly if you need to re-solder a joint (do it
outdoors so the fumes aren't troublesome).

In fact, on one or two occasions I used a trick I'd read to prevent
tarnishing of a PC board I had just etched. I took it out of the
etch, scrubbed off the etch mask (toner-transfer, if I recall
correctly), cleaned up the copper, then immediately sprayed with
Krylon.

Installing the parts was no problem - they were all through-hole and
the Krylon burned away from the pads at the first touch of hot
solder.

I also used it as a protective/moistureproofing spray on a small
Geiger counter PC board I'd assembled from a kit. The circuit design
and board layout aren't great - it's prone to "falsing" due to current
leakage from the high-voltage traces to ground, and any trace of flux
or moisture on the board made it unusable. Scrub with isopropanol,
rinse with distilled water, shake dry, gently bake in a warm oven
(120F or so) for an hour, cool, spray with Krylon. Never a hint of a
problem since.

So, my guess is that Krylon Acrylic is probably not all that different
from many commercial PC-board spray lacquer.

[Rick]

"Dave Platt" <dpl...@coop.radagast.org> wrote in message
news:rrlstb-...@coop.radagast.org...

> > I have used clear Krylon for this for years. Never had a problem.
>

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Fri, 20 Mar 2015 06:01:43 -0500) it happened "Rick"
<rik...@bellsouth.net> wrote in <meguk9$f30$1...@news.albasani.net>:

>> > I have used clear Krylon for this for years. Never had a problem.

I bought a dish motor, to move a satellite dish, many years ago.
At one point something was not working, and also curiosity (not the one on mars)
caused me to open it.
Wanted to probe some signals with the scope, the PCB appeared to be covered in a layer
of what I think is paraffin wax..
Had to prick through the wax to measure anything.
Anyways 10 years later it is still working in spite of the little probe holes I made.
You could melt some paraffin and immerse the board in it to make it all-weather proof and
moisture proof I'd think.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:49:57 GMT) it happened Jan Panteltje
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote in <meh1hd$ki1$1...@news.albasani.net>:

PS I think it could be still working because it is largely self-healing,
at high temperatures (sun on it) any holes will fill up again.

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 02:37:01 -0700, Robert Stevens <rste...@tsci.edu>
wrote:

>

>I like to keep the underside of my Veroboard projects from tarnishing.
>
>In terms of effect on compnents and resoldering, does anyone know if
>hairspray is an acceptable substitute for commercial PCB spray
>laquer?

>It is sure a lot cheaper.
>

>Robert Stevens

And, for completeness, has anyone tried commercial PCB spray lacquer
on their hair?

--sp

[Jim Thompson]

Sno-o-ort :-D

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 21:55:55 -0700, dpl...@coop.radagast.org (Dave
Platt) wrote:

>So, my guess is that Krylon Acrylic is probably not all that different
>from many commercial PC-board spray lacquer.

Krylon clear acrylic spray doesn't have any phosphor additives so it's
difficult to inspect for adequate coverage. Otherwise, it's the same.

[JW]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:14:04 -0700 Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-Th...@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote in Message id:
<69eoga9pi0g0fejho...@4ax.com>:

>On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:02:17 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
><spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 02:37:01 -0700, Robert Stevens <rste...@tsci.edu>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I like to keep the underside of my Veroboard projects from tarnishing.
>>>
>>>In terms of effect on compnents and resoldering, does anyone know if
>>>hairspray is an acceptable substitute for commercial PCB spray
>>>laquer?
>>
>>>It is sure a lot cheaper.
>>>
>>>Robert Stevens
>>
>>And, for completeness, has anyone tried commercial PCB spray lacquer
>>on their hair?
>>
>>--sp
>
>Sno-o-ort :-D

That's *not* recommended!

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:49:57 GMT, Jan Panteltje
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Wanted to probe some signals with the scope, the PCB appeared to be covered in a layer
>of what I think is paraffin wax..
>Had to prick through the wax to measure anything.
>Anyways 10 years later it is still working in spite of the little probe holes I made.

Wax conformal coating works very nicely and is easily reworked, but is
attacked by solvents, heat, mold, mildew, etc. It also tends to
attract and retain dirt and dust. Wax is not particularly strong and
can easily be scraped off. Since the OP's project is apparently a
breadboard, that is likely to be shifted around the workbench, a wax
coating might be problematic. I had problems getting labels and
inspection stickers to stay on a wax coated PCB. For the inside of a
rotator, which is unlikely to be handled, it's probably fine. It's
also the cheapest conformal coating available.

>You could melt some paraffin and immerse the board in it to make it all-weather proof and
>moisture proof I'd think.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax

See my previous comments on masking electrical components and moving
parts. A wax encrusted connector is a really bad idea.

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Fri, 20 Mar 2015 08:49:42 -0700) it happened Jeff Liebermann
<je...@cruzio.com> wrote in <flfogal7045dfppj7...@4ax.com>:

>On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:49:57 GMT, Jan Panteltje
><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Wanted to probe some signals with the scope, the PCB appeared to be covered in a layer
>>of what I think is paraffin wax..
>>Had to prick through the wax to measure anything.
>>Anyways 10 years later it is still working in spite of the little probe holes I made.
>
>Wax conformal coating works very nicely and is easily reworked, but is
>attacked by solvents, heat, mold, mildew, etc. It also tends to
>attract and retain dirt and dust. Wax is not particularly strong and
>can easily be scraped off. Since the OP's project is apparently a
>breadboard, that is likely to be shifted around the workbench, a wax
>coating might be problematic. I had problems getting labels and
>inspection stickers to stay on a wax coated PCB. For the inside of a
>rotator, which is unlikely to be handled, it's probably fine. It's
>also the cheapest conformal coating available.
>
>>You could melt some paraffin and immerse the board in it to make it all-weather proof and
>>moisture proof I'd think.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax
>
>See my previous comments on masking electrical components and moving
>parts. A wax encrusted connector is a really bad idea.

So is a plastic sprayed D connector, I'v done it :-)

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:41:10 -0400) it happened JW
<no...@dev.null> wrote in <mrfoga5laa05lgf2v...@4ax.com>:

Jimmy is probably more into sniffing glue.
;-)

[John Devereux]

I didn't know about the additive for UV florescence, might be an
interesting effect in nightclubs (like I go to any....).




--

John Devereux

[Phil Hobbs]

Wow, black light hair spray. Groooovy!

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

[meow...@care2.com]

On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 3:49:43 PM UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:49:57 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Wanted to probe some signals with the scope, the PCB appeared to be covered in a layer
> >of what I think is paraffin wax..
> >Had to prick through the wax to measure anything.
> >Anyways 10 years later it is still working in spite of the little probe holes I made.
>
> Wax conformal coating works very nicely and is easily reworked, but is
> attacked by solvents, heat, mold, mildew, etc. It also tends to
> attract and retain dirt and dust. Wax is not particularly strong and
> can easily be scraped off. Since the OP's project is apparently a
> breadboard, that is likely to be shifted around the workbench, a wax
> coating might be problematic. I had problems getting labels and
> inspection stickers to stay on a wax coated PCB. For the inside of a
> rotator, which is unlikely to be handled, it's probably fine. It's
> also the cheapest conformal coating available.
>
> >You could melt some paraffin and immerse the board in it to make it all-weather proof and
> >moisture proof I'd think.
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraffin_wax
>
> See my previous comments on masking electrical components and moving
> parts. A wax encrusted connector is a really bad idea.

Repairing wax coated equipment 30 years later is a revolting job.


NT

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:36:15 -0700 (PDT), meow...@care2.com wrote:

>Repairing wax coated equipment 30 years later is a revolting job.

Ummm... I envision an oscilloscope encased in many pounds of wax. At
least it's not creosote. You're suppose to coat the PCB's, not the
equipment.

I can see removing the wax from the enclosure, knobs, dials, meters,
jacks, buttons, and connectors might precipitate a revolt among the
employees. Was it the rancid wax smell, disgusting filth, gross crud,
hideous black mold, or yucky green slime caused by the breakdown of
the wax to oil and oleic acid, which mildly attacks copper?

[David Eather]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 14:27:53 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 02:37:01 -0700, Robert Stevens <rste...@tsci.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> I like to keep the underside of my Veroboard projects from tarnishing.
>> In terms of effect on compnents and resoldering, does anyone know if
>> hairspray is an acceptable substitute for commercial PCB spray
>> laquer?
>
> PCB spray does not use lacquer. I suspect you're thinking of acrylics
> or acrylates copolymer, which is what hair spray contains. It's
> somewhat suitable for PCB's because it protects, but also can be
> dissolved off with MEK or acetone. However, hair spray does not
> contain any fluorescent dye, which is necessary for proper inspection
> of the PCB using a cheap UV flashlight.
> <https://www.google.com/search?q=acrylic+pcb+coating+inspection+uv&tbm=isch>
> That's also why you don't want to use Krylon clear acrylic.
>

Hair spray comes off with water.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:02:17 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

>And, for completeness, has anyone tried commercial PCB spray lacquer
>on their hair?

Ummm... no. Besides, it would be pointless now as most of my hair is
gone. When I had hair, my favorite mix was mostly mineral oil with a
little olive oil, bees wax, and cheap perfume added. The hair
"holding" ability was in the bees wax. While attending college, I was
mixing the stuff up in five gallon buckets and selling it at a nice
profit, that was still less than commercial hair grease. Phosphors
would have been a cool addition, but orange or blue hair wasn't
fashionable at the time. I had to drop this sideline and switch to
hand cleaner after a rather messy oil spill.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:06:04 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>
wrote:

>Hair spray comes off with water.

Nope. If that were true, then the lady friends expensive coiffure
would fall apart when she sweats.
<http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/consumer/faq/hairspray-ingredients.shtml>
Ordinary shampoo also doesn't remove hair spray. To get it off,
there's baking soda, apple cider vinegar, and an unreal assortment of
concoctions:
<https://www.pinterest.com/explore/hair-buildup-remover/>

[k...@zzz.com]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 18:40:47 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:06:04 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>
>wrote:
>
>>Hair spray comes off with water.
>
>Nope. If that were true, then the lady friends expensive coiffure
>would fall apart when she sweats.
><http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/consumer/faq/hairspray-ingredients.shtml>
>Ordinary shampoo also doesn't remove hair spray. To get it off,
>there's baking soda, apple cider vinegar, and an unreal assortment of
>concoctions:
><https://www.pinterest.com/explore/hair-buildup-remover/>

Ladies don't sweat! Every gentleman knows that ladies perspire.

[k...@zzz.com]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 18:07:28 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 10:02:17 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
><spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
>
>>And, for completeness, has anyone tried commercial PCB spray lacquer
>>on their hair?
>
>Ummm... no. Besides, it would be pointless now as most of my hair is
>gone. When I had hair, my favorite mix was mostly mineral oil with a
>little olive oil, bees wax, and cheap perfume added. The hair
>"holding" ability was in the bees wax. While attending college, I was
>mixing the stuff up in five gallon buckets and selling it at a nice
>profit, that was still less than commercial hair grease. Phosphors
>would have been a cool addition, but orange or blue hair wasn't
>fashionable at the time. I had to drop this sideline and switch to
>hand cleaner after a rather messy oil spill.

Why would one intentionally put gunk in one's hair? I wash hair to
get it clean. I'd like it to stay clean.

[Jasen Betts]

Horses sweat, men perspire, ladies merely glow.

--
umop apisdn

[meow...@care2.com]

On Saturday, March 21, 2015 at 12:48:39 AM UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 12:36:15 -0700 (PDT), meow...@care2.com wrote:
>
> >Repairing wax coated equipment 30 years later is a revolting job.
>
> Ummm... I envision an oscilloscope encased in many pounds of wax. At
> least it's not creosote. You're suppose to coat the PCB's, not the
> equipment.

Heh

> I can see removing the wax from the enclosure, knobs, dials, meters,
> jacks, buttons, and connectors might precipitate a revolt among the
> employees. Was it the rancid wax smell, disgusting filth, gross crud,
> hideous black mold, or yucky green slime caused by the breakdown of
> the wax to oil and oleic acid, which mildly attacks copper?

After 30 years all the internal wax coating has captured lots of dirt, turning it into a filthy sticky mess coating PCBs & components. Much more gross than dry dirt alone.


NT

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 22:59:02 -0400, k...@zzz.com wrote:

>Why would one intentionally put gunk in one's hair? I wash hair to
>get it clean. I'd like it to stay clean.

Were you ever 18 years old? Every hair had to be in the correct place
or you would be considered disheveled or worse. Oh wait... there's
nothing worse.

Do you recall Brylcreem?
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brylcreem>
<https://www.google.com/search?q=brylcreem&tbm=isch>
and "The greasy kids stuff"?
<https://kitsadnauseam.wordpress.com/2009/05/25/greasy-kid-stuff-the-brand-that-viral-marketing-built/>
Grease was in.

Rolling back a few more generations, there was "Macassar Oil" for the
head, and "antimacassar" to protect the furniture:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macassar_oil>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimacassar>
One of the claims for Macassar Oil is that it stimulates hair growth.
Grease has been in fashion since mens wigs went out of fashion.

Somewhere around 1965, alcohol solvents replaced some of the grease as
the hair tonic of choice. On application, they evaporated, and left a
thin residue of grease, which held the hair in place, but did not look
like a lube job gone awry. For marketing purposes, it was part of the
"natural look" in both mens and womens fashions. The "natural look"
was intended to make one look like they did not use artificial means
to improve one's looks, but sold more cosmetics, concoctions, and
clothing, than any fashion campaign previously. There were several
hair tonics that claimed to "penetrate" the hair, but actually just
evaporated, leaving nothing behind.

At some time near the end of the "natural look" craze, someone clever
invented "pH balance" shampoo. What this shampoo did was refuse to
form foam or suds, except over a very narrow pH range. This was
carefully calibrated to NOT coincide with the natural or typical pH
value of the scalp, sweat, or even rinsed hair. In order to obtain
suds, one had to first apply some of the shampoo, rub it into the
hair, rinse, and then re-apply another load of shampoo. That was
great for doubling shampoo consumption. However, that wasn't enough.
The color of the shampoo was changed to be invisible in one's hands,
so that it was difficult to tell how much was being dispensed. The
viscosity of the shampoo, and the shape and size of the bottle were
designed to dispense a giant blob of shampoo and resist all attempts
to dispense smaller amounts. The bottle was also made to be top heavy
so that it would tend to fall over and gush its contents onto the
floor. Oh yeah... some shampoos add vitamins, fragrances, and
flavors. We now have at least 2 generations of Americans, that have
never seen or used real shampoo.

Actually, it's a bit more complex than that:
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/horizon/dec98/shampoo.htm>

Anyway, please don't suggest that hair products and associated
chemical accessories are about getting one's hair clean. They're
really about hype, image, cool, promoting habitual behavior,
maximizing consumption, and fashion.

I use a tiny blob of dishwashing liquid soap. It's cheaper and works
better (on what hair I have remaining).
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/jeffl/slides/jeffl-07.html>

[k...@zzz.com]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:23:35 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 22:59:02 -0400, k...@zzz.com wrote:
>
>>Why would one intentionally put gunk in one's hair? I wash hair to
>>get it clean. I'd like it to stay clean.
>
>Were you ever 18 years old?

Sure, forty something years ago.

>Every hair had to be in the correct place
>or you would be considered disheveled or worse. Oh wait... there's
>nothing worse.

Nope. Not even close. I never used anything other than shampoo in my
hair.

>
>Do you recall Brylcreem?
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brylcreem>
><https://www.google.com/search?q=brylcreem&tbm=isch>
>and "The greasy kids stuff"?
><https://kitsadnauseam.wordpress.com/2009/05/25/greasy-kid-stuff-the-brand-that-viral-marketing-built/>
>Grease was in.

Sure but it's more than gross.

>Rolling back a few more generations, there was "Macassar Oil" for the
>head, and "antimacassar" to protect the furniture:
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macassar_oil>
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimacassar>
>One of the claims for Macassar Oil is that it stimulates hair growth.
>Grease has been in fashion since mens wigs went out of fashion.

Yeah, I remember leisure suits, too. Perhaps it's been in fashion but
I have never been held captive by what's in fashion at any particular
time. ...unless you consider "clean" a fashion. Let women have the
fashion designers.

BTW, I have never worn a leisure suit. My FIL had them and I thought
he looked ridiculous in them. ;-)

[John Larkin]

Bar soap is good enough for the rest of my body, so it's good enough
for my hair.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing laser drivers and controllers

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:23:35 -0700, the renowned Jeff Liebermann
<je...@cruzio.com> wrote:

>
>Anyway, please don't suggest that hair products and associated
>chemical accessories are about getting one's hair clean. They're
>really about hype, image, cool, promoting habitual behavior,
>maximizing consumption, and fashion.

Some of the stuff (I'm looking at you, Schwartzkopf) sold through
women's hairdressers is astoundingly dear.

>
>I use a tiny blob of dishwashing liquid soap. It's cheaper and works
>better (on what hair I have remaining).
><http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/jeffl/slides/jeffl-07.html>

Wasn't the 1950's approach to simply spit into your comb beforehand?
Cheaper again, but you don't get that delightful lemony smell.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

[Phil Hobbs]

"Horses sweat, men perspire, and women glow."

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 13:09:44 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:23:35 -0700, the renowned Jeff Liebermann
><je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>>Anyway, please don't suggest that hair products and associated
>>chemical accessories are about getting one's hair clean. They're
>>really about hype, image, cool, promoting habitual behavior,
>>maximizing consumption, and fashion.
>
>Some of the stuff (I'm looking at you, Schwartzkopf) sold through
>women's hairdressers is astoundingly dear.

If you have time or interest, you might want to look at the
ingredients or MSDS sheet on some of these hair products and guess
their intent. For example, formaldehyde or methylene glycol was a
common ingredient for "smoothing" the hair.
<https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/hairsalons/>

>>I use a tiny blob of dishwashing liquid soap. It's cheaper and works
>>better (on what hair I have remaining).
>><http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/jeffl/slides/jeffl-07.html>
>
>Wasn't the 1950's approach to simply spit into your comb beforehand?
>Cheaper again, but you don't get that delightful lemony smell.

Close. The ritual was to spit on the left hand, smear the saliva into
the hair, comb with the right hand, wipe left hand on greasy blue
jeans. Done correctly and after some practice, the move can be
completed in seconds, or extended into a many minute long ceremonial
procedure (to impress the girls). I vaguely recall doing that once or
twice, but abandoned the practice mostly because I didn't like the
spit on my jeans.

Product idea: What the world needs is an electromechanical consumer
product dispenser. For example, screw a hair grease tube into the
dispenser, select the delivery quantity on the dial or keypad, press
the button, and it will deliver exactly the quantity selected. It can
be sold as an over-consumption reduction product and ecologically
correct product. One could probably give away the dispenser at near
cost, and sell the adapters for various style bottles and tubes at a
profit. It can probably be made to work with everything from table
salt to hair oil.

[Clifford Heath]

On 21/03/15 17:23, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> We now have at least 2 generations of Americans, that have
> never seen or used real shampoo.

Say "no" to shampoo. Demand *real* poo.

[k...@zzz.com]

No issue, it's just that shampoo is easier. Hair takes more soap.

[David Eather]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:40:47 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:06:04 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Hair spray comes off with water.
>
> Nope. If that were true, then the lady friends expensive coiffure
> would fall apart when she sweats.
> <http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/consumer/faq/hairspray-ingredients.shtml>
> Ordinary shampoo also doesn't remove hair spray. To get it off,
> there's baking soda, apple cider vinegar, and an unreal assortment of
> concoctions:
> <https://www.pinterest.com/explore/hair-buildup-remover/>
>
>

Hair spray DOES come off with water.

In my past I had a job where shinny shoes were mandatory. If I forgot or
there wasn't time to do a spit and polish then a thick layer of hair spray
would cover any problems for at least that day. Water took it off. I
assure you it is fully true.

Also if it weren't able to be removed with water, imagine the problems all
the women would have with insoluble crap in there hair.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:00:49 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>

wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:40:47 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
>wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:06:04 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hair spray comes off with water.
>>
>> Nope. If that were true, then the lady friends expensive coiffure
>> would fall apart when she sweats.
>> <http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/consumer/faq/hairspray-ingredients.shtml>
>> Ordinary shampoo also doesn't remove hair spray. To get it off,
>> there's baking soda, apple cider vinegar, and an unreal assortment of
>> concoctions:
>> <https://www.pinterest.com/explore/hair-buildup-remover/>

>Hair spray DOES come off with water.

Some shampoos are water soluble, while others are not:
"Water-soluble vs. Non-soluble Silicones Found in Hair Products"
<https://www.nenonatural.com/hair-blog/-water-soluble-vs-non-soluble-silicones-found-in-hair-products>
Decoding the ingredients list is difficult. This list might help:
<http://science-yhairblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/silicone-ingredient-solubility-list.html>

>In my past I had a job where shinny shoes were mandatory. If I forgot or
>there wasn't time to do a spit and polish then a thick layer of hair spray
>would cover any problems for at least that day. Water took it off. I
>assure you it is fully true.

Clever trick. I can't determine if your unspecified brand of "hair
spray" was absorbed by the porous leather of the shoes, or perhaps
evaporated off. Also, I've been fairly careful to distinguish between
shampoo and acrylic PCB conformal coatings used as hair holding
sprays. I was discussing shampoo while you seem to be referring to
hair holding spray.

Hair spray is clear and I would have difficulties visually determining
if it was actually removed by water without a microscope. If you
have some old shoes or scrap leather available for testing, mix some
ultraviolet sensitive phosphor dye with the hair spray. Let dry and
then wash it off with water. If the shoes or leather still light up
under the UV light, the hair spray is still on the leather. If you
want, I can do this simple experiment for you if you specify the type
of hair spray that you used. Also, I'm feeling kinda lousy right now
and this may need to wait a few days. You can find overpriced UV leak
detectors at any auto parts store. The water soluble type is for
radiator and cooling system leaks. The oil soluble type is for engine
and lube oil leaks.

>Also if it weren't able to be removed with water, imagine the problems all
>the women would have with insoluble crap in there hair.

They do have problems, which is why I posted a rather large list of
hair buildup removers. However, that was from shampoo buildup, not
acrylic hair spray.

[David Eather]

On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:37:56 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>

If you put hairspray on hairspray on hairspray (i.e. many 'layers') it
would sort of crack and you could peel it off as a somewhat fragile sheet.

With water it made a gooey gel not unlike what happens to the surface of
soap if it sits in a bit of water.

So my guess is it didn't soak in at all, but just sat on the surface.

[David Eather]

On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:37:56 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>

The hairspray was the cheapest generic crap possible. I don't need/desire
any experiments. I just shared my experience which suggested something
different to what was being stated. If you want to experiment though, then
of course I have no objections...

Just thinking if you experiment though, it might be significant that the
shoes had a layer of polish on them (even if it wasn't shiny enough) all
that oily/waxy stuff might stop any penetration .

[Spehro Pefhany]

I'm tired of ending up with the fake stuff:

http://speff.com/Sham%20Poo.jpg

[Ralph Barone]

I thought that older hairsprays were a shellac product, dissolved in an
alcohol.

[Clifford Heath]

On 22/03/15 11:00, David Eather wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:40:47 +1000, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 11:06:04 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hair spray comes off with water.
>>
>> Nope. If that were true, then the lady friends expensive coiffure
>> would fall apart when she sweats.
>> <http://antoine.frostburg.edu/chem/senese/101/consumer/faq/hairspray-ingredients.shtml>
>>
>> Ordinary shampoo also doesn't remove hair spray. To get it off,
>> there's baking soda, apple cider vinegar, and an unreal assortment of
>> concoctions:
>> <https://www.pinterest.com/explore/hair-buildup-remover/>

> Hair spray DOES come off with water.

Some hair sprays use PVA, which is slightly soluble; sufficiently so for
a thin layer to come off in the shower but not in the rain.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 11:23:42 +1000, "David Eather" <eat...@tpg.com.au>
wrote:

>The hairspray was the cheapest generic crap possible.

Maybe one of these:
"10 of the Best Hair Sprays Under $10"
<http://www.popsugar.com/beauty/Best-Hair-Sprays-Under-10-28870690>
$10 for hair spray? Might as well use cheaper Krylon clear acrylic
spray.

>Just thinking if you experiment though, it might be significant that the
>shoes had a layer of polish on them (even if it wasn't shiny enough) all
>that oily/waxy stuff might stop any penetration .

I suspect that the leather pores are clogged by the hair spray, which
might not be such a good thing. When the instructions on polishing
your shoes include using a leather cleaner, it's really suggesting
that you unclog the pores before applying a polish.
<http://www.leathertherapy.com/pages/Leather-Care-Choosin-Is-Confusin.html>
Wax-based polishes, liquid shoe polishes and spray-on saddle
lacquers add shine at the expense of clogging leather pores.

Looks like preserving the shoe shine is one of the official misuses
for hair spray, so I guess it works:
<http://www.rd.com/home/unbelievable-uses-for-hair-spray>
Preserve your shoes’ shine:
After you’ve lovingly polished your shoes to give them the
just-from-the-store look, lightly spray them with hair spray.
The shoe polish won’t rub off so easily with this coat of
protection.

On the other foot, we have a warning against using hair spray for
cleaning leather because it contains alcohol:
<http://www.fibrenew.com/blog/frequently-recommended-leather-remedies-that-ruin-leather/>
See number 5.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 21:57:01 -0400, Spehro Pefhany
<spef...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:

>On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 07:56:06 +1100, the renowned Clifford Heath
><no....@please.net> wrote:
>
>>On 21/03/15 17:23, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> We now have at least 2 generations of Americans, that have
>>> never seen or used real shampoo.
>>
>>Say "no" to shampoo. Demand *real* poo.

>I'm tired of ending up with the fake stuff:
>http://speff.com/Sham%20Poo.jpg

It's really for the dawgs:
<http://www.fieldandstyle.com/products-page/oat-aromatherapy/dog-sham-poo-bar/>

Works like magic:
<http://c8.alamy.com/comp/E5NNJD/sham-poo-the-magician-us-poster-1932-E5NNJD.jpg>

[meow...@care2.com]

On Sunday, March 22, 2015 at 12:37:49 AM UTC, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> Hair spray is clear and I would have difficulties visually determining
> if it was actually removed by water without a microscope. If you
> have some old shoes or scrap leather available for testing, mix some
> ultraviolet sensitive phosphor dye with the hair spray. Let dry and
> then wash it off with water. If the shoes or leather still light up
> under the UV light, the hair spray is still on the leather. If you

or the dye moved out of the spray and into the leather


NT