Waterborne and Windex experiment

[Jamie Buxton]

I've heard the assertion that waterbornes are damaged by Windex, so I did some experimenting. I coated maple plywood with four coats of Target's EM8000. I chose maple because I thought it would show damage most easily. I let the EM8000 cure for a week. Then I did the following tests.

1) Spray Windex on, and rub it around like I was cleaning the surface. Result: no observable effect.

2) Make three quarter-sized puddles with water, oil, and Windex. Wait two minutes. Wipe off. No observable effect.

3) Repeat the puddle test, but wait ten minutes. With this one, I could see some color where the Windex had been. The color looked like the maple had gotten wet.

4) Repeat the puddle test, but wait two hours. At the end of two hours, there was no observable effect at the water and the oil puddles, but the Windex puddle was nearly gone. There was a distinct "wet spot" appearance where the Windex had been, and the surface of the finish there was bulging out of the plane of the rest of the wood. It looked like the ammonia in the Windex was somehow helping the water to penetrate through the finish. Five days later, the discoloration had disappeared. Presumably, the water had migrated further into the wood, or come back out through the finish.

My conclusion is that Windex does indeed have an effect on the EM8000. However, if it is used the way it is likely to be used, the effect is not significant. That is, I won't let fear of Windex chase me away from this waterborne.

[Jamie Buxton]

I did one other test. After the EM8000 had cured only overnight, I sprayed it with Windex and rubbed it around. This damaged the finish. It permanently changed the sheen. This is not surprising. EM8000 cures to the point you can handle it in a couple hours. However, it cures more over the next several days. Target talks about a 72-hour cure, but I like to wait a week before I put it into hard service.

[Jim Rimmer]

Good information. Thanks.

[Steve Bagi]

I did the same test with General Finishes WB Pre Cat Urethane after reading similar posts. The windex had no effect on my test piece which had cured for about a week. I even left a puddle of Windex sit overnight and no damage occured.

[Scott Holmes]

Someone be brave and test it with the most widely sold water-borne... Minwax Polycrylic.

Using a Pre-Cat post-Cat finish changes the finish. Windex should not hurt it.


Target brand finishes are far superior to the minwax finishes.

[Phil Phelps]

What's in Windex? Water, alcohol, ammonia, fragrance, and dye?

[Jason Roehl]

I'd be real surprised if any evaporative finish (vs. a two-part catalyzed) was fully cured in a week. A month is probably much closer to a full cure.

[Phil Phelps]

I'd be real surprised if any evaporative finish (vs. a two-part catalyzed) was fully cured in a week. A month is probably much closer to a full cure.

10 4, dude.

[Jim Becker]

I'd be real surprised if any evaporative finish (vs. a two-part catalyzed) was fully cured in a week. A month is probably much closer to a full cure.

Target's EM6000 product isn't an evaporative finish, although the water carrier evaporates off. It's an acrylic and cures by cross-linking. The term "lacquer" in the name is because it emulates desirable qualities, such as burn-in and quick re-coating like a solvent-based lacquer.

Jamie, my real-world experience with Target's product in my kitchen confirms your experiment long-term. The finish is two generations back PSL and has had no perceivable damage due to cleaning products. It's only been starting to show physical wear and that largely because our girls don't really give a you-know-what about what they bang into it as they walk by... kids...

[Jason Roehl]

Jim, I probably should have said, "any product with an evaporative component", but that's why I also put the "vs. a two-part catalyzed". Two-parts can be up to 100% solids, finishes that have ingredients which evaporate cannot, and those are the ones (most finishes) that will likely take a month or so to fully cure.

Basically, I wouldn't recommend cleaning ANY finish with any kind of chemical other than water for at least a month after final application.

[Jamie Buxton]

...Target's EM6000 product...

I tested EM8000, not EM6000. I'm not completely clear what the difference is between the two, despite studying Target's marketing material.

[Scott Holmes]

Actually water-borne finishes (non-cat) don't cure, they are coalescing.

The water evaporates, then the slow drying glycol ether (GE) evaporates in a few days or weeks. Coalescing finishes are pre-cured (acrylic and sometimes <5% urethane droplets that are softened in the GE. Coalescing is sort of like re-hardening and sticking together.

[Chris Hudson42]

I thought it might be interesting to try this same Windex treatment on a gloss finished sample piece of cherry with Deft Clear Wood Finish lacquer. This is an evaporative nitrocellulose type non-catalyzed lacquer that I recently used on a Cherry Butler's Table and rubbed out using the 'pullover' technique.

Using my sample scrap (after all, some advised with Deft my table would be susceptible to water damage, let alone Windex) I put a good sized blob ( 1/2 teaspoon?) of Windex on it. It sat as a blob and did not spread out. In about 20 hours it had evaporated, leaving a bluish-green ring. Inside the ring, the Deft was definitely not as glossy - a bit satin looking. But the lacquer clearly had not been penetrated.

I took my 'pullover rubber' with a little pullover solvent on it. One swipe and the ring was gone, and the gloss was back - perfectly matching the main gloss on the board. It is impossible to see where the ring was - it was perfectly restored with the pullover swipe.

I will continue my complete aversion to all waterborne furniture 'finishes':D

Chris

[Jamie Buxton]

Jason and Phil were both concerned that the EM8000 might not be fully cured in the one-week curing time I used for my experiment, so I extended the test. I let the finish cure for a month, then I repeated the test where I let a puddle of Windex sit on the finish for two hours. As far as I can tell, the results at a month are the same as at one week.

[Jeff Jewitt]

Not to pick any fights here but coalescing is the way waterbornes form a film, not the way they cure. A waterborne will either cure by evaporation of the solvent(s) or cross-linking which can be done oxidatively (air), or by an internal or external catalyst.