Replies

1. 
   Scrit | Feb 05, 2004 02:28pm | #1

   Scott

   An HVLP set-up will generate a lot less bounce back and get a much higher percentage of the finish on the workpiece, perhaps something to consider.

   Scrit

1. 
   garth | Feb 05, 2004 07:41pm | #2

   Scrit

   Are not turbine set ups HVLP, I thought they were and whould give me the small foot print plus the portability that I need.

   Scott T.

1. 
   Scrit | Feb 05, 2004 08:40pm | #3

   There are two ways to acheive HVLP - a conventional compressor, filter and HVLP conversion gun or a turbine and HVLP gun. The main differences (apart from price) are that a compressor-driven HVLP conversion gun can spray heavier materials, such as latex paint, more easily and the compressor means you can add a separate pressure pot for long sessions. Sorry for the misunderstanding, my coments were meant to convey that HVLP is more economical and less messy than conventional high pressure spraying. And yes, they are very portable. If going this way try to go for a 3-stage or 4-stage turbine over a 2-stage - they deliver a greater volume of air and are noticeably smoother

   Scrit

2. 
   DJK | Feb 06, 2004 05:49pm | #4

   Scott

   Check the archives. I have posted, about five or six times, instructions for building a dual motor, 5 stage HVLP turbine. It combines 2 stage and 3 stage motors to produce 10psi. output. Combined with a decent Apollo or Fuji gun will spray un-thinned polyurathane and latex.

1. 
   garth | Feb 06, 2004 07:02pm | #5

   Thank you will do a search and see what I come up with.

   Scott T.

2. 
   Tao | Feb 07, 2004 02:18am | #6

   >>Check the archives. I have posted, about five or six times, instructions for >>building a dual motor, 5 stage HVLP turbine. It combines 2 stage and 3 stage >>motors to produce 10psi. output. Combined with a decent Apollo or Fuji gun will >>spray un-thinned polyurathane and latex.

   I'm curious about your results.  The two four-stage units I have tested only gave about 7 PSI static pressure with the hose plugged.  Pressure at the gun with the trigger pulled was quite a bit less, and pressure at the air cap waas even less, on the order of 4 to 5 PSI.  I used a Snap-on fuel pressure gauge to measure the pressure, so I'm fairly sure the results are reasonably accurate.  I also measured the air flow with a crude system that measured the time it took to fill a known volume, and the maximum throughput I measured was around 15 CFM, a far cry from the 85 to 100 CFM that many manufacturers claim.  Their measurements must be for a turbine running free with no hoses or restrictions at either end; a highly misleading figure.

   I don't doubt that the setup you describe gets close to 10 PSI static pressure, but I would sure be interested to know how it performs in service with 25 or so feet of hose and a large air cap.  It would be nice to know pressure at the gun, at the air cap, and also volume through the gun.

   One of the reasons I prefer conversion guns to turbines is that you can get a full ten PSI at the air cap, and even cheat a little if necessary, while I haven't seen a turbine yet that takes full advantage of the allowable air pressure.  Your five stage rig must get closer, but I'm curious how much closer.

   Michael R.

3. 
   Tao | Feb 07, 2004 02:25am | #7

   >> I know that a good gun and compresser is said to be better, but I have a space and proability problem and have decide on the turbine.

   Just a thought for your consideration:  A Sharpe 998HVLP is a professional quality conversion gun, available for $199 on the web.  It will run all day on a little twin-tank side stack compressor like Porter Cable and Campbell-Hausfeld sell for around $250.00, so for $450 plus tax you get a very compact, portable system that will outperform any turbine I have seen, plus you'll have a compressor for runnung nailers, inflating tires, blowing dust off things, etc.

   If you really want a turbine, have at it.  A lot of people are very happy with theirs.  I just wanted to point out that there are alternatives that meet your criteria.

   Michael R.

1. 
   garth | Feb 07, 2004 06:56am | #8

   Woodwiz

   Thank you very much I will look into this set up. Sounds like it would meet all my needs.

   Again thanks for the suggestion

   Scott T.