did a chip on the inside part of windshield

[Nomad]

I also do inside damage if I believe it can be done successfully. Don't get them often. Once a car that had been in a tornado in Oklahoma had the back glass blown out and a perfect bullseye on the inside of the WS. I have also drilled through the laminate to get resin into an inside break. Mostly in the frit band along the bottom where a rock strike has broken both sheets of glass. I believe I posted what I did on another thread not too long ago.

Regardless of the admonitions of organizations and some here on the forum, I will continue to help my clients the best I can regardless of the posted "rules". Progress is not made, new ways of thinking are not started if we are slaves to some arbitrary procedural set of dictates. I may follow them 90+ percent of the time, but there are circumstances that may point me in another direction. It may be the clients insistence, or the location of a break that can't be seen from the drivers seat, or a clients personal situation that puts them in a place that they only want to get a temporary fix til they get home or they simply can't afford a new windshield right now.

Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and even Edison pushed the limits and challenged existing "wisdom" and rules. They were right, the rules were wrong. I don't think guidelines are a bad Idea, but when ROLAGS is elevated to a position where no one dare question it, then I have a problem and I think WSR will have a problem too.

Jason, keep doing what you're doing.

[Chips be-gone]

Jason
I feel you have been slapped enough times. I will not add to the pain that you felt by us long time so called pros but I see it as if you drill through the top layer and through the lamination to the inside layer, don't you think that by injecting resin through there it will hit the lamination and bleed through the lamination and give a bad distortion? That is one reason we do not drill to the lamination to do a reg repair.

Also the fact that on the inside, once you remove the UV light from curing the inner sheet will not get anymore UV to help set the resin if you removed the light to soon.... How long did you leave the light on the break and did you use it on the inside or outside to cure...?

Remember, UV does not pass through glass. That is why you will not get a tan or burn in your car if the window is up and if the windows are down you get a truckers tan or burn while driving.

Just the way I look at this. I may be looking at this wrong.

[Nomad]

I think all breaks that we repair go to the lamination. That is why they flower with too much heat and/or pressure. Drilling to or through it doesn't make any difference on this. It does make the chip look worse when completed if drilled unnecessarily.

If you go all the way through both layers though, it will give the driver and passengers better ventilation and prevent that annoying increase in pressure that happens when you slam the door.

[Brent Deines]

Nomad, you make some very good points, and although I am a ROLAGS supporter I was recently reminded by a fellow committee member that it is a living document and is subject to change based on new products, techniques, and information that are proven to be valid. Therefore it is not necessary to agree with everything in ROLAGS to be a supporter, but it is necessary for me to adhere to the standard, which I do. That does not mean however that I discourage technicians from experimenting, although I do discourage them from experimenting on a customer's windshield. That said, I think that most of us have tried something we were not sure would come out to our satisfaction with the understanding that the customer would have to replace the windshield if we were unsuccessful. In this case I would have passed on the repair, but the fact that Jason did not pass it up, and apparently both he and his customer were happy with the repair, makes it difficult for me to criticise. Some would argue that there is a safety issue here, but I would argue that in most states the driver of this vehicle would not be required to have the break repaired or the glass replaced, so repairing it is surely better than leaving it un-repaired. I also think that even a questionable windshield repair is safer than having your windshield replaced. There are a lot of things that can go wrong with a windshield replacement that could make a vehicle unsafe, but with a windshield repair the safety is never more of an issue than before the repair was made. ROLAGS is a voluntary standard that a technician can choose to follow or choose to ignore, therefore it is up to the technician to determine what is repairable and what is not.

Chips be-gone, just to clarify your statement "UV does not pass through glass", it is actually the PVB that the UV rays will not pass through. The solar green glass used in most windshields will reduce the amount of UV that comes through the glass, but does not completely block it. Your point however is still valid. Anything on the inside of the laminate will receive only the UV rays that come through the rest of the windows in a vehicle, but cannot be cured through the windshield. I was not actually 100% sure of this so we broke out the ultraviolet light meter and did some testing this morning. Sure enough, 0 UV was getting through the windshield on a 2001 Chev Silverado, but the side windows and even the dark privacy windows in the back did allow UV to pass through.

Jason, things get a little heated on this board from time to time, but that is only because we are all very passionate about our work, and our customers. Whether we all agree with you or not I think this has been a very good discussion so far. Some good points have been made on both sides of the debate, and I appreciate that fact that you are open minded and don't get too upset when others assert their opinions.

[Chips be-gone]

Brent
What percentage of UV did the side glass allow in? My thoughts are maybe 1 - 5% of the 100% possible.

Sorry for going off the topic. I am just looking for a better point for not repairing on the inside or if you do, for leaving the lights on the inside for a longer cure time....

Also, What is the total time frame to have the Resin 100% cured. If I am doing a repair on a auto and it is in a garage or at the end of the day as the sun sets I leave the light on it for a longer time (10 min.'s average) knowing it will not be getting UV in the garage or as the sun sets at the end of the day.

This may need to be a new topic at this time. Or just short winded.

[Brent Deines]

I knew I should have been writing everything down! Ok, so I did a few more quick tests and here is what I came up with. The solar green tempered side glass blocked about 86% of the UV light, and the privacy glass on the tempered rear door glass blocked about 97% of the UV light. I could not get my meter to register any UV through the windshield. Unfortunately I could not find my samples of 1/8" solar green glass as this would approximate one layer of a typical windshield, but if I remember correctly it blocks about 70% of UV light. I think I posted those results on the forum in the past but don't have time to search at the moment, so if I am wrong about that last number please let me know.

Now keep in mind that I was using a 12V UV light with suctions cups and the amount of UV transmitted through the glass is directly related to how much UV the light produces, and how close it is to the meter, so these figures are for reference only.

The UV is measured in micro watts per square centimeter or uW/cm2 and our meter is set to measure 365nm UV wavelength. Here are some numbers that you may find interesting.

Bright Sunlight: Around 6000 uW/cm2 (actually this depends greatly on the season, location, etc., but this gives you something to go on)
Good 12V light: 1450 uW/cm2 at 1/4" from the sensor.
Same light through tempered solar green side lite: 200 uW/cm2
Same light through tempered privacy side lite: 40 uW/cm2

This is why your resin will sometimes cure within seconds in the bright sunlight.

As to the total time frame to properly cure resin, there are too many variables to count, including the type of light, the type of resin, etc. However we know from testing that a good 12V, 120V or 240V light fitted with suction cups will completely cure a drop of pit resin on the surface of the windshield in 2 minutes or less, and in some cases only seconds. We also know that the 1st layer of glass blocks approximately 70% of the UV, so we need to add some time to compensate for that. That is why when using a Delta Kits light and Delta Kits resins we recommend a full 5 minute cure. If you are using a battery operated light you may need to increase your time to 10 minutes to get a full cure, but 5 minutes should be sufficient when using a high quality 12V, 120V, or 240v light. We feel that is ample time for most lights and most resins so we don't try to pin it down closer than that, but you should always check with your resin and light manufacturers to get their recommendations, and make sure they have done some testing to back up those recommendations. I was recently told by a competitor that the sun did not produce UVA, but a simple Google search will tell you otherwise. I don't think the light outside or the light in the room will make much difference on how long you need to leave your light on if using a light, but how close you get the bulb to the repair will, so if you have a light that sits very high off the glass you need to increase your cure time accordingly.

Sorry I can't be more specific at the moment, but I have limited time today and had not planned on doing a whole battery of testing.

[sydfloyd44]

Are you kidding me?

You drilled thru the laminate?

You just created an extremely unsafe situation for anyone in that vehicle. That windshield needs REPLACED! It is no longer about someone being happy with it.

I DO NOT CARE what anyone might say about my post, that is RIDICULOUS!

Really??? Drilled thru the laminate?????????????? WHAT????????????????????

[SGT]

Do you think drilling through the PVB comprimises the windshield/vehicle crash management system and passenger safety? Absolutely and if we do not think so we are kidding ourselves. To what degree is another issue though. If you decide to do this practice at least admit to ourselves we are knowingly, with intent, creating an unsafe condition that may just harm someone. What are those odds? who knows, probably nothing will ever happen but it could. Try telling your customer what procedure you are doing will comprimise windshield structural integrity and possibly cause harm to them in an accident. You would not be lying and and ethically they have the right to know. See what they say then. Most sensible individuals would more than likely say no thanks.

Lets say something did happen and people were seriously injured or worse killed and they investigated and determined the windshield could not perform as designed due to the repair that intentially comprimised the PVB. Forget about the legalities, could you sleep at night knowing you experimented with there life even if it was good intentions? Is keeping that customer happy agaisnt your better judgement, or that lousy 50 bucks worth it now? Sure I know that is an extreme example but I was trying to hit home. Regardless of what a customer wants, there needs should not sway you. You were hired as a professional and they will respect your opinion wether you follow a standard, code or other protocol you do not feel threatened by.

For me safety is of the highest priority and there is no room comprimise. Especially intentional. Thats what works for me. What works for you is up to you and there is no one there to stop you except you. So think beyond the money and the customers proding to fix it.

"IT IS OKAY TO SAY NO AND SOMETIMES MUST BE SAID"

[Chips be-gone]

but remember, he did it for $150.00. It must of been time for the car payment.
There goes the pride of the W/S tech.... Money over road the pride.... We can now add this to the hackers hand book.
Sorry, I did have to add to the pain. I have been thinking about this since I read it the first day and thought I could just sit on the sidelines. I was wrong.

[Nomad]

I guess that we need to do some testing. Maybe drill a large hole clear through the WS and then test it for safety. I cannot believe that a pin hole size hole in the laminate would compromise the safety of the WS at all. I have seen some people drill clear through to the laminate every time, and some companies even recommend doing this. If this procedure compromised safety and integrity, some evidence surely would have surfaced by now.

The laminate seems to be this sticky gooey flexible stuff when you examine it. I find it very difficult to believe that a tiny hole in something like this could cause catastrophic failure. I could be wrong but I don't think so. This said, I have not drilled to or through the laminate except on very rare occasions. I have accidentally done so a few times, and don't believe that should be a reason to abandon the repair and have the WS replaced.

If you really are a true believer in never disturbing the laminate, then what about a small amount of delamination around an old chip or small crack? Would that not also cause a failure in a crash? I would like to see some evidence before belittling and denigrating another tech by implying that they are a hack.

In other words, if it is such poor practice that makes a dangerous situation, then let us see the references to the appropriate research proving it so.

And Brent, does the resin, once it is partially cured, continue to cure even in the absence of UV light? I have worked with some catalyzed products and it seems that once the reaction is started it continues on its own. I know that if I left a partially catalyzed lump of stuff in the bucket it would set the new stuff up almost immediately if you mixed them together.