Compare epoxy, PU and polyaspartic

First the load profile

A warehouse, professional kitchen and showroom place different demands on a floor. Separately map mechanical stress, chemicals, cleaning, temperature changes, UV light and desired anti-slip.

The surface also counts. Compressive strength, tensile strength, moisture, cracks, flatness and existing coatings determine what preparation and primer are needed.

• Type and intensity of traffic
• Water, fats and chemicals
• Temperature and thermal shock
• Hygiene, anti-slip and cleaning method
• Available time until commissioning

Properties of epoxy

Epoxy systems are widely used because of their adhesion, hardness and wide finishing options. They can be constructed as a thin coating, broadcast system or thicker pouring layer.

Epoxy is not automatically suitable for every situation. Moisture from the substrate, movement, low application temperature, UV exposure and curing time must be checked in advance.

When PU is interesting

PU systems can offer more flexibility and are used where comfort, crack bridging or specific mechanical properties are important.

There are major differences within the PU family. For wet or thermally heavily loaded process areas, a more robust composite system may be required. The term PU alone says too little.

Velocity of polyaspartic

Polyaspartic systems can offer a short turnaround time and good color stability. This makes them interesting for locations where downtime is a heavy burden.

Fast curing simultaneously reduces the processing window. Preparation, mixing, shift staffing and phasing must therefore be carefully organised.

A fair comparison

Compare systems on total layer thickness, consumption, preparation, anti-slip, chemical resistance, recoating times and time to full load. In addition, look at repairability and maintenance.

A test surface can help to assess adhesion, appearance and roughness. The final choice is recorded as a complete layer structure, not as a separate product.