Cameron. So called reactive dilutants are after my time really so I can't decently comment from first hand.

So, this is probably totally wrong but I'm confused. If they are really using glycidyl ether as a dilutant there's a lot more than simple dilution going on. Hence the 'reactive' I expect. I thought it was the glycidyl groups open on the base that reacted with the hardener amines to form the links and so cure the resin?

Amine blush is an excess of amines in the proportion of hardner. Non blushing epoxy carefully provides exactly the quantity of amines in th ehardener necessary to fully cure - which is why it's so vital the mix ratios are observed. Excess hardner - too many amines, you get blush, too fast a cure and possible encapsulated unconverted base and a sticky surface and weak product. Too little hardner you get unconverted base and insufficient cross linking and a rubbery product.

If they're adding G ethers then I'd have thought amine could bond there as readily as the base string and the ethers evaporate off. Isn't that a VOC these days? What's the base/hardener ratio? Does the thinner stuff need more hardener? What's the mixing criteria? If the hardener has to bond with both base and a reactive dilutant it's going to be even more important to have a homogeneous mix and exact ratios.

Nano mixes; I think you're wasting time on so called nano particles since the benefit in strength is limited in value until you 1/ get the base material to perform as per datasheet, 2/ have a need beyond what's simply feasible with the material properties as is and finally 3/ can be assured the 'additives' will not have a detrimental effect.

Epoxy is a fairly complex material, or rather the hadener is. The base resin is pretty much unchanged from one brand to another. The formulation chemistry happens mostly in the hardener and tailors the materials properties including things like strength improvers. Its complex and to get beyond the base physical properties is not trivial. Formulators can make fast or slow, clear, non blushing or brittle or soft epoxies. Where you see 100% solids usually implies the mix isn't diluted, or rather I'd guess that means its not using VOC's these days. To get the stuff to fully cure in chains and extensive cross linking usually requires particulate solids in the base and particulates in the hardener. This is analogeous to the proposed Nano particles I suspect and the papers on the benefits are simply a refinement of whats already in there. particles are already in there that in part is what the '100% solids' refers to (or at least it used to!).

It gets tricky where circumstances require a formulator to provide a property that requires addition of a material that material is itself a particulate in larger quantities, not liquid and the formulator then has to counter excess small ( or nano to use the jargon here) particulate that cause cure problems, similar to the Carbon black goo effect for example. If there already a lot or particulate in there, adding more material will weaken the product.

Again my experience here is over ten years old so take it for what its worth, and it relates to resin infusion and prepreg mixes in mixed fibre laminates, mostly tension stuff as structural composites usually are. The exact opposite of E/G property wise unfortunately. The basic rules to the base materials still apply though.

Also to be honest, dilutants, nano this, filler that are all irrelevant in the bigger picture for Epoxy as an engineering material. If you can get a low cps epoxy formulation then the first challenge is still to get the stuff to perform as per datasheet first. Once that's there it's almost trivial to work out the sections required.

As an end user with a non bleeding edge application I'd be hesitant to expect to be able to modify the mix without a lot of tangible effort and moreover simply don't see the need.