Corrosion A journal of the Institute of Corrosion · Corrosion Management A journal of the Institute of Corrosion Issue 146 November/December 2018 Protection of above ground storage

CorrosionManagement

A journal of the Institute of Corrosion

Issue 146 November/December 2018

Protection of above ground storage tanks

www.icorr.org

All the latest Branch News in your areaPage 6

Read the detail in our informative Technical Article series Page 14

Corrosion Management

2 November/December 2018 www.icorr.org

Coating Thickness Material Analysis Microhardness Material Testing

Microhardness determination of coatings in the micrometer range

FISCHERSCOPE® HM2000S

• Determination of plastic an elastic parameters

• Instrumented Indentation Test• Thin coatings measurable• Easy to use

www.helmutfischer.xy

HELMUT FISCHER ((your adress))((street & number)), ((place))Tel.: (+00) 00 000 00 00, Fax: (+00) 00 000 00 [email protected]

•FieldUpgradeable•VibratesonAlarm•CompactSize•HighlyRepeatable

www.fischergb.co.uk

Wall Thickness GauGeTheFISCHERSCOPE®UltrasonicsUMPSeriesmeasureswallthicknessofpressurevessels,boilertubes,storagetanksandmore

Fischer insTrumenTaTion (GB) lTdGordletonIndustrialEstate,HannahWay,Lymington,SO418JDTel:+44(0)[email protected]

ContentsIssue 146 November/December 2018

4The President Writes

4Institute News

10Industry News

13Innovative Products

14Technical Article Advanced cathodic protection design of storage tank internal surfaces through FEM modelling

18Technical Article A New Beginning, the Better Way To Assess Coating Performance

23Technical Article TSA coatings – methods and considerations when measuring their thickness

26Technical Article Protecting Tank bases from Corrosion

27 Sustaining Members

32Diary Dates

Published on behalf of the Institute of CorrosionSquare One Advertising and Design Limited84 Queen Street, Sheffield S1 2DW, United Kingdom.Publisher and Managing EditorDebbie HardwickTel: 0114 273 0132Fax: 0114 270 0422Email: [email protected] EditorBrian GoldieEmail: [email protected] One Advertising & Designwww.squareone.co.ukAdvertising ManagerJonathan PhillipsTel: 0114 273 0132 Fax: 0114 272 1713

Email: [email protected] copy date for January/February 2019 issue is: 11th January 2019SubscriptionsUK £70.00Europe £80.00Outside Europe £90.00 airmail £80.00 surface mailEnquiries and subscriptions to the Institute of Corrosion at the address below:The Institute of CorrosionPresidentSarah VaseyFormer PresidentJohn FletcherVice PresidentGareth Hinds

Hon. SecretaryDr. Jane LomasBarratt House, Suite S3, Kingsthorpe Road, Northampton, NN2 6EZ Tel: 01604 438222 Email: [email protected] Website: www.icorr.orgAll rights reserved Reproduction without written permission from the Institute of Corrosion is prohibited. Views expressed in editorial text or advertising copy are the opinions of the contributors/advertisers and are not those of the Institute or the Publisher. ISSN: 13 55 52 43

Cover photo: Belzona Polymerics Ltd

Institute News


I am writing this to you from Tel Aviv where I have the pleasure of attending the 13th Biannual Conference of the Israeli Corrosion Forum. This is the last opportunity that I will have to write to you as President, as at the AGM on the 29th November in Birmingham, Gareth Hinds will be elected as the new President. It has been a real honour for me to serve in this position. I have a new found respect for the Presidents that have

gone before me, and for Gareth taking on the role. On that note I would like to thank John Fletcher who steps down as a Trustee after 6 years of service to the Institute.Our new President Dr Gareth Hinds is based at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in Teddington, Middlesex, where he leads a group with research interests in corrosion and electrochemistry. Gareth has participated in the activities of the Corrosion Science Division since 2003, and is a long-standing member of Council. He is also a Trustee and a member of the Correx board so he has a good understanding of the way the Institute works.The Presidency is certainly a position that keeps you busy, and often in ways you would not expect! We have record membership numbers, a new initiative to benefit members and a new home in 5 Saxon Court, Northampton. The 8th of November was the presentation of another round of Young Engineers Case Studies. All of these activities are possible due to the dedication of our volunteers, and I hope that you will continue to support both Gareth and the Institute as a whole.Over the past 2 years I have thoroughly enjoyed meeting many of the members and attending branch meetings, we really do have a great membership and a strong community. All that is left to me is to say thank to you all for this experience and to wish Gareth all the success, I know he will do a fantastic job, and I am excited to see where he take us.

ICorr President, Sarah Vasey.

The President WritesFrom the Editor

Each year the Institute of Corrosion bestows a range of internationally-renowned awards in recognition of excellence in corrosion science and engineering, and to reward outstanding service to the Institute and the wider corrosion community. Many of these awards are open to nomination by members of the Institute. Below is a brief description of each award together with details of how to nominate potential candidates.

U.R. Evans AwardThe U.R. Evans Award is the premier scientific award of the Institute of Corrosion and is presented annually for outstanding international achievements in pure or applied corrosion science. The recipient is selected by a Corrosion Science Division panel and presented with a sword and an engraved plaque at the annual Corrosion Science Symposium. The recipient is also granted Honorary Life

ICORR AWARDS CALL FOR NOMINATIONSFellowship of the Institute. Nominations may be submitted at any time via email to the CSD Chair, Julian Wharton ([email protected]).

Paul McIntyre AwardThe Paul McIntyre Award is presented to a senior corrosion engineer, who, as well as being a leading practitioner in his field, has advanced European collaboration and international standards development. The award consists of an engraved trophy, which is presented at the annual CED Working Day meeting. The recipient is requested to present a brief overview of their activities and encouraged to prepare an article for publication in Corrosion Management. Nominations should be submitted to the CED Chair, Nick Smart ([email protected]), by 28 February 2019.

Another year is almost over, and if you’re like me, you’ll have wondered where the time has gone, with all those things you planned to do, but haven’t managed. I had hoped to get more cutting-edge technical articles in each issue, but didn’t quite manage this. However this issue has a bumper four technical articles, two relating to testing and two about above ground storage tanks.There is a short piece on measuring dry film thickness of thermal sprayed aluminium coatings and the importance of the measuring method, and a thought-provoking look at specifications and protective coating testing, by experts from AkzoNobel.The articles on storage tanks cover the use of Finite Element Modelling to more accurately design the cathodic protection system, and how looking at an alternative industry helped solve a corrosion protection problem.Looking forward to next year, there are exciting developments in our training programmes and our move to new offices, and I look forward to bringing you news of these. I would welcome technical article submissions from members (and their colleagues) on their developments in corrosion protection and control. These can be sent to the editor, [email protected]. A list of the editorial themes planned for next year can be found in the media pack at, www.icorr.org/publications.All that remains is for me to wish all readers the compliments of the season.Brian Goldie, Consulting Editor

Institute News

www.icorr.org November/December 2018 5

H.G. Cole AwardThe H.G. Cole award is in the form of a poignard and is made in recognition of exceptional services to the development of the Institute. It is only awarded on an occasional basis, typically every 5 to 10 years, reflecting the highest possible level of commitment of the recipient to the activities of the Institute. Nomination and selection for this award is administered by the ICorr Awards Committee. Nominations may be made at any time to the Awards Committee Chair, Gareth Hinds ([email protected]).

Honorary FellowshipHonorary Fellowship is awarded in recognition of outstanding service to the Institute over many years. The recipient is bestowed the suffix FICorr (Hon) and all future membership fees are waived. Nominations for Honorary Fellowship must be submitted via Council.

T.P. Hoar AwardThe T.P. Hoar Award is presented to the author of the best paper published in the scientific journal Corrosion Science during the previous calendar year. The winning paper is selected by a sub-committee of the Corrosion Science Division and the author receives a certificate and a cash sum of £300.

Galloway AwardThe Galloway Award is presented to a student author for the best publication describing original research in corrosion science and engineering, as judged by a sub-committee of the Corrosion Science Division. The winning paper is published in Corrosion Management and the prize consists of a certificate and a cash sum of £250. The Institute does not retain copyright of the material so this does not prevent separate publication of the work in a scientific journal. Submissions (in the form of papers published within the past 12 months or draft publications) may be sent via email at any time to the CSD Chair, Julian Wharton ([email protected]).

Lionel Shreir AwardThe Lionel Shreir Award is made to the best student presenter at the annual Corrosion Science Symposium. Selection of the recipient is carried out by a sub-committee of the Corrosion Science Division. The award consists of a certificate and a cash prize.For further details on the Institute awards, including lists of past recipients, please visit https://www.icorr.org/icorr-awards/

Young Engineer ProgrammeThe October meeting, held as usual at the offices of McDermott’s in Paddington, was the penultimate meeting of the Young engineer Programme (YEP). The subjects for this meeting were “Presentation Skills” given by David Mobbs and “Inspection methods” given by Ian Daniel from Sonomatic. The culmination of this programme is the presentation by the delegates of their Case Study solutions, and as this meeting was fast approaching, the presentation skills section was a timely reminder on how to prepare for a presentation that is concise, and the do’s and don’ts in developing an effective presentation. This is a skill that we are all required to use in our everyday working life, but few are ever trained in. The team mentors (John Boran, Rob Doggett and Chris Googan) were also present which gave the opportunity for some last minutes discussion on the results of their investigation into the Case Study and possible solutions, with one team having a draft presentation already prepared.After the presentation on training, Ian Daniel described the various methods of inspection and the benefits of each, and how it’s possible to combine the various techniques to broaden the amount of useful information obtained.

Non-intrusive inspection, NII, was a key aspect of the discussion, as many operators are looking to “zero man entry” over the life of the asset. The presentation covered developments in storage tank bottom inspection, and remote monitoring via robotics. The evening closed with a dinner and the opportunity to network.A report on the Case Study presentation evening can be found on page 8 of this issue.

This is a very exciting time for ICATS as we launch the new ICATS course material and prepare for the introduction of the updated website and online registration/renewals.The new ICATS course addresses every aspect of Protective Coating application including:l Health and Safety l Surface preparation l Metal sprayl Paint application l Fire protection l Access options and specific industry requirementsl Trouble Shooting

During November we introduced this new course to our Trainers at seminars in Bristol, Manchester, Edinburgh and Northampton. These were a great success, and also included an overview of the ICATS development plans and a detailed look at the new programme.We are also about to introduce our new website which will work much better with smart phones and tablets than the old site, and is part of a wider ICATS update. As previously announced, the Protective Coating Apprenticeship Programme is progressing and a pilot programme begins in January 2019.For further information on any of the above please contact the office, at [email protected], or phone 01604 438222.

ICATS News

Institute News


Simon Bowcock has been appointed the as the new Young ICorr council member. He will take over from Christian Bridge who made a significant contribution in re-establishing Young Icorr, leading initiatives to increase student membership and organising young professional networking events. This included a very successful event in collaboration with The Welding Institute and the London Materials Society attended by over 50 young engineers. The Institute would like to thank Christian for all his efforts during his tenure and wish him well in his future endeavours.We are looking to proactively engage students from university and looking for volunteers to deliver a 15-minute presentation

to materials and corrosion departments around the country. This approach has proven very successful at the University of Oxford with a recent presentation by Chris Bridge and Simon encouraging over 32 students to sign up. In addition, London Branch took part in the recent Imperial College Materials Society career fair with Mash Biagioli manning the ICorr stand. There was a good turnout of students, and 50 of them took away Institute membership packs, however it is too early to determine how successful this was. If you are interested in volunteering at a university event, then please contact, [email protected]

Young ICorr

Corrosion Engineering Division2019 CED working dayFollowing on from the successful Corrosion Engineering Division working day held on the topic of ‘Atmospheric Corrosion in Industrial Applications’ at the Birchwood Park Conference Centre, Warrington in April 2018, the 2019 meeting will be held in parallel with the Corrosion Science Symposium-Electrochemical Society meeting at Strathclyde University from 26-28 August. The theme of the CED meeting will be Industrial Applications of Electrochemical Corrosion Monitoring. More details will follow in due course.Most of the presentations from the previous CED meetings, and documents produced by the working groups, are available to members through the members’ area of the web site. Contact details for the chairs of the CED working groups are also given on the web site if you would like to become involved in these activities.

2019 Paul McIntyre AwardWe look forward to receiving nominations for the 2019 Paul McIntyre award. This award will be presented to a senior corrosion engineer, who, as well as being a leading practitioner in his field, has advanced European collaboration and international standards development. Details of the nomination process can be found on page 4. The 2018 recipient was Dr John Broomfield, who was presented with the award at the CED Working Day in Warrington in April.

Cathodic Protection Working group chairThere is a vacancy for chairman of the Cathodic Protection working group, as Ross Fielding is stepping down after 10 years’ service. Anybody interested in taking over this role should contact the chair of the corrosion engineering division, Nick Smart ([email protected]) for further information.

Institute NewsLocal Branch NewsAberdeen BranchThe branch has now moved its activities to the Sir Ian Wood Building, Robert Gordon University (RGU), which provides ‘State of the Art’ Teaching / AV Facilities, and kicked off its new session with some thoughtful insights into the complex issue of Preferential Weld Corrosion (PWC) in a presentation by Neil Gallon and Michael Young of Rosen. This meeting was also the annual joint event with TWI (The Welding Institute) North Scottish Branch.

Pre-September meeting networking at the Robert Gordon University.

PWC is of increasing concern to many operators, especially in relation to ageing assets. This talk helped explain what exactly PWC was, and discussed some of the many complex welding parameters / considerations and features that can lead to PWC. The talk also discussed procedures for diagnosis of PWC, identification of mitigation options, and highlighted several other difficulties and issues that can arise with both of these aspects in relation to PWC management.

Immediately preceding the September event, committee Member - Ms. Zahra Lotfi, Snr. Corrosion Engineer, Oceaneering International, gave a presentation to students of the School of Engineering, explaining how corrosion control is an essential part of engineering design and maintenance of every aspect of our lives – our buildings, transport, gas,

September speakers (L to R), Neil Gallon and Michael Young (of Rosen) with Aberdeen Branch chair Dr Yunnan Gao, and Mark Bragg, Technical Secretary of TWI North Scottish Branch.


Institute News


Institute Newsoil, water industries, and emphasising how all depend for their survival on its prevention. This event was part of a series of talks to Aberdeen University and RGU University students to encourage them to take up free ICorr membership and to become more involved in the corrosion community.

Vice chair Stephen Tate followed on from these university presentations by providing assistance to the AFBE-UK Transition and Interview Programme on 13th October. AFBE-UK promotes higher achievements in education and engineering particularly among people from black and minority ethnicity backgrounds. Interested parties can seek further information at https://afbe.org.uk/about-usIn October, Chris Burke, Technical Consultant / Product Manager of Emerson – Permasense gave a presentation on “Non-intrusive wall thickness monitoring”. Permansense was originally a joint research project between BP and Imperial College, London, and is now part of Emerson, operating worldwide with currently over 20,000 sensor devices in-service. Changes to process operations can often have a significant impact on plant integrity. For example the onset of sand production can be caused through increases in the drawdown on a well and high flowrate from bringing on new or previously shut-in wells, and which can impact on the effectiveness of chemical corrosion inhibitors. Current long-term risk-based asset integrity methodologies cannot predict these sudden operational events, meaning the increased levels of erosion or corrosion that these events can cause can often go undiscovered until the next planned inspection, and risk failing before that. Chris spoke about optimizing plant integrity through continuous wall thickness monitoring using fully wireless ATEX rated equipment for automated UT, that can be very quickly set-up at upstream and downstream energy sites.

This talk complemented the September one, in that the sensors are now also being installed to monitor PWC, and this will be the subject of a future technical article.The presentation reviewed the increasing use being made by many operators of continuous / automated wall thickness monitors as a means to not only track erosion and corrosion in areas of concern, but as a means of identifying underlying process operations responsible - thereby facilitating and validating corrosion mitigation strategies online so that timely, evidence-based, integrity management decisions can be made. Advantages of these new tools to corrosion / integrity engineers were discussed in great detail, prompting many questions from the large audience on matters relating to sensor installation methods, durability, system size, and data management.All past Aberdeen ICorr Presentations may be found on: https://sites.google.com/site/icorrabz/resource-centerFull details of future events can be found on the diary page of the magazine and on the website, or contact: [email protected]

The well attended September event on PWC for subsea and topsides welded systems.

Chris Burke of Emerson-Permasense, explaining sensor technology.

London BranchAt the October meeting, Paolo Marcassoli from Cescor gave a very interesting talk on the use of Finite Element Method (FEM) in Cathodic Protection Design. Paolo introduced the advantages of FEM modelling, explained its mathematical principles and presented case studies where the technique had been implemented.

Over the past few years the use of computer aided approaches have improved the design of galvanic and impressed current cathodic protection systems. To ensure that protection conditions are achieved at each point of the structure, correct anode spacing is critical. FEM allows accurate analysis of structures with complex geometries, and the impact of various factors on corrosion control, providing precise prediction of protection current distribution.FEM is a numerical technique for solving boundary value problems, it minimalizes an error function, generating a stable solution. It solves simple equations over small subdomains, i.e. finite elements, to approximate more complex equations over a larger domain. Such analysis considers both, the primary current distribution related to electrolyte resistivity and the secondary current distribution related to electrode reactions. Boundary conditions are characterized by electrochemical behaviour of the metallic surface under protection, for example through the Tafel equations. The electrical field is then solved using Laplace equation.The first case study demonstrated the application of FEM on an above ground crude oil storage tank, where the bottom of the tank was protected internally by coating and galvanic anodes, flush-mounted type or zinc ribbon, depending on the water hold-up. This case is described in more detail in the article on page 14. In the second case study Paolo presented how FEM benefits retrofit CP design of offshore assets. This included applications in: offshore platform protected by galvanic anodes, offshore platform retrofitted by impressed current system, subsea pipeline retrofitted by galvanic anode sleds, and Single Point Mooring retrofitted by galvanic anodes clamp and pods. The study showed that FEM modelling in cathodic protection design is a very useful tool that helps to ensure thorough protection of the asset and possible reduction of costs by optimization of anodic system installation, and determining need for a new retrofit system.This was an excellent talk and was well received by the audience. The technique presented is currently widely used in the industry and is recognized

Paolo Marcassoli.

Continues on page 8

Institute News


Continued from page 7

by professional organisations. It surely is a step forward in cathodic protection design and will continue to develop in the future.The November meeting was devoted to the presentations from the Young Engineers on the results of their YEP case study of a heat exchanger failure. This was the culmination of 12 months of study by the delegates who have worked through modules that span the breadth and depth of the technologies used in our industry.

It was a truly fantastic evening with 3 excellent presentations from the teams Team Boran: Agnieszka Knyter Rachel Colpitts Liam Fox Konstantinos Katsounis Team Doggett: Daniel Burke Oliver Smith Caroline Earl Jessica Easton Team Googan: Mark Fearns Stephen Shapcott Liya GuoThere was a good deal of questions from the audience after each presentation and following which the judges retired to deliberate.Bill Hedges from BP, on presenting the award, said how hard it had been to select a winner as they were all so good. However there has to be a winning team and that was Team Doggett, who will be travelling to the USA in April 2019 to attend the NACE Conference in Nashville, where a whole programme of events will be arranged. They will post a blog of their activity and learnings on a daily basis on the Institute website. The organisers are grateful to the President and staff of NACE for pledging their support to the winners whilst they are in Nashville by providing free conference registrations, and access to the student award ceremony.The winning team will also present their conference learnings during the London branch 2019 winter series lectures.The response from the delegates attending this programme has been incredibly encouraging;“This programme has altered the way I think about my work and how I carry it out”

“I have found a new job and moved to London living in Kew Gardens and cycling to work each day. I love it”

“I hadn’t realised the value of ICorr and I will go back to work on Monday and encourage them to engage”

A comment from one of the senior engineers in our fraternity gave the programme even more credibility, “This is probably

the most important function in the UK Corrosion calendar, it’s truly fantastic”

It’s also interesting to note that Agnieszka of Team Boran, travelled from Poland in 2015, under her own steam, to hear the previous YEP case study presentations, and decided then she wanted to be involved in the next YEP programme.Thanks go to all those involved in the process; the organising committee, the lecturers, the hosts, the mentors, the judges, the delegates, and if course a big thank you to the sponsors of the event, BP.The second joint meeting of the branch with the SCI London Group was held on 25 October, at their prestigious headquarters in Belgrave Square. This ultra-modern auditorium made for a most comfortable setting and was enjoyed by an attendance of over 60. The evening chairman, John T O’Shea, a Past President of ICorr, began the procedures by thanking Dr Fred Parrett, currently Hon. Treasurer of the SCI London Section, for all his work in helping to organise this event.

The first presentation “A Fighting Ship” was based around the Mary-Rose project at Portsmouth. This was given by Professor Eleanor Schofield, Head of Conservation and Collections Care at the Mary Rose Trust. Eleanor graduated from Imperial College, where she also received her PhD in Material Science. She has recently received an Honorary Chair at the University of Kent, at Canterbury.Professor Schofield began her talk by correcting the too often quoted story that the Mary Rose sank in 1545 on her maiden voyage. In fact she was built in 1510 and served for 34 years as the flagship of Henry VIII’s navy in many battles, particularly in wars against France. Following the lifting of the ship out of the seabed mud, the timber hull was treated over many years by spraying with water and polyethylene glycol to prevent further deterioration once it was exposed to the air. Perhaps less well known is the work in restoring and maintaining over 19,000 artefacts that had also been recovered. A significant part of the collection was the 1200 + iron cannonballs, which had been exposed to sea-water since the ship sank, and which were in danger of corrosion when exposed to the air due to the chloride in sea-water. It was

The YEP delegates and mentors.

The winning team and mentor, Rob Doggett with Bill Hedges.

John O’Shea introducing the evening.

Institute News


Midland BranchThe September meeting was very well attended. This was hosted by Amey, at their Birmingham offices, with the food kindly sponsored by Impalloy.

Iqbal Johal from the Galvanizers Association (GA) gave a very informative overview of galvanising. He discussed the process itself and its limitations. Iqbal also presented details of a very interesting building which had been specially engineered around the use of galvanising, and its aesthetic appearance. It was also very interesting to learn of the HDG business model, which GA members are very supportive of. Discussions about closer links between GA and ICorr followed, due to what was seen as a common aim of the Institute and Association.The branch hosted the Institute AGM on 29 November, preceded by a series of technical presentations on pipeline integrity, and a report on both will be included in the Jan/Feb 2019 issue of Corrosion Management.

vital that ways were found of preserving the these, as it was recognised that while the cannons were made to last and be used many times, the cannonballs were only needed for a one-off use, and thus greatly inferior in their quality and standard of manufacture.

Initially researchers attempted to remove chloride from the cannonballs, by soaking in water with and without chemical treatment. Chloride reduction by heating in an atmosphere of hydrogen was also attempted, but unfortunately these methods did not successfully prevent disintegration when they were later put on display. To better understand this problem, Professor Schofield, established a joint research project with the department of archaeology at UCL and the UK Diamond Light Source in Didcot which is the UK’s national synchrotron. This works like a giant microscope, harnessing the power of electrons to produce penetrating bright light X-rays, which combined with absorption spectroscopy, and fluorescence mapping, made it possible to visualise the differences in the corrosion profiles. These could be traced to the treatments applied in the 35 years since the cannon balls were recovered with the Mary Rose. The results revealed detailed maps of the elements involved in the corrosive process, giving an unprecedented insight into conservation on a molecular scale. This crucial information will help to protect these and other cultural heritage artefacts for many decades to come. The second presentation, “Fighting Corrosion” was given by Jim Glynn, a previous chairman of London Branch. Jim concentrated on the “dynamic duo” of corrosion protection - a suitable protective coating as the primary source of defence, supported where appropriate by a cathodic protection system to prevent any corrosion occurring at areas of coating damage. It is often commonly believed that rusting is a simple, chemical oxidation reaction – but it is not. Aqueous corrosion is a complex, multi-stage step process which includes electron transfer at the molecular level. Thus these electro-chemical reactions during corrosion can be influenced by the external application of electrical potentials. Under the right circumstances, corrosion can be stopped by applying the appropriate level of negative potential using a DC current supply. Jim presented many examples where the correct conditions of a good coating and a suitable working cathodic potential were present. However, he also described many examples where this was unsuccessful. These included a pipeline coating that had totally disbonded and broken away from the pipeline, due to a higher potential than required being applied, which generated hydrogen gas on the surface of the pipeline, causing the coating damage. He also described Thermally Sprayed Aluminium (TSA) applications, which are excellent protective coatings when properly applied. The aluminium content can act as its own in-built cathodic protection anode. However, in the wrong environment, the aluminium can be quickly used up, and premature failure occurs.Jim expanded his presentation to compare recent case studies of retro-fitting remote anode beds to two similar North Sea platforms which had exceeded their design life, but it was

Professor Eleanor Schofield .

Jim Glynn .

decided that the protection of these structures subsea could be extended using additional cathodic protection. One had been fully coated with coal tar epoxy, while the legs on the other had been left bare, but with a built-in corrosion factor that should have exceeded its expected life. The coated structure required a current output of 1,000 Amps, while the bare steel legs needed around 7,500 Amps, to produce the correct negative potentials, with these high DC currents supplied by banks of adjustable transformer rectifiers located on the platform decks. Jim also interspersed a number of quiz questions, asking the audience to identify some notable “Dynamic Duos” in life, film and comic books, which was well received and considered a fun way to conclude the presentations. The vote of thanks was given by Dr Parrett and he presented the speakers with ICorr engraved pens, as a memento of the evening, which was followed by refreshments and networking in the Garden Rooms.

Industry News


EUROCORR 2018, Congress Report The yearly flagship event of the European Federation of Corrosion, the EUROCORR congress, took place in the ICE Congress Centre, Kraków, Poland on 10 – 13 September.This year’s congress, organised by the Polish Corrosion Society, with the conference committee headed up by Agnieszka Krolikowska, was the largest yet with some 1200 delegates. It was divided into 38 parallel sessions, with as many as 14 running concurrently. These included sessions organised by the various EFC working parties, technical meetings and workshops, covering a large range of corrosion technologies. There were several ICorr members present, including Gareth Hinds, Stuart Lyon, Chris Googan, and Douglas Mills, who also attended the General Assembly and the Coatings Working Party meeting on behalf of the Institute. The EFC is in good shape both financially, and generally, after two years under the Presidency of Damien Féron who will hand over the reins to the next President, Arjan Mol from Delft University, in January 2019.

The opening session on the Monday morning saw the European Corrosion Medal awarded to Kemal Nisancioglu (Norwegian University for Science and Technology, NTNU), who delivered a plenary lecture on “External and internal segregations in localised corrosion of aluminium alloys”. Kemal described how high resolution and high sensitivity techniques have helped to detect and clarify the significance of the nano-scale critical segregations behind localised processes such as filiform and intergranular corrosion.It was very good to see the award of an EFC Honorary Fellowship being made to a stalwart of ICorr, Don Harrop, and the UK connection continued with the Cavallaro Medal being awarded to G Timothy Burstein (University of Cambridge, UK), who delivered a plenary lecture on “Aspects of long-term corrosion prediction and unpredictable behaviour”. In this Tim describe the processes that can occur during slow reactions of the passive state of stainless steels which lead to degradation of passivity. He noted that a significant level of understanding can only be obtained via meticulous experimental design.A reception was held on the Monday evening to mark the opening of a large exhibition featuring a total of 51 exhibitors. On the Tuesday morning, Jeffrey R. Didas (2018-19 president of NACE International) gave a plenary lecture on “The IMPACT study: A global examination of corrosion management best practices”, in which he reviewed the report’s contents. The plenary lecture on the Wednesday morning was delivered by Joerg Alfred Vogelsang (Sika Technology AG) on the “Testing of coatings in industrial context: expectations and limitations”. Joerg stressed the importance of reliability and reproducibility, raising particular concerns regarding accelerated testing in

terms of the conflict between a “faster to market” attitude and customers’ expectations.The EUROCORR Young Scientist Grant award, which provides financial support to young corrosion practitioners to visit and interact with groups working in other countries, was presented on the Thursday morning to three young scientists from European universities (details can be found at http://efcweb.org/EUROCORR+Young+Scientist+Grant.html. As always with EUROCORR, it was encouraging to see so many young corrosion scientists and engineers attending and presenting their work.More than 200 posters were on display, many of high quality and the prize for the best poster was presented to Ursa Tiringer (Jozef Stefan Institute, Ljubljana, Slovenia) for “The self-healing effect of hybrid sol-gel coatings based on CeO2 nanoparticles filled with Ce3+ applied on AA7075”.

On the Thursday, Dante Battocchi (North Dakota State University, USA) gave a plenary lecture on “Cr-free coatings for the protection of aircraft alloys”, in which he described materials which have emerged as candidates for coatings that match the performance of their Cr-based predecessors but are not hazardous to personnel or the environment.A more detailed report on the proceedings of EUROCORR 2018 will appear, in four parts, in Corrosion Engineering Science and Technology, beginning in January 2019.Next year, the EUROCORR congress will be held from 9th to 13th September at the Barceló Sevilla Renacimiento, Saville, Spain. See call for papers below.Ruth Bingham and Douglas Mills

Damien Féron and Agnieszka Krolikowska.

EUROCORR 2019, Seville, Spain - 9-13 September 2019

CALL FOR PAPERSThe hosts for the 2019 annual Eurocorr ccongress, the Sociedad Española des Materiales, SOCIEMAT, together with the European Federation of Corrosion, EFC, and DECHEMA, have announced that the theme will be “New times, new materials, new corrosion challenges”. A call for papers has been issued, with the deadline for abstract submission, 16 January 2019.Instructions for abstract submission and the online submission form are available on the congress website, http://eurocorr.org/EUROCORR+2019

Industry News


Corrosion Protection of Offshore PlatformsThe use of high performance coatings to protect offshore structures is the common method to prevent excessive corrosion. Three coat paint systems (to ISO 12944, or NORSOK M501 standards) can give a proven 15 years’ service life without major maintenance, however to reduce operating costs, platform operators are looking at new coating systems to extend this period, due to the high cost of carrying out any re-painting offshore. The cost of this maintenance painting on an offshore platform can be up to 100 times more expensive as land based maintenance, so when coatings fail it costs the owner enormous amounts of money due to loss of production.The Oil & Gas Technology Centre (OGTC), in Aberdeen has been carrying out trials of a new anti-corrosion coating on two North Sea offshore platforms in collaboration with SPI Performance Coatings in the UK (the supplier). OGTC, which is jointly funded by the UK, Scottish, and Aberdeen governments, was established to develop a culture of innovation that will consolidate Aberdeen and North-East Scotland’s position as a global hub for oil and gas technology and innovation.This novel spray applied inorganic coating (1) was applied initially on one N Sea platform which undergoing planned fabric maintenance. The coating was applied to areas of the platform’s lower deck that were suffering from severe corrosion. The existing three coat system which had required repair roughly every 3 to 5 years was completely removed from structural steel tubulars and flat plate. Initially, the surface was power washed and degreased to remove contaminants, and all tubulars were blasted to SA2.5, and flat plate mechanically prepared to ST3. While rust rashing was visible on areas prior to spray application of the anti-corrosion coating, this was deemed acceptable by the manufacturer due to its tolerance of damp substrates with this level of rust rashing/flash rusting. One coat of the anticorrosive coating was applied at 500 micron, and after curing an aesthetic topcoat was applied.The novel coating is a 100% solids water based inorganic phosphate “ceramic” coating, which according to the manufacturer, reacts with the steel surface to form a 2 micron protective layer of iron magnesium phosphate, and a barrier ceramic-type layer which also acts as a phosphate “reservoir” to repair the protective layer when damaged, to give long-lasting corrosion protection. This trial is due to finish in December and the initial findings will be available at the beginning of 2019. In addition a further trial on another N. Sea platform began in in June 2018. Again, a single 500 micron coat of the novel coating plus an aesthetic topcoat were applied to pipework and some flat plate after surface preparation to SA2.5.

Reference(1) EonCoat, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.

AETOC 2019The 11th International workshop on Application of electrochemical techniques to organic coatings, AETOC, will be held at Canet de Berenguer near Valencia, Spain, from 2nd-5th April 2019. This will be an opportunity to discuss the latest research topics and find industrial partners. More information can be found at, http://www.aetoc.uji.es/

LATEST LITERATUREUnmasking corrosion to design better protective thin films for metalsMetals are commonly protected from corrosion by naturally forming, super-thin oxide films.Traditionally, these protective films have been viewed as simple oxides of well-known compounds, but new work from scientists at Northwestern University, the University of Virginia and the University of Wisconsin-Madison has revealed new insights into these oxide films.Using state-of-the-art experimental techniques and theoretical modelling, the scientists were able to analyse oxide films at the atomic level, deciphering how the atoms are arranged in the oxides, and found that the protective films develop new structures and compositions that depend on how fast the oxide film grows. The study’s authors say their findings could provide clues about how to make the protective films better. The team studied the oxides that form on alloys composed of nickel and chromium, which are widely used in a variety of products. This study is published in, “Non equilibrium Solute Capture in Passivating Oxide Films”; Phys. Rev. Lett.; 2018.

Market Study Paints & Coatings – Europe (3rd Edition)

This report from Ceresana analyses the revenues, production, import, and export of paints and coatings, as well as demand split by the applications, eg construction, transportation, general industry, and others. Data are provided for Europe as a whole and the 24 major countries. Furthermore, demand is split by paint and coating types (vinyl, acrylics, alkyd, epoxy, PUR, polyester, and

other resins), as well as by technologies (waterborne, solvent borne, powder) for the 8 largest countries.According to the report, architectural paints are the largest application area of paints and coatings. Residential construction has a rising demand for facade and interior wall paints, yet, large commercial construction and infrastructure projects provide for a positive development of revenues. The market researchers of Ceresana forecast that about 58% of all paints and coatings will be utilised in the construction industry in 2025. Application for industrial goods is decisively affected by the economic situation of individual countries. In this segment, Ceresana expects a growth of European demand for paints and coatings by, on average, 1.4% per year.Another important application is the transportation segment. This industry is characterised by several innovations such as finishes offering thermal insulation or self-healing effects. Production and upstream manufacturing processes are being relocated from Western European to Eastern European countries, due to more favourable general conditions; research and development, on the other hand, remain in Western European countries.Besides the division by various application areas, the market report also analyses the demand per product type: ranging from paints and coatings based on acrylics, vinyl, alkyd, epoxy, polyurethane (PUR), and polyester up to products based on other materials. Paints and coatings based on acrylics and vinyl account for the largest share of the European market: the share amounts to about 53%. The increased focus on sustainability and environmental protection in Europe supports consumption of waterborne paints and coatings as well as other environmentally friendly alternatives.Further details can be obtained from [email protected]

For all the latest news, events and debates join us on

Industry News


Water-borne coatings market According to an article in the European Coatings Journal, the demand for environment-friendly water-borne coatings is rising. The global market for water-borne coatings should increase at a CAGR of 5.7 % by 2022 and reach a value of EUR 82.7 billion. In 2017 the global water-borne coatings market size was about EUR 62.4 billion.Asia-Pacific was the dominant market market in 2017, worth EUR 24.6 billion. This market is largely driven by architectural coatings application, and the water-borne coatings in the architectural segment is expected to show good growth in the next five years especially from the developing countries, driven by huge investments in new infrastructure developments, new housing projects, and renovation of residential and commercial buildings.The quality and robustness of water-borne coatings is improving due to use eco-friendly raw materials. Although

best known for their use as architectural coatings, water-borne acrylic coatings, also known as acrylic latex coatings, are much more than just residential coatings. Other than architectural application, they are also used for many different applications including automotive and marine. Asia-Pacific has been a bright spot in the global water-borne coatings market in the backdrop of the overall slowdown in global economic development. Moreover, as Asia-Pacific is the hub for foreign investment and has a booming manufacturing sector largely due to the low-cost labour and easily accessible raw materials.The growing middle-class population and the rising standard of living in the region will increase the demand for architectural coatings which in turn will drive the water-borne coatings market. In addition, concerns for environmental, health, and safety issues are driving the demand for water-borne coatings in the Asia-Pacific region.A more extensive market overview can be found in the current issue of the European Coatings Journal.

CEOCOR 2019The international congress and technical exhibition dealing with corrosion and protection of pipes and pipeline systems will be held next year from 21 to 24 May, at the H.C. Andersen Castle (Tivoli), Copenhagen, Denmark.

The registration deadline is the end of March 2019 and as spaces are limited, early booking is advised. To register for the congress, or for further information, visit www.ceocor2019.comExhibitors are invited to showcase their products and solutions for the corrosion and cathodic protection industry. The majestic foyer of the H.C. Andersen castle will provide the ideal

conditions for the exhibitors and the organisers will do their outmost to facilitate the best possible climate for the meeting between professionals and vendors.In addition, limited sponsorships opportunities are still available, see the website or contact he local organisers, Thomas Larsen, [email protected], or Lars Vendelbo Nielsen, [email protected]

European Coatings Show – The gathering of the coatings and paint industryThe next European Coating Show, covering trends and technologies in all aspects of the production of paints, coatings, sealants, construction chemicals and adhesives will be held on 19 - 21 March 2019 in NurembergThe demands placed on paint and coatings are growing all the time, and the decision-makers and thought leaders in the coatings industry face great challenges. The European Coatings Show gives the opportunity to meet the innovation leaders and discuss the latest developments in pigments, additives, adhesive and raw materials, intermediates for construction chemicals, as well as laboratory and production equipment, testing and measuring equipment, application and environmental protection and safety work.Further details can be found at, https://www.european-coatings-show.com

Impedance sensor for the early failure diagnosis of organic coatingsA miniature impedance sensor for field diagnosis of the early failure of coatings has been developed based on microelectronics and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS).The aging process of polyurethane-based coatings in a salt spray test chamber was studied using the impedance sensor. Several critical indexes related to EIS, such as phase angle, breakpoint frequency, specific capacitance, and impedance modulus, were proposed to evaluate the severity of coating degradation.The results indicated that the impedance sensor could accurately monitor the degradation process of coatings, and could detect when the coating may be regarded as completely degraded and fails to protect the metal substrate.This study was published in the Journal of Coatings Technology and Research, November 2018, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 1259–1272.


Industry News


STANDARDS UP-DATE

ISOThese documents are currently under consideration in the technical committee.ISO/DTR 23487-1 & 2 Metallic and other inorganic coatings - Corrosion protection of offshore wind turbines - Part 1: Duplex coating of towers, Part 2: Corrosion protection of foundation structuresISO/DTR 22770 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Analytical colorimetry method to support visual assessment of surface preparation gradesThese documents have obtained substantial support within the appropriate ISO technical committee, and have either been submitted to the ISO member bodies for voting or formal approval ISO/DIS 16573-1 Steel - Measurement method for the evaluation of hydrogen embrittlement resistance of high strength steels - Part 1: Constant load test Revision of ISO 16573:2015ISO/DIS 3183 Petroleum and natural gas industries - Steel pipe for pipeline transportation systems (Revision of ISO 3183:2012, ISO 3183:2012/Amd 1:2017)ISO/DIS 21968 Non-magnetic metallic coatings on metallic and non-metallic basis materials - Measurement of coating thickness - Phase-sensitive eddy-current method (Revision of ISO 21968:2005)ISO/FDIS 19901-9 Petroleum and natural gas industries - Specific requirements for offshore structures - Part 9: Structural integrity managementISO/FDIS 2063-1 Thermal spraying - Zinc, aluminium and their alloys - Part 1: Design considerations and quality requirements for corrosion protection systems (Revision of ISO 2063-1:2017)New Standards issued during the last two monthsISO 11124-3 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Specifications for metallic blast-cleaning abrasives- Part 3: High-carbon cast-steel shot and gritISO 11125-1 & 7 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Test methods for metallic blast-cleaning abrasives - Part 1: Sampling, Part 7: Determination of moistureISO 11126-5 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Specifications for non-metallic blast-cleaning abrasives - Part 5: Nickel slagISO 20769-1 & 2: Non-destructive testing - Radiographic inspection of corrosion and deposits in pipes by X- and gamma rays - Part 1: Tangential radiographic inspection, Part 2: Double wall radiographic inspectionISO 20728 Corrosion of metal and alloys - Determination of resistance of magnesium alloys to stress corrosion crackingISO 4623-1 Paints and varnishes - Determination of resistance to filiform corrosion - Part 1: Steel substratesISO 8504-3 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Surface preparation methods - Part 3: Hand- and power-tool cleaning

CENEN 13144:2018Metallic and other inorganic coatings - Method for quantitative measurement of adhesion by tensile testThis document specifies a quantitative method for the measurement of adhesive strength of metallic and other inorganic coatings applied to metallic, polymer and glass substrates. Typical coatings for which this document applies are metallic coatings such as aluminium, copper, nickel, nickel plus chromium, silver, tin, tin-nickel alloys, zinc, gold as well as other inorganic coatings such as oxides or nitrides, e.g. of

aluminium, indium and indium-tin, silicon, niobium, titanium, tungsten, zirconium and others. This document does not apply to certain hot dip, spray and mechanical coatings, for which other standards may apply, e.g. EN ISO 14916 or EN ISO 4624. The measurement is valid if the cohesion and adhesion properties of the adhesive are higher than those of the coating subjected to test.EN ISO 11126-1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8:2018 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Specifications for non-metallic blast-cleaning abrasives - Part 1: General introduction and classification, Part 3: Copper refinery slag (ISO 11126-3:2018), Part 4: Coal furnace slag (ISO 11126-4:2018), Part 6: Iron and steel slags (ISO 11126-6:2018), Part 7: Fused aluminium oxide (ISO 11126-7:2018), Part 8: Olivine (ISO 11126-8:2018EN ISO 20728:2018 Corrosion of metal and alloys - Determination of resistance of magnesium alloys to stress corrosion cracking (ISO 20728:2018)EN ISO 21809-1:2018 Petroleum and natural gas industries - External coatings for buried or submerged pipelines used in pipeline transportation systems - Part 1: Polyolefin coatings (3-layer PE and 3-layer PP) (ISO 21809-1:2018)

Innovative ProductsCorrosion in generator stator cooling systems is a serious problem because it can obstruct the flow of cooling water and reduce the efficiency of the cooling system, leading to operational problems as time goes on. Because of low conductivity requirements, corrosion inhibitors must meet special parameters for this use. Corrosion inhibitors for hydrostatic testing and layup of cooling water systems in the nuclear industry are also limited, in this case by low sodium restrictions.Cortec® Corporation, has developed a simple water treatment product for use in cooling systems where low conductivity or low sodium products are required. Based solely on organic components, VpCI®-648 does not contain nitrites or any halogen counter ions, and at recommended dosages, it does not significantly contribute to the conductivity of water systems, and protects both ferrous metals and copper. It contributes less than two parts of sodium per billion at a typical dose, making it an excellent choice for use in the nuclear industry, concluded the company.

Low conductivity / low sodium corrosion inhibitor

www.icorr.org

Visit the ICorr website for all the latest news

Institute News


Technical Article

Above ground crude oil storage tank bottoms usually consist of welded 6-8 mmm thick steel plates. The tank bottom does not have a structural function, except for the plates connected to the tank shell, and its main purpose is to contain the stored fluid. The so-called secondary containment, which typically consists of a high-density polyethylene membrane laid below the tank bottom, is often applied to enhance the containment capacity for polluting stored fluid.

The steel tank bottom operates with its lower side in contact with the foundation, typically sand, and its upper side in contact with stored fluid. The lower side of the steel plates on the tank bottom is preferably coated, except for the welded edges. The coating can be simply a primer or a more durable coating system, such as epoxy. The upper side is normally coated after erection of the tank. The important difference between lower and upper sides of the tank bottom is that lower side is not accessible, while the upper side can be visually inspected and repaired during shutdowns throughout the operating life of the tank [1].Above ground storage tanks are equipped with cathodic protection (CP) of the lower side of the tank bottom to prevent oxygen and microbial corrosion of steel in contact with soil. Both impressed current (IC) or galvanic anodes (GA) are applicable. The most common CP system in use for large diameter crude oil tanks is by IC with distributed linear anodes. Typically, mixed metal oxide activated titanium anodes are used in the form of a wire, ribbon or expanded mesh grid. The CP components below the tank bottom, such as anodes, permanent reference electrodes or anode-to-cable electrical connections, are not accessible and their maintenance or replacement is unfeasible. In crude oil storage tanks, the upper side of the bottom is typically in contact with some water originally entrapped or emulsified in the oil, which separates by gravity permanently wetting the tank bottom. Internal corrosion can be caused by oxygen dissolved in water, or by hydrogen reduction in case of acid waters. Corrosion can be aggravated by galvanic coupling with heating pipes made of corrosion resistant alloys. The consolidated approach to prevent internal corrosion is the combination of an organic coating, intended to reduce contact between the metal surface and water, and consequently the protection current demand, with galvanic anode CP, is sized to maintain the bare steel surfaces at breaks in the coating, below the protection potential. The applied coating is required to guarantee lower degradation with time, based on exposure conditions – environmental and operating (mainly temperature).

Obviously, coating repair or full replacement is possible during planned shutdowns, typically every 5 to 10 years. The design of the galvanic anodes CP system should consider a number of aspects, including:n Metallic surfaces to be protected, including surfaces which can drain anode currentn Water phase chemical analysis and protection current densityn Design lifeIn addition, water hold-up should be considered in order to guarantee that protection conditions are permanently achieved throughout the tank bottom. Water hold-up determines the maximum allowed spacing amongst adjacent anodes. Cathodic protection is accomplished in accordance with applicable standards, for instance DNVGL-RP-B401 [2] and should be integrated with case-by-case verification of the galvanic anode distribution.In this article the use of Finite Element Method (FEM) modelling is proposed as an advanced tool for optimization of anode spacing based on the expected potential distribution [3]. Two cases were analysed, the first case concerns the throwing power of flush mounted anodes, on which anode spacing depends. Modelling was performed based on a real end-life anode size. This is the most frequent case for protection when a significant water hold-up is present. Whenever the risk of low water hold-up is high, CP design by zinc ribbon can be a viable alternative since complete anode wetting is ensured. In this second case, the spacing of the zinc ribbon helix positions was investigated. In both cases, modelling results were compared with empirical formulae available in literature.

Modelling approachBoth cases described in this article used proprietary software. In the first case, a 3D model with a cylinder of variable radius around the anode was considered, whereas for the second one, an axial symmetric geometry was modelled.For flush mounted anodes, the geometry of an anode block with size 23 × 144 × 11 mm, representative of the end-life anode sizes in a real case, was used. Due to being in contact with the coating on the lower face, this surface was considered as insulated. In the case of zinc ribbon, 20 × 20 mm square section anodes placed on tank bottom with variable spacing, were considered. It was assumed that this geometry is representative of helix positioning. The cathodic surface is the bottom line in the case of a tank protected by zinc ribbon, and the bottom surface of cylinder in case of flush mounted anodes. To take into account coating degradation, a coating breakdown factor equal to 25% was conservatively considered as a final value at the end of design life. Coating breakdown was applied as a reducing factor to the protection current.Domains were meshed with tetrahedral elements (FEM) with number in the order of 103.As far as boundary conditions are concerned, constant potential equal to the measured potential was applied to anodic surfaces of galvanic anode systems.At the cathodic surfaces, the following equation, based on Tafel equations and oxygen limiting current, was applied [5] (Figure 1):

Advanced cathodic protection design of storage tank internal surfaces through FEM modellingPaolo Marcassoli, Bruno Bazzoni, Cescor SRL, Milan, and Dimitrios Mamalopoulos, Cescor UK Ltd

(Eq. 1)

Technical Article


wheren iL is the oxygen limiting current densityn icorr corrosion current density (coincident with iL due to the oxygen reduction as dominant cathodic process)n ba anodic Tafel slopen iH2 hydrogen exchange current density on steeln EH2 hydrogen equilibrium potentialn bH2 hydrogen Tafel slopeA summary of the parameters considered for the modelling is given in Table 1. For Case A, the simulation has been run with:n icorr = iL = 50 mA/m2

n coating breakdown, cb = 25%n water resistivity, ρ = 0.2 ΩmAs far as current density values for Case B are concerned, the following considerations were taken into account:The water drained at the tank bottom can be considered in equilibrium with the oil phase because the contact time is always high enough (in the order of days). Accordingly, species dissolved in the oil, specifically gases such as air and carbon dioxide, and some residuals of hydrogen sulphide also dissolve in the water phase, either separated or emulsified. As far as corrosion and CP are concerned, the oxygen concentration is the key parameter. For above ground tanks, in which the oil phase can be considered in equilibrium with the atmosphere, the oxygen concentration in the water phase can be obtained from the Henry’s Law. In practice, because the maximum solubility of

oxygen in oil is an average 80 ppm [4] the drained water can be considered as oxygen saturated, that is in the range 5 – 12 ppm depending on temperature.In summary the oxygen limiting current density can be estimated as a minimum in the range 50 – 120 mA/m2.

Case A: Comparison of results obtained by FEM and empirical equations for flush mounted anodesThis study was aimed at verifying the conservativeness of available empirical throwing power formulae through the application of FEM modelling. Repeat runs were carried out by varying the radius of the protected surface surrounding the anode. It was found that with 2.1 m radius, corresponding to 4.2 spacing between the anodes, and protection conditions, assumed to be +150 mV vs Zn for protection in anaerobic condition and against Microbiologically-Influenced Corrosion (MIC), are achieved (Figure 2). According to Lazzari [6], the throwing power L of a galvanic anode inside a pipe or through a water layer can be calculated as:

Where ΔV is the driving voltage in mV, in this case 150 mV, φ is the diameter of the pipe or the width of the layer, ρ the water resistivity in Ωm and i the current density in mA/m2. Assuming φ is equal to the water hold-up (H), the maximum throwing power of anode is equal to 1.54 m (< 2.1 m). The calculated value is then conservative with respect to the real potential distribution expected on tank bottom based on FEM modelling. In fact, by verification of the final positions of anodes on the tank bottom with 3 m spacing (Figure 3), i.e. 2 times the throwing power of 1.5 m, it can be observed that maximum potential is much lower than the limit value of +0.15 V vs Zn and that CP design was conservative. Application of FEM modelling is always recommended, since the real geometry, number and distance of anodes may produce some mutual synergistic or interference effects.

Figure 1 – Boundary conditions at cathodic surface, based on Tafel equations and oxygen limiting current density.

Parameter Unit Value

icorr=iL mA/m2 50, 75, 100, 125, 150

Ecorr V vs SCE -0.65

ba mV/dec 60

iH2 A/m2 0.00002

EH2 V vs SCE -0.80

bH2 mV/dec 120

cb - 25%

Water hold-up (H) m 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5

Resistivity (ρ) Ωm 0.1, 0.2, 0.5, 1

Eanode V vs SCE -1.05

Table 1: Summary of parameters considered for FEM modelling.

(Eq. 2)

Figure 2: Potential distribution within the separated water in the area surrounding a flush mounted anode on tank bottom (xz and yz planes) and potential distribution on tank bottom.

Institute News


Technical Article

Case B: Protection by zinc ribbonA number of simulations were repeatedly performed until the target protection was reached (see example in Figure 4). In order to estimate the maximum spacing between zinc ribbon anodes, the target potential value of -900 mV vs SSC (corresponding to +150 mV vs Zn) was considered. This threshold ensures protection also against MIC.

In a first step, spacing result data were plotted vs water hold-up H, as a function of seawater resistivity (Figure 5). All the interpolation curves have a similar trend, with a dependency that is approximately described by:

where the coefficient m is a variable depending on the water resistivity.

Values were then expressed as a function of m (Figure 6a), and an approximately parabolic dependency was found,

from which equation 5 could be derived,

In a second step, the dependency on the total final current density i, calculated by iL multiplied by cb, was investigated. The relationship between spacing and final current density was once again of parabolic type (Figure 6):

combining equations, 5 and 6 and plotting above parameters (Figure 7), the following formula for maximum zinc ribbon anode spacing in tanks with water hold-up H can be derived:

Figure 4: Example of potential distribution (V vs Zn) within separated water for tank bottom protected by zinc ribbon.

Figure 5: Spacing vs water hold-up results as a function of resistivity of water (iL=50mA/m2; cb=25%).

(Eq. 3)

(Eq. 5)

(Eq. 6b)

Figure 6a Top: m coefficient vs water resistivity; Figure 6b Bottom: spacing vs final current density.

Figure 7: Spacing vs. water hold-up, water resistivity and final current density grouped in a single parameter.

(Eq. 4)

Figure 3: Potential distribution on tank bottom protected by flush mounted anodes, with spacing of 3 m calculated according to [6].

Technical Article


Where the maximum spacing and water hold-up H, are expressed in metres, water resistivity ρ in Ωm and final current density i in A/m2. Above equation includes the effect of the driving voltage (150 mV), since protection potential and anode potential are fixed. This model does not take into account the anode resistance which depends on anode geometry, however, for typical zinc ribbon sizes available in the market, no significant change is expected. This has been further confirmed by some model runs with modified anode section sizes, for which results are not reported here.Eq. 7 assumes the typical form of throwing power relationships according to [5], i.e.:

which in this case, the characteristic length φ is coincident with water hold-up H.

ConclusionsCathodic protection of above ground storage tank internal surfaces has been investigated. The application of Finite Element Method (FEM) modelling has been considered in order to improve and optimize anode spacing.Two applications were analysed, throwing power of flush mounted anodes, i.e. the typical solution applied when a significant water hold-up is expected, and protection by zinc ribbon on tank bottom, which is the most appropriate solution for cases where low water hold-up is expected.For flush mounted anodes, the empirical formulae given in the scientific literature have been confirmed to be conservative with respect to simulation results, and appropriate for CP design. However, further optimization can be achieved through modelling, due to the possibility of verifying the final realistic distribution on tank bottoms.For the zinc ribbon with circular or helix positioning, a simple formula for calculation of spacing has been derived from FEM modelling data.

References1. DNV-GL RP B401 (2017). Cathodic Protection Design.2. EEMUA. Inspection, maintenance and repair of aboveground vertical cylindrical steel storage tanks. Publication 159.3. S. Lorenzi, B. Bazzoni, P. Marcassoli, T. Pastore, “Current and potential distribution modelling for cathodic protection of tank bottoms”, Corrosion 67, 2 (2011): p. 026001, doi:10.5006/1.3553930, ISSN 0011-9312 (print) 1938-159X (online).4. Alec Groysman, Corrosion in Systems for Storage and Transportation of Petroleum Products, Springer, 2014.5. L. Lazzari, P. Pedeferri, Cathodic Protection, Polipress, Milano, 2006.6. L. Lazzari, Engineering Tools for Corrosion, 1st Edition, Woodhead Publishing, August 2017, eBook ISBN: 9780081024256, Hardcover ISBN: 9780081024249.7. P. Marcassoli, C. Panizza, B. Bazzoni, “Internal cathodic protection of crude oil storage tanks. Use of FEM modelling for improving galvanic anode distribution”, Eurocorr 2018, Krakow, Poland, September 2018.

(Eq. 7)

(Eq. 10)

FOR ALL THE LATEST CORROSION INDUSTRY JOBS

For job seekers• Over 60 jobs currently being advertised • Set up job alerts for immediate notifications • Upload your CV so employers can find you • Free to use

For employers• Place your job in front of our highly qualified members • Over 10,000 visitors every month • Fill your jobs quickly with great talent

For more information contact Jonathan Phillips on

0114 273 0132 or email [email protected]

All sustaining members receive a 15% discount

VISIT THE ICORR JOB BOARD

www.icorr.org

Visit the ICorr website for all the latest news

Institute News


Technical Article

A New Beginning, the Better Way To assess Coating PerformanceRoger Francis, RF Materials Ltd, UKHow do structure owners decide and hence specify which coating/system is correct for the protection of their specific asset against corrosion in the environment in which it will operate, either as a new building or for maintenance? Traditionally, aside from the use of successful track records, it is common for coating specifications to be based on test criteria deemed important by specification authorities, however are these tests relevant to the intended service environment? Has the meaning of the test data been misinterpreted? Have the tests been ascribed a level of accuracy and dependency that the test method simply cannot deliver? The answers to these vital questions were explored in a previous article (1), which raised the following central questions about specifications, coatings and testing, 1. Are the tests that are routinely conducted relevant to what the coating is meant to do when placed in service?2. Do product performance specifications that are imposed on the coatings and prepared for end users of those coatings, have any real meaning? Or are they merely arbitrary?3. Has the meaning of the test data achieved been properly applied or is it being misinterpreted?4. Have the tests been ascribed a level of accuracy and dependency that the test method simply cannot deliver?Several examples were provided in that original article that established that the answer to all of these questions is most often “no, or not necessarily.” Take for instance, the absurdity of a specification calling for ASTM B117 salt-fog testing of a lining destined for application in a potable water tank, or reliance on standard Atlas cell tests (cold wall-effect tests) to pre-qualify linings for aboveground storage tanks in an arctic-type environment by chilling linings in a test with water rather than air. Specifications based on just these examples alone had far-reaching relevancy, corrosion and cost implications that had not hitherto been challenged this way in the literature.At the end of the earlier article, an explanation was given as to why there is indeed a ‘dark side’ to coatings testing, highlighting fundamental barriers that exist which prevent the meaningful and valuable use of testing of coatings systems. The article hinted that perhaps there is a “better way” with specifications and testing but left the question elusively unanswered. It has been several years since the original article was published and it is now time to discover “the better way.” This article will examine the flaws of the current system of establishing and using specifications and testing and a “better way” in order to provide the end-user real value in the use of protective coatings. It will discuss three tests as illustrative examples of the flaws in the current system of using specificationsand testing. These three tests are accelerated corrosion testing, pull-off adhesion testing, and constant stress, chemical immersion testing. Accelerated corrosion testing and pull-off testing are popular tests, and often misunderstood and misapplied in both the laboratory and real world. Chemical resistance testing is invaluable in many instances but can be irrelevant as outlined here. Notwithstanding, this article will show how these tests, as examples of testing in general, can be used in a manner that provides the end user real value.

It all begins with specificationsThe foundation of using a protective coating in the real world lies typically with the product performance specification (2). A specification describes a standard of properties necessary for the coating to meet its service requirements. Specifications are established and published by end-users, specifiers, coatings manufacturers and trade organisations, to name a few. They can range from simple to complex. However, in the final analysis they are all used to communicate a precise

requirement for the coating’s use. Specifications come in many forms, but generally fall into three categories.

Conventional wisdom specifications These are specifications that are typically initiated and discussed at trade organisations’ committee meetings, where the participants provide anecdotal experiences of performance that are then crafted into a specification. These anecdotal observations are discussed to the degree that they take on a reality of their own with no evidence of actual utility. This is not to say that there is no reality, per se, in the anecdotal observations themselves, rather it means they may be real or they may not be real and either way could lead to problems in the real world. The problem is that these anecdotal observations and experiences are not based on any scientific principle or verified using scientific methodology. They are therefore, at times wildly inconsistent in their application.

Hand-Me-Down SpecificationsThese are specifications that have been developed some time in the past and applied year after year without ever looking at the basis of the original specification for updating or improvement. Oftentimes, the turn-over in personnel charged with maintaining specifications does not allow the specification authority to gain the knowledge and experience to allow an evaluation of the efficacy of a specification before the personnel have moved on to other jobs. The next person in line in charge of the specification starts at ground zero; and the vicious circle continues.

Common-Use SpecificationsThese are specifications that are used over and over again by many different users for no other reason than that they exist, provide results and are rationalized by “if they are good for them, they should be good for us” (without ever considering if this is actually a truism).The one thing these specification categories have in common is that they are presupposed and based on “accepted fact,” not “proven fact.” The latter should be the case if the specifications are to be useful to the end user. Because of this, many specifications as currently designed and implemented, simply fail the end user.

Relevance: either you have it or you don’tProduct testing is the consequence of a specification, that is, a product is tested to ensure it meets the given specification requirement. The question of relevancy of a test with respect to the particular service conditions and necessities is often, if not usually, bypassed in the specification-building process.At one time or another, the example tests of pull-off adhesion, accelerated corrosion resistance and chemical testing, often fall victim to being irrelevant to the coating’s intended use.Pull-off adhesion testing, as embodied by ASTM D4541 or ISO 4624, is a common test found in specifications, if for no other reason that it provides a number and is easy to run (3,4). Engineers love it; engineers like big numbers for adhesion measurements; sales-people may use those large adhesion numbers to buttress claims of coating superiority; chemists, meanwhile, scratch their heads.To those whose primary concern is developing coating specifications, it is important to note that the relevancy of that large adhesion number is highly questionable. It is only relevant if in the service of the coating, an external force acts in such a way as to remove the coating from the substrate. The pull-off test has essentially little to no meaning for the coating on

Carl Reed, Greenman-Pedersen, Inc. Mike O’Donoghue and Vijay Datta,, International Paint LLC.

Technical Article


a storage tank, or on a pipeline, or on any other infrastructure that remains in a static state (5). People just do not go around with suction cups trying to pull coatings off of structures. For the most part, the only one who actually may worry about pull-off adhesion testing is Spiderman.Practitioners liken pull-off adhesion to an estimation of the corrosion protection by a coating on a steel substrate. This is, of course, nonsense. Coatings, such as epoxies for instance, protect steel against corrosion by interposing a high electrical resistance into the corrosion-cell circuit and forming a thermodynamic interaction at the coating-steel interface setting up a barrier to prevent water, oxygen and ions from reacting with the iron (6,7).Several of these practitioners have concluded that by measuring the strength of this interaction of the coating/substrate interface using pull-off adhesion, a correlation to corrosion protection is possible. However, the interaction of the coating and substrate in the dry state is significantly altered by the wet state encountered in a corrosion cell, and when there is no corrosion cell present. It is argued that water — and other species — will interfere with the polymer/substrate interaction because of the different favorability of the Lewis acid-base interactions and the consequential equilibrium considerations (8).Much can be revealed in this regard with a consideration of polyurea coatings. In the dry state, the polyurea coating typically exhibits excellent adhesion to steel. Subject the coating to water, however, especially if there is a break in the film, and the coating is readily detached from the substrate leaving an opening for corrosion to take place. This is all due to the water being a stronger Lewis base than the functional groups on the polymeric backbone of the polyurea. Water essentially unzips the interaction between the polyurea and the steel. Hence, carrying out pull-off adhesion measurements in the dry state of the polyurea does not provide any indication whatsoever of a correlation of adhesion to corrosion protection afforded by the coating in immersed conditions (9).Accelerated-corrosion-testing relevancy is something altogether different. In fact, it has long been the holy grail for coating technologists to equate or correlate the results of accelerated corrosion testing to observations in the real world. Many attempts have been made to make this correlation. However, it has been recently shown that this is not possible because of the millions of variables in the real world that cannot be simulated in a test chamber where only a few variables can be controlled. If an observation of corrosion in the real world matches that found in an accelerated cabinet, it is at best mere coincidence. Therefore, the use of accelerated corrosion testing as a means to predict what occurs in the real world today must be deemed irrelevant(10).

Through all the arbitrary rationale …How specification values for tests are determined is often a mystery, shrouded in the smoke and haze of backroom committee meetings. Anecdotal stories of experiences with testing are compared with anecdotal observations of real-world experiences and somehow molded together until a number suitable to most is agreed upon. The only problem is that the specification number developed in no way necessarily reflects what actual performance is required by the coating to meet the needs of the end user.Accelerated corrosion testing is often specified with a number for underfilm corrosion creep (or what is commonly referred to as scribe creep) but this has no real relation to what may be considered a failure by the end user. Why so? Because different users have different criteria for failure, with failure defined as the degree of deterioration of a structure that triggers a substantial investment to correct the deteriorating condition. For example, the original ISO 12944-6 specification, scribe creep is allowed a maximum of 1 mm before being considered a failure (11) . However, a 1-mm failure in the real world would most likely not be considered a failure. Instead, the user would probably grind down the area of corrosion and “slap on” a repair coat. Also, if a value of 1.1 mm is observed in a test, how can that be a failure when it is virtually impossible to resolve that miniscule difference between 1 and 1.1 mm, as in figure 1. A similar argument can be made for pull-off adhesion. In the original ISO 12944-6, the standard of acceptance is 725 psi

minimum adhesion. In the real world, what is the actual difference if the value was found to be 700 psi? The coating is sticking to the structure with the unlikelihood of coming off, and yet the coating system “fails the specification criteria.” The difference between 725 psi and 700 psi is less than 4 percent but the measurement itself may have a 10-to-20-percent inaccuracy, i.e., a coefficient of variation of +/-20%. But by specification law, the coating fails at 700 psi? Absurd!Specifications are predicated on the idea that the specification writers know what is best for the end user when in fact the specification writer rarely knows the user’s needs and why. This is particularly true for third-party specifications. These specifications publish required values from testing which are guesses at what is

best for the user and are nothing but arbitrary in nature.

Test data and the law of unintended consequencesSometimes, end users get so hung up with the small details of a test specification while the big picture of the testing itself gives a total opposite and unwanted result. In Biblical parlance this would be described as “straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.” Take for example, the specification for scribe creep and its measurement in an accelerated corrosion environment. In a neutral electrolyte environment such as ASTM B117, there are two corrosion processes going on at the same time (12). At the scribe, anodic corrosion takes place forming the typical corrosion products. The distance the anodic corrosion process emanates away from the scribe is referred to conventionally as “scribe creep.” Now, scribe creep is certainly a common specification value. For example, the original ISO 12944-6 has a scribe-creep specification of 1 mm maximum, ISO 12944-9 a scribe creep specification of 8 mm maximum for non-zinc rich coatings; and the list goes on.Let us probe the scribe-creep phenomena a little deeper. Concurrent to the formation of the corrosion product soup at the anode, a reaction proceeds at the cathode which produces a highly alkaline solution. If the latter is strong enough, and the Lewis acid-base interaction between the coating and the steel

is weak enough, the coating will detach from the substrate along the so-called cathodic front. This process is referred to as cathodic delamination (Fig. 2).The cathodic alkaline fluid will pool underneath the delaminated coating and remain there until the delaminated coating weathers away, thereby exposing the steel to the elements. Being highly alkaline, this fluid will suppress any anodic corrosion and thus affect the growth of scribe creep due to corrosion suppression.It has been shown that the amount of scribe creep is inversely proportional to the degree of cathodic delamination, which itself stems from the generation of alkalinity at the cathode. Consequently, the implication is that a coating

Figure 1: Passing (left) and non-passing (right) scribe test results.

Figure 2: Example of cathodic delamination.

Institute News


Technical Articlewith weak interactions with the steel may have cathodic delamination, but a relatively insignificant amount of scribe creep. So, are we saying that in order to meet a scribe-creep specification, a coating manufacturer will want to supply a coating that has a significant amount of cathodic delamination to make sure that the amount of scribe creep is minimised? Wait a minute! For the end user this can be disastrous. As mentioned with cathodic delamination, the coating actually delaminates from the steel substrate and over time weathers away, exposing a much larger area of bare steel which corrodes, thus perpetuating the corrosion problem of the asset. It has been well said that “Knowledge is a deadly friend if no-one sets the rules”(12).Pull-off adhesion testing has its own set of unintended consequences as well. For a single-coat system, there are five possible loci of failure, that is, locations in the substrate/ paint system where failure may occur, but only one of them actually deals with the adhesion failure between the coating and the substrate. Other loci of failure would be cohesive failure of the coating, adhesive failure of the glue to the coating, cohesive failure of the glue, and adhesive failure of the glue to the pull stub or dolly. Therefore, a result caused by the cohesive failure of the coating, or any of the other three loci, could be mistakenly identified as an adhesion failure of the coating and substrate (Fig. 3).To make things even more complicated, often noted that the locus of failure is a combination of two or more failures. To exacerbate matters further, if the coating system contains two coats, then the number of loci of failures jumps to seven (two being coating-adhesion failures). Moreover, should the coating system consist of three coats, the number of loci of failures increases to nine (three being coating adhesion failures). Hence, the opportunities for misinterpreting test results can escalate as the number of coats increases.The law of unintended consequences states, “Without a clear understanding of the fundamentals, the best of intentions can lead to the worst of consequences.” This is certainly true for these examples. It is true that ASTM D4541 pull-off testing requires that the locus of failure be reported, but what this does is render what was conceivably a simple test of providing a single number for a specification, something far more complex and difficult, and almost impossible to interpret.Now let us observe the law of unintended consequences in action in a coating failure from the realm of our third testing regimen of interest, namely chemical-immersion testing.

Wac-ky expectations, Wac-ky testing, Wac-ky specificationsIn tar sands deposits, steam-assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) is used to extract bitumen and an important part of the process includes treatment of boiler water feed that is used to generate steam, in weak acid cation (WAC) ion-exchange vessels. Typical WAC service conditions are temperatures in excess of 93 C pressures of 40 to 60 psi, and weekly chemical regeneration schedules of a backwash, 1.5 hours of acid injection (6-percent hydrochloric acid), dilution, 1.5 hours of caustic injection (5-percent sodium hydroxide), dilution, and finally a rinse. The aggressive conditions pose a significant challenge to protect WAC vessels from the ravages of corrosion. Historically,

the majority of WAC vessels were lined using a single layer of 1-inch-thick chlorobutyl rubber (14).When a spate of premature failures occurred in 2003 with rubber linings in WAC vessels, a test programme was launched at a third-party independent laboratory to identify alternative linings that could provide the designed 10-year-plus coating life expectancy. One-coat and multi-coat systems of generically different systems were evaluated (solvent-free epoxies, solvent-borne epoxies, vinyl esters with and without glass-flake, polysilox iranes, baked phenolic and rubber linings).Chemical immersion of coated panels was carried out separately in the laboratory in each of the hot process fluids (acid, alkali and produced oil/produced water) at a continuous 90 C for 28 days. With eight candidate linings, the test was expensive with lining assessments based on knife adhesion, pull-off adhesion, impact resistance, impedance and colour change. The test duration was deemed the rough equivalent of three years of real-world exposure.While the chlorobutyl rubber failed the test in the hydrocarbons, an acid-resistant one-coat solvent-free epoxy passed the tests. Subsequently specified for WAC vessel service, the coating then mysteriously failed within months in four WAC lining installations (Fig 4).

What was the root problem? Good intentions and a 10-year coating life expectation led to premature coating failure because, despite the one-coat, solvent-free epoxy being best in the lab test, the constant test conditions did not mimic in the least, real-world cyclical conditions to which the lining was exposed.Ironically, a coating failure had been unwittingly specified.

The specification authority incorrectly assumed that the accelerated laboratory constant stress testing of the lining in each separate WAC vessel media at 90 C was relevant to the actual real-world cyclic stress exposure. A repeat sequence of “coating stress/incomplete stress relaxation/coating stress” phenomena operated on coatings in a real-world environment where efficient stress dissipation in the coating was far less than that in a constant stress laboratory test. Hence, the laboratory coating test results were irrelevant.So what testing should have been done? The answer is to represent as closely as possible, the specific real-world conditions that a lining is expected to withstand in a WAC vessel or in any other asset where a high-performance coating is required. In the case of the WAC vessel, there were several other environmental factors that had a bearing on what meaningful tests could be run on laboratory-coated panels. First, there is the aforementioned regeneration chemical environment that is a cyclical process. Second, there are high temperature spikes up to 150 C to consider aside from typical in-service temperature fluctuations from 75 C up to 95 - 105 C. Third, different dilute mineral acids may be used in the regeneration of the ion exchange resins, for example hydrochloric and sulphuric acid. Fourth, the produced oil/produced water will contain bitumen, diluent and flocculants at varying percentages. Fifth, operating pressure spikes can occur up to ca. 1,400 kpsig. Sixth, the expansion and contraction of steel in a WAC vessel can be likened at times to a “heartbeat” and is vastly different to that experienced by coated steel coupons immersed in hot chemical media in a laboratory test(15). Laboratory testing must consider all factors that will affect the coating’s performance in the real world and apply them during the testing to prevent unintended consequences.

Not even close to the markEven when a testing programme is relevant, when the specification provides for a result that actually measures a real-

Figure 3: Pull-off adhesion showing at least three different loci of failure.

Figure 4: Blistering failure from WAC vessel.

Technical Article


world failure and the nature of the result is clear, there is no guarantee that the result is going to be close to the real value for the property being tested. Generally, testing protocols have many variables that have proven very difficult to control, both intra- and inter-laboratory. Consequently, these factors add to the variability of the result.Method repeatability and reproducibility (Method R&R) are measures of the ability of testers or testing laboratories to come up with correct results. Method R&R is modelled after the Measurement System Analysis Gauge R&R, where for a method measurement system to be considered effective, an R&R value of less than 10 percent must be realized. An R&R value of 10 to 30 percent may be satisfactory depending on a specific circumstance; a value greater than 30 percent is considered unsatisfactory and the method needs improvement (16).In 2011, a report on the Method R&R conducted on five different commonly run tests by seven different laboratories, was issued (17). All but one test had R&R values greater than 30 percent with the one remaining test in the marginal category. At NACE Corrosion 2016, a paper was presented on the reproducibility and repeatability of conducting the ISO 20340 cycle corrosion testing using five different academic labs (18). Although a combined R&R value was not determined, the separate reproducibility and repeatability values were very much over 30 percent for scribe-creep evaluation, indicating that the test method is not effective.Without methodologies that can be trusted to provide a result that is accurate, the whole concept of running the tests to begin with becomes moot.

We’ve got to get together sooner or later because the revolution’s here... And you know it’s rightGiven that specifications and subsequent testing tend to be, as has been shown, irrelevant, arbitrary, misunderstood and ineffective, what should be done? What can be done to think outside the proverbial box instead of inside a proverbial rut?A user should be testing a product to learn about it and its effect on the desired performance for an end user, and not to merely satisfy a specification.The answer is to do away with all specifications as they are currently defined. The “better way” is to abandon specifications based on thin air, so to speak, and conduct relevant and non-arbitrary coating testing based upon truly representative real-world conditions.In a nutshell, this would include abolishing specifications with performance requirements that utilize at least two of the example tests highlighted in this monograph, accelerated corrosion testing and pull-off adhesion, as well as others, and for the reasons previously outlined. The idea that the goodness or badness of a coating system can distilled down to a finite number from a test is nonsense and should be always avoided. A single pass/fail test result does not take into consideration that failure is not a single finite value. An asset owner can only define what a failure is based on by the economics of the situation. As mentioned earlier, failure is the degree of coating-system deterioration that would trigger a substantial investment to correct the deteriorating condition. Ideally, an end user will make a decision on a coating system based on value, where value equals performance over cost.By knowing the performance of a coating and the cost of the coating, the end user can make a reasoned choice of a coating system to use for his or her asset. An irrelevant and arbitrary specification will not allow the determination of performance for the asset.If no specifications are the order of the day, what can or should replace them?Testing protocols for end-use situations should be assembled and implemented that define what tests are important to run in order to meet end-use requirements. These protocols can range from very general (the protection of steel in an offshore environment) to very specific (the protection of steel on risers of offshore platforms in Gulf Coast waters). Testing of

coatings, or coatings systems, would be conducted by coating manufacturers, end users or third-party testing laboratories using these protocols and then results submitted to the end user for evaluation. The end user would evaluate the results and make a reasoned decision on what coating system to use based on a value judgment, i.e., performance as a function of cost.These test protocols can be created by anyone, from trade organizations (such as SSPC or NACE), to user groups to individual end users. The decision of what to use as testing protocols must lie with the end user as he or she will ultimately be doing the evaluating.To further enhance the use of these proposed testing protocols, the concept of “focused testing” can be employed to good effect. “Focused testing” can be broken down into two key streams of work.First, in-situ testing is an excellent way to screen and pre-qualify coatings. Ideally, all coated test specimens should be carried out on freshly prepared substrates (a normal practice) and possibly field-retrieved substrates (an uncommon practice). This will facilitate a comparison and contrast of coating performance as a function of specific substrates, surface preparation and contamination such as, by example, overcoating welds using different film thicknesses.Second, a set of the same testing specimens can be tested to failure in the laboratory according to the test protocols developed by end users, engineers and coating manufacturers that reflect real-world conditions in the particular end user’s facility. The type of failure, germane to the asset under consideration, will have been primarily established by the end user himself. The time taken to reach that failure will be recorded, providing the asset owner with added performance information to be used in developing the reasoned value judgement.The in-situ real-world test results versus appropriately conceived laboratory test results derived from real world in-service conditions will show with confidence which coatings are likely to withstand those in-service conditions in the long run. Also, the focused tests undertaken will have merit providing a meaningful correlation with real-world service environments. Modelling based on this comparison can then be conducted such that laboratory testing may be used alone, thus reducing time and cost for the asset owner.With a trove of data and results from the testing conducted from the protocols in hand, this modeling can then be used to establish testing life spans that can be used to predict real-world life spans. But that is a story for another day...

Summary and conclusionsThis article, as a sequel to the original 2011 article, examines four serious questions regarding deficiencies in the current use of coating performance specifications and testing.1. Coating testing is currently conducted that is not necessarily relevant to the coating’s intended end-use service.2. Requirements found in coating performance specifications are arbitrarily determined and do not take into consideration the particular needs of the end user.3. Data from testing can often be misinterpreted because of a lack of understanding which can easily result in unintended consequences.4. Test data often has poor repeatable and reproducible characteristics which provides for a lack of confidence of any result reported.The “better way” is to do away with coating performance specifications as they are currently defined. These specifications can be replaced with testing protocols that define the performance of a coating by the specific requirements of the end user such that a reasoned judgment of the best value coating can be achieved. To enhance the “better way,” the use of “focused testing” is also recommended.

References1. O’Donoghue M., Datta, V.J., Winter M. and Reed C., “Hubble, Bubble, Tests and Trouble: The Dark Side of Misreading the Relevance of Coating Testing,” JPCL, May, 2010.

Institute News


Technical Article

2. Schilling, M. S., “Coating Specifications– Great Expectations, or Plan 9 from Outer Space?”, SSPC Annual Confer ence, Nashville, Tenn., November 12-16, 2000.3. ASTM D4541-09, “Standard Test Method for Pull-Off Strength of Coatings Using Portable Adhesion Testers,” ASTM, West Conshohocken, Pa., 2010.4. ISO 4624, “Paints and varnishes — Pull- off test for adhesion,” International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva, 2016.5. Croll S.G., Siripiromi C. and Keil B.D., “Pull-Off Adhesion Test for Coatings on Large Pipes: possible variations in failure location and mode,” American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 2014 Conference, August 3-6, 2014, Portland, Ore.6. Fowkes, F.M., Sun, C-Y and Joslin, S. T., “Enhancing Polymer Adhesion to Iron Surfaces by Acid-Base Interaction,” Corrosion Control by Organic Coatings, ed. H. Leidheiser, NACE Corrosion 1981, Houston, Tex.7. Reed, C., “Underfilm Corrosion Creep and Cathodic Delamination: Under the Microscope,” NACE Corrosion 2014, Houston, Tex.8. Fowkes, F. M. and Mostafa, M., “Acid-Base Interaction in Polymer Adsorption,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev., Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 3-7, 1978.9. O’Donoghue, M. and Datta, V. J., “Titans of the Abyss: Polyurethane, Polyurea, and Hybrid Lining Technology”, JPCL, January, 2014.

10. Reed, C. and Coronado, K., “The Futility and Folly of Seeking the Accelerated Corrosion Holy Grail”, SSPC Annual Conference, Toronto, Ontario, 2013.11. ISO 12944-6, “Paints and varnishes — Corrosion protection of steel structures by protective paint systems Part 6: Laboratory performance methods,” International Organization for Stand- ardization (ISO), Geneva, 1998.12. ASTM B117-11, “Standard Practice for Operating Salt Spray (Fog) Apparatus,” ASTM, West Conshohocken, Pa., 2011.13. “Epitaph,” recorded by King Crimson, lyrics by Peter John Sinfield, 1969.14. O’Donoghue M., Datta V.J., Adlem S., Whittaker J., Wade W. and Pardy M. “The Curse of the Mummy: Mysterious Tank Lining Failures in WAC Vessels,” JPCL, February, 2016.15. Personal communication with Norm Spence, Spence Corrosion Control, October, 2015.16. “Measurement Systems Analysis Ref- erence Manual,” Automotive Industry Action Group, 2010.17. Winter, M., “Laboratory Test Methods for Offshore Coatings – A Review of a Round Robin Study,” NACE Corrosion 2011, Houston, Tex.18. LeBozec, N., Bougon, L., Carter, J., Scholtz, T., Knudsen, O. O., Flogard, A., “Round Robin Evaluation of ISO 20340 Annex A Test Method”, NACE Corrosion 2016, Houston, Tex.Editor’s Note : This article is based on “Hubble Bubble Rising” published in JPCL, December 2017.

For all the latest news, events and debates join

us on

TO ADVERTISE IN CORROSION MANAGEMENT

please contact

Jonathan Phillips or Debbie Hardwick at:

Square One

+44 (0)114 273 0132 [email protected]

Technical Article


TSA coatings – methods and considerations when measuring their thicknessWhen considering long term corrosion protection in an atmospheric, offshore structure, or marine environment, a Thermally Sprayed Aluminium (TSA) coating is recognised as outperforming other methods of corrosion protection. TSA coatings are suitable for structure subjected to temperatures from ambient to exceeding 120C, where a minimum of 200 µm thickness is recommended (1). Accuracy of the thickness measurement becomes a critical part of the corrosion protection process in order to maximise the coating’s effectiveness and longevity. An understanding of the measuring methods available is important, due to the effect the type of substrate material and other factors have on thickness measurement quality.

A TSA coating can be simply described as a melted aluminium material sprayed with specialised equipment onto a cleaned and prepared surface, where the small molten or softened aluminium particles flatten on impact and solidify to form a layer (figure 1).Thermal spray coating systems include plasma spraying, detonation spraying, wire flame spraying, electric arc wire spraying, and high velocity oxy-fuel spray. These conventional spray systems have demonstrated that they generally work well over extended periods. Nonetheless, incidents have been recorded of premature coating failure due to blistering and detachment which indicated that coating quality and coating application procedure are extremely important factors for consideration. Reduced corrosion protection and shorter lifetime have been attributed to porosity (in aluminium), oxide content, and non-uniformity of the TSA coatings produced by conventional spraying systems [2].

The measurement principleThere are two measurement principles used – magnetic induction and phase sensitive eddy current. Magnetic induction being the method used where the base material is carbon steel only, while the phase sensitive method can be used for measuring the TSA thickness on duplex steel, stainless steel and aluminium substrates in addition to magnetic induction.

Peter Ho, Fischer Instrumentation (GB) Ltd.

Technical Article

Accuracy of coating thickness measurement is critical on offshore structures.

Figure 1.

Institute News


Technical Article

Magnetic induction measurement method for TSA coatings on carbon steelThere are certain pre-requisites to be satisfied before using the magnetic measurement method. The coating must be a non-magnetic material and the base must be ferro-magnetic. Coating thicknesses up to 100mm can be measured, depending on the specific probe used.The basic theory of the magnetic induction method (figure 2) is that the probe is brought into contact with the magnetic substrate with its non-magnetic coating. The excitation current (I~) generates a low-frequency magnetic field with a strength that corresponds to the distance between the probe and the base material. A measurement coil measures the magnetic field. In the instrument, the obtained measurement signal (U) is converted into the coating thickness values via the characteristic probe output function (f), i.e., the functional correlation between the probe signal and the coating thickness (th).

Phase sensitive eddy current measurement method for TSA coatings on stainless steelA pre-requisite to be satisfied in this case is that the coating must be a conductive material whereas the base can be non-conductive, conductive or magnetic. Coating thicknesses of up to ca. 700µm can be measured.The basic theory of the phase sensitive method (figure 3) is that the probe is brought into contact with the electrically conducting coating, where an alternating magnetic field induces eddy currents in the substrate and coating (eddy currents being more intense in higher conducting materials). The thickness of the coating material changes the average conductivity and hence the eddy current density. An electronic readout converts the signal feedback to thickness.

Measuring influencesAs described above, there are specialist probes and measurement devices for accurately measuring the thickness of TSA coatings. When using the chosen device, it is important to be aware of the effect of the various measuring influences vis a vis the base material, as shown in tables 1 and 2.

CalibrationFrom the tables, it can be seen where calibration of the TSA measurement probe is necessary, for example, with the Phase Sensitive Eddy Current method, the porosity of the TSA coating and its electrical conductivity have a large impact on the measurement. Calibrating the probe is usually easily done as the user is guided step by-step through the process by the instrument’s software. Measurements are taken of the base material (e.g. stainless steel), then of an over-thick TSA coating (material depending, but >1 mm, on the same steel base); and

Figure 2. Magnetic Induction.

Figure 3. Eddy Current Measurement signal (U) is a function of the probe output (f), the coating thickness (th) and the impedance phase shift (φ).

Base material Magnetic induction Phase sensitive-EC

Carbon steel

Duplex steels

Stainless steels (Austenitic)

Aluminium

Table 1.

Materials property

Magnetic induction PS-EC

Roughness of substrate Large scatter Small impact

Roughness of TSA coating Large scatter Small impact

Curvature Large scatter Small impact

Porosity of TSA coating No impact Large impact via

conductivity of coating

Permeability of base material Large impact Small impact

Electric conductivity of TSA coating No impact Large impact

Temperature of environment and

sampleNo impact Large impact via

conductivity of coating

Table 2.

Technical Article


finally, measurements are taken on real samples at the higher and lower ends of the expected range.

Specialist probes and handheld measurement devices can confirm an applied TSA coating’s thickness and hence protection capabilities over its lifetime, which has been predicted to be more than 30 years for 200um thick TSA - far superior to an organic coating. Longevity brings lower

costs, as often the TSA coating can last longer than the substrate material itself, particularly if there is an understanding of the influences of the substrate material on the measurement

method used and of the importance of proper calibration, in determining that actual film thickness applied.

References[1] Palmer, A.C.; Roger, A.K. Subsea Pipeline Engineering, 2nd ed.; PennWell: Tulsa, OK, USA, 2008; pp. 247–264, cited by Nataly Ce and Shiladitya Paul “Thermally Sprayed Aluminum Coatings for the Protection of Subsea Risers and Pipelines Carrying Hot Fluids Coatings” 2016, 6, 58. [2] T. Rosbrook, W. H. Thomason and J. D. Byrd, MP, September 1989, p.34-38, cited by S. Shrestha and A. Sturgeon “Characteristics and electrochemical corrosion behaviour of thermal sprayed aluminium (TSA) coatings prepared by various wire thermal spray processes” in EUROCORR 2005 Lisbon, Portugal, 4-8 September 2005.

Thermal spraying.

Xxxx

Xxxxxx

Corrosion Management • Circulation of 1500 subscribers.• Published bimonthly – 6 issues a year.• 75% of subscribers UK Based.• Majority of readers employed at senior level as

decision makers and specifiers in their field.• The main focus of each issue is a themed

technical article • Editorial also includes: Institute News, Industry

News, Innovative Products, Diary of Events, Recruitment and currently the Sustaining Members Directory.

Don’t delayWe have a range of advertising opportunities in Corrosion Management Magazine. However because this is a technical journal, space is limited and is booked on a first come first served basis.

Display AdvertisingFull page from £400.00Recruitment advertising full pages from £600.00

Key Facts

2

CorrosionManagement | September/October 2016

ContentsIssue 133 September/October 2016

4The President Writes

4Institute News

8Industry News

12Technical ArticleGrout and Concrete Electrical Resistivity Testing – External Cathodic Protection of Steel Pipelines within Grout Filled Cased Crossings

15Technical ArticleHazards in Closed Pipe Water Systems

17Innovative Products

18Project News

20 Sustaining Members

26ICATS Registered Companies

32Diary Dates and Branch Contacts

Published on behalf of the Institute of Corrosion

Square One Advertising and Design Limited

84 Queen Street, Sheffield S1 2DW, United Kingdom.

Publisher and Managing Editor

Debbie Hardwick

Tel: 0114 273 0132

Fax: 0114 270 0422

Email: [email protected]

Consulting Editor

Brian Goldie


Design

Square One Advertising & Design

www.squareone.co.uk

Advertising Manager

Jonathan Phillips

Tel: 0114 273 0132 Fax: 0114 272 1713


Editorial copy date for November/December 2016 issue is: 11th November 2016

Subscriptions

UK £70.00

Europe £80.00

Outside Europe £90.00 airmail £80.00 surface mail

Enquiries and subscriptions to the Institute of Corrosion at the address below:

The Institute of Corrosion

President

John Fletcher

Former President

Trevor Osborne

Vice President

Sarah Vasey

Hon. Secretary

Dr. Jane Lomas

Barratt House, Suite S3, Kingsthorpe Road,

Northampton, NN2 6EZ

Tel: 01604 438222


Website: www.icorr.org

All rights reserved Reproduction without written permission from the Institute of Corrosion is prohibited. Views expressed in editorial text or advertising copy are the opinions of the contributors/advertisers and are not those of the Institute or the Publisher.

ISSN: 13 55 52 43

Surface Profile MeasurementThe Surface Profile Probe, part of Fischer’s materials testing range, measures blasted surfaces, enabling the user to prepare the substrate, select the cleaning method and apply the right amount of coating.

The probe is interchangeable with Fischer’s coating thickness probes and used with the FMP series of measurement handhelds to provide quick and repeatable measurements.

For coating thickness and surface profile precision and accuracy on tough jobs, turn to a Fischer instrument.

For more information, call 01590 684100www.fischergb.co.uk

Applied Graphene Materials plc

The Wilton CentreRedcarCleveland TS10 4RFUnited Kingdom

+44 (0)1642 [email protected] www.appliedgraphenematerials.com

Create new barriers…• Significantly enhanced anti-corrosion and

barrier properties

• Very low loading additions

• Other multi-functional performance gains with graphene

• Dispersions developed and tailored to customers’ requirements

• Extensive in-house coatings and product integration expertise

• Commercialised graphene production

Tomorrow’s anti-corrosion material. Today.

03_A6 advert_for James.indd 1 03-Oct-16 2:00:34 PM

Developers and manufacturers of test equipment

TQC UK Po Box 977A Surbiton, KT1 9XL United Kingdom +44 208 255 0143 [email protected] www.tqc.eu

Order your FREE

catalogue now on

www.tqc.eu

155

tEchnical spEciFications hUll RoUGhnEss

GaUGE / GEnERal pURposE pRoFilomEtERAccuracy +/- 5 microns or <2%, whichever is greater

Memory Enough for 4 complete surveys done both

in- and out-docking, totally over 10.000

readings Location storage Simply point and click the hull location in the

displayed graphical representation of the

ship’s hullUnits MicronsSpeed 50 mm/s, with speed indication LED in the

Sensor unitInterface USB serial to PC connection

Power supply AA type Alkaline Cells, available

worldwide Material ABS, aluminiumDimensions Sensor: 205x80x50 mm / 8.07x3.15x1.97 inch

Control Unit: 200x115x40 mm / 7.87x4.53x1.47

Weight Sensor: 630 g / 22,22 oz Control unit: 350 g / 12,35 oz

oRDERinG inFoRmation hUll RoUGhnEss GaUGE / GEnERal pURposE pRoFilomEtER

Art. No

Dc9000 Hull Roughness gauge and general ProfilometerScope of supply: Hull Roughness control unit, sensor unit, calibration reference plate, USB flash drive with software, USB data cable, neck strap, batteries

and waterproof rugged casing & traceable calibration certificate.

accEssoRiEs / spaREsDc9015 Calibration plate for TQC Hull Roughness GaugeDc9025 Protective pouch for Hull Roughness Gauge

stanDaRDs NACE TG461 Measuring Hull Roughness of Vessels While in Dry-dock (Draft standard)

SURFACE CLEA

NLIN

ESS AN

D RO

UG

HN

ESS

ccicaliBRation cERtiFicationinclUDED

154

HULL ROUGHNESS GAUGE / GENERAL pURpOSE pROFILOmEtERTQC has made the next evolutionary step in hull roughness surveys. Surpassing the industrial standards with an easy to operate 4-way directional push button, graphical represen-tations, storage of data in multiple batches and survey reports in Microsoft Excel®. The whole system fits into a small sized waterproof rugged casing that is allowed as carry on travel luggage and benefits your overseas travel plans.

Controlling the roughness of a ship’s hull plays an important role in the operating costs of a vessel. The roughness of a ship’s hull increases mainly due to corrosion, pitting, plate undulation, mechanical damage, dry spray and above all bio fouling. Proper maintenance and the correct application of high-end anti-fouling coatings reduce the hydrodynamic effects and will lead to significant savings on fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.

The hull roughness is measured during in-docking and out-docking. The Hull Roughness Gauge measures the AHR value (Average Hull Roughness) of sea going vessels. AHR is the ‘mean’ of all the vessel’s hull roughness readings and is the measure against which ship’s performance is correlated.All profile measurements The new adjustable RT parameter suits all general purpose profile measurements like windmill blades, aircraft wings etc.

Significant savings The TQC Hull roughness Gauge consists of a Control unit and a Sensor unit. The Hull Roughness Control unit can be operated with just one hand, a 4-way directional push button operates an intuitive menu on a large illuminated display. The neck strap keeps the users’ hands free when required.

The Sensor unit is equipped with three non-slip wheels and a carbide tipped stylus and is moved over the ship’s hull in a horizontal way collecting series of measurements. A set of LED’s indicate the status of the instrument so operation is possible without observing the control unit.

Statistics, time/date and location of each series and the average hull roughness are automatically calculated and stored in the Control unit. Using the supplied USB-cable and software you instantly create inspection reports in Microsoft Excel. Your own company logo and or -details can be incorporated to restyle your reports.

SURF

ACE

CLEA

NLI

NES

S A

ND

RO

UG

HN

ESS

FEATURES Easy to operate 4-way directional push button Storage of data in multiple batches Survey reports in Microsoft Excel® Rugged casing

Suits all general purpose profile measurements

inspection equipment for quality control and assurance during blasting and coating

Hardness

lCoating Thickness dry / wet lEnvironmental conditionslSurface CleanlinesslInspection toolslSoluble SaltslAdhesionlHardness lPorosity lProfilelEtc.

Advertise in Corrosion Managementa leading industry organisation publication

Institute News


Technical Article

Protecting Tank bases from Corrosion

Roger Francis, RF Materials Ltd, UK

Above ground liquid storage tanks are a common feature in the oil and gas industries, and these existing tanks, as well as new tank farms, need protection from external corrosion, which is common at the base of these a heavy structures. Regulations are in place designed to prevent the escape of hazardous media into the environment from these tanks, and to ensure integrity, frequent, costly maintenance and inspection needs to be carried out during their lifetime in service. Industry practice is to protect the base of these tanks from corrosion using cathodic protection, however often the protection of the rim is neglected. The crevice at the interface between the steel tank and its base (chine angle) is where corrosion can set in due to water ingress, which can be exacerbated by poor drainage and sloping of the foundation towards the tank.

A sealant would prevent this water penetration between the tank bottom and its concrete base, however, it is difficult to effectively seal a steel tank to its foundation, typically concrete, as these dissimilar materials are subject to movement, expansion and contraction at differing rates. Tank cement, bitumen, asphalt, caulks and other sealants have been used for many years, but typically proving to be only temporary solutions, due to poor adhesion and the lack of flexibility of these while the tank is in operation. In some cases, this tank base “protection” can do more harm than good, as moisture could seep through damaged areas of the sealant and be effectively sealed in, causing increased corrosion. In addition, inspection of these tanks can prove difficult as measuring devices cannot easily detect the remaining steel thickness through the sealant.A more effective solution has been proposed, that of microporous membranes. Originally developed for water- and weatherproofing roofs, tank maintenance engineers started noticing some features of these microporous membranes which could prove useful on tank bases:n Application of the membrane system is straightforward, without the need for hot work or any specialist tools. A primer is applied first to enhance adhesion, followed by the membrane with a reinforcement sheet at a total thickness of about

250 micron, followed by a second coat of resin at about 150 microns, applied by brush. The two-coat system ensures complete coverage. n Unlike sealants, membranes prevent water ingress but do not trap moisture. Similar to human skin, their microporous nature allows the water vapour to escape, leaving the underlying substrate dry and firm.n Membranes adhere very well to different substrates - they have been used on many roofing substrate materials with great success for many years. Most carry a globally recognised approval, such as BBA, which tells the specifiers that they can expect a 25-year service life from the membrane system.n It is known that most tank base protection systems fail due to their rigid nature, however membranes can accommodate the natural movement of the substrate and move in sympathy. For example, the elongation of a typical acrylic ester copolymer emulsion, reinforced membrane system is 20% lengthwise and 100% crosswise after a 7 day cure at 20C (tested according to BS2782). The same system will exhibit a tear strength tested in accordance with ASTM D624 (7 days cure at 20C) of 33 N/mm.In these days of ageing structures, the industry continually needs to look for alternatives to common maintenance techniques, such as in this case with the use of membranes instead of sealants. What aids progress in corrosion management is communication, and material manufacturers, contractors, asset owners and operators, engineering design houses, testing houses and classification societies, can jointly facilitate continuous progress.

Marina Silva, Belzona Polymerics Ltd

Typical tank base corrosion.

Tank base sealed with a flexible membrane.


Sustaining Members


CATHODIC PROTECTION ENGINEERING LTD Chapel Green Farm, Chapel Lane, Wythall, Birmingham B47 6JXTel: 07399607344 Email: [email protected]

CORROCONSULT UK LIMITED The Kiosk, Overley, Telford, TF6 5HD Tel: 01952 740234

CORROSION CONTROL INCORPORATED (GOLD MEMBER) 494 Fairplay Street, Rutledge, Georgia 30663, USA Tel: +706 557 9624 Email: [email protected]

CORROSION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES EUROPE LTD (GOLD MEMBER) 11 & 12 Merlin Park, Mildenhall, Suffolk IP28 7RD Tel: 01638 711955 Fax: 01638 711953 Email: [email protected] www.ctsonline.com

CORRPRO COMPANIES EUROPE LTD (GOLD MEMBER) Adam Street, Bowesfield Lane, Stockton On Tees, ClevelandTel: 44(0) 1642 614 106 Fax: +44(0) 1642 614 100Email: [email protected] www.corrpro.co.uk

DUVINE LTD Sturmer Road, Haverhill, Suffolk, UK, CB9 7UUTel: X +44 (0)1440 706777 Fax: +44 (0)1440 762810Email: [email protected] www.duvine.co.uk

BEASY Ashurst Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton, Hants, SO40 7AATel: 02380 293223 Fax: 02380 292853 Email: [email protected] www.beasy.com

CESCOR UK LTD Gable House, 18-24 Turnham Green Terrace Chiswick, London, W4 1QPTel: 0208 996 5111 Email: [email protected]

CORROSION CONTROL 3 Ivy Court, Acton Trussell, Staffordshire, ST17 0SN 01785 711560 Fax: 01785 711561 Email: [email protected] www.controlcorrosion.co.uk

CORROSION ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS LTD Unit S1, 64-66 Akeman Street, Tring, Herts, HP23 6AFTel: 01442 767 899 Email: [email protected] www.corrosionengineering.co.uk

CUMBERLAND CATHODIC PROTECTION LTD GO2 & GO3 The Bridgewater Complex, Canal Street,Bootle, L20 8AH Tel: 0151 5500015 Fax: 0151 5500016

PRO-TECH CP LTD Chase End, The Oxhey, Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire GL20 6HRTel: 01684 298679 Mobile: 07717 487632Email: [email protected] www.protechcp.com

SEGCORR LTD 11a Springfield Avenue, Newport, Shropshire TF10 7HPTel: 07484838232 Email: [email protected]

SGK Technoparkstr 1, Zurich 8005, SwitzerlandTel: +41 44 2131590 Email: [email protected]

ADLER & ALLAN LTD Britannia Road, Waltham Cross, EN8 7NYTel: 01992 657412 Email: [email protected]

AQUATEC GROUP LIMITED Aquatec House, Stroudley Road, Basingstoke, RG24 8FWTel: 01256 416010 Email: [email protected]

CATHELCO Marine House, Dunston Road, Chesterfield S41 8NYTel: +44 (0) 1246 457900 Fax: +44 (0) 1246 457901Email: [email protected] www.cathelco.com

CATHODIC PROTECTION CO LTD

Venture Way, Grantham, Lincolnshire, NG31 7XSTel: +44 (0)1476 590666

Email: [email protected]: www.cathodic.co.uk

Clearly the best protection…Designers and developers of Cathodic Protection Systems since 1950

TRUst® Transformer RectifiersCuprion® Marine Anti Fouling

Remote Monitoring & Control Systems

Refine™ Reference ElectrodesELGARD™ MMO Mesh Anodes

Thyristor/Switch Mode Power Supplies…for your investment

CATHODIC PROTECTION CONSULTANCY SERVICES

CATHODIC PROTECTION AND MONITORING

CATHODIC PROTECTION INTERNAL CORROSION MONITORING PIN BRAZING POWER SUPPLIES

T: +44 (0) 1952 290321 E: [email protected] W: www.bacgroup.com W: www.rcslgroup.com

Specialists in Cathodic ProtectionInspection - Design - Installation

Commission - Monitoring - TestingTel: 01952 230900 Email: [email protected]

CANADA USA

TEL: 905-634-7751 FAX: 905-333-4313

www.Rustrol.com

SOLID-STATE CATHODIC ISOLATOR®

Mitigation Of AC Induced Voltages • Lightning • AC Fault Current

Leaders in the Cathodic Protection Industry…Since 1957INTERPROVINCIAL CORROSION CONTROL CO. LTD.

Corrosion Control Company ABBox 324, 261 23 Landskrona,Sweden

Your specialist when it comes to Cathodic Protection Systems for Power Plants, Tank Farms, Pipelines, Concrete Structures, Harbours, Jetties and Refineries.

Tel: +46 418 411 900 Email: [email protected]

Fax: +46 418 411 935 Website: www.3ccc.se

Sustaining Members


MAPEI UK LTD Mapei House, Steel Park Road, Halesowen B62 8HDTel: 0121 5086970 Email: [email protected] www.mapei.co.uk

IMPALLOY LTD Bloxwich, Walsall, West Midlands, WS3 2XNTel: 01922 714400 Fax: 01922 714411 Email: [email protected] www.impalloy.com METEC CATHODIC PROTECTION LIMITED Visage House, 2 Shaftesbury Avenue, South Shields NE34 9PHTel: 0191 7316010 714411 Email: [email protected]

MGDUFF INTERNATIONAL LIMITED (GOLD MEMBER)1 Timberline Estate, Gravel Lane, Quarry Lane, Chichester,West Sussex, PO19 2FJTel: +44 (0) 1243 533336 Fax: +44 (0) 1234 533422 Email: [email protected] www.mgduff.co.uk

MME GROUPMateriaal Metingen Europe B.V, Rietdekkerstraat 16,PO Box 4222, 2980 GE Ridderkerk, The NetherlandsTel: +31 (0) 180 482 828 Fax: +31 (0) 180 462 240 Email: [email protected] www.mme-group.com

NORTH EAST CORROSION ENGINEERS LTDWest Pitmillan Business Centre Foveran, Ellon, AberdeenshireTel: +44 (0) 1358 788116 Fax: +44 (0) 1358 789828 Email: [email protected] www.neceltd.com

OMNIFLEX UK LTD67 Europa Business Park, Bird hall Lane, Cheadle, Stockport Cheshire SK3 0XATel: 0161 491 4144 Email [email protected] www.omniflex.com

SILVION LIMITEDThe Brambles, Grantham Road, Old Somerby, Grantham, Lincs, NG33 4AB, UKTel: 01476 590932 Fax: 07872 857310 Email: [email protected] [email protected] www.silvion.co.uk

SPECIALIST CASTING LTDTatham Street, Sunderland SR1 2AGTel: 0191 5108843 Email: [email protected] www.specialistcastings.com

VECTOR CORROSION TECHNOLOGIES27a Upper High Street, Cradley Heath, Birmingham, B64 5HXTel: 01384 671400 Email: [email protected]

VOLKERLASERThe Lodge, Blackpole Road, Worcester, WR4 9FHTel: 0800 022 3292 Email: [email protected] www.volkerlaser.co.uk

ALFRED BAGNALL & SONS LTD6 Manor Lane, Shipley, W.Yorks BD18 3RDTel: 01274 714800 Fax: 01274 530171 Email: [email protected] www.bagnalls.co.uk

APB CONSTRUCTION (UK) LTD (GOLD MEMBER)First Floor Offices, Grange Business Centre, River Works, Grange Lane, Sheffield, S5 0DPTel: 01709 541000 Fax: 01709 541411 Email: [email protected]

APB GROUP LIMITEDRyandra House, Ryandra Business Park, Brookhouse Way, Cheadle, Stoke on Trent ST10 1SRTel: 01538 755377 Fax: 01538 755010

BRIDGECOAT LTD3 Shawcross Industrial Estate, Ackworth Road, Hilsea, Portsmouth, PO3 5JPTel: 02392 666161 Email: [email protected]

DENHOLM INDUSTRIAL SERVICES200 Carmichael Street, Glasgow, G51 2QUTel: +44 (0)141 445 3939 Email: Damian.O’[email protected]

D.F. COATINGS LTDUnit 17 Willments Industrial Estate, Hazel Road, Woolston, Southampton, SO19 7HSTel: 02380 445634 Email: [email protected]

DYER & BUTLER LTDMead House, Station Road, Nursling, Southampton, Hampshire, SO16 0AHTel: 02380 742222 Fax: 02380 742200 Email: [email protected] www.dyerandbutler.co.uk

F A CLOVER & SON LTDBardolph Road, Richmond, TW9 2LHTel: 020 89486321 Fax: 020 89487307 Email: [email protected]

FIRESAFE SERVICES (NE) LIMITEDUnit 28A Spencer Road, Blyth Riverside Business Park, Blyth, Northumberland, NE24 5TGTel: 01670 351666 Fax: 01670 352666 Email: [email protected]

FOUNTAINS (PART OF THE OCS GROUP)Blenheim Court, George Street, Banbury, OX16 5BHTel: 07876 556197 Email: [email protected]

GABE (IS) LTD 12 Church Street, Omagh, Co Tyrone, BT78 3BXTel: 028 82240391 Email: [email protected]

GPL SPECIAL PROJECTS LTDPO Box 516, Salford, M5 0BJTel: 0161 745 7888 Email: [email protected]

HANKINSON PAINTING GROUPCotton Place, 2 Ivy Street, Birkenhead, Wirral CH41 5EFTel: 0870 7892020 Email: [email protected]

HDM TUBES LTDI Shed, Longships Road, ABP Ports, Cardiff Docks, CF10 4RPTel: 07710080845 Email: [email protected] www.hdmtubes.co.uk

CORROSION ENGINEERING AND CATHODIC PROTECTION FIELD SERVICES

Contact: Brendan Kelly 01912606224 [email protected]

or Lee Jones email [email protected] Tel. 0800 0328210 and 0191 2606200

R & R Corrosion Ltd. 5 Broomiesburn Road,

Broomiesburn Industrial Estate, Ellon, Aberdeenshire AB41 9RD

Tel: 01358 729644 Fax: 01358 729655 Email: [email protected]

www.rrcorrosion.com

COATING APPLICATORS

stoprust.com

OFFSHORE CORROSION CONTROL

Deepwater EU Ltd. 4.8 Frimley Business Park | Frimley Camberley | Surrey | GU16 7SG

Tel: +44 (0) 1483 600482

Sustaining Members


PIPERCREST LTD T/A HALLS SPECIALISED SERVICESBrooklyn Farm, North Hill, Norden on the Hill, Essex SS17 8QATel: 01375 361408 Fax: 01375 361448

OWENS CORNING FOAMGLAS® INDUSTRY (GOLD MEMBER)31-35 Kirby Street, Hatton Garden, London, EC1N 8TETel: 07789 507094 Email: [email protected]

R & W RAIL LTDLocks Farm, Main Road, Dibden, Southampton SO45 5TDTel: 02380 845379 Website: www.rwcivilengineering.co.uk

SCA GROUP LIMITED7 Crane Way, Woolsbridge Industrial Park, Three Legged Cross, Dorset, BH21 6FATel: 01202 820820 Email: [email protected] Website: www.sca-group.com

SPECIALIST PAINTING GROUP LTDUnit 3 Prosper House, Astore Park, Padholme Road East, Fengate, Peterborough, PE1 5XLTel: 01733 309500 Email: [email protected] www.specialistpaintinggroup.co.uk

SHUTDOWN MAINTENANCE SERVICES LIMITEDTel: 01634 256969 Fax: 01634 256616 Email: enquiries@shutdownmaintenance.comwww.shutdownmaintenanceservices.co.uk

SPECIALIST BLASTING SERVICE LTDTrevol Business Park, Torpoint, Plymouth, PL11 2TBTel: 023 8044 4455

STANDISH METAL TREATMENT LTDPotter Place, West Pimbo, Skelmersdale, Lancs, WN8 9PWTel: 01695 455977 Fax: 01695 728835 Email: [email protected]

SURFACE TECHNIK (OLD HILL) LIMITEDSovereign Works, Deepdale Lane, Lower Gornal, Dudley, DY3 2AFTel: 1384 457610 Fax: 01384 238563 Email: [email protected] www.surfacetechnik.co.uk

WEDGE GROUP GALVANIZING LTDStafford Street, Willenhall, West Midlands WV13 1RZTel: 0845 271 6082 Email: [email protected] www.wedge-galv.co.uk

WESCOTT INDUSTRIAL SERVICES LTDWestcott House, Unit 9 B/C &10 Tyne Point Industrial Estate, Jarrow, Tyne & Wear, NE32 3UPTel: 0191 497 5550 www.wescottis.com

W G BEAUMONT & SON LTDBeaumont House, 8 Bernard Road, Romford, RM7 0HXTel: 01708 749202 Fax: 020 85909885 Email: [email protected]

WILLIAM HARE LTDBrandlesholme House, Brandlesholme Road, Bury BL8 1JJTel: 0161 609 0000 Fax: 0161 609 0468 Email: [email protected] www.williamhare.co.uk

AW CORROSION SOLUTIONS LTD5 Brookfield, Four Elms, Edenbridge, Kent, TN8 6NJTel: 01732 700924 Email: [email protected]

HERRINGTON INDUSTRIAL SERVICES LTD Crown Works, Crown Road, Low Southwick, Sunderland, Tyne & Wear, SR5 2BS Tel: 0191 516 0634 Fax: 0191 548 1553 Email: [email protected] www.herringtonltd.co.uk

JACK TIGHE LTDRedbourne Mere, Kirton Lindsey, Gainsborough, Lincolnshire, DN21 4NWTel: 01652 640003 Email: [email protected]

JPV (PAINTERS) LTDUnit 8, Prospect Way, Hutton Industrial Estate, Brentwood, Essex, CM13 1XATel:01277 201515 Fax: 01277 201616 Email: enquiries @jpvpainters.co.uk

KAEFER LIMITEDEthan House, Royce Avenue, Cowpen Lane Industrial Estate, Billingham, TS23 4BXTel: 01642 371850 Fax: 01642 562971 www.kaeferltd.co.uk

KUE GROUP LIMITEDBirksland Street, Bradford, BD3 9SUTel: +44 (0)1274 721188 Fax: +44 (0)1274 720088 www.kaeferltd.co.uk

MCL COATINGS LTDPickerings Road, Halebank Industrial Estate, Widnes, Cheshire, WA8 8XWTel: 0151 423 6166 Fax: 0151 495 1437 Email: [email protected] www.mcl.eu.com

MCL SITE PROJECTS LTDPickerings Road, Halebank Industrial Estate, Widnes, Cheshire WA8 8XW Tel: 0151 423 6166 Email: [email protected]

MPM NORTH WEST LTDMarine Road, Maryport, Cumbria, CA15 8AYEmail: [email protected] www.mpmarine.co.uk

NORTHERN PROTECTIVE COATINGS LTD16 High Reach, Fairfield Industrial Estate, Bill Quay, Gateshead, Tyne & Wear, NE10 0URTel: 0191 438 5555 Fax: 0191 438 3082 Email: [email protected]

NUSTEEL STRUCTURESLymane, Hythe, Kent CT21 4LREmail: [email protected] www.nusteelstructures.com

ORRMAC COATINGS LTDNewton Chambers Road, Thorncliffe Park Estate, Chapeltown, Sheffield S35 2PHTel: 0114 2461237 Fax: 0114 2570151 Email: [email protected] www.orrmac.co.uk

PIPELINE TECHNIQUE (GOLD MEMBER)Deveronside Works, Steven Road, Huntly, Aberdeenshire, AB54 4PSTel: 01466 795888 Email: [email protected]

T: 01543 450167E: [email protected]: www.industrialcoatingservices.co.uk

Industrial Coating Services are a midlands based company, operating throughout the UK, specialising in Abrasive blasting cleaning and application of protective coatings. works also including; Intumescent coatings, decorative painting, ultra high water jetting, stone & brick cleaning, graffiti removal and graffiti coatings

Training Confined space PTS/COSS ICATS ICORR Paint Inspector SMSTS SSSTS PASMA IPAF NEBOSH 3 ICATS Trainers

AccreditationsUVDBNHSS 19AISO 9001& ISO 14001OHSAS 18001 ConstructionlineFirst Aid - 4 dayRISQS

ServicesSurface preparationProtective Coating ApplicationScaffold and EncapsulationGraffiti removalAnti graffiti coating

CONSULTING TESTING AND INSPECTION

Sustaining Members


SSE LTDGrampian House, 200 Dunkeld Road, Perth, PH1 3GHTel: 01738 456000 Fax: 01738 456647

CHEMCO INTERNATIONAL LTDInnovative rust & wet-tolerant, Solvent-free Coatings East Shawhead Industrial Estate, Coatbridge, Scotland, UKTel: 01236 606060 Fax: 01236 606070 Email: [email protected] www.chemcoint.com

HEMPEL UK LTD (GOLD MEMBER)Berwyn House, The Pavillions, Cwmbran, Torfaen, South Wales, NP44 3FD, United KingdomTel: 01633 874024 Fax: 01633 489012 Email: [email protected] www.hempel.com

CANHareness Road, Altens, Aberdeen, AB12 3LETel: 01224 870100 Fax: 01224 870101 Email: [email protected] www.cangroup.net

CORROSION MANAGEMENT LTDEngineering Consultants, Rugby, CV22 6HL, United KingdomEmail: [email protected]

EXOVARosewell house, 2A(1F) Harvest Drive, Newbridge, Midlothian EH28 8QJTel: 03302220321 Email: [email protected] www.exova.com

HYDROCOMM LTD1 Kent Place, Oughtonhead Way, Hitchin, Hertfordshire SG5 2LETel: 07779333781 Email: [email protected]

HYDROSAVE UK LTDSwallow Court, Kettering Pkwy, Kettering, Northamptonshire NN15 6XXTel: +44 (0) 1536 515110 Fax: + 44 (0) 1536 515119 www.hydrosave.co.uk

INDEPENDENT PROTECTIVE COATINGS SERVICES LTDUnit 14, Hedgend Industrial Estate, Shuart Lane, St Nicholas-At-Wade, Kent, CT7 0NBTel: 01843 845472 Fax: 01843 847722

INTECSEALansbury Estate, 102 Lower Guildford Road, Knaphill Woking, GU21 2EPTel: 01483 795300 Email: [email protected]

LUX ASSURE LIMITEDUnit 5.3 Heriot Watt Research Park, Research Park South, Edinburgh EH14 4APTel: 0131 5167290 Email: [email protected]

MISTRAS GROUP LTDNorman Way Industrial Estate, Over, Cambridge, CB24 5QETel: 01954 231612 www.mistragroup.co.uk

OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL SERVICES LTDOceaneering House,Pitmedden Road, Dyce, Aberdeen, AB21 0DPTel: 01224 758500

PAINT INSPECTION LIMITED61 High Street, Fareham, PO16 7BGTel: 0845 4638680 Email: [email protected] www.paint-inspection.co.uk

PIPELINE TECHNIQUE (GOLD MEMBER)Deveronside Works, Steven Road, Huntly, Aberdeenshire, AB54 4PSTel: 01466 795888 Email: [email protected]

PLANT INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT LTD1st Floor Office, Woodburn House, Woodburn Road, Blackburn AB21 0RXTel: 01224 798870 Email: [email protected] www.pim-ltd.com

RAWWATER ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITEDCulcheth Enterprise Park, Withington Avenue, Culcheth, Warrington WA3 4JETel: 01925 767990 Website: www.rawwater.com

SAFINAH LTD5 Keel Row, The Watermark, Gateshead, Tyne & Wear, NE11 9SZTel: 01670 519900 Email: [email protected]

SCALED SOLUTIONS LTD6 Nettlehill Road, Houston Industrial Estate, Livingston, EH54 5DL Email: [email protected] www.scaledsolutions.co.uk

SGK Technoparkstr 1, Zurich 8005, SwitzerlandTel: +41 44 2131590 Email: [email protected]

SONOMATIC LTDDornoch House, The Links, Kelvin Close, Birchwood, Warrington WA3 7PBTel: 01925 414000 Email: [email protected] Web: www.sonomatic.com

STEEL PROTECTION CONSULTANCY LTDPO Box 6386, Leighton Buzzard, Beds. LU7 6BXTel: 01525 852500 Fax: 01525 852502 Email: [email protected] www.steel-protection.co.uk

TOPLINE LIMITED40 Birabi Street, GRA Phase 1, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, NigeriaTel: 084 46238 Email: [email protected] www.toplinelimited.net

SPECIFIERS

SUPPLIERS COATINGS

Winn & Coales (Denso) LtdDenso House, Chapel Road, London SE27 OTR Tel: 0208 670 7511

Fax: 0208 761 2456 Email: [email protected] Web: www.denso.net

LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS FORCORROSION CONTROL

LEADERS IN CORROSION PREVENTION &SEALING TECHNOLOGY

A MEMBER OF WINN & COALES INTERNATIONAL

Sustaining Members


SCANGRITEastfield Road, South Killingholme, Immingholme, Immingham, North Lincs, DN40 3NFTel: 01469 574715 Fax: 01469 571644 Email: [email protected] www.scangrit.co.uk

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTDThe Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GDTel: 01865 843000 Fax: 01865 843010

INSTITUTE OF METAL FINISHINGExeter House, 48 Holloway Head, Birmingham, B1 1NQTel: 0121 6227387 Fax: 0121 6666316 Email: [email protected] www.uk-finishing.org.uk

MPI GROUPPeel House, Upper South View, Farnham, Surrey, GU9 7JNTel: 01252 732220 Fax: 01252 732221 www.protectivecoatingseurope.com

IMECHE ARGYLL RUANE 4 Europa View, Sheffield Business Park, Sheffield, S9 1XHTel: +44 (0)114 3995720 Fax: +44 (0)114 2430035Email: [email protected] www.imeche.org/arl

QUALITY CONTROL

+44 (0)161 371 [email protected] www.elcometer.com

- Surface Profile - Surface Cleanliness- Climatic Testing - Dry Film Thickness- Material Thickness - Adhesion- Appearance - Pinhole & Porosity- Concrete Inspection - Data Management

from start...

...to finish

Corrosion Management Jan 2016 65x75mm.indd 1 1/21/2016 2:11:54 PM

INDEPENDENT PROTECTIVE COATINGS SERVICES LTDUnit 14, Hedgend Industrial Estate, Shuart Lane, St Nicholas-At-Wade, Kent CT7 0NBTel: 01843 845472 Fax: 01843 847722

INDESTRUCTIBLE PAINT LTD25 Pentos Drive, Sparkhill, Birmingham, B11 3TATel: 0121 7022485 Email: [email protected] www.indestructible.co.uk

INTERNATIONAL PAINT LIMITED (GOLD MEMBER)Stoneygate Lane, Felling, Gateshead, Tyne & Wear, NE10 0JYTel: 0191 469 6111 Fax: 0191 496 0676 Email: [email protected] www.international-pc.com

JOTUN PAINTS (EUROPE) LTD (GOLD MEMBER)Stather Road, Flixborough, Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire DN15 8RRTel: 01724 400 125 Fax: 01724 400 100 Email: [email protected] Web: www.jotun.co.uk

SHERWIN-WILLIAMS PROTECTIVE & MARINE COATINGS (GOLD MEMBER)Tower Works, Kestor Street, Bolton, BL2 2AL, UKTel: +44 (0)1204 521771 Email: [email protected] sherwin-williams.com/protectiveEMEA


PPG PROTECTIVE & MARINE COATINGSUnit 3 Maises Way, The Village, Carter Lane, South Normanton, Derbyshire, DE55 2DSTel: +44 (0) 1773 814520 Fax: +44 (0) 1773 814521 www.ppgpmc.com

SPECIALTY POLYMER COATINGS INC (GOLD MEMBER) LTDContact our UK based stockist & certified distribution centreTel: +44 (0) 7748 993326 Email: [email protected] www.spc-net.com

FERNOX2 Genesis Business Park, Albert Drive, Sheerwater, Woking, GU21 5RWTel: 01483 793200 Fax: 01483 793201 Web: ww.fernox.com

FISCHER INSTRUMENTATION (GB) LTDGordleton Industrial Park, Pennington, Lymington, Hampshire, SO41 8JDTel: 01590 684100 Email: [email protected]

GMA GARNET (EUROPE) GMBHPO Box 9, Middlewich, Cheshire, CW10 9FDTel: 01606 836233 Email: [email protected] www.gmagarnet.co.uk

LAKE CHEMICALS & MATERIALS LTD3 Paper Mill Drive, Redditch, Worcestershire, B98 8QLTel: 01527 594630 Email: [email protected]

LLEWELLYN RYLAND LTDHaden Street, Birmingham, B12 9DBTel: 0121 4402284 Email: [email protected]


PRESSERV LTDUnit 7 Ocean Trade Centre, Altens, Aberdeen, AB21 0GUTel: 01224 772694 Email: [email protected]

RENTAJET GROUP LIMITEDPaultons Park, Ower, Romsey, Hampshire SO51 6ALTel: 02380 817160, Fax 02380 814016 Email: [email protected]

SUPPLIERS GENERAL

RECIPROCAL ORGANISATIONS

TRAINING AND COATING INSPECTORS

Visit the ICATS websitewww.icats-training.org

FOR ALL THE LATEST CORROSION INDUSTRY JOBS VISIT THE ICORR JOB BOARD

https://jobs.icorr.org/

BRANCH DATES10th January 2019 London Branch 18.00 – 21.00 Venue: Skempton Building, Imperial College, London, SW7 2BB Pipework corrosion – Prediction and reality. Speaker: Patricia Conder, Sonomatic

29th January 2019 Aberdeen Branch 18.00 – 21.00 Venue: Room N242, Sir Ian Wood Building, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, AB10 7GJ Integrity issues and planned production losses – How to break the cycle.Speaker: Paul McCarthy, Plant Integrity Management

14th February 2019 London Branch 1800—2100 Venue: Skempton Building, Imperial College, London, SW7 2BB Past, present and future of corrosion Speaker: Bijan Kermani, Keytech

26th February 2019 Aberdeen Branch 1800 - 2100 Venue: Room N242, Sir Ian Wood Building, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, AB10 7GJ A novel approach to combating CUI, and MIC-resistant HDPE linings for seawater applications Speakers: George Sykes, International Paint, and Michael Barakay, RMB Products, Rob Mackie, United Pipeline Systems

14th March 2019 London Branch 1800—2100 Venue: Skempton Building, Imperial College, London, SW7 2BB The President’s talk Speaker: Gareth Hinds

26th March 2019 Aberdeen Branch 1800 Industrial Visit, ICR Venue: Aberdeen Energy Park, Claymore drive, Bridge of Don, Aberdeen, AB23 8GW

30th April 2019 Aberdeen Branch 5:30 - 8:00 Venue: Room N242, Sir Ian Wood Building, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, AB10 7GJ Corrosion Inhibitor Screening: Impact of Test Approaches Speaker: Dr. Ian Carpenter of Scaled Solutions

28th May 2019 Aberdeen Branch 6:00 - 8:00 Venue: 3 Commercial Park, Venture Dr, Westhill, Aberdeen, AB32 6FQ NACE Presentation and Demo (Material Loss from Surface Preparation) and Evaluating the Effect of Surface

Preparation Standard on Zinc Rich Epoxy Primers Speakers: AIS Training - NACE Presentation and Demo & Simon Daly of Hempel on Evaluating the effect of surface Preparation Standard on Zinc Rich Epoxy Primers

ADDITIONAL DIARY DATES2nd - 5th April 2019 AETOC 2019 Valencia, Spain Contact: http:/www.aetocuji.es

21st – 24th May 2019 CEOCOR 2019 H.C Andersen Castle (Tivoli), Copenhagen, Denmark Contact: www.ceocor2019.com

9th -13th September 2019 EUROCORR 2019 Seville, Spain Contact: http://www. eurocorr.org

Institute EventsDIARY DATES 2018/19

www.icorr.org

Visit the ICorr website for all the

latest news

www.icorr.org

BRANCH CONTACT DIRECTORYABERDEEN:Yunnan Gao (Chairman)01224 353325Email: [email protected]

LONDON: Paul Brooks (Chairman)Mobile: 07880 791087Steve Barke (Secretary)George Winning (Speakers)[email protected]

MIDLANDS BRANCH: Bill Whittaker (Chairman)Email: [email protected]

NORTH EAST:Neil Wilds (Chair)Marie Halliday (Vice Chair)Alex Sandilands (Secretary)Email: [email protected]

NORTH WEST: Brenda Peters, Analysis ScientificTel: 01706 871700Email: [email protected]

YORKSHIRE: Nigel Peterson-WhiteTel: 07793 710559Email: [email protected]

CSD DIVISION: Julian [email protected]

CED DIVISION: Nick SmartTel: 01635 280385


Visit the ICATS

websitewww.icats-training.org

FOR ALL THE LATEST

CORROSION INDUSTRY JOBS

VISIT THE ICORR JOB BOARD

Documents

Corrosion A journal of the Institute of Corrosion · Corrosion Management A journal of the Institute of Corrosion Issue 146 November/December 2018 Protection of above ground storage