CoatingsPro Magazine

JUL 2018

CoatingsPro offers an in-depth look at coatings based on case studies, successful business operation, new products, industry news, and the safe and profitable use of coatings and equipment.

Issue link: https://coatingspromag.epubxp.com/i/999269

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 57 of 68

COATINGSPRO JULY 2018 57 what are the prime takeaways from this project? Lessons Learned As this facility is now environmentally controlled, no further corrosion of the substrate (steel) or degradation of the coatings would be expected. But it was. Adhesion testing was performed to verify that the primer coating material applied was adher- ent and a viable candidate to receive additional coatings without potential future problems. Testing was also performed to verify that the areas with previous touch-up repaired coatings were also viable candidates to receive additional coatings without potential issue. Adhesion testing results were all acceptable. To fix the problem, the surfaces will need to be clean and free of corro- sion and other contaminates prior to additional coatings application. Ultimately, the contractor and owner reached a mutually accept- able resolution as to the repair and final condition of the building's interior coatings. e most important lesson learned from this project is to consider the entire construction process and types of exposure when selecting coatings systems for installation. e only consideration given to coatings selec- tion in this case was the final intended use and service environment. at consideration was in the form of the typical metal building structural steel painting requirements as previously discussed, and it wasn't enough. e selection of a white primer was the first "non-normal " element of the installation, and it's pretty reasonable to expect that with extended storage times in the laydown yard, the white coated surfaces would be corroded and stained from that exposure. W hat could the contractor have considered as other options to eliminate or at least mitigate the encountered conditions and necessary repairs? One option is simply to cover and protect the construction materials to minimize exposure to the elements, thereby maintaining the original coated condition though installation. Once covered and enclosed, there would have been no degradation of the coating due to exposure. is is especially necessary and probably the only option with the cuts, uncoated ends of the roofing panels, and other similar build- ing materials. Another option to eliminate or mitigate these issues could have been to better control the arrival and storage times of the construction materials, thereby minimizing the opportunity for damage to the coating systems from the elements. A third option would have been to select high-performance coatings systems that would have been able to endure exposure to the elements prior to erection — especially if white is the customer's color of choice. CP D. Terry Greenfield is a principal consultant with CorroMetrics Services, Inc. Greenfield has more than 37 years' experience in the protective coatings and corrosion industry, providing program and project management, quality assurance, condition assessment and maintenance planning , specification development, failure analysis, expert witness, and training for the marine, transportation, oil and gas, and other industries. Greenfield is a graduate of the University of Central Florida. He is a NACE Level III Coating Inspector with Bridge, Marine, and Nuclear Specialties. He holds Offshore and Shipboard Corrosion Assessment Technician certifications, and he is a Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC) Certified Protective Coatings Specialist. For more information, contact: CorroMetrics Services, Inc., (251) 445-1562, www.corrometrics.com Staining on Structural Steel Re ad e r In qui r y at co ati n g sp ro m a g.co m /i n q07 18

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of CoatingsPro Magazine - JUL 2018