How to Avoid Premature

Coating Failures
Proper Removal of Soluble Salts
After Detecting Their Presence

CSI Webinar 10/19/10

Presenter: Regis Doucette
Chlor*Rid Intnl., Inc.
(201) 664-5487
Regis@chlor-rid.com

Awareness
Recognition
Elimination
Coating project costs: 80/20 rule applies
80% Surface Preparation
20% Coating

Objective: Reduce liability of premature coating failure

from corrosion with better knowledge and field-tested
specification details
Goal: Achieve full life cycle coating performance

Why salts are a big issue?

Lead based coatings are banned.

Lead formed insoluble salts.
Visual standards are insufficient.
Salts are nonvisible.
Specifications may not adequately address nonvisible contaminants.
Residual salts are a leading cause of premature coating failure.
Testing and removal is always much less than the cost of premature failure .

Salts are a controllable variable!

Uhlig and Revies

Corrosion & Corrosion Control:
The most important single factor
influencing the life of a paint is
the proper preparation of the metal
surface
H. Mitschkes award winning 2001 JPCL article:
A 1g/cm2 increase in chlorides has the potential
to reduce coating life by 50%.

Reality Check

Prior to 1995, it is estimated that at least 3 out of 4

contractors suffered major failures during projects or
shortly thereafter. Most coatings did not survive more
than 5 to 7 years. Now with changes, including (soluble
salt remover), we have an approximately 70 to 90%
reduction in lifecycle costs, have reduced premature
coating failures and increased service life.

Non vendor specific edit

What are Soluble Salts?

Ionic contaminants

Water soluble inorganic compounds

Primarily chlorides, sulfates, and
nitrates
Non-visible contaminants
Can bond electrochemically to the metal substrate

Sources
Marine environments (sea water-chlorides)
Abrasives (chlorides/sulfates)
De-icing salts (chlorides)
Environmental fallout & acid rain
(sulfates/nitrates):

Stack gases
Auto/vehicle emissions

Chemical processes/plants & power plants

(many combinations of salts)
Water and sewage treatment facilities
Lightning

Sulfuric Acid Reigns Supreme

http://www.turi.org/library/turi_publications/massachusetts_chemical_fact_sheets

Nitrates
Sulfates

Chlorides

Non-visible

Visually clean substrates are not adequate

Soluble salts require testing to be detected

Which salt is the problem? - Primarily

dependent on service environment

Microgram
per square centimeter
Pinky fingerprint approximates 1 square centimeter
M&M candy sliced into one million pieces
--single slice = 1 microgram
Salt packet from McDonalds for fries
--disolved in water
--then spread over 1,000 sq ft would deposit

1 microgram per square centimeter

g/cm2

Relative Size Chart

40 mil

Perspective -- Sizing
Hair

Beach Sand

Detrimental Effects of Salts

Interferes with adhesion
Accelerates corrosion
Causes blistering of coatings

Corrosion Cell

A corrosion cell consists of 4 components

An anode ( - provided by steel itself)

A cathode ( + provided by steel itself)
A metallic pathway (provided by steel itself)
An electrolyte (salt + moisture = electrolyte)

Coating failure

Corrosion p

Cathode

Metallic pathway

Anode

Electrolytethe ONE and ONLY

variable we can control is

Salts are hygroscopic = Draw moisture

All liquid applied coatings are permeable and salts

will draw moisture through the coating film, thereby
providing the electrolyte needed for corrosion
activity

Some coatings are less permeable than others

Osmotic Blisters

The same hygroscopic action which causes

corrosion also causes osmotic blistering

The hygroscopic action of salts builds up

pressure within a blister which can exceed
the bond strength of the coating

A.

B.

A = Fingerprint effect B = Random test sample location

would yield imperfect results

Salt Corrosion Cycle

Iron +Salt + Moisture = RUST + Acid
Fe + 2H+ Fe+2 + H2
Fe+2 + O2 +4H+ Fe+3 + 2H2O
Fe+3 + 3Cl- FeCl3
2FeCl3 + 3H2O Fe2O3 + 6HCl

Without
remediation, repeat reaction cycle

Detecting Soluble Salts

Lab analysis

Time consuming and costly.

Field testing

Conductivity

Ion specific

Testing for Salts

Two parts:
Extractions
Analysis

Detecting Soluble Salts

Extraction methods

Swabbing (DI water) [25 35%]

Patch Cell (DI water) [45 60%]
Wet filter paper (DI water) [??]
Magnetic cell (DI water) [45 60%]
Sleeve method (proprietary acid solution) [80%]
Boiling (lab; destructive field sample) [90 95%]

Quantitative analysis

(Sources: SSPC TU4; Third party laboratories)

Analysis methods
Two distinct methods:
Conductivity measures all conductive constituents.
Ion specific measures the specific ion of concern;
chloride, sulfate, or nitrate.

Conductivity Method
Measures everything conductive in the sample.
Many species are not detrimental to the coating film
nor induce premature coating failure.
Measures all minerals.
Conversion to chloride level is an estimate.
Assumes a lab correlation based on 100% chlorides.
Conductivity and reactivity are different.

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
-L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S

Conductivity vs Chloride Ion

Specific
19 panel tests with derived index for
analysis

Plotted test points sorted by ascending values of Chloride Ion Specific results.

Sorted by ascending values of Conductivity results.

Ion specific method:

Measures the specific problematic ion.
Can measure different ions chlorides, sulfates,
and nitrates.
Reagent liquid chemicals can measure chlorides, but
usually result in a range ( > to < ).

Ion specific method

limitations:
Quantab strip:
Lot specific factor for calculation.
Does not read below 30 ppm;
7.5 g/cm2 equivalent with Bresle and 3 ml DI.
Reagent liquid chemicals can measure chlorides, but
usually result in a range ( > to < ).

Chloride Analysis by Ion

Detection Tubes
Sealed ampoule, break both ends and
immerse in extract solution
Cl- read from calibrated tube in PPM and
micrograms per square centimeter
ISO 8502-5

Analysis of Sulfate

Electronic turbidity method

Add barium chloride to extract solution to form
BaSO4
Measure absorbency/transmittance

New Field Test Kit

ISO 8502-11
Maryland Bridge
I-95 Delaware
Casciano Bridge near Newark A/P

Analysis for Nitrates

Dip pillow end of nitrate strip into extracted
solution for 2 seconds
Wait 1 minute and compare color on pillow
to color on comparator card

NASA Gantry
St. Lawrence Seaway

Criteria for Chlorides:

Source
Suppliers
NAVSEA
NAVFAC
IMO
DNV
Units=g/cm2
*Equivalents

Immersion
2-5
3
ND
3*
2

Atmospheric
5 - 15
5
ND
2

Risk Levels for Soluble Salts:

Soluble salt

Chloride

Nitrate

Sulfate

g/cm2

g/cm2

g/cm2

Low Risk

0 to 3

0 to 5

0 to 10

Medium Risk

3 to 8

5 to 10

10 to 20

>8

>10

>20

Unit

High Risk

Cumulative Risk

Threshholds for each, but risk additive &

not independent nor mutually exclusive
How much weight should go on thin ice?
Chlorides
Sulfates
Nitrates

Units for Soluble Salts

Surface Concentration:
Micrograms per square centimeter
Abbreviated (g/cm2)

Solution Concentration:
PPM (parts per million)

Convert to g/cm2 based on volume and

area

Note: 10 mg/m2 = 1 g/cm2

Standards

SSPC Guide 15
extraction procedures
analysis procedure
units, conversions

ISO
chloride ion, sulfate ion
conductivity
extraction

Removal

Bonding strength
Why are salts left behind if they
are water soluble?
The electrochemical attachment of salts to
the substrate (adsorption) are greater than
the forces applied to remove them.

Surface Preparation Methods

Ultra High Pressure washing

- Profile impact
- Salt mitigation
Abrasive blasting & Pressure wash (3000 psi min)
cycles with water.
- Multiple passes.
- Bonded salts.
- Time and cost.
Wet abrasive blasting
- Micronic particles.
- Rinsing required.
Abrasive blast followed a soluble salt REMOVER
wash.
- Cost effective.

Coatings Economics
Goal: Achieve lowest cost/ft2/yr for the expect coating life
Total Surface Area:

90,000 ft2

Service: Tank Lining

Cost/ft2/yr (todays $):

Cost /yr over 15 yrs

Insufficient Surface Prep:

$500,000

5 yr coating cycle

Insufficient Surface Prep:

$1.11/ft2/yr

Proper Surface Prep:

$515,000

15 yr coating cycle

Proper Surface Prep:

$0.38/ft2/yr

Based on actual experience by NAVFAC since instituting revised specifications in 1995.

Summary

Awareness:
Salts may be present
Recognition:
Incorporate testing in specifications
Testing to quantify levels present
Elimination:
Traditional surface prep methods may not remove
salts adequately.
Cost effective use of acidic soluble salt remover
Test to verify prior to coating.

Uhlig and Revies

Corrosion & Corrosion
Control:
A poor paint system on a
properly prepared metal surface
usually outperforms a better paint
system on a poorly prepared
surface

Strive for Products

Proven
Efficient
Improves Adhesion
Assists in removal of surface oils
Cost effective
Safe
Easy to use
Environmentally friendly

Ten Best Management

Practices
Industry
Associations
Quality Control
In Service/Field

Surface Preparation of Soluble Salt

Contaminated
Steel Substrates Prior to Coating
NACE International Publication 6G186

Section Headers as presented on

Page 1 of this report, verbatim

The purpose of this technical committee report is to

increase the industry awareness of the following:
The effects of various nonvisible soluble salt contaminants
on a coatings performance;
An approach to risk assessment regarding the costs of
soluble salt removal versus the risk of future
coating failure;
Identification of the indicators of salt contamination; and
Various methods of salt contamination removal.

Surface Preparation of Soluble Salt

Contaminated
Steel Substrates Prior to Coating
NACE International Publication 6G186
Appendix B
Preparing a Specification
B1 Specification requirements regarding salt testing are usually driven
by the specification writers knowledge of salt test kits.
B2 Some of the basic components of a specification associated with
nonvisible soluble salts include, .(next slide)
B.3 Numerous sampling methods are described in SSPC-Guide 15. .
B.4 Appendix C is an example of a portion of a written specification for
a lining that incorporates these components.
Appendix B has been provided courtesy of the Salt River Project (SRP)
Tempe, AZ

Surface Preparation of Soluble Salt

Contaminated
Steel Substrates Prior to Coating
NACE International Publication 6G186

(a) Identify a field test kit or method for extraction and the method of
analysis for each type of salt contaminant;
(b) Determine at what point in the project activity testing occurs, taking
into consideration surface preparation methods and procedures;
(c) Choose the number of tests to be performed or a method for
identifying the number and frequency of testing;
(d) Give guidance on or select test locations;
(e) State what level of soluble salt contamination is acceptable (see the

Surface Preparation of Soluble Salt

Contaminated
Steel Substrates Prior to Coating
NACE International Publication 6G186

Section Headers as presented on Page 1 of this rep

Effect

of Salt Contamination on Coating Performance

Risk Assessment
Salt Contamination Sources
Water-Soluble Salt Contaminants (Chlorides, Nitrates, and
Sulfates)
Recognition and Identification of Salt Contaminants
Field Tests to Detect the Presence of Salts
Salt Removal Methods
Project-Specific Sampling Protocols and Acceptance Criteria

Surface Preparation of Soluble Salt

Contaminated
Steel Substrates Prior to Coating
NACE International Publication 6G186
Section Headers as presented on Page 1 of this
report, verbatim (continued)
References
Appendixes:

A. Area-Based Sampling Protocol and

Testing
B. Preparing a Specification
C. Example Lining Specification

Surface Preparation of Soluble Salt

Contaminated
Steel Substrates Prior to Coating
NACE International Publication
6G186
www.nace.org
Store
Members free; non-members $31

BEST PRACTICES (BMP)

Technical Guide #15

The Society for
Protective Coatings
Draft Version
American Petroleum
Institute

Specification
Unified Facilities
Guide Specifications

Societies

BEST PRACTICES (BMP)

Quality Control
Called in specs
Warranty ONLY
Repeated mentor advice
to test for salts rather
than risk fiasco

Specification
Several pages address
similar to Dewpoint, RH,
Temp. KEY Criteria

QC Caring

BEST PRACTICES (BMP)

Quality Control -- Fleets

& Structures proper washdown
should not harm assets
Concrete and other repairs,
intercoat adhesion issues

Specification
Pipelines/structures when
redoing CP clean properly

In Service/Field

NAVSEA: 009-32 Standard Item

Chloride limit: 3 g/cm2 immersion.

FY-10: Water wash to meet the limit after abrasive blast.
Can require multiple washes.

FY-11 (Prelim): Allows the use of an approved salt

remover.
Approval via the F718 from the coating manufacturer

ONR funded research at Carderock and CTC,

Johnstown support efficacy and acceptability of
an established and time tested soluble salt remover.

Surface Preparation Issue

Industry standards are generally visual.

Present coatings cannot tolerate salts.
Non-visible contaminants are getting more attention.
Soluble salt removal is critical to coating life cycle
performance.

Enclosed Lifeboat

Courtesy of US Coast Guard

Cable for aft hook

PRIOR VIDEO and these next 5 slides courtesy of US Coast Guard

Courtesy of US Coast Guard

Type: Crude Oil Tanker

Case 1

DWT: 135,000

Age Of Vessel : 16 Years,

Total Steel replacement : 1,200 Metric Tonnes

Renewals were carried out on various internal structures in

Cargo & Ballast tanks including areas on the bottom plating

Courtesy of US Coast Guard

Case # 1..

Case 1
The renewal Process on the Ship....

Case 1.. Contd..

The
Final
Product

Courtesy of US Coast Guard

Arrival
Condition

Case 2
Type: Oil Tanker , DWT: 108,628

Age Of Vessel : 15 Years,

Case 2..

Total Steel renewal was : 150 T .. And steel renewal was Limited only to Ballast tank areas

What happened : Case # 1 = 1200 Tonnes and Case # 2 = 150 Tonnes.

Reason :
The Ship owner in Case # 2 did better Preventive Maintenance during her trading Years!!

Courtesy of US Coast Guard

The B-307 was flown to Dulles in

2003 for delivery to the
Smithsonian

Boeing Removes Corrosion Inducing Salts

from Ditched Aircraft

Repairs:

Incorporating Salts into

a SPECIFICATION
THE GOOD
THE BAD
and THE UGLY

WHAT IS A SPECIFICATION?
(Class response)

A specification is the legal

written word requiring a
contractor to perform certain
tasks.

The Good

Specify- State in detail (Websters College

Dictionary)

A specification should clearly state what is

required of the contractor.

A specification should sequentially

delineate each course of action.

The Bad

Do not repeat statements in a specification.

State it only once. Even a slight change in
verbiage will give different meanings to the
intended meaning.

Do not use ambiguous statements such as

or equal. If or equal is used clearly state
what is equal.

The Ugly
Do not use long sentences. Short sentences are
more easily understood.

Use concise and accurate industry language.

mg/cm2 is not micrograms per square centimeter.

PPM does not convey the correct information

regarding contamination on a surface.

Specification Language
(answer these questions)
What
Where
When
How
How many

WHAT?
What salts need to be tested:
chlorides, sulfates and/or
nitrates

WHERE?
Where are the tests to be taken:
in corroded areas, at welds, on
the floor, on the ceiling, on the
sidewalls etc.

WHEN?
When are tests to be taken:
before and/or after surface
preparation, after a storm recontaminates the surface etc.

WHY?
Test because the specification
requires a maximum acceptable
level be achieved prior to
coating application

HOW MANY?
Test per specified frequency:
(5 tests per 1000 sq ft. or part
thereof)

1.
2.
3.
4.

SALTS
IN
A
SPECIFICATION
Test before preparation (this is a baseline)
Wash before preparation if salts do not meet
specification (prevent possible impregnation)
Prepare surface
Test after preparation (this establishes if remediation is
required)

5.
6.

Remediate if necessary
Retest to establish if specification is met

Test Where?

Test at locations of corrosion

Test at locations of coating failure

Test at weld seams

Exactly Where Do I Test?

On metal loss areas- 70% of total tests.
Next to welds (30%) (vertical and
horizontal).
If no metal loss areas are visible, select
areas representative of the surface as a
whole.
Areas not washed by rainfall

When do I test?
Prior to surface preparation (this establishes a
starting base level)
After surface preparation but prior to coating
(this determines if further surface cleaning is
needed)
After decontamination (if salts meet the
required level, coating may progress).
Between coats if coating has become
contaminated.

How many tests do I take?

New Construction/Complete
Removal/Replacement
Five (5) tests for the first 1000 square feet
(1002 meters) or part thereof.
Two (2) tests per 1000 square feet for the
next 3000 square feet (3002 meters) or part
thereof.
One (1) test per 2000 square feet (200 2
meters) on the remainder or part thereof.

How Many Tests??? (Repair)

Ft2
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000

(m2)
(100)
(200)
(300)
(400)
(500)
(800)
(1,000)
(1,200)
(1,400)
(1,600)

Number
5
5+2=7
5+2+2=9
5+2+2+2=11
5+2+2+2+1=12
5+2+2+2+1+1=13
5+2+2+2+1+1+1=14
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1=15
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1+1=16
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1+1+1=17

REPAIR ATMOSPHERIC
Recommended Number and Distribution of Measurements: Spot
Repair for Used Surfaces

How Many Tests??? (Tanks)

Ft2 (m2)
Wall Measurements

Floor Measurements

Ceiling Measurements

1,000 (100)

2,000 (200)

5+2=7

5+2=7

5+2=7

3,000 (300)
5+2+2=9
5+2+2=9
4,000 (400)
5+2+2+2=11
6,000 (600)

5+2+2+2+1=12

5+2+2=9
5+2+2+2=11

5+2+2+2=11

5+2+2+2+1=12

5+2+2+2+1=12

8,000 (800)
5+2+2+2+1+1=13
5+2+2+2+1+1=13
5+2+2+2+1+1=13
10,000 (1,000)
5+2+2+2+1+1+1=14
5+2+2+2+1+1+1=14
5+2+2+2+1+1+1=14
12,000 (1,200)
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1=15
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1=15
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1=15
14,000 (1,400)
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1+1=16 5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1+1=16
5+2+2+2+1+1+1+1+1=16

Tank Linings
Recommended Number and Distribution of Measurements: New
and Old Surfaces

MAINTENANCE PAINTING
Atmospheric/Immersion

For the first five (5) spots one (1) test per one
(1) spot.

Remainder of structure - one (1) test per five

(5) spots.

Where, When, How Many and

Allowable Levels

ACCEPTABLE LEVELS
Immersion at Ambient Temperature
Chloride
Low Risk 0 to 3
Med Risk 3 to 8
High Risk >8

Nitrate
0 to 5
5 to 10
>10

Sulfate
0 to 10
10 to 20
>20

Atmospheric at Ambient
Temperature

Chloride Nitrate
Sulfate
Low Risk 0 to 7
0 to 10
0 to 15
Med Risk 7 to 15 10 to 20
15 to 30
High Risk >15
>20
>30

Uhlig and Revies

Corrosion & Corrosion
Control:
A poor paint system on a
properly prepared metal surface
usually outperforms a better paint
system on a poorly prepared
surface

1. A fast, cheap job is not good.

2. A cheap, good job is not fast.
3. A good, fast job is not cheap.

Summary of Key Points

Soluble salts are widespread

Salts cause coating failure
Levels of acceptance
Field methods for extraction
Field methods for analysis
Specification writing