PaintSquare : Publications : Corrosion and durability testing: changes in the air

Corrosion and durability testing: changes in the air ( Download PDF version)
by Allen Zielnik
Journal of Architectural Coatings January 2005 Vol. 4, No. 1: 26-27 Durability
Passing the Test - Durability: Corrosion and durability testing:
changes in the air
Advances in methods offer greater
In This Article
real-world correlation Passing the
Conflicting reports on varying standards
test Allen Zielnik
Current testing approaches

Congratulations! Your design has

Multiple tests are the key to more accurate
been selected by The Donald for his data
newest luxury high-rise building. As
one would expect, the timeline on the Conclusioncyclic methods may offer best
correlation
project will be intense and your new
customer expects that the materials specified for the project will not only bring your
dramatic vision to life, but will also maintain its structural integrity for the next 100
years.
In essence, your task is no different than it has been on countless other occasions.
You will be concerned with the aesthetic aspects of color and appearance, as well as
the protective ability of the coatings to guard both structural and decorative elements.
The coatings sales reps line up outside your door, all armed with a wide range of test
data to show their products are the best, and the amount of data available is
staggering. So, how do you sort out the claims to make the right choice? Is there a
specific, standard testing methodology that is reliable for your needs? What,
specifically, do you need to know about corrosion test methods to make the right
decision?
The quick answer to these questions is that there are numerous standards currently in
place with no universal agreement on which produce the most accurate results.
Further, many of the current testing standards that have been used to validate
performance of materials do not necessarily produce reliable results. This is creating a
challenge for the coatings industry, especially as manufacturers are forced to address
new environmental regulations that change the way products are made and, thus,
make historical track records of their products less reliable.
The following are two approaches to testing, however, that are gaining popularity in
the coatings industry because they have been proven to greatly increase the
probability of accuracy in predicting real-world application performance.
1. Samples must be exposed to intensive testing which replicate myriad
combinations of stresses on materials, particularly those that occur during
the transitions between relatively steady state conditions (e.g., from wet to
dry and back again).
2. An increasing array of innovative new testing equipment is being utilized to
set the benchmark on how materials react to a wide range of stress
variables, leading exponentially to more reliable test data.
To put these two approaches into perspective, it is important to review the paradox
surrounding varying testing standards, to evaluate current testing approaches, and to
explain why innovations in cyclic corrosion testing (CCT) testing are producing better
results.
This column will examine some important issues related to test methods for
anticorrosion performance. Future columns will address coatings durability and
appearance issues as well.
Conflicting reports on varying standards
http://www.paintsquare.com/library/article_download.cfm?articleid=3313&pub=4 (1 of 4) [11/01/2011 09:32:29 a.m.]

PaintSquare : Publications : Corrosion and durability testing: changes in the air

Coatings manufacturers can no

longer rely on the long-term
track records of their products
to convince customers of their
performance because many
traditional products are being
phased out due to VOC, heavymetal, and other environmental
regulations. New formulations
are being introduced at such a
rapid pace that the emphasis
has shifted to highly accelerated
laboratory testing of these new
coating materials.
A large number of performance- Advanced cyclic corrosion cabinets such as
based specifications and test
the model pictured are commonly used to
methods have been developed
evaluate the performance of decorative and
by recognized standards
protective architectural coatings applied to test
organizations such as ASTM
panels or parts such as door and window
International, the International
profiles.
Standards Organization, NACE Photos courtesy of Atlas Material Testing
International, and various
governmental, trade, and other organizations around the world. But at present, no
specification or test standard is universally recognized or accepted.
There are, in fact, considerable differences of opinion on coatings test methodologies.
The key to successful laboratory testing is to predict, or correlate with, some real-world
outdoor performance and provide assurance of expected service life. But, just as there
is no one outdoor environment, there is also no one universal test that will accurately
predict performance and service lifetime for all types of decorative and protective
coatings.
Current testing approaches
Can historical laboratory corrosion tests serve as a guide? For decades, coatings
manufacturers have routinely provided corrosion test results showing performance vs.
hours of test exposure to a salt fog. The most commonly referenced of such methods
is the ASTM B117 test, in which coated metal test panels, usually scribed to provide a
defect, are suspended in a sealed chamber and continuously subjected to a neutral
5% sodium chloride salt solution which is atomized at a temperature of 95 F (35 C).
The history of this test dates back to 1914, and the test was codified as B117 in 1939
when coatings were very different.
The B117 test may be somewhat useful for a marine environment, but historically it
has shown little and sometimes even reverse correlation to actual coatings
performance in other applications such as architectural uses. The standard provides
no pass/fail criteria, and exposure times can range from 24 to 6,000 hours or more.
The fact that several different coatings can all pass a 500-hour (or other length) test
provides no guidance to the customer about actual long-term performance.
There are other variations of this continuous fog type of test, some with modified
solutions containing acids, copper, or other salts, to try to improve correlation with
performance, but all have limitations. A guiding principal of modern laboratory
accelerated testing is to try to simulate the conditions of the in-service environment as
closely as possible.
One reason that these historical tests dont seem to work well is that they do not
capture the stresses caused by cycles of the outdoor environment (hot/cold, wet/dry,
sunlight/dark, etc.). We have come to understand that it is during these transitions that
coatings are most stressed and when the degradation principally occurs, not during
the steady-state conditions, harsh though they may be.

http://www.paintsquare.com/library/article_download.cfm?articleid=3313&pub=4 (2 of 4) [11/01/2011 09:32:29 a.m.]

PaintSquare : Publications : Corrosion and durability testing: changes in the air

Multiple tests are the key to more accurate data

Accelerated cyclic corrosion
testing, or CCT, is fast becoming
the norm for evaluating the anticorrosion properties of
protective coatings. This
innovative approach to
accelerated testing exposes
materials to numerous variables
that can cause stress on
coatings.

Salt-fog testing, pictured here, provides a

highly corrosive environment to accelerate
performance evaluations of coatings. Experts
generally agree that test systems alternating
between wet and dry cycles at elevated
temperatures provide the best correlation to
"real-world" conditions.

In particular, CCT can be

programmed to emphasize
stresses that typically occur in
transitional periods such as
exposure to wetting and drying
and rewetting, temperature
ramps and cycles, freeze and
thaw, night and daytransitional
periods that are critical
components of the corrosion
process.

These tests were largely

pioneered by the automotive
industry, which essentially makes small buildings that move. The U.S. Federal
Highway Administration has also compared CCT testing to parallel outdoor exposure
testing on bridge coatings. Previously, tests were conducted in accordance with
traditional B117 salt-fog methodologies, but the new practice of using CCT in place of
B117 has shown much better correlation to the outdoor results and generated a vast
improvement in predictive accelerated test results for the industry.
The success that CCT has demonstrated in these industries is one of the reasons why
it is now being adopted more frequently in the architectural protective-coatings
industry as well.
There are quite a few, slightly differing CCT methods, but most normally include a saltfog period, a dry or freeze period, and with some a UV and moisture-condensation
period; examples can be found in the ASTM G85 Annex document. Some methods
also incorporate gas injection, such as sulfur dioxide, and acid-rain sprays.
The best CCT devices on the market incorporate the following three mechanisms: 1)
advanced cycle options for immersion, variable-controlled humidity, gas injection, and
temperature cycling from below freezing to near 100 C; 2) solution sprays to provide
direct impingement of samples with various electrolytes, such as to simulate acid rain;
and 3) the ability to automatically switch from salt fog to dry-off or controlled
temperature with humidity from ambient to saturated RH.
The adoption of these new testing methods for architectural coatings, particularly by
smaller coatings producers, has been slower to occur than might be expected. This
most likely is due to the fact that many manufacturers are not aware that such data
can be made available to them. Another reason may be that it takes anywhere
between two weeks and 10 months or more to complete a full cycle of testing on
protective coatings, and the coatings supplier has not yet finished or committed their
line to this procedure.
Conclusioncyclic methods may offer best correlation
Since no single test can be absolutely predictive for all coating types and service
environments, you may want to consider evaluating coatings based on the results of
several different test methods and make sure that there is strong emphasis placed on
durability during short-term (diurnal) and long-term (seasonal) stress transitions.

http://www.paintsquare.com/library/article_download.cfm?articleid=3313&pub=4 (3 of 4) [11/01/2011 09:32:29 a.m.]

PaintSquare : Publications : Corrosion and durability testing: changes in the air

Time permitting, you may want to insist that CCT procedures are used before you
make a decision. Perhaps a collaborative effort between you and your coatings vendor
will help move the process of CCT along in the industry, leading to a wide range of
products that are proven winners in the field.
By doing so, the vision of your design will ultimately be manifested by a good
architectural-coating selection that will stand the test of time.JAC
This is the first in a series of columns on assessing the durability of coatings by Allen
Zielnik, Atlas Material Testing Technologies L.L.C.
Journal of Architectural Coatings 2005 Technology Publishing Company

http://www.paintsquare.com/library/article_download.cfm?articleid=3313&pub=4 (4 of 4) [11/01/2011 09:32:29 a.m.]