Experimental Evaluation of Structural Steel Coating Systems
Publication: Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering
Volume 28, Issue 12
Abstract
Departments of transportation (DOTs) currently use the conventional three-coat system as the predominant choice for the corrosion protection of steel bridge structures. Eliminating one step in the coating process could potentially save time and cost associated with lane closures and traffic control costs. This research paper evaluates several two-coat systems based on the zinc-rich primer and polysiloxane topcoat technology. All samples were conditioned and coated in a state-of-the-art, climate-controlled paint booth, simulating common field ENvironmental CONditions (ENCON) (ENCON 1: 25 °C/50% RH, ENCON 2: 10 °C/40%RH, and ENCON 3: 32°C/80% RH). Accelerated weathering tests were performed on 435 coated samples (scribed and unscribed). Regardless of the ENCON considered, the performance of the two-coat system is very comparable to the three-coat system. This coating technology offers much improved performance with quicker set time and better adhesion pull-off strength. Considering its durability and ease of application, this two-coat system can be attractive to other public and private agencies to enhance and extend the service life of steel structures.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) for funding this effort. The authors are grateful to the University of Dayton Research Institute’s Coating Group and the US Air Force Coatings Technology Integration Office (CTIO), located at Wright-Patterson AFB. Specifically, to Mr. Clayton Baldwin and Mr. Terry Wills for their expertise in coating and testing all samples. Special thanks to all industrial representatives from PPG Industries Inc., International Protective Coating, Carboline Company and Sherwin-Williams for supplying all coating materials.
References
ASTM. (2008). “Standard test method for evaluation of painted or coated specimens subjected to corrosive environments.” ASTM D1654, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2009a). “Standard test method for evaluating degree of blistering of paints.” ASTM D714, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2009b). “Standard test method for pull-off strength of coatings using portable adhesion testers.” ASTM D4541-Type IV, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2011). “Standard practice for fluorescent UV-condensation exposures of paint and related coatings.” ASTM D4587, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2012). “Standard practice for evaluating degree of rusting on painted steel surfaces.” ASTM D610, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2013). “Standard practice for nondestructive measurement of dry film thickness of nonconductive coatings applied to ferrous metals and nonmagnetic, nonconductive coatings applied to nonferrous metals.” ASTM D7091, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2014a). “Standard test method for abrasion resistance of organic coatings by the Taber abraser.” ASTM D4060, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2014b). “Standard test method for chipping resistance of coatings.” ASTM D3170, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2014c). “Standard test method for specular gloss.” ASTM D523, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2014d). “Standard test methods for drying, curing, or film formation of organic coatings at room temperature.” ASTM D1640, West Conshohocken, PA.
ASTM. (2015). “Standard practice for testing water resistance of coatings using water immersion.” ASTM D870, West Conshohocken, PA.
Chang, L., and Lee, Y. (2002). “Evaluation of performance of bridge deck expansion joints.” J. Perform. Constr. Facil., 16(1), 3–9.
Chang, L. M., and Georgy, M. (1999). “Warranty clauses for INDOT steel bridge paint contracts.”, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN.
Fultz, B., Corbett, W. D., and Best, K. (2011). “Time is money: Improving shop & field painting throughput by reducing finish coat handling time.” J. Prot. Coat. Linings, 28(11), 34.
General Motors World Wide Standards. (2013). “Cyclic corrosion laboratory test.”, Detroit.
Ghorbanpoor, A., Tabatabai, H., and Leppi, Z. (2013). “Aesthetic coating for steel bridge components.”, Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation, WI.
Image J version 1.49 [Computer software]. National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Keijman, J. M., and Kennedylaan, J. F. (2000). “Properties and use of inorganic polysiloxane hybrid coatings for the protective coatings industry.” 2 Journeys of J. Corrosão e Protecção de Materiais, in press.
McMillan, C. (2011). “Red means go, polysiloxane technology on the Roosevelt Island bridge.”, Las Vegas.
MINITAB version 17 [Computer software]. Minitab Inc., State College, PA.
Mowrer, N. R. (2003). “Polysiloxane coatings innovations.” Brea: Ameron International Performance Coatings and Finishes Group, Brea, CA.
Myers, J., Washer, G., and Zhang, W. (2010). “Structural steel coatings for corrosion mitigation.”, Missouri Dept. of Transportation, MO.
PPG Industries. (2010). “Comparing PPG polysiloxane coatings and traditional coating systems.” 〈http://www.cgedwards.com/ameron/PSX%20700SG%20Whitepaper%20Final.pdf〉 (Jun. 2011).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering
Volume 28 • Issue 12 • December 2016
Copyright
© 2016 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Jan 15, 2016
Accepted: Apr 18, 2016
Published online: Jul 1, 2016
Published in print: Dec 1, 2016
Discussion open until: Dec 1, 2016
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.