CED working day April 28th 2021 – ‘Managing Corrosion in Low-Carbon Energy Technologies’,

CED working day April 28th 2021 – ‘Managing Corrosion in Low-Carbon Energy Technologies’,

CED working day April 28th 2021: Managing Corrosion in Low-Carbon Energy Technologies.

The Corrosion Engineering Division will be holding its Spring Working Day on April 28th 2020. If the Covid-19 situation allows it, the meeting will be held at the York National Railway Museum, otherwise the meeting will be held on-line, as it was in 2020. The theme of the meeting will be ‘Managing Corrosion in Low-Carbon Energy Technologies’, which will include, for example, heat pumps, solar power, wind turbines, hydro power, hydrogen fuel, fuel cells, nuclear, and carbon capture and storage technologies.

Invitation for presentations

The organisers would like to invite speakers to apply to give a presentation during the day. If you are interested, please send your contact details, a title and a brief summary of your proposed talk to the CED chair, Nick Smart at nick.smart@jacobs.com. The event will also include meetings of the CED working groups; for more information about these, see https://www.icorr.org/technical-divisions-ced-csd-2/.

Working group agendas

The working group agendas have just been released, click on the links below to download them:

CED Agenda Coatings Working Group 2021

CED Agenda Renewables General Discussion 2021

CED Agenda CP Working Group

CED Agenda Oil and Gas Working Group

CED Agenda Corrosion Concrete Working Group

CED Agenda Nuclear Working Group

Letter to the Editor

Sir,

I would like to draw the readers’ attention to the ‘Review of the cathodic disbondment resistance of pipeline coatings’ on page 14 of the September/October issue, in which it is claimed that ‘the main cause of coating degradation on pipelines with CP is cathodic disbondment’.

There are many papers from established pipeline experts that roundly dispute this. Correctly deigned and applied pipeline coatings do not fail when there is a properly designed and operated CP system. For example, the paper presented at the 2007 NACE Corrosion Expo from David Norman and Colin Argent, both well-known and respected pipeline specialists, who described and defined the failure modes for pipe and field joint coatings. There are many more.

I appreciate that, for example FBE coatings can blister in service; perhaps the world expert in FBE who wrote the book on same (ISBN-13 : 978-1575901480), Alan Kehr, presented clear data in his book and in subsequent work, that such blisters are not significant and do not lead to corrosion if CP is properly operated. They are largely caused by water intake. 3LPE and 3LPP coatings are so high in dielectric strength that cathodic disbondment is inconceivable except, possibly, at coating damage down to steel. Also, Section 9 of Macaw’s Encyclopaedia of Pipeline Defects lists some 40 causes of pipe coating failures, cathodic disbondment is not one of them.

Brian Wyatt, Corrosion Control Ltd.

AGM

AGM

The Annual General Meeting of the Institute of Corrosion, was held virtually on 19th November 2020. This was preceded by presentations from the 2020 recipients of the Institute’s premier awards, Prof. Carmen Andrade (Paul McIntyre Award) and Prof. Robert Cottis (U.R. Evans Award).

Bob Cottis gave a talk about hydrogen induced cracking in high strength steels, which was recorded and will be available in the Members area of the website. Due to a technical glitch Carmen Andrade’s talk was not recorded, but a version was previously published in the July/August 2020 issue of Corrosion Management.

In his last speech as President, Gareth Hinds reported on the many events that had happened during his 2 years as ICorr President, including the opening of the Institute’s new home in St Peter’s Gardens, the new branding of the Institute’s logo, and the development of new courses to expand the knowledge of corrosion. The challenges of COVID-19 have resulted in many events being held on line and this has allowed people to attend workshops, seminars and the AGM from all around the world. Gareth thanked all the people who had helped him to make his Presidency run smoothly, especially the Trustees, Office staff and Council members.

The Honorary Treasurer, Tony Collins reported that the Institute was in good financial shape, despite the difficulties of running courses in the current climate. Gareth thanked Tony for his ongoing excellent management of the Institute’s finances.

A list of proposed Trustees and Council members was presented to the AGM attendees. The majority of people had agreed to continue in their current (voluntary) posts, with the President Gareth Hinds becoming the new Immediate Past President; the Vice President Bill Hedges becoming President and Stephen Tate becoming the new Vice President.

Bill Hedges

Bill Hedges

Stephen Tate

Stephen Tate

Sarah Vasey, who was the previous Immediate Past President has been co-opted onto Council and it was proposed to include the Chair of Correx, which is occupied by an ICorr member in an unpaid capacity. The nominees were unanimously accepted by the ICorr members present. A full list of the Trustees and Council members can be found at, https://www.icorr.org/icorr-structure/

The Articles and Memorandum of Association of the Institute had been thoroughly reviewed, modernised and brought into line with current ICorr practice. These had been available for viewing on the ICorr website prior to the AGM. The revised versions were unanimously accepted by the AGM attendees.

The final item of business was the awarding of an Honorary Life Fellowship of the Institute to Trevor Osborne for his outstanding contribution to ICorr. In addition to his other work for ICorr, Trevor had personally organised and supervised the refurbishment of Corrosion House, without any remuneration and the Trustees and Council wanted to acknowledge his altruistic work.

How Is a Coating Condition Survey Conducted?

How Is a Coating Condition Survey Conducted?

The eight-step coating survey methodology

Is a full coating condition survey necessary before applying a coating system? Isn’t understanding the environmental issues and operating in line with ISO 12944 enough?

In a short answer to these questions, imagine that your car is making strange noises from under the bonnet. You take it to two mechanics.

The first opens the bonnet, looks inside, taps the engine in a couple of places with a hammer, and then diagnoses the problem.

The second mechanic opens the bonnet, connects an electronic diagnostic machine, and invites you to have a tea while you’re waiting. Having received a computer printout, the mechanic then raises the car so he can look underneath. He makes a couple of phone calls, before presenting you with a detailed appraisal of the issue you have.

The question is this: which mechanic do you believe will provide the best, safest, longest-lasting, and most cost-effective solution? The one who carried out the most extensive and structured assessment, right?

In this article, we examine how an effective coating survey should be conducted to provide the knowledge needed to ensure the correct coating system is applied most cost-effectively.

When is a coating survey used?

A coating condition survey (or ‘coating survey’) should be used as a proactive measure in the protection of any previously coated structure. For example, this may include surveying coatings in the offshore environment or on bridges that are at risk of corrosion. Such proactive surveying will help to reduce maintenance costs, increase the integrity of infrastructure, and improve safety. A win/win/win.

Steps for successful surveying of coatings

To be effective, a coating survey must be designed, carried out in line with planning, recorded and reported. It’s essential to conduct coating surveys using a methodical and structured approach. This ensures that each survey benefits from the same rigorous standards. The following eight steps form the core of a coating condition survey.

1.     Planning the coating survey – what is needed?

It’s important to define the parameters of the survey before it is started. The information that is needed may depend upon factors such as:

  • Age of the asset
  • Time since the last coating survey
  • The value of the asset
  • When routine maintenance is due
  • If a new coating system will add value to the asset
  • Health and safety issues

2.     Planning the coating survey – what is the expected output of the survey?

The detail required of the survey should also be assessed. It is possible to produce a survey in too much detail. For example, consider an example of surveying the condition of a front door. Should you survey it as a single item, or assess each element separately? If the latter, then a survey will include each hinge, the letter box, the door knocker, each pane of glass, the inside and outside handles, the inserts, the frame, and the lock mechanism. One item becomes a survey of a dozen or more items.

If a survey is too detailed, it risks information overload and crucial details could be overlooked upon review. If not detailed enough, the survey may miss crucial details altogether.

3.     Planning the coating survey – how do you grade conditions?

The survey should carry out its assessment with a recognised and consistent grading system that establishes the severity of degradation of each component under the survey. The standards to which the assessment of coating/corrosion degrading must conform to are ISO 4624 parts 2-7 and the European Scale of Rusting for Anticorrosive Paint (commonly referred to as the Re Scale).

4.     Conducting the coating survey – note physical details

The survey should consider all the corrosive environmental issues that may affect the coating’s current condition. The location of the structure and the environmental factors associated with the location will affect how a coating performs. Factors include climate, moisture, and UV exposure.

5.     Conducting the coating survey – the original application

To better understand how the original coating has been affected by physical details, the survey should include key information about the original coating such as the date of application, the coating manufacturer, the applicator, and so on.

6.     Conducting the coating survey – note extraordinary events and occurrences

Over time, a structure’s coating may be affected by many events. These may include severe weather conditions, accidents, fire, maintenance, repairs, and refurbishment. The more detail that can be compiled within this section of the survey, the more informed the survey’s results will be.

7.     Conducting the coating survey – assessing the coating

The survey should move onto assessing the existing coating, considering adherence to the structure, dry film thickness, the percentage of failure across the system and its component parts, and the presence of aspects such as mill scale, chalking, pitting, etc.

8.     Recording and reporting – planning the next steps

The survey should record all details required of it, as set out in the planning steps. The survey should make recommendations as to:

  • Whether immediate maintenance is required
  • What maintenance should be planned for the next one to three years
  • The locations that are difficult to reach and which may require extra measures
  • Whether coating of an area may lead to the need for adjacent areas to be recoated

Answering these points will form the basis of a full coating maintenance programme that is designed to ensure asset integrity during the expected lifetime of the asset.

In Summary

A coating condition survey should form part of the routine maintenance checks for all structures on which protective coatings are used to combat corrosion. The survey should assess all components of the structure that have been identified as required to be surveyed, and assessment should be conducted in a manner that ensures consistency and completeness.

By following a consistent survey methodology, the survey should establish the current state of the existing coating, and the reasons for any degradation.

By monitoring the performance of a structure’s coating, an asset owner can understand the action needed to reduce the effects and consequences of corrosion. To ensure this, it is imperative that surveys are carried out by those with the training, experience, and qualifications to do so.

In our next article, we examine a world first that will define the coating survey professional and how industry carries out coating condition surveys in the future. In the meantime, to find out more about the Coating Survey Course, email the Institute of Corrosion or contact Corrodere.

From the Editor

From the Editor

Well another year nearly over, and what an eventful year it has been. The pandemic has seen major challenges for our industry, and for the Institute with the move to online meetings. However, we have managed to keep the magazine being printed, unlike other publications which have had to move to online versions.

This issue contains four technical articles covering different areas, as well as the now regular, “Ask the Expert” and “Fellow’s Corner” columns, and can I remind readers to send in their technical questions for our experts to answer. There is an article describing the advantages of a new class of probes for corrosion inspection, and Simon Daly has an update on the work being carried out to harmonise specifications in the Oil & Gas industry. The other articles cover corrosion control in storage tanks and corrosion assessment techniques for reinforced concrete structures.

Finally, I would like to offer my good wishes for the festive season to all readers.

Brian Goldie, Consulting Editor