Protective Coatings Validation

28
Protective Coatings Testing & Research Presentation

Transcript of Protective Coatings Validation

Page 1: Protective Coatings Validation

Protective Coatings Testing & Research

Presentation

Page 2: Protective Coatings Validation

Contents

Page 3. A&I Testing and Research Page 4. Experiment 1136 – Colour and Gloss Retention Page 5. Experiment 1136 - Photos after 1538 Hours Exposure Page 6. Experiment 1136 - Photos after 1976 Hours Exposure Page 7. Experiment 1136 - Colour and gloss Reading after 1976 Hours Exposure Page 8. Experiment 1136 - Photos after 2700 Hours Exposure Page 9. Experiment 1136 - Colour and gloss Reading after 2700 Hours Exposure Page 10. Experiment 1134 - Corrosion Resistance – Mild Steel Substrate Page 11. Experiment 1134 - Photos after 32 Hours Exposure Page 12. Experiment 1134 - Photos after 278 Hours Exposure Page 13. Experiment 1134 - Photos after 917 Hours Exposure Page 14. Experiment 1146 – Epoxy Zinc Rich Performance Page 15. Experiment 1146 - Photos after 1003 Hours Exposure Page 16. Experiment 1147 - Corrosion Resistance – HDG Substrate Page 17. Experiment 1147 - Photos after 381 Hours Exposure Page 18. Testing Validation and Quality Assurance Page 19 – 27. Past Projects

2

Page 3: Protective Coatings Validation

A&I Testing and Research

In order to demonstrate the suitability of a fluoropolymer coating system for iconic Australian architectural steelwork, A&I Coatings decided to test the Vitreflon fluoropolymer protective coating system alongside a market leading polyurethane system and a market leading polysiloxane system.

3

Page 4: Protective Coatings Validation

Experiment 1136

Experiment 1136 involves the use of a QUV accelerated weathering machine to test the colour and gloss retention of the three different coating technologies, fluoropolymer, polyurethane and polysiloxane in accordance with ISO 11507.

The testing details and regime are as follows: Type 1 lamps (UVB-313) and the cycle is 8 hours UV at 60 degrees C followed by 4 hours Condensation at 50 degrees C.

Please note that this test only tests the colour stability and gloss retention of the topcoats and doesn’t provide any corrosion resistance data.

The coating system on these samples is an etch primer to provide adhesion to the aluminium followed by the respective topcoats.

4

Page 5: Protective Coatings Validation

1538 Hours Exposure

5

Page 6: Protective Coatings Validation

1976 Hours Exposure

6

Page 7: Protective Coatings Validation

Colour and Gloss Readings

Vitreflon 700 Polyurethane Polysiloxane

Original Gloss @ 60 ̊ 72.5 67.9 69.1

Gloss after 1976 Hours Exposure

66.5 12.5 8.5

Gloss Retention as % 92% 18% 12%

Colour Variation - dE 2.95 5.94 5.25

Gloss and colour variation readings taken at 1976 hours exposure.

7

Page 8: Protective Coatings Validation

2700 Hours Exposure

8

Page 9: Protective Coatings Validation

Colour and Gloss Readings

Vitreflon 700 Polyurethane Polysiloxane

Original Gloss @ 60 ̊ 72.5 67.9 69.1

Gloss after 2700 Hours Exposure

44.1 2.2 1.9

Gloss Retention as % 61% 3% 3%

Colour Variation - dE 5.87 18.71 11.64

Gloss and colour variation readings taken at 2700 hours exposure.

9

Page 10: Protective Coatings Validation

Experiment 1134

Experiment 1134 involves the use of a salt spray chamber to test the corrosion resistance of the three different coating technologies, fluoropolymer, polyurethane and polysiloxane in accordance with AS 2331.3.1.

The testing details and regime are as follows: Samples in the salt spray chamber are exposed constantly to salt fog which is 5% salt by weight in water. The chamber is maintained at a temperature of 35 ̊c.

10

Page 11: Protective Coatings Validation

32 hours Exposure

From the below photos it can be seen that at 32 hours exposure the Fluoropolymer coating system was the last to rust at the scribe .

1st coat V586 Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd coat V416 Epoxy MIOX – 225um 3rd coat V700 Fluoropolymer Topcoat – 50um

1st coat Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd coat Epoxy MIOX – 200um 3rd coat Polyurethane Topcoat – 75um (competitor products)

1st coat Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd coat Epoxy MIOX – 175um 3rd coat Polysiloxane Topcoat - 100 (competitor products)

11

Page 12: Protective Coatings Validation

278 Hours Exposure

At 278 hours exposure it appears the Vitreflon 700 coating system is the slowest to blister/show rust creep at the scribe.

1st coat V586 Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd coat V416 Epoxy MIOX – 225um 3rd coat V700 Fluoropolymer Topcoat – 50um

1st coat Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd coat Epoxy MIOX – 200um 3rd coat Polyurethane Topcoat – 75um (competitor products)

1st coat Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd coat Epoxy MIOX – 175um 3rd coat Polysiloxane Topcoat - 100 (competitor products)

12

Page 13: Protective Coatings Validation

917 Hours Exposure

At 917 hours exposure it appears the Vitreflon 700 coating system still remains the slowest to blister/show rust creep at the scribe.

Vitreflon 700 Polyurethane Polysiloxane

13

Page 14: Protective Coatings Validation

Experiment 1146

Experiment 1146 involves the use of a salt spray chamber to test the corrosion resistance of Vitrezinc 586 Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer in comparison with two market leading alternatives in accordance with AS 2331.3.1 The testing details and regime are as follows: Samples in the salt spray chamber are exposed constantly to salt fog which is 5% salt by weight in water. The chamber is maintained at a temperature of 35 ̊c. The DFT aimed for in this test was 75 microns for all three primers.

14

Page 15: Protective Coatings Validation

1003 Hours Exposure

At 1003 hours exposure the Vitrezinc 586 Zinc Rich Epoxy Primer remains the slowest to blister or show rust creep.

15

Page 16: Protective Coatings Validation

Experiment 1147

Experiment 1147 involves the use of a salt spray cabinet to test the corrosion resistance of A&I Coatings Hot Dipped Galvanising duplex protective coating system in comparison with two market leading alternatives in accordance with AS 2331.3.1. At 381 hours exposure all coating systems appear to be performing similarly. The overall amount of corrosion appears to be very similar to the mild steel coating systems after the same exposure time. After the Hot Dipped Galvanising duplex coating system has been exposed for 917 hours they will be removed from the salt spray cabinet so that a direct comparison can be observed between the mild steel coating system performance and HDG coating systems. This length of exposure means we will see a result on the 3rd of February 2014.

16

Page 17: Protective Coatings Validation

381 Hours Exposure

Basecoat – Hot Dipped Galvanising - HDG 500 1st coat - V580 Zinc Phosphate Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd Coat - V416 Epoxy MIOX – 275um 3rd Coat - V700 Fluoropolymer Topcoat – 50um

Basecoat – Hot Dipped Galvanising - HDG 500 1st coat - Zinc Phosphate Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd Coat - Epoxy MIOX – 250um 3rd Coat – Polyurethane Topcoat – 75um (competitor products)

Basecoat – Hot Dipped Galvanising - HDG 500 1st coat - Zinc Phosphate Epoxy Primer – 75um 2nd Coat - Epoxy MIOX – 225um 3rd Coat – Polysiloxane Topcoat – 100um (competitor products)

17

Page 18: Protective Coatings Validation

Testing, Validation and Quality Assurance

Salt Spray Chamber – Corrosion Testing

QUV Chamber – Gloss and Colour Retention and UV Stability

18

Page 19: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

NAB Headquarters - Docklands

19

Page 20: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Picton Railway Station

20

Page 21: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Wahroongah Prep School

21

Page 22: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Liverpool Railway Station

22

Page 23: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Australian Institute of Sport - Canberra

23

Page 24: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Macquarie University

24

Page 25: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Royal North Shore Hospital

25

Page 26: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

Seaford Rail Corridor

26

Page 27: Protective Coatings Validation

Real Life Situations

M7 Roadside Barriers

27

Page 28: Protective Coatings Validation

Conclusion

We look forward to being of assistance with coating requirements on your project.

See more at www.aicoatings.com

28