Energy Report Ballast Tank Coating Test of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 on MUKI Z Jotun AS

Transcription

1 Energy Report Ballast Tank Coating Test of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 on MUKI Z 2001 Jotun AS DNV Reg. No. / Report No. 128OB65-7 / Rev. No. 00,

2

3 Report for Jotun A/S Table of Contents 1 INTRODUCTION SCOPE OF WORK WORK CARRIED OUT PRIOR TO EXPOSURE Primary surface preparation Application Application procedure Panel coding Dry film thickness Pinhole detection EXPOSURE PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS AND TESTS CARRIED OUT AFTER EXPOSURE EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS CONCLUSION REFERENCES Appendix A Meteorological data of weathering period Appendix B Infrared spectra Appendix C Detailed test results Appendix D Photo documentation Page ii of ii

4 1 INTRODUCTION The coating system, JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80, applied to steel panels shop primed with Muki Z 2001 has been tested in accordance with the IMO Performance Standard for Protective Coatings /1/. 2 SCOPE OF WORK The following work and tests have been performed by JOTUN AS at the JOTUN AS test laboratory in Sandefjord, Norway, partly under supervision of a representative from DNV: Surface preparations as described in Table 1 and 2 Application processes as documented in Table 3 Two months outdoor weathering of the shop primed test panels The following work and tests have been performed by DNV at the DNV Energy laboratory in Bergen, Norway: Identification of the coating system by means of determination of density and infrared (IR) spectra Total dry film thickness measurements and pinhole detection on the test panels before testing 180 days exposure in an exposure tank with wave movement (confer Figure 1 for details) 180 days in dry heat (confer Figure 1 for details) 180 days in condensation chamber (confer Figure 1 for details) Evaluation of testing performed after exposure, including visual check for rust and blisters, undercutting from scribe, adhesion measurements and coating flexibility Evaluation of cathodic protection during wave tank exposure 3 WORK CARRIED OUT PRIOR TO EXPOSURE 3.1 Primary surface preparation The primary surface preparation was carried out as described in Table 1. Table 1 Primary surface preparation data* Surface preparation date November 2008 Surface preparation method Blast cleaning with Alsil. A3 Blasting standard Sa 2½ Roughness Rmax: microns Water soluble salts Standard used: ISO 8502: The Bresle Method, measured 15 mg/m 2 Dust and abrasive inclusions No dust or abrasive contaminations were observed on the surface * Data given by Jotun AS Page 1 of 10

5 3.2 Application Application procedure MUKI Z 2001 was applied to the test panels according to the application data given in Table 3. The shop primed test panels were weathered outdoors for two months. Details on the weathering process and followed cleaning of the test panels is provided in Table 2, while further meteorological data of the weathering period is attached as Appendix A. Table 2 Secondary surface preparation and weathering details Weathering site (outdoor) At the JOTUN AS site in Sandefjord, Norway Start of weathering Stop of weathering Preparation of test panel after the weathering period Washed with fresh water. 12 mg/m 2 water soluble salts measured One coat of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (Al/Bronze) and one coat of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (Al) were applied to the weathered and cleaned shop primed test panels. The complete application data are given in Table 3. Page 2 of 10

6 Table 3 Application data Coating data Shop primer 1 st coat 2 nd coat Paint system Manufacturer MUKI Z 2001 JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 Grey Al/Bronze Al JOTUN AS Date Time 13:35 09:30 15:10 Batch no. Liquid / Comp A: P Base / Comp A: Lab made Base / Comp A: Lab made Batch no. Paste / Comp B : P Hardener / Comp B : Lab made Hardener / Comp B : Lab made Thinner name (if used) NA Jotun no. 17 Jotun no. 17 Batch no. thinner NA NA NA Method of application Airless spray Airless spray Airless spray Equipment used (pressure ratio) WIWA (60:1) WIWA (60:1) WIWA (60:1) Air pressure at nozzle [bar] Size nozzle [inch] Fan width [º] Mix. ratio [weight%] A:B = 40:60 A:B = 100:20 A:B = 100:20 Volume solids [%] Wet film thickness [µm] Dry film thickness [µm] 20 Average ca 160 Confer Table 4 Thinner [volume%] Air temperature [ºC] Humidity [% RH] Steel temp. [ºC] Dew point [ºC] Comments: Present during the application of shop primer: Terje Aamodt, Reidar J. Pettersen, Cecilie Clasen, Odd Arntzen and Phuoc van Hoang Jotun AS. Nedim Kaniza, Bodycote. Present during the application of 1 st and 2 nd coat: Reidar J. Pettersen, Cecilie Clasen, Odd Arntzen and Terje Aamodt Jotun AS. Vidar Kvamme Det Norske Veritas. Page 3 of 10

7 3.2.2 Panel coding The panels were coded with the unique DNV system name J24Z followed by a suffix specific for every panel s position during the six-month exposure testing as shown in Figure 1. Condensation chamber (size: 150x150 mm) Reference (size: 150x150 mm) C1 C2 R1 Wave tank (size: 400x200 mm) W1 top W2 bottom W3 side (cooled) W4 side (not cooled) scribe anode scribe scribe artificial holiday U-beam U-beam H Heating cabinet (size: 400x200 mm) Figure 1 Panel coding Page 4 of 10

8 3.2.3 Dry film thickness The dry film thickness (DFT) measurements of the total coat were carried out by means of a calibrated PosiTector 6000 using the template shown in Figure 2. Table 4 shows the results from the measurements of the total dry film thickness. Panel coding on the reverse side Panel coding on the reverse side Figure 2 DFT measurements locations Page 5 of 10

9 Table 4 Results from the DFT measurements of the total coat, values are given in µm (20 µm subtracted for shop primer) Measuring point Panel (according to Figure 2) W1 W2 W3 W4 H C1 C2 R1 Total Max Min Average StDev Page 6 of 10

10 3.3 Pinhole detection Pinhole detection was performed on the coated test panel before the tank exposure. The detection was carried out by means of an Elcometer 269 Pinhole detector at 90 volts. The results from the pinhole detection are presented in Table 6. 4 EXPOSURE The exposure in the simulated ballast wave, condensation chamber and heating cabinet was carried out according to the IMO Performance Standard for Protective Coatings /1/. The exposure was started and terminated PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION The density of each component of the coating system as described in Table 3 was determined by means of an Erichsen Mod. 290/1 pyknometer based on ISO /5/. Furthermore, IR spectra of all components were recorded on a Nicolet Protégé 460 FT-IR spectrometer. The results from the paint identification are listed in Table 5 and Appendix B respectively. Table 5 Product identification analysis Product Batch no. Density [g/ml] Infrared identification MUKI Z 2001 (Paste / Comp B) MUKI Z 2001 (Liquid / Comp A) JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80, Al/Bronze (Base / Comp A) JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80, Al/Bronze (Hardener / Comp B) JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80, Al (Base / Comp A) P * Confer Appendix B, Figure B1 FR ** 2.06** NA P Confer Appendix B, Figure B2 Lab made Confer Appendix B, Figure B3 Lab made Confer Appendix B, Figure B4 Lab made NA*** Confer Appendix B, Figure B5 Lab made ** 1.62** NA JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80, Al (Hardener / Comp B) Lab made Confer Appendix B, Figure B6 * Sample of MUKI Z 2001, batch P , provided DNV by Jotun AS. This sample was found not proper, due to low viscosity. Density of this product was measured by Jotun AS, and stated to be 2.07 g/ml. ** Sample provided by Jotun AS, analysis performed by DNV. *** Jotun AS did not provide DNV with enough paint to perform density analysis. Page 7 of 10

11 6 EXAMINATIONS AND TESTS CARRIED OUT AFTER EXPOSURE The visual inspection for blisters and rust as well as the adhesion testing were carried out according to specifications and standards referred to in the IMO Performance Standard for Protective Coatings /1/. In addition, the evaluation of cathodic protection was performed in accordance with ISO 15711:2003 /5/, ASTM G8:1996 /6/ and further IACS Rec. No. 101 /7/, interpretation details are given in the present report. The results of the examinations are schematically given in Table 6 and more detailed in Appendix C. Pictures of the panels after exposure as well as pictures of the adhesion tests are enclosed as Appendix D. Page 8 of 10

12 7 EVALUATION OF TEST RESULTS The test results have been evaluated in accordance with the requirements for epoxy-based systems on shop primed and two-month weathered steel substrate stated in the Performance Standard for Protective Coatings /1/. The results from this evaluation are presented in Table 6. Table 6 Results from evaluation of the coated test samples Test parameter Acceptance criteria /1/ Test results Evaluation Blisters on panel 1) No blisters No blisters Passed Rust on panel 1) No rust No rust Passed Number of pinholes 2) 0 0 Passed Adhesion values average wave tank panels [MPa] 3) > 3.5 adhesive failure cohesive failure Total adhesive: 0 % Total cohesive: 100 % Passed Adhesion values average > 3.5 adhesive failure 8.1 condensation chamber panels [MPa] 4) Passed 3 cohesive failure Total adhesive: 0 % Total cohesive: 100 % Current demand wave tank bottom panel [ma/m 2 ] 5) < Passed Cathodic disbondment wave tank bottom panel [mm] 5) < Passed Undercutting from scribes average maxima of wave tank panels [mm] 6) < Passed U-bar / U-beam 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Confer Appendix C, Table C1 for details Confer chapter 3.3 for details Confer Appendix C, Table C2 for details Confer Appendix C, Table C3 for details Confer Appendix C, Table C5 for details Confer Appendix C, Table C6 for details Any defects, cracking or detachment at the angle or weld will lead to system being failed. No defects, cracking or detachment Passed 8 CONCLUSION Based on the results and evaluations described in the present report, the coating system, one coat of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (Al/Bronze) and one coat of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (Al), applied to steel panels shop primed with MUKI Z 2001, all products by JOTUN AS, has passed the test requirements given in the IMO Performance Standard for Protective Coatings /1/. Page 9 of 10

13 9 REFERENCES /1/ IMO MSC.215(82):2006 Performance Standard for Protective Coatings for dedicated sea water ballast tanks in all types of ships and double-side skin spaces of bulk carriers (including all official standards referred to therein). /2/ ISO :1988 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products - Surface roughness characteristics of blast-cleaned steel substrates - Part 4: Method for the calibration of ISO surface profile comparators and for the determination of surface profile - Stylus instrument procedure. /3/ ISO :2006 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products Tests for the assessment of surface cleanliness Part 6: Extraction of soluble contaminants for analysis - The Bresle method. ISO :1998 Preparation of steel substrates before application of paints and related products Tests for the assessment of surface cleanliness Part 9: Field method for the conductometric determination of water-soluble salts. /4/ ISO :1997 Paint and varnishes - Determination of density Part 1: Pyknometer method. /5/ ISO :2002 Paints and varnishes - Determination of resistance to cathodic disbonding of coatings exposed to sea water. /6/ ASTM G8:1996 Standard test method for cathodic disbonding of pipeline coats /7/ IACS Rec. No. 101: 2008 Model Report for IMO Resolution MSC.215(82) Annex 1 Test Procedures for Coating Qualification. /8/ ISO :2003 Paint and varnishes - Evaluation of degradation of coatings - Designation of quantity and size of defects, and of intensity of uniform changes in appearance - Part 2: Assessment of degree of blistering. /9/ ISO :2003 Paint and varnishes - Evaluation of degradation of coatings - Designation of quantity and size of defects, and of intensity of uniform changes in appearance - Part 3: Assessment of degree of rusting. /10/ ISO :2005, (section 5.3.1) Paints and varnishes - Evaluation of degradation of coatings - Designation of intensity, quantity and size of common types of defects, and of intensity of uniform changes in appearance - Part 8: Assessment of degree of delamination and corrosion around a scribe. - o0o - Page 10 of 10

14 APPENDIX A METEOROLOGICAL DATA OF WEATHERING PERIOD Page A1 of A3

15 The weathering of the shop primed test panel was carried out at the JOTUN AS site in Sandefjord, Norway. The meteorological data was obtained from the Norwegian Meteorological Institute. Melsom is the name of the nearest weather station that records temperature. Melsom is located a few km from Sandefjord. Figure A1 Temperature variations [ºC] for January 2009 Figure A2 Daily precipitation [mm] for January 2009 Page A2 of A3

16 Figure A3 Temperature variations [ºC] for February 2009 Figure A4 Daily precipitation [mm] for February o0o - Page A3 of A3

17 APPENDIX B INFRARED SPECTRA Page B1 of B4

18 0,271 0,26 0,25 0,24 0,23 0,22 0,21 0,20 0,19 0,18 0,17 0,16 0,15 0,14 ARBITRARY 0,13 0,12 0,11 0,10 0,09 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,05 0,04 0,03 0,02 0,01 0, , ,9 1/cm Figure B1 IR spectra of MUKI Z 2001 (binder phase of paste), batch no. P ,611 0,60 0,58 0,56 0,54 0,52 0,50 0,48 0,46 0,44 0,42 0,40 0,38 0,36 0,34 0,32 ARBITRARY 0,30 0,28 0,26 0,24 0,22 0,20 0,18 0,16 0,14 0,12 0,10 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0, , ,9 1/cm Figure B2 IR spectra of MUKI Z 2001 (liquid), batch no. P Page B2 of B4

19 0,372 0,36 0,34 0,32 0,30 0,28 0,26 0,24 0,22 0,20 ARBITRARY 0,18 0,16 0,14 0,12 0,10 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0,000 Figure B3 0, , ,9 1/cm 0,17 IR spectra of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (binder phase of base, Al/Bronze), batch no.: Lab made ,16 0,15 0,14 0,13 0,12 0,11 0,10 0,09 ARBITRARY 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,05 0,04 0,03 0,02 0,01 Figure B4 0, , ,9 1/cm IR spectra of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (hardener, Al/Bronze), batch no.: Lab made Page B3 of B4

20 0,359 0,34 0,32 0,30 0,28 0,26 0,24 0,22 0,20 ARBITRARY 0,18 0,16 0,14 0,12 0,10 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0,000 Figure B5 0, , ,9 1/cm 0,17 IR spectra of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (binder phase of base, Al), batch no.: Lab made ,16 0,15 0,14 0,13 0,12 0,11 0,10 0,09 ARBITRARY 0,08 0,07 0,06 0,05 0,04 0,03 0,02 0,01 Figure B6 0, , ,9 1/cm IR spectra of JOTACOTE UNIVERSAL 80 (hardener, Al), batch no.: Lab made Page B4 of B4

21 APPENDIX C DETAILED TEST RESULTS Page C1 of C6

22 Table C1 Development of blisters and rust after exposure Panel Blisters 7) Rust 8) Other defects W W W W H C C ) The of the degree of blistering was performed according to ISO /8/ 8) The evaluation of degree of rusting was performed according to ISO /9/ Page C2 of C6

23 Table C2 Panel Adhesion test no. 9) Results of the pull-off adhesion test: wave tank and heat panels Adhesion strength [MPa] 10) Fracture [%] 11) C, 70D W C, 55D C, 75D C, 70D W C, 75D C, 75D C, 95D W C, 70D C, 75D C, 45D W C, 35D C, 70D C, 95D H C, 95D C, 95D Average 8.4 Total adhesive: 0 % Total cohesive: 100 % Maximum 8.9 Minimum 7.3 9) Number of test specimen per panel in accordance with IACS Rec. No. 101 /7/. 10) Adhesion tests were carried out with a DeFlesko PosiTest AT adhesion tester. Dollies with 20 mm diameter were used. The coating surface and dollies were softly grinded with FEPA P#320 SiC paper and rinsed with technical alcohol. The dollies were glued to the coated surface with 3M DP410 adhesive. The curing of the adhesive was carried out according to manufacturer s recommendations. A whole saw was employed to carefully cut through the coating down to bare steel before pulling off the dollies. 11) A/B: Fracture between the steel surface and the shop primer B: Fracture in the shop primer B/C: Fracture between the shop primer and the first coat C: Fracture in the first coat C/D: Fracture between the first coat the second coat D: Fracture in the second coat -/Y: Fracture between the second coat and the glue Page C3 of C6

24 Table C3 Panel Adhesion test no. 9) Results of the pull-off adhesion test: condensation chamber panels Adhesion strength [MPa] 10) Fracture [%] 11) C, 99D C C, 90D C, 93D C, 80D C C, 80D C, 70D Average 8.1 Total adhesive: 0 % Total cohesive: 100 % Maximum 9.0 Minimum 7.5 9) Number of test specimen per panel in accordance with IACS Rec. No. 101 /7/. 10) Adhesion tests were carried out with a DeFlesko PosiTest AT adhesion tester. Dollies with 20 mm diameter were used. The coating surface and dollies were softly grinded with FEPA P#320 SiC paper and rinsed with technical alcohol. The dollies were glued to the coated surface with 3M DP410 adhesive. The curing of the adhesive was carried out according to manufacturer s recommendations. A whole saw was employed to carefully cut through the coating down to bare steel before pulling off the dollies. 11) A/B: Fracture between the steel surface and the shop primer B: Fracture in the shop primer B/C: Fracture between the shop primer and the first coat C: Fracture in the first coat C/D: Fracture between the first coat the second coat D: Fracture in the second coat -/Y: Fracture between the second coat and the glue Page C4 of C6

25 Table C4 Panel Adhesion test no. 9) Results of the pull-off adhesion test: reference panels (for information only) Adhesion strength [MPa] 10) Fracture [%] 11) C, 1D C, 8D, 7-/Y R C, 15D, 5-/Y C, 2D, 2-/Y C, 5D, 3-/Y C, 4D, 4-/Y Average 8.0 Total adhesive: 3.5 % Total cohesive: 96.5 % Maximum 9.5 Minimum 6.8 9) Number of test specimen per panel in accordance with IACS Rec. No. 101 /7/ 10) Adhesion tests were carried out with a DeFlesko PosiTest AT adhesion tester. Dollies with 20 mm diameter were used. The coating surface and dollies were softly grinded with FEPA P#320 SiC paper and rinsed with technical alcohol. The dollies were glued to the coated surface with 3M DP410 adhesive. The curing of the adhesive was carried out according to manufacturer s recommendations. A whole saw was employed to carefully cut through the coating down to bare steel before pulling off the dollies. 11) A/B: Fracture between the steel surface and the shop primer B: Fracture in the shop primer B/C: Fracture between the shop primer and the first coat C: Fracture in the first coat C/D: Fracture between the first coat the second coat D: Fracture in the second coat -/Y: Fracture between the second coat and the glue Page C5 of C6

26 Table C5 Cathodic protection Cathodic disbondment [mm] 12) Zinc anode weight loss [g] Current demand [ma/m 2 ] 13) ) Assess loss of adhesion at the artificial holiday by using a sharp knife to make two cuts through the coating to the substrates, intersection at the holiday. With the point of the knife, attempt to lift and peel back the coating from around the holiday. Record whether the adhesion of the coating to the substrate has been reduced and the approximate distance, in millimetres, that the coating can be peeled. (From ISO 15711:2003 /5/) Additionally IACS interpretation of IMO PSPC: Repeat the cutting and lifting all around the artificial holiday to find the maximum loss of adhesion. Disbonding from artificial holiday can be either loss of adhesion to the steel substrate or between the shop primer and the epoxy coating and shall be less than 8 mm for epoxy based systems to be acceptable (compatibility test). Cohesive adhesion failure in the shop primer is not to be included as part of the loss of adhesion. (From IACS Rec. No. 101 /7/) 13) Exposure time: 119 days submerged in natural seawater during total 180 days of cyclic exposure as defined in /1/ Utilisation factor: 0.8 Consumption rate for Zn-anodes: 11.3 kg/a year Table C6 Undercutting from scribes Panel Undercutting from scribes [mm] 14) W1 2 W3 1.5 W4 1.5 Average ) Rinse the test panel with fresh water immediately after exposure, [ ], and inspect for visible changes. Carefully remove any loose coating using a knife blade held at an angle, positioning the blade at the coating/ substrate interface and lifting the coating away from the substrate. (From ISO :2005, section /10/) Addionally IACS interpretation: Undercutting from scribe can be either corrosion of the steel substrate or delamination between the shop primer and the epoxy coating (compatibility test). For PSPC maximum width is used (MSC.215(82), Appendix 1, section 2.2.6). The average of three maximum records of three panels with scribe is used for acceptance. Cohesive adhesion failure in the shop primer is not to be included as part of the delamination. (From IACS Rec. No. 101 /7/) Table C7 Flexibility (for information only) Panel Diameter of Mandrel [mm] 15) Elongation [%] 16) Comments W Many small cracks was observed R Many small cracks was observed 15) Maximum diameter of mandrel for which any cracking in the coating occurs 16) Calculated respectively to the diameter of the mandrel for which any cracking occurs. Page C6 of C6

27 APPENDIX D PHOTO DOCUMENTATION Page D1 of D9

28 Figure D1 Overview picture of the wave tank panels (above from left to right: W1, W2, W3, W4 and H) and the condensation chamber panels (below from left to right: C1 and C2) after exposure Figure D2 Small cracks in the coating after flexibility test (above W1 and below R1) Page D2 of D9

29 Figure D3 Undercut scribe on the top wave tank panel (W1) Figure D4 Artificial holiday and cathodic disbondment from the artificial holiday on the wave tank bottom panel (W2) Figure D5 Undercut scribe on the side wave tank panel with cooling (W3) Figure D6 Undercut scribe on the side wave tank panel (W4) Page D3 of D9

30 Figure D7 Adhesion test no. 1, 2 and 3 Figure D8 Adhesion test no. 4, 5 and 6 Page D4 of D9

31 Figure D9 Adhesion test no. 7, 8 and 9 Figure D10 Adhesion test no. 10, 11 and 12 Page D5 of D9

32 Figure D11 Adhesion test no. 13, 14 and 15 Figure D12 Adhesion test no. 16, 17 and 18 Page D6 of D9

33 Figure D13 Adhesion test no. 19, 20 and 21 Page D7 of D9

34 Figure D28 Adhesion test no. 22 Figure D29 Adhesion test no. 23 Figure D30 Adhesion test no. 24 Page D8 of D9

35 Figure D31 Adhesion test no. 25 Figure D32 Adhesion test no. 26 Figure D33 Adhesion test no. 27 Page D9 of D9

36 DNV Energy DNV Energy is a leading professional service provider in safeguarding and improving business performance, assisting energy companies along the entire value chain from concept selection through exploration, production, transportation, refining and distribution. Our broad expertise covers Asset Risk & Operations Management, Enterprise Risk Management; IT Risk Management; Offshore Classification; Safety, Health and Environmental Risk Management; Technology Qualification; and Verification. DNV Energy Regional Offices: Americas and West Africa Det Norske Veritas Ltda Rua Sete de Setembro 111/12 Floor Rio de Janeiro Brazil Phone: Nordic and Eurasia Det Norske Veritas AS Veritasveien 1 N-1322 Hovik Norway Phone: Asia and Middle East Det Norske Veritas Sdn Bhd 24th Floor, Menara Weld Jalan Raja Chulan Kuala Lumpur Phone: Offshore Class and Inspection Det Norske Veritas AS Veritasveien 1 N-1322 Hovik Norway Phone: Europe and North Africa Det Norske Veritas Ltd Palace House 3 Cathedral Street London SE1 9DE United Kingdom Phone: Cleaner Energy & Utilities Det Norske Veritas AS Veritasveien 1 N-1322 Hovik Norway Phone: o0o - Final page