Server maintenance is scheduled for Saturday, December 21st between 6am-10am CST.
During that time, parts of our website will be affected until maintenance is completed. Thank you for your patience.
Use GIVING24 at checkout to save 20% on eCourses and books (some exclusions apply)!
Coatings have been used as a primary method to protect the substrate underneath from corrosion in various geographical environments. A diverse range of generic coating types are available to protect the metals in different corrosive environments. Selection of the right coating for a specific metallic substrate at given operating conditions and environment is key to avoiding any premature failures of coating.
Pull-off adhesion testing is a commonly used method to determine the coating adhesion strength. Relying on the pull-off adhesion testing technique to determine the coating adhesion strength is increasingly common due to its quantitative result. This study focuses on how the pull-off adhesion strength value of the coating is affected by the change in critical factors i.e. surface profile morphology (spherical, sharp & angular) and a range of surface roughness profile height (μm). Test sample surface was prepared to visually clean steel with diverse sizes and shapes of abrasives, coated with a 3 coat system. Pull-off adhesion testing was performed on the fresh coating and after exposing the coating to cyclic ageing test conditions adopted from ISO12944-9, Annex B. Additionally, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and surface characterization of abrasives using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and cross sectional analysis of coating sample after ageing with SEM-EDS (Scanning electron microscopy-Energy dispersive spectroscopy) were also performed.
Modern design, manufacturing and field-testing specifications include surface profile and adhesion testing on the assumption that they are linked to long term corrosion prevention. There are a number of careful studies, dating back decades, that find no link between measurements of adhesion and (undercutting) corrosion performance, but other studies do, and the concept remains intuitively appealing and widely assumed.
We are unable to complete this action. Please try again at a later time.
If this error continues to occur, please contact AMPP Customer Support for assistance.
Error Message:
Please login to use Standards Credits*
* AMPP Members receive Standards Credits in order to redeem eligible Standards and Reports in the Store
You are not a Member.
AMPP Members enjoy many benefits, including Standards Credits which can be used to redeem eligible Standards and Reports in the Store.
You can visit the Membership Page to learn about the benefits of membership.
You have previously purchased this item.
Go to Downloadable Products in your AMPP Store profile to find this item.
You do not have sufficient Standards Credits to claim this item.
Click on 'ADD TO CART' to purchase this item.
Your Standards Credit(s)
1
Remaining Credits
0
Please review your transaction.
Click on 'REDEEM' to use your Standards Credits to claim this item.
You have successfully redeemed:
Go to Downloadable Products in your AMPP Store Profile to find and download this item.
Many coating product data sheets call for surface profiles of 3-4 mils. Others call for 1.5-2 miles surface profile for a very similar coating type – why should this be? To start to understand this we need to first of all look at why we measure the surface profile on steel surfaces. It pretty much comes down to two main things.
Steel surfaces are frequently cleaned by abrasive impact prior to the application of protective coatings. The resultant surface profile must be accurately assessed to ensure compliance with job or contract specifications. But is profile height alone (the most commonly measured parameter) a good indicator of long-term coating performance?