Save 20% on select best sellers with code MONSTER24 - Shop The Sale Now
This paper introduces the available technology of chemical coating removal as an alternative to mechanical coating removal by comparing and contrasting the advantages and disadvantages of each chemical coating removal technology. Due to the high cost and environmental drawbacks of mechanical methods of coating removal, chemical coating removal systems have advanced as a cost effective and environmentally friendly way to remove coatings that are highly cost effective on a per square foot basis cost comparison. The presentation will discuss all chemical coating removal technology, features and benefits.
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.
Shielding of cathodic protection (CP) by disbonded coatings is considered a “worst case scenario” for external corrosion in the pipeline industry. It has been hypothesized that if coatings were partially permeable to CP, the imbalance between cathodic and anodic reactions would induce a high pH environment under disbonded coatings and that would impede corrosion. However, direct experimental evidence of this process has been limited. Moreover, this line of reasoning is often inversed incorrectly assuming that the only reason for the presence of a high pH environment under disbonded coatings is their partial permeability to CP current.
The recent development of an electrochemical self-validating technique to measure the relatively small ionic currents that could permeate through defect free coatings has shed a new light on the topic. It has been found that most of the commercial pipeline coatings tested in unaged conditions present a CP shielding behavior. Accelerated hydrothermal ageing of fusion-bonded epoxy (FBE) coatings was performed to study the effect of water absorption. Ageing resulted in major plasticization, which increased the conduction of CP current through FBE coatings. However, FBE seems to be partially permeable to H+ and/or OH-, which reduces its ability to form and retain a high pH environment under disbonded coatings. In conjunction, these results thus indicate the extremely limited capability of commercial pipeline coatings to prevent corrosion in case of disbondment.
The Brazilian cost of corrosion was estimated at 3% of the GPD in 2018, that percentage is equivalent to approximately $US 49 billion, according to an ABRACO1 journal released in 20201. It is estimated that from this cost $US 19 billion could have been saved through anticorrosive actions. In another research conducted by the EPRI2 the results showed that at least 22% of corrosion costs could be avoided through adequate mitigating actions2.
Corrosion information for engineers, designers, consultants involved in the design, maintenance, and rehabilitation of structures with steel pile foundations.
The Brazilian cost of corrosion was estimated at 3% of the GPD in 2018, that percentage is equivalent to approximately $US 49 billion, according to an ABRACO(1) journal released in 2020.1 It is estimated that from this cost $US 19 billion could have been saved through anticorrosive actions. In another research conducted by the EPRI(2) the results showed that at least 22% of corrosion costs could be avoided through adequate mitigating actions.2