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)!
A606-04 steel panels (same composition as A588 weathering steel) were exposed at 30 sites in southeast Florida for periods of up to 3.5 years. The distances of the sites from the east coastline ranged from 0.1 mi to 21 mi.
Specifying weathering steel for bridge applications in Florida is being considered for cost savings and structural design advantages. Chloride deposition is a significant concern regarding use of uncoated weathering steel and, in Florida, coastal regions receive sea salt depositions. A606-04 steel panels (same composition as A588 weathering steel) were exposed at 30 sites in southeast Florida for periods of up to 3.5 years. The distances of the sites from the east coastline ranged from 0.1 mi to 21 mi. Generally, the corrosion rates decreased with distance from the coast, but there were interesting exceptions related to unimpeded exposure to the coastline and sulfur dioxide depositions. Results are compared to those of Townsend and Zoccola’s study of weathering steel exposures and suggestions provided for rapid site characterization for weathering steel suitability at specific locations. Corrosion rates appeared acceptable at distances greater than 2 mi from the shoreline. Direct assessments (specimen weight loss) appeared to have significant advantages over indirect, parameter measurements of chloride, sulfur dioxide and TOW (time of wetness). An advantage of direct assessment is that no environmental factor, anticipated or not, will likely be neglected. A method for making a direct assessment in an equivalent time period as indirect (ISO or ASTM) assessments is presented.
Key words: weathering steel, uncoated weathering steel, chloride, sulfur dioxide, TOW, atmospheric deposition
The corrosion products on samples from 31 stations (0.1 to 21 miles from the ocean) were analyzed using XRD to observe the intensities and peaks related to akaganeite, goethite, lepidocrocite and hematite products.
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.
This paper will focus on how to address the major CP concerns from the system point of view during the design phase of offshore projects. It will also recommend solutions for potential issues that may arise during the installation and operation phases of projects.
Damage example cases of pigtails under high temperature and pressure. Also: the technique for the remaining life assessment of pigtails - based on the relation between OD change and life consumption.