The Performance of Thermoset Polymers in Mineral and Organic Acid

Copyright ©1996, Technology Publishing Company

ost severe corrosion problems en-countered in chemical processing,paper mills, food plants, and tank

cars involve mineral acids and their deriva-tives. Typically, in these industries, corrosionof steel depends upon the concentration ofacids. In some cases, corrosion increases andin others it decreases with increasing acidconcentration.1,2 When aeration or oxidizingagents are also present, corrosive conditionsare usually extreme.

In addition to the mineral acids, mostother acid-environments are corrosive to agreater or lesser degree. Mild corrosives suchas organic acids, alkalis, and high puritywater can cause severe corrosion under cer-tain conditions. Chemical-resistant coatingsor linings used in these cases provide long-term protection of steel and prevent costlydamage of an industrial structure.

This article explains the corrosiveagents found in most industrial processingfacilities, summarizes how thermoset liningsprotect steel against these agents, reviewsresin types and reinforcements for linings,

and explains laboratory tests used to evalu-ate linings for acid service. Sample perfor-mance test data are included.

Corrosive Conditions

Mineral AcidsIn terms of corrosive conditions, sulfuric, nitric,and hydrochloric acids are the 3 most impor-tant inorganic acids. Sulfuric acid is producedmore than any other chemical. It is used ex-tensively in many processes—directly or indi-rectly in nearly all industry—in the productionof hydrochloric acid, other chemicals, andtheir derivatives. It is used in petroleum refin-ing and in the manufacture of explosives, syn-thetic detergents, fertilizers, dyes, drugs, pig-ments, textiles, storage batteries, and rubbers.

Sulfuric acid is made by the contactprocess or lead-chamber process, with theformer accounting for about 70 percent oftotal production. Sulfur, or sulfur compoundssuch as copper sulfide ore, are burned toform SO2, which is converted to SO3 in the

The Performance of Thermoset Polymers in

Mineral and Organic Acid Service

58 / Journal of Protective Coatings & Linings

M

by Mosongo Moukwa and Travis Barkey,

Master Builders Inc.


presence of oxygen and a catalyst. Theseacids are designated according to the percentfree sulfur trioxide or the equivalent percentH2SO4. For example, acid containing 20 per-cent free SO3 is called either 20 percent fum-ing acid or 104.5 percent sulfuric acid. Mostacids are shipped to the customer in 3 con-centrations, namely, 78 percent, 93 percent,and fuming acid.

Carbon steel is widely used for sulfuricacid in concentrations over 70 percent.Pipelines, storage tanks, tank cars, and ship-ping drums made of steel commonly handle78 percent, 93 percent, and 98 percent acidsand fuming acid. More dilute acids attack steelvery rapidly. Steel is not suitable in concentra-tions below about 65 percent at any tempera-ture. For acid concentration of about 70 per-cent, steel can be used, depending on thetemperature involved. Steel is generally un-suitable above 80 C (176 F) at acid concentra-tions up to 100 percent, and shows compara-tively high rates of corrosion around 101percent acid. Entrained air may have a de-structive effect on steel in strong acid service.2

Most concentrations of nitric acidrapidly attack ordinary cast iron, nickel castirons, magnesium, steel, and low alloy steel.Occasionally, cast iron and steel are used invery strong acid at room temperature whendanger of dilution is not present. Metals,stainless steels, and other alloys are general-ly suitable for various temperatures and con-centrations. Hydrochloric acid is the mostdifficult of the common acids to handle fromthe standpoint of corrosion and contructionmaterials, because it is very corrosive tomost of the common metals and alloys.3,4

Organic AcidsAcetic acid, which is frequently used in thefood and beverage industry, is the most com-monly produced organic acid. Other organicacids show similar corrosion behavior and, inthe absence of data, one must assume thatthey all are corrosive. Organic acids areweaker than inorganic acids because they areonly slightly ionized. Aluminum is not suit-able for formic acid, one of the strongest andmost corrosive organic acids. Maleic and lac-tic acids are more aggressive than acetic acidwith regard to intergranular attack on stain-less steel. The fatty acids such as stearic acidare less corrosive, but a stainless steel is re-quired at high temperatures. Naphthenic acidpresents a corrosion problem in petroleumrefining, mainly because of the high tempera-tures involved. Citric and tartaric acid arefound in food products.3,4

Corrosion Control with Thermoset Coatings

Mechanisms of ProtectionCorrosion control with thermoset coatingsinvolves the design of a barrier between

Linings for Acid Service

JULY 1996 / 59

Relining of a tank for acid service at elevated temperatures.Photos and figures courtesy of the authors


passage of electrons or electricity. Thelower the permeability of a coating, thebetter its adhesion.

Water can diffuse through the poly-mer coating and collect at the interface.This adds to the delamination force and hy-drolyzes existing metal-polymer bonds. Theaccumulation of water reduces bondingstrength and releases metal ions to the in-terface/polymer to help catalyze otherdegradation (such as photo oxidation).

The permeability of a coating film ismeasured by the moisture vapor transmis-sion rate, that is, the passage of watermolecules through the intramolecular spacesand filler/binder interfaces in the coating.The lower the moisture vapor transmission,the more effective the polymer is as a vehi-cle for protective coatings. In general, eventhough thin, non-reinforced coatings can re-sist many chemical environments, theyshould not be used for severe service be-cause they have higher permeation rates. Asa result, they may fail in service by blister-ing, leading to early system failures becauseof corrosion of the substrate.

The second mechanism by which ther-moset coatings prevent corrosion is chemi-cal resistance. The choice for the system re-inforcement/resin is usually determined by anumber of factors. The corrosion resistanceis the most critical but not the only deter-mining factor. Because linings are expectedto be serviceable for many years, laboratorytesting is of the utmost importance in deter-mining the limitations of a formulation.

Thermoset Resin FormulationsThe resins used in heavy corrosion controlare various formulations of 3 common cate-gories: polyester, vinyl ester, and epoxy.These are treated in detail in the currentJPCL series, Generic Coating Types.7,8

Table 1 shows the typical properties ofthese base resins.

Polyester linings offer good overallchemical resistance to oxidizing, acidic, and

the substrate and the environment. Manytypes are available, and substantial knowl-edge is required for proper selection. As ageneral rule, these coatings should not beused where the environment will rapidlyattack the substrate. One defect or a smallarea of exposed metal may result in rapidperforation. An evaluation test program isalso recommended to select a suitable ther-moset from the wide variety available.

Proper application and surface prepa-ration are essential to coating or lining sys-tem success. If the metal surface is notproperly prepared, the coat may peel offbecause of poor bonding. Selecting a liningsystem, including primer, is also a criticalfactor in the performance. If the primerdoes not adhere well or is not compatiblewith the topcoat, early failure is likely.5,6

Generally, the selection of a givenresin is based not only on its specific chemi-cal resistance properties, but also on itsphysical performance. The viscosity of theprimer should be such that it wets and ad-heres to the substrates and allows for the re-moval of entrapped air. The physical quali-ties should provide sufficient bond strengthand mechanical compatibility with the sub-strate. The lining system must also be eco-nomical and provide the best performanceat lower cost. It is expected to be non-con-taminating to the stored product and to havea high resistance to the diffusion of variouschemical anions and cations through thecoating. The system should expand andcontract with the surface over which it is ap-plied without losing adhesion. Finally, itshould display these characteristics over along period to be economical and reducethe overall costs of maintenance.

Thermoset coatings and linings pro-vide protection according to 2 mechanisms:low permeability and chemical resistance.

The coating must display low perme-ation not only with respect to air, oxygen,water, and carbon dioxide, but also withrespect to the passage of ions and to the



The lower

the lining’s

permeability,

the better

its adhesion.


solvent environments. Polyester resins usedin corrosion control linings and coatings areproduced by the condensation polymeriza-tion of unsaturated dibasic organic acidswith polyols. Variation in chemical resistanceis obtained by the choice of organic acidand polyol used to make the resin. This un-saturated polyester resin is dissolved in across-linking monomer to lower its viscosityto aid in application. The polyester resinsthat provide the higher chemical resistanceare those synthesized from bisphenol A andfumaric acid or maleic acid. The most com-mon cross-linking monomer is styrene. Thecuring process uses a free radical additionreaction to polymerize the resin. Organicperoxides provide the source of the freeradicals required for curing.

Vinyl ester resins used in corrosioncontrol linings also contain an ester linkageand can be cross-linked with unsaturatedmonomers by free radical reaction. Vinylester prepolymers are formed by reaction ofepoxy novolac resin with acrylic ormethacrylic acid. They typically withstandexposure to strong acids, salts, and oxidizingmaterials with limited alkaline resistance.They excel in resistance to strong oxidizing

conditions such as sodium hypochloritemanufacturing and storage tanks, wheremost other materials fail. Formulations aretailored using combinations of promotersand various peroxides to achieve maximumperformance and handling characteristics.Polyester and vinyl ester undergo highshrinkage during cure. Though strong, theyare brittle if not reinforced.

Conventional epoxy (bisphenol A)coatings cure by internal linkage by reac-tion with amines. These coatings have ex-cellent resistance to alkalis, salts, weaknon-oxidizing acids and some solvents.They have poor resistance to organic acids,concentrated inorganic acids, oxidizers, andstrong solvents. They possess excellent ad-hesion to a variety of substrates and exhibitminimal shrinkage. Failure typically occurswhen the lining is exposed to chemicalsbeyond its resistance properties or to ther-mal cycling, which causes disbondment.

Bisphenol F epoxy (also known asepoxy novolac) coatings are similar to con-ventional epoxies but with improved solventresistance. They can handle strong acids (upto 98 percent sulfuric acid) and concentratedalkalis better than conventional epoxies.


JULY 1996 / 61

Table 1Typical Properties of Various Thermosetting Polymers Used in Linings

Chemical Resistance

Good Poor Physical Characteristics

Polyester Weak acids Strong solvents High shrinkageBleach Strong acids Moisture sensitive curesAlcohol High strengths

Vinyl ester Broad range of Strong alkalis Low flexibilityacids and alkalis High shrinkage

Bleach Moisture sensitive curesOxidizers

Epoxy Alkalis Strong acids Excellent adhesionBis A Weak acids Oxidizers Low shrinkage

Salts Strong Solvents High strengthsSome solvents

Epoxy Alkalis Oxidizers Excellent adhesionConcentrated Low shrinkageSulfuric acid High strengthsMany solvents High heat resistance


Polyester and vinyl ester resins havebeen used as lining materials for many yearsand have good resistance to many chemi-cals. With all conditions remaining equal,

vinyl ester coatings have the broadest over-all chemical resistance and have been usedsuccessfully in chemical, paper, sewage,food processing, and atomic power plants.



Fig. 1 - Change in weight for various base resins after 28 days

of immersion in concentrated sulfuric acid (98 percent) at

38 C (100 F)

Fig. 2a - Effects of the chemicaltemperature on the change

in weight for an epoxy novolacbase resin and in 98 percent

sulfuric acid.

Fig. 2b - Modified vinylester base resins

immersed in sulfuric acid for 28 days at

different temperatures.


Testing for Chemical ResistanceThe laboratory procedure commonly useddetermine chemical resistance is ASTM D543, Practices for Evaluating the Resistanceof Plastics to Chemical Reagents. In thistest, castings are immersed in a selectedchemical, and the changes in weight aremeasured. Typically, a gain in weight is in-terpreted as swelling of the polymer matrix,whereas a loss in weight indicates chemicalattack. The analysis of the change in weightover time and the observation of the sam-ples after the test are both critical. Theyhelp assess the likely long-term perfor-mance of the coating in service.

An example is an epoxy resin formu-lation exposed to methanol that showed aweight gain as follows: • 5.9 percent at 3 days;• 8.5 percent at 7 days;• 10.3 percent at 14 days; and• 8.2 percent at 28 days.

While the overall gain in weight maynot be seen as a failure, the drop in weightgain between 14 and 28 days did show thatthe material underwent some chemical at-tack beyond 28 days.

The changes in weight of variousresin formulations when exposed to con-centrated sulfuric acid, nitric acid, and ace-tone, are shown in Figs. 1 to 4. The figuresshow that the overall chemical resistance of

the vinyl ester resin formulations is superi-or to that of the epoxy novolac. In fact, theepoxy novolac has begun to lose weight at14 days of immersion in acetone. Epoxynovolac is, however, the only resin to sur-vive concentrated sulfuric acid, but its per-formance in concentrated sulfuric acid islimited to 49 C (120 F).

Testing for Degree of CureThe chemical resistance of a thermoset resinsystem is related not only to its chemistry,but also to its degree or extent of cure andits functionality. In other words, how muchof the functionality or how many of the re-active sites have participated in the forma-tion of the hardened polymer. Most often, itis the temperature at which a lining curesthat ultimately defines the amount of cure.During the curing process, three-dimension-al networks are formed that determine thecross-link density. The higher the density,the more difficult it is for the aggressivechemicals to penetrate and swell the poly-mer resins. However, when the resin beginsto cure, the mobility of reactive sites de-creases, making it less likely for them toreact with each other. High temperaturesmay be required to increase the cross-linkdensity. A commonality of all thermosettingsystems is the liberation of heat (exothermicreaction) accompanying cure.


JULY 1996 / 63

Fig. 3 - Change in weight for various base resins in 50 percent nitric acid after 7, 14, and 28 days of immersion at 21 C (70 F)


The degree of cure can be determinedusing a thermal analysis technique such asDifferential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC).9 Inthis laboratory procedure, heat is applied toa “cured” polymer sample in a cell at a con-stant rate that promotes residual functionali-ty to react. DSC is preferred to other thermalmethods because it is a heat flow measure-ment technique and yields a quantitativemeasure of both heat and rate of reaction.

The heat of reaction of the resin canbe seen as an exotherm and is determinedby comparison to an empty cell that isbeing heated simultaneously. For a “cured”polymer, the area under the exotherm peakrepresents the heat generated during thereaction of residual functionality. Thesmaller the area (indicating that most of thereaction has occurred), the more complete-ly cured the polymer. If an uncured speci-men is placed in the cell, a total heat of re-action can be generated. This total is thencompared to the residual heat of reactionof the already cured sample, and a percent-age of total cure can then be calculated.

The DSC exothermic peaks obtainedfor a bisphenol F epoxy with triethylenetetra amine as a cross-linker is shown inFig. 5a. The total heat generated during thecuring reaction (DHR) is represented by the

total area under the curve. The residualheat of reaction for the same resin initiallycured for 7 days at 21 C (70 F) is shown inFig. 5b. The extent of reaction or the per-cent of cure (a) can be calculated as a =(DHR - DHt,resid)/DHR, where DHR is theheat liberated when an uncured material istaken to complete cure (reaction products),and DHt,resid is the heat evolved up totime t during completion of cross-linking ofsample cured to apparent completion.7

With DHR equals 543.7 J/g and DHt,residequals 126.2 J/g obtained from Fig. 5, thepercent cure is calculated to be 77 percent.Typically, the residual exotherm of apolyester lining of similar functionality, alsocured for 7 days, is found to be muchlower than that of the epoxy novolac (Fig.5c). The polyester resin is more fully curedthan epoxy novolac, and therefore, all con-ditions being equal, will display greater re-sistance to chemicals.

To take advantage of the functionalityof a novolac epoxy, it is often necessary,though not always practical, to post cure theresin at elevated temperatures up to 60 C(140 F). Thermal analysis with DSC allowsthe determination of an appropriate tempera-ture and time for post curing by measuringresidual exotherms at various cure schedules.



Fig. 4 - Change in weightfor various base resins inacetone after 7, 14, and 28 days of immersion at

21 C (70 F)


Reinforcement for Thermoset ResinsThermoset coatings suitable for heavy-dutycorrosion control are typically used in com-bination with a reinforcement that reducespermeation rates and provides protection

against physical abrasion and coating dam-age.10,11 The reinforcement material is se-lected based upon its handling characteris-tics and its compatibility with the resinselected. The 3 most common types of rein-


JULY 1996 / 65

Fig. 5 - DSC exothermicpeaks obtained for an uncured bisphenol epoxyresin immediately after reaction with triethylenetetramine as a cross-linker(a), and for the same resininitially cured for 7 days at21 C (70 F) (b), and forpolyester cured for 7 days at 21 C (70 F) (c).DSC scans were performedat 10 C/min (50 F/min).


forced linings are flake-filled linings, fiber-glass mat-reinforced linings, and woven fab-ric-reinforced linings (Fig. 6). These liningscan be constructed from polyester, vinylester, and epoxy resins.

Flake-filled linings are generally high-ly filled with glass or mica flakes (Fig. 6a).These linings are either sprayed or trowel-applied in 2 coats to a thickness of 0.8 to3.8 mm (31 to 150 mils), depending on the



Fig. 6 - (a) Trowelled and spray-applied flake-reinforced linings;

(b) trowelled and spray-applied fiberglass reinforced linings;

(c) trowelled and spray-appliedwoven lining


type of service required. The operationaltemperature limit for immersion services isbetween 54 C and 93 C (130 F and 200 F),depending on the type of resin, and thetype and size of the flake reinforcement.The flakes reduce the permeation charac-teristics by increasing the tortuousness ofthe path that an ion or molecule has to fol-low to migrate through the composite sys-tem. They are the most effective in provid-ing a barrier to permeation within thelining.

Fiberglass mat-reinforced linings typi-cally consist of a trowel-applied, mineral-filled base-coat, 1 or 2 layers of choppedstrand mat, a layer of chemical grade surfaceveil, and 1 or 2 resin finish coats (Fig. 6b).Limitations for immersion service are in themaximum range of 71 C to 82 C (160 F to180 F), depending on the resin type incor-porated into the composite. Both wovenfabric linings and fiberglass mat-reinforcedlinings are useful in protecting against ther-mal cycling, thermal shocks, and impact.

The woven fabric lining typically con-sists of 3 main layers: a trowel-applied,mineral-filled base-coat; a resin-saturatedwoven fabric layer; and a trowel-applied

topcoat (Fig. 6c). These linings have beensuccessfully used for years to protect steelvessels under constant immersion condi-tions up to 77 C (170 F).

Testing for Moisture Vapor Permeation in Reinforced LiningsThe moisture vapor permeation of a coat-ing is an important factor in its perfor-mance. It can be determined according toASTM D 1653, Standard Test Method forWater Vapor Transmission of Organic Coat-ing Films. A film of coating, either individu-al components or lining (made of multiplecomponents as shown in Figure 6), is fas-tened over the mouth of a cup containing adesiccant (such as CaCl2) and placed in achamber set to 38 C (100 F) and 90 percentrelative humidity. Since the relative humidi-ty inside the cup is effectively 0 percent, apressure gradient exists, providing a drivingforce for moisture vapor to permeate thelining. Daily weight gains are recordeduntil a steady state is reached. The slope ofthe weight change versus time can then beused to calculate the permeance. For lowpermeability linings, “dummy” specimenswithout desiccant are tested simultaneously


JULY 1996 / 67

Table 2Water Vapor Permeation for Various Resin Systems

Thickness Permeabilitya Permeanceb Max To

mm g•Pa-1 s-1 m-1 g•Pa-1 s-1 m2 serviceResin Lining type (mils) (perm in) (perms) C (F)

Novolac Flake glass 1.8 1.6 x 10-13 9.15x10-11 93vinyl ester Trowel and (70) (0.00011) (0.0016) (200)

roll; 2 coats

Polyester Flake glass 1.8 3.2x10-13 1.8x10-10 93Trowel and (70) (p.00022) (0.0031) (200)roll; 2 coats

Epoxy Woven fabric 3.8 2.4x10-12 6.46x10-10 71Trowel and (150) (0.0017) (0.0113) (160)roll; 2 coats

Polyester Woven fabric 3.3 2.46x10-12 7.7x10-10 71Trowel and (129) (0.0017) (0.0135) (160)roll; 2 coats

aPermeability is the moisture transmission rate of the lining at the stated thickness. It is given in g•Pa-1 s-1 m-1. (perm in).bPermeance is the moisture transmission rate of the lining. It is given in g•Pa-1 s-1 m2. One perm is equal to 1 grain of H2O/hr/sq ft per 1 in. difference in Hg vapor pressure across the membrane.


so that moisture absorbed by the sealantmaterial and any changes in barometricpressure can be subtracted.

Table 2 shows vapor permeation datafor various lining systems prepared withthermoset resins. Since linings are designedto act as barriers by physically isolating thesubstrate from moisture, low permeationlinings are the preferred choice of speci-fiers, scientists, and technologists. Thesetypes of linings are rarely prone to blister-ing when exposed to wet elevated temper-ature environments.

Because permeation is a major issuecommon to all linings, laboratory testingshould also conform to the Atlas test, ASTMC 868, Standard Test Method for ChemicalResistance of Protective Linings, which sim-

ulates temperature gradient across the liner.The lining is applied to the substrate ofchoice (steel or concrete). Three quarters ofthe test cell is filled with water or anothersolution to form both the vapor phase andthe liquid phase. The cell is also equippedwith ports for a heater, thermocouple, andcondenser. This setup allows evaluation ofthe lining at elevated temperatures, whichare common in processing plants and out-door chemical storage. In a steel vessel, el-evated product temperature creates a ther-modynamic gradient between the outsideambient air and internal elevated tempera-ture environment. This process is common-ly known as the cold wall effect, importantto the performance of the lining. This situa-tion provides a driving force for moistureinto the lining system, which can delami-nate the lining. Fig. 7 shows an Atlas testcell setup.

The Atlas test is a convenient way ofobtaining coating performance data at ele-vated temperatures and simultaneouslytests a coating’s resistance in both liquidand vapor phases. This test is helpful in de-termining a coating’s resistance to thestresses that occur when a temperature dif-ferential exists across the coating film. Ex-posure should be a minimum of 3 months,and observations should include generaldegradation, loss of adhesion, loss of mate-rial and softening, and discoloration.

Several modifications have beenmade to the standard Atlas cell test. In one,a jacket is held in place on the externalsurface of the panels used in the cell. Thisjacket has fluid running through it, and thefluid temperature is controlled to produce athermal gradient. The importance of thismodification is illustrated by the markeddecrease in coating performance as thethermal gradient increases. Another modifi-cation is the use of pressure in the cells.This has been achieved by designing ametal cell with large flanges used to holdtest panels in place. The pressurized cell



Fig. 7 - Atlas cell setup

Fig. 8a - The interior of a steel tank being

re-coated after the failure of a lining

exposed to concentratedsulfuric acid at

temperature above themaximum service

temperature

Fig. 8b - A close-up of the pitted steel surface, the result

of chemical corrosion by the concentrated

sulfuric acid.


better simulates the environment in pres-sure vessels and also affords the possibilityof introducing various gases into the cell toaccount for the service conditions in whichthe coating or lining is used.12,13

Final Considerations: Field Practices

It has been the authors’ experience that lin-ings fail in actual exposure conditions pri-marily because of poor application practices.The performance of a coating varies enor-mously with the quality of the application.Some of the most important application con-ditions are the surface preparation methodand surface cleanliness, the applicationmethod and coating thickness, the applica-tion temperature and humidity, and the curetemperature and time. The surface of thesubstrate to be coated may be severely pittedor may have significant salt contamination.Contamination on a steel surface can causequick and total failure of a lining system.Contamination can occur before or duringsurface preparation. Blasting is typically re-quired, but it does not always remove all thechloride.

In a tank relining situation, the sub-strate should be free of any of the previousmaterial that was stored in the tank. Duringthe lining application, it is important to en-sure the full saturation of the mat layers, toavoid wicking of the chemical into the liningand a reduction in the permeation resistance.Failure to detect pinholes can be disastrousbecause they accelerate corrosion of steeland promote delamination. Fig. 8a shows arelining of steel tank after the previous coat-ing has failed under exposure to concentrat-ed sulfuric acid above the maximum recom-mended service temperature. The failedlining was removed, and the steel was blast-ed. Fig. 8b shows the pitted steel, the resultof chemical corrosion made possible by thechemical destruction of the lining. JPCL

References

1. J.D. Scantlebury, V. Ashworth, and B.Yap, “Electro Induced Polymer Coatings”JOCCA (1978), 61: 335-340.

2. Robert H. Perry and Don Green, Perry’sChemical Engineer’s Handbook, SixthEdition, (New York, NY: McGraw-Hill,1984), Section 23, pp. 8-9.

3. P.A. Schweitzer, Corrosion Resistance Ta-bles, Second Edition (New York, NY: Mar-cel Dekker, 1986), pp 312-1147.

4. I. Mellan, Corrosion Resistant MaterialsHandbook, Third Edition (Park Ridge, NJ:Noyes Data Corporation, 1976) pp. 487-540.

5. H. Leidheiser and W. Funke, “Water Dis-bondment and Wet Adhesion of OrganicCoatings on Metals: A Review and Inter-pretation” JOCCA (1987), 70: 121-132.

6. W. Funke, “Thin Adhesion Layers to Im-prove Wet Adhesion of Organic Coatingson Metal Surfaces,” in Proceedings of theSymposium on Advances in CorrosionProtection by Organic Coatings, Cam-bridge, UK, 1989, Eds. D. Scantlebury andM. Kendig (Pennington, UK: The Electro-chemical Society, 1989), pp. 121-128.

7. W.R. Slama, “Polyester and Vinyl EsterCoatings” JPCL (May 1996), 88-109.

8. W. Kaminski, “Hybrids,” JPCL (April1996), 57-63.

9. R.B. Prime, “Thermosets,” in ThermalCharacterization of Materials, Ed. Edith A.Turi (New York, NY: Academic Press,1981), pp. 435-569.

10. A.L. Hendricks, “Selecting and ApplyingLinings” JPCL (January 1985), 16-21.

11. R. Washburn and W.R. Slama, “Rein-forced Chemical Resistant Thermoset Lin-ings” JPCL (October 1985), 30-42.

12. L. Ketter, W.H. Julius, and D. Welding,“Evaluating High Performance Coatings”MP(August 1992), 35-40.

13. M.D. Brown, “Laboratory and Field Testsfor Coatings That Make Sense in the RealWorld” MP (August 1994), 30-33.


JULY 1996 / 69

Mosongo Moukwa isTechnical Director forEngineered Materials atMaster Builders. He is responsible for materialsresearch, new technologydevelopment, and international research.Moukwa was previouslytechnical director for theconstruction products division, where he wasresponsible for productdevelopment, productsupport, and qualitycontrol for both inorganic- and organic-based materials,including coatings andlinings.

Moukwa holds a PhDin Applied Sciences fromthe Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke,Canada. He is a memberof ASTM, SSPC, ACI, andSPI. He has written extensively in the area of materials, and hasedited a book for theAmerican Ceramics Society.

Travis Barkey is Senior Product Developerin the polymer group atMaster Builders. He hasbeen involved in product development ofpolymer-based coatingsand linings, adhesives,and grouts for 5 years.Barkey holds a BS inChemistry from PurdueUniversity in Lafayette,IN. A member of SSPCand SPI, Barkey has authored a number ofarticles on coating technology and testingprocedures and hasmade presentations atSSPC conferences.

The authors can be reached at Master Builders, 23700 Chagrin Boulevard, Cleveland, OH 44122;216/831-5500; fax: 216/831-6053.

The Performance of Thermoset Polymers in Mineral and Organic Acid

Documents

Transcript of The Performance of Thermoset Polymers in Mineral and Organic Acid