Papa Vian Sam 2012

DOI 10.
1515/corrrev-2012-0024 Corros Rev 2012; 30(5/6): 171–197
Sankara Papaviansam*, Natashah Zaver and Jennifer Pollock
Comparison of international standards to evaluate

field-applied pipeline girth weld coatings
Abstract: The external surfaces of all underground oil and applications in the north. Stringent property require-
gas pipelines are protected by polymeric coatings and ments, including weld metal strength overmatching and
cathodic protection. The polymeric coatings are classified attainment of adequate weld metal and the heat-affected
under two types: mainline coating and girth weld coat- zone fracture toughness, are proving to be a challenge.
ing. Most of the modern mainline coatings are applied Current research shows that the thermal treatment asso-
in the mill as line pipes are made. The mainline-coated ciated with mill-applied coatings can significantly change
line pipes are shipped to the construction site where they pipe properties, particularly pipe strength as a function
are joined by welding. Over the weld joint – commonly of application temperature. For field-applied coatings on
known as girth weld – coatings are applied in the field. the girth welds, it is important to ensure that the coating
The mainline coating, girth weld coating, and cathodic application process does not alter the performance in this
protection all should function in a complementary fash- region and that the mechanical properties of the girth
ion. The standards developed by various associations for welds are not adversely affected by the coating applica-
evaluating and selecting mainline coatings were previ- tion process.
ously reviewed. In this article, three international stand- Girth weld coatings should further be compatible with
ards for girth weld coatings developed by the Canadian mainline coatings. The performance of girth weld coatings
Standards Association, National Association of Corrosion depends on the bonds to the substrate and to the original
Engineers, and International Standards Organization coating, the moisture seal at the joints, and water absorp-
have been reviewed and compared with those for main- tion. Whereas mainline coatings are applied in the mills
line coatings. It should be noted that in addition to these under optimum conditions, coatings on the girth welds
international standards, other country-specific standards are applied in the field.
are also available. Several procedures and methodologies have been
developed since the 1940s, and some of these procedures
Keywords: coating standards; field applied pipeline are still being used now. In a previous publication, the
coatings; girth weld pipeline coatings; pipeline external standards for evaluating mainline coatings have been
coatings. reviewed (Papavinasam & Revie, 2008), and in this article,
the standards for girth weld coatings have been reviewed.
The standards for evaluating mainline and girth weld
*Corresponding author: Sankara Papaviansam, CanmetMATERIALS,
175 Longwood South Road, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8P–OA5,
coatings have also been compared.
e-mail: spapavin@nrcan.gc.ca
Natashah Zaver and Jennifer Pollock: CanmetMATERIALS, 175
Longwood South Road, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
2 Standard laboratory
methodologies
1 Introduction
The standards for evaluating coating to protect external
A strain-based design methodology that uses modern surface can be broadly divided into three types:
high-strength line pipe and advanced welding technolo- – Type 1: Provide guidelines to design external
gies is required to adequately accommodate the second- protection of using polymeric coatings
ary loading associated with potential ground movements. – Type 2: Provide guidelines to evaluate specific types
A critical aspect to consider in the application of advanced of coatings
high-strength pipe (X80–X120) relates to the qualifica- – Type 3: Provide detailed procedures to evaluate a
tion of girth weld strength and toughness for demanding specific property of coatings.
Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Authenticated | 93.180.53.211
Download Date | 11/15/13 5:00 AM
172 S. Papaviansam et al.: Field-applied pipeline girth weld coatings
2.1 Type 1: design standards Used in Pipeline Transport Systems, Part 3: Field
Joint Coatings
These standards provide guidelines to in designing the – NACE Standard SP0109, Standard Practice, “Field
external protection of pipelines using polymeric coatings Application of Bonded Tape Coatings for External
and cathodic protection systems. These standards refer to Repair, Rehabilitation, and Weld Joints on Buried
type 2 standards in evaluating a specific coating type and Metal Pipelines”
to type 3 standards in evaluating a particular property. – CSA Z245.22-10, Plant-Applied External Polyurethane
The standards include Foam Insulation Coating for Steel Pipe, Annex A:
– Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Z662, Oil and Tape Coating.
Gas Pipeline Systems, Annex L: Test Methods for
Coating Property Evaluation)
– National Association of Corrosion Engineers 2.2.2 Heat-shrinkable
(NACE) RP0169, Control of External Corrosion on
Underground or Submerged Metallic Piping Systems – ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries –
– International Organization for Standardization External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines
(ISO) 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Used in Pipeline Transport Systems, Part 3: Field
External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines Joint Coatings
Used in Pipeline Transportation Systems. – NACE Standard 0303, Standard Recommended
Practice, “Field-Applied Heat-Shrinkable Sleeves for
Pipelines: Application, Performance, and Quality
2.2 Type 2: specific coating evaluation
Control”.
standards
Over the past 60 years, several different pipeline coat-

2.2.3 Fusion-bonded epoxy (FBE)
ings have been applied as girth weld coatings (Figure 1)
(Buchanan & Tacoma, 2004). The standards that provide
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries –
guidelines to evaluate specific types of pipeline girth weld
External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines
coatings have been recently developed. The standards are
Used in Pipeline Transport Systems, Part 3: Field
the following.
Joint Coatings
– NACE Standard RP0402, Standard Recommended
2.2.1 Tape Practice, “Field-Applied Fusion-Bonded Epoxy
(FBE) Pipe and Coating Systems for Girth Weld
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Joints: Application, Performance, and Quality
External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines Control”
Powdered
epoxy
Polypropylene
Wax
Urethane and epoxy
Fusion bonded epoxy
Shrink sleeve
Tape
Coal tar enamel/asphalt
1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
Figure 1 Field-applied coatings over the years (Buchanan & Tacoma, 2004).

S. Papaviansam et al.: Field-applied pipeline girth weld coatings 173
2.2.4 Liquid epoxy – NACE Standard RP0375, Standard Recommended

Practice, Field-Applied Underground Wax Coating
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Systems for Underground Pipelines: Application,
External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines Performance, and Quality Control.
Joint Coatings
– NACE Standard RP0105, Standard Recommended 2.2.9 Elastomeric
Practice, “Liquid-Epoxy Coatings for External Repair,
Rehabilitation, and Weld Joints on Buried Steel – ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries –
Pipelines”. External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines
Joint Coatings.
2.2.5 Liquid polyurethane, fiber-reinforced epoxy,
fiber-reinforced vinyl ester, and cast polyurethane
2.2.10 Coal tar
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries –
External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines – NACE Standard RP0602, Standard Recommended
Used in Pipeline Transport Systems, Part 3: Field Practice, Field-Applied Coal Tar Enamel Pipe Coating
Joint Coatings Systems: Application, Performance, and Quality
– CSA Z245.22-10, Plant-Applied External Polyurethane Control.
Foam Insulation Coating for Steel Pipe, Annex B:
Liquid Coatings.
2.3 Type 3: specific properties evaluation
standards
2.2.6 Polyolefin
Several parameters influence the performance of a coating
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – at different stages. Type 3 standards were developed to
External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines evaluate each of the properties individually. There are
Used in Pipeline Transport Systems, Part 3: Field more than 100 standards, and they can be further classi-
Joint Coatings. fied based on the properties they evaluate (Figure 2): steel,
coating, steel-coating interface, coating-soil interface,
steel-soil interface, and coating-coating interface.
2.2.7 Thermal spray aluminum (TSA)
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – 2.3.1 Steel

External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines
Used in Pipeline Transport Systems, Part 3: Field The steel surface plays an important role in the performance
Joint Coatings of coating. Surface imperfections, both physical and chemi-
– The Society for Protective Coating (SSPC)-CS 23.00/ cal, can cause premature failure. Coatings tend to pull away
AWS C2.23M/NACE No. 12: Specification for the from sharp edges and projections. Before the application of
Application of Thermal Spray Coatings (Metallizing)
of Aluminum, Zinc, and Their Alloys and Composites
for the Corrosion Protection of Steel. Steel/soil
interface Steel
Steel/coating/
girthweld Steel/coating
2.2.8 Hot-applied microcrystalline wax coating interface
interface
– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Coating/

External Coatings for Buried or Submerged Pipelines soil
interface Coating
Joint Coatings Figure 2 Factors affecting coating performance.

coatings, the steel surface is blast cleaned, the surface profile – NACE RP0178, Fabrication Details, “Surface Finish
is established, and physical and chemical contaminants are Requirements and Proper Design Consideration for
removed. The test methodologies and standards for deter- Tanks and Vessels to be Lined for Immersion Service”
mining steel properties are discussed in this section. – ASTM (formerly American Society for Testing and
Blast cleaning: The primary functions of blast clean- Materials) D4417, Standard Test Method for “Field
ing before coating are to remove physical material from the Measurements of Surface Profile of Blast Cleaned
surface that can cause early failure of the coating system Steel”
and to create a suitable surface profile that will enhance – NACE RP0287, Recommended Practice for “Field
the adhesion of the coating. The blasted steel surface may Measurement of Surface Profile of Abrasive Blast
further be cleaned by solvents. Standards describing the Cleaned Steel Surface Using a Replica Tape”
procedure for cleaning include – ISO 8502-3, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before
– SSPC-SP 1, “Solvent Cleaning” Application of Paints and Related Products –
– SSPC-SP 2, “Hand Tool Cleaning” Tests for the Assessment of Surface Cleanliness,
– SSPC-SP 3, “Power Tool Cleaning”, 2004 (1982) “Assessment of Dust on Steel Surfaces Prepared for
– NACE No. 1/SSPC-SP 5, Joint Surface Preparation Painting (Pressure-Sensitive Tape Method)”
Standard, “White Metal Blast Cleaning” – ISO 8503-1, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before
– NACE No. 2/SSPC-SP 10, Joint Surface Preparation Application of Paints and Related Products – Surface
Standard, “Near-White Metal Blast Cleaning” Roughness Characteristics of Blast-Cleaned Steel
– NACE No. 3/SSPC-SP 6, Joint Surface Preparation Substrates, “Specifications and Definitions for ISO
Standard, “Commercial Blast Cleaning” Surface Profile Comparators for the Assessment of
– NACE No. 4/SSPC-SP 7, Joint Surface Preparation Abrasive Blast-Cleaned Surfaces”
Standard, “Brush-Off Blast Cleaning” – ISO 8503-2, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before
– NACE No. 5/SSPC-SP 12, Joint Surface Preparation Application of Paints and Related Products – Surface
Standard, “Surface Preparation and Cleaning of Roughness Characteristics of Blast-Cleaned Steel
Metals by Waterjetting Prior to Recoating” Substrates, “Method for the Grading of Surface
– NACE No. 8/SSPC-SP 14, Joint Surface Preparation Profile of Abrasive Blast-Cleaned Steel – Comparator
Standard, “Industrial Blast Cleaning” procedure”
– SSPC-SP COM, Surface Preparation Commentary for – ISO 8503-4, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before
Steel and Concrete Substrates Application of Paints and Related Products –
– ISO 8504-1, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before Surface Roughness Characteristics of Blast-Cleaned
Application of Paints and Related Products – Surface Steel Substrates, “Method for the Calibration
Preparation Methods, “General Principles” of ISO Surface Profile Comparators and for the
– ISO-8504-2, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before Determination of Surface Profile – Stylus Instrument
Application of Paints and Related Products – Surface Procedure”
Preparation Methods, “Abrasive Blast-Cleaning”
– ISO-8504-3, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before In all the standards, three methods of measuring surface
Application of Paints and Related Products – Surface profile are described: comparison with standard surface
Preparation Methods, “Hand- and Power-Tool profiles, measurements with fine-pointed probes, and
Cleaning” replica-tape measurements.
Visual contaminations: Dust, corroded materials,
Surface preparation depends on the type of coating. Table varnish, previous coatings, and by-products of abrasive
1 presents surface preparation requirements for various cleaning constitute visual contaminations. The visual
coatings as recommended by type 2 standards. contaminations do not allow the coating to adhere well on
Surface profile: Blast cleaning produces different to the substrate. The presence of visual contamination has
surface profiles. The profile to which steel surface should resulted in failures of field pipes (Beavers, 1992; Vincent,
be blasted depends on the thickness of the coating. Table 2 2001). Standards describing the procedure to remove
presents surface profile requirements for various coatings visual contaminations include
as recommended by type 2 standards. Standards describ- – NACE Recommended Practice RP0394, Standard
ing the procedure to measure surface profiles include Recommended Practice, “Application, Performance,
– SSPC-VIS 1, “Visual Standard for Abrasive Blast and Quality Control of Plant-Applied, Fusion-Bonded
Cleaned Steel (Standard Reference Photographs)” Epoxy External Pipe Coating”, 1994, Appendix P

Coatings Surface preparation requirements
As required by CSA NACE ISO

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A SSPC-SP 2, SSPC-SP 3, NACE No. 3/ Adjacent plant coating:
SSPC-SP 6 ISO 8501-1, ISO 8504-3
(power tool)
Dust contamination: ISO
8502-3
Petrolatum N/A N/A Steel substrate: ISO
8501-1, ISO 8504-3
(hand tool cleaning)
Adjacent plant coating:
ISO 8501-1, ISO 8504-3
(power tool)
8502-3
Wax N/A N/A Steel substrate: ISO
8501-1, ISO 8504-3
(hand tool cleaning)
Adjacent plant coating:
ISO 8501-1, ISO 8504-3
(power tool)
8502-3
Polymeric Liquid primers: NACE No. 3/SSPC-SP 6, SSPC-SP 2, Steel substrate: ISO
SSPC-SP 6/NACE No. 3 SSPC-SP 3 8501-1 (abrasive blast
Fusion bond epoxy cleaning)
primers: SSPC-SP 10/ Adjacent plant coating:
NACE No. 2 ISO 8501-1, ISO 8504-3
(power tool)
8502-3
Heat-shrinkable N/A SSPC-SP 1 Adjacent plant coating:
ISO 8501-1, ISO 8504-3
8502-3
FBE powder N/A SSPC-SP 1, NACE No. 2/SSPC-SP 10, Steel substrate: ISO
SSPC-VIS 1 8503-5
8502-3
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A SSPC-SP 1, SSPC-SP 2, SSPC-SP 3, Steel substrate: ISO
NACE No. 5/SSPC-SP 12, SSPC-SP 14, 8503-5, (abrasive
NACE No. 2/SSPC-SP 10, blasting)
SSPC-VIS 1
Liquid polyurethane SSPC-SP 10/NACE N/A
No. 2
Fiber-reinforced epoxy N/A
Fiber-reinforced vinyl
ester
Cast polyurethane
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed N/A N/A Steel substrate: ISO
polypropylene (PP) 8503-5
Hot-applied PP tapes/ Dust contamination: ISO
sheets 8502-3
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed
polyethylene (PE)
Hot-applied PE tapes/
sheets

(Table 1 continued)
Coatings Surface preparation requirements

(standards)
TSA N/A N/A Steel substrate: ISO

8503-5 (abrasive blast)
8502-3
Chloride ion content:
ISO 8502-6, ISO 8502-9
Hot-applied N/A SSPC-SP 1, SSPC-SP 2 Steel substrate: ISO
microcrystalline 8501-1
wax Dust contamination:
8502-3
Elastomeric N/A N/A Steel substrate: ISO
8503-5
8502-3
Coal tar N/A SSPC-SP 1, NACE No. 3/SSPC-SP 6 N/A
(ISO 8501-1)
If a blast not possible, hand tool:
SSPC-SP 2, or power tool: SSPC-SP 3
(ISO 8504-3)
Table 1 Requirements of surface preparation for various coatings.
– CSA Z245.20, “Plant-Applied External Fusion Bond – ISO 8502-9, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before
Epoxy Coating for Steel Pipe”, Section 12.9 Application of Paints and Related Products, “Field
Method for the Conductometric Determination of
Nonvisual contaminations: Steel contaminated with
Water-Soluble Salts”
soluble salts (e.g., chlorides, sulfates) develops rust
rapidly in the presence of humidity. By-products of phos-
Although the effects of surface nonvisual contamination
phoric acid treatment may affect the interaction between
on FBE coatings have been widely studied, the importance
the pipe and the coating. Standards describing the proce-
of is not well recognized in type 2 standards. No standard
dure to determine nonvisual contaminants include
to specify the limits for nonvisual contaminations is cur-
– SSPC-TU 4, “Field Methods for Retrieval and Analysis
rently available.
of Soluble Salts on Substrates”
– ASTM D4940, Standard Test Method for “Conductive
Analysis of Water Soluble Ionic Contamination of
Blasting Abrasives” 2.3.2 Coating
– ISO 8501-1, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before
Application of Paints and Related Products, “Rust Both the properties of the coating material and the quality
Grades and Preparation Grades of Uncoated Steel control practiced during the application of the coating
Substrates and of Steel Substrates After Overall influence the reliability of the coating. Several standard
Removal of Previous Coatings” tests are performed to evaluate the properties of both the
– ISO 8502-2, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before raw materials and the coating material. These standards
Application of Paints and Related Products, are classified as common (to all coatings) and specific
“Laboratory Determination of Chloride on Cleaned (to a particular coating) tests and are discussed in this
Surfaces” section.
– ISO 8502-6, Preparation of Steel Substrates Before Thermal conductivity: The temperature of oil and gas
Application of Paints and Related Products, infrastructure depends both on weather and operating
“Extraction of Soluble Contaminants for Analysis – conditions. The value of thermal conductivity provides
The Bresle Method” information on the heat transferability of the coating.

Coatings Surface profile requirements, mil (μm)
As required by (standards) CSA NACE ISO
Tape Bituminous N/A 2–3 (50–76) Not specified

Petrolatum N/A N/A Not specified
Wax N/A N/A Not specified
Polymeric (40–110) 2–3 (50–76) Not specified
Heat-shrinkable N/A 2 (50) Not specified
FBE powder N/A 2.5–4.0 (64–100) (50–100)
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A 2–4 (50–100) (50–100)
Liquid polyurethane (40–110) N/A
Fiber-reinforced vinyl ester
Cast polyurethane
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A (50–100)
Hot-applied PP tapes/sheets
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
Hot-applied PE tapes/sheets
TSA N/A N/A (60–125)
Hot-applied microcrystalline N/A Not specified Not specified
wax
Elastomeric N/A N/A (50–100)
Coal tar N/A 1.5–3.5 (38–89) N/A
Table 2 Requirements of surface profiles for various coatings.
The procedures in evaluating thermal conductivity of polymers has long been recognized. Electrical resis-
are presented in tivity measurements are used to investigate the rates
– ASTM E1225, Standard Test Method for “Thermal and extent of polymerization, glass transition tempera-
Conductivity of Solids by Means of the Guarded- ture, solid-state and dielectric properties, degradation,
Comparative-Longitudinal Heat Flow Technique” and related properties. The resistance of polymeric
coatings is normally high (1014 Ω). This high resistance
Type 2 standards do not consider thermal conductivity as
protects the infrastructure from corrosion; however, the
important for coating performance.
resistance decreases as water-containing ionic species
Dielectric strength: Polymeric coatings are insula-
enters the coating. Therefore, electrical conductivity
tors and should have high dielectric strength. Dielectric
is a measure of coating performance. Standards that
strength is defined as the voltage gradient at which an
provide procedures to evaluate electrical conductivity
increase in conductance occurs. Standards that provide
include
procedures to determine dielectric strength include
– ASTM D257, Standard Test Method for “DC Resistance
– ASTM D1000, Standard Test Method for “Pressure-
or Conductance of Insulating Materials”
Sensitive Adhesive-Coated Tapes Used for Electrical
– ASTM C611, Standard Test Method for “Electrical
and Electronic Applications”
Resistivity of Manufactured Carbon and Graphite
– ASTM D149, Standard Test Method for “Dielectric
Articles at Room Temperature”
Breakdown Voltage and Dielectric Strength of Solid
Electrical Insulating Materials at Commercial Power Not all type 2 standards recognize the importance of deter-
Frequencies” mining the electrical resistance of the coatings. Table 4
– ASTM D495, Standard Test Method for “High-Voltage, presents the electrical resistance requirements for various
Low-Current, Dry Arc Resistance of Solid Electrical girth weld coatings.
Insulation”
Indentation hardness: Indentation hardness is a measure
Table 3 presents the requirements of dielectric strength for of determining the resistance of coatings to mechani-
various coatings as required by type 2 standards. cal abuse during storage, construction, and backfilling.
Electrical conductivity/insulation resistance: The Standards that provide procedures to determine hardness
value of electrical-resistivity data in studying the properties include

Coatings Dielectric strength requirements

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A Not specified Not specified

Wax N/A N/A > 6.7 V/μm (ASTM D149)
Polymeric Not Cold-applied thin backing polymeric tape Not specified
specified system: minimum 500 V/25 μm (ASTM
D149)
Cold-applied tape coating with tension,
field applied, bonded multilayer
Inner layer: 18,000 V/mm minimum
(ASTM D149)
Outer layer: 22,000 V/mm (550 V/mil)
minimum (ASTM D149)
Total tape system: 9450 V/mm (240 V/
mil) minimum (ASTM D1000)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A N/A Not specified
PE backed, primer Not specified
PP backed, primer Not specified
FBE powder N/A Not specified Not specified
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A In accordance with supplier’s Not specified
specification (ASTM D149)
Liquid polyurethane Not N/A
specified
Fiber-reinforced vinyl ester N/A
Cast polyurethane N/A
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A Not specified
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
TSA N/A N/A Not specified
Hot-applied N/A 14 V/μm (350 V/mil) minimum Microcrystalline wax ≥ 4
microcrystalline wax V/μm (ASTM D149)
Outer wrap (wax-laminated
plastic film on spun-bonded
plastic mat) ≥ 14 V/μm
(ASTM D149)
Outer wrap (wax-saturated
spun-bonded plastic
mat) ≥ 14 V/μm (ASTM
D149)
Elastomeric N/A N/A Not specified
Coal tar N/A > 10 V/μm (250 V/mil) (ASTM D495) N/A
Table 3 Requirements of dielectric strength for various coatings.
– ASTM D1474, Standard Test Method for “Indentation – ASTM D785, Standard Test Method for “Rockwell
Hardness of Organic Coatings” Hardness of Plastics and Electrical Insulating
– ASTM D2240, Standard Test Method for “Rubber Materials”
Property-Durometer Hardness” – ASTM D3363, Standard Test Method for “Film
– ASTM D2583, Standard Test Method for “Indentation Hardness by Pencil Test”
Hardness of Rigid Plastics by Means of a Barcol Table 5 presents the hardness requirement of various girth
Impressor” weld coatings as described in type 2 standards.

Coatings Insulation resistance
Tape Bituminous N/A Not At 23°C: ≥ 106 Ω m2 for RS100

specified ≥ 0.8 for RS100/RS70
Petrolatum N/A N/A At 23°C: ≥ 106 Ω m2 for RS100
≥ 0.8 for RS100/RS70
Wax N/A N/A At 23°C: ≥ 106 Ω m2 for RS100
≥ 0.8 for RS100/RS70
Polymeric Not specified Not At 23°C: ≥ 108 Ω m2 for RS100
specified ≥ 0.8 for RS100/RS70
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A N/A Not specified
FBE powder N/A Not Not specified
specified
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A Not At 23°C: 106 Ω m2 for RS100
specified 0.8 for RS100/RS70
Liquid polyurethane Not specified N/A At 23°C: 106 Ω m2 for RS100
0.8 for RS100/RS70
Fiber-reinforced epoxy N/A At 23°C: 106 Ω m2 for RS100
0.8 for RS100/RS70
Fiber-reinforced vinyl ester N/A At 23°C: 106 Ω m2 for RS100
0.8 for RS100/RS70
Cast polyurethane N/A Electrical volume resistivity: at
23°C: ≥ 1012 Ω cm (ASTM D257)
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
Hot-applied N/A Not Not specified
microcrystalline wax specified
Elastomeric N/A N/A Volume resistivity: polychloroprene, and
EPDM: > 1011 Ω cm (ASTM D257)
Coal tar N/A 1 × 1014 N/A
Ω-cm
(ASTM
C611)
Table 4 Requirements of insulation/electrical resistance for various coatings.
Penetration resistance: The penetration or deforma- Table 6 presents the penetration resistance requirements
tion resistance of a coating is a measure of resistance of as described in type 2 standards.
the coating to loading from soil and other buried objects. Water permeation: Coatings function as a barrier by
During the test, the depth or penetration as a result of physically isolating the substrate from moisture. The entry
blunt rod load is measured with a micrometer depth of water is the first step in the development of a corrosion
gauge. Standards that provide procedures to determine cell (American Gas Association [AGA], 1978a). Standards that
penetration resistance include provide procedures to determine water permeation include
– ASTM D5, Standard Test Method for “Penetration of – ASTM D570, Standard Test Method for “Water
Bituminous Materials” Absorption of Plastics”
– ASTM G17, Standard Test Method for “Penetration – ASTM G9, Standard Test Method for “Water
Resistance of Pipeline Coatings (Blunt Rod)” Penetration into Pipeline Coatings”
– ASTM D937, Standard Test Method for “Cone – ASTM E96, Standard Test Method for “Water Vapor
Penetration of Petroleum.” Transmission of Materials”

Coatings Indentation hardness

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A Not specified At 23°C: 1.0 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm residual
thickness
Petrolatum N/A N/A At 23°C: 0.1 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm residual
thickness
Wax N/A N/A At 23°C: 0.1 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm residual
thickness
Polymeric Not Not specified 23°C
specified Up to 50°C: 10.0 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm
residual thickness
Up to 80°C: 1.0 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm
residual thickness
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A Not specified At 23°C
For up to 50°C: 1.0 N/mm2, ≥ 0.6 mm residual
thickness
thickness
thickness
At Tmax: For up to 50°C: 1.0 N/mm2, ≥ 0.6 mm
residual thickness
thickness
thickness
PE backed, primer At Tmax: 10.0 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm residual
thickness
PP backed, primer At Tmax: 10.0 N/mm2, no holiday, ≥ 0.6 mm residual
thickness
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A In accordance with At Tmax: ≤ 30% DFT (resistance at 10 N/mm2,
supplier’s specification holiday detection at 5 kV/mm)
(ASTM D2240, Shore D
hardness)
Liquid polyurethane Not N/A At Tmax: ≤ 30% DFT (resistance at 10 N/mm2,
specified holiday detection at 5 kV/mm)
Fiber-reinforced epoxy N/A At Tmax: ≤ 10% DFT (resistance at 10 N/mm2,
holiday detection at 5 kV/mm)
Fiber-reinforced vinyl ester N/A At Tmax: ≤ 10% DFT (resistance at 10 N/mm2,
holiday detection at 5 kV/mm)
Cast polyurethane N/A Not specified
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A At Tmax: ≤ 0.9 mm at a pressure of 10 N/mm2
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE At Tmax: ≤ 1.0 mm at a pressure of 10 N/mm2
Hot-applied N/A Not specified Microcrystalline wax: needle penetration at 25°C:
microcrystalline 26–50 (ASTM D1321)
wax
Elastomeric N/A N/A Elastomer FJC: 60–70 Shore A (ISO 7619-1)
Polychloroprene: 60 to 70 Shore A (ISO 7619-1)
EPDM: 70 Shore A (ISO 7619-1)
Coal tar N/A Not specified N/A
Table 5 Requirements of indentation hardness for various coatings.

Coatings Penetration resistance

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A Coating compound: at 25°C, 100 g for 5 s: 20 mm Not specified
(ASTM D5)
Polymeric Not specified Cold-applied tape coatings with tension, field Not specified
applied, bonded multilayer
Total tape system: 25% with no holidays at 22°C
maximum; 50% with no holidays at MST (ASTM G17)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A Not specified Not specified
PE backed, primer
PP backed, primer
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A Qualification requirements: 10% of DFT at upper Not specified
service temperature (ASTM G17)
Liquid polyurethane Not specified N/A
Fiber-reinforced N/A
epoxy
Fiber-reinforced vinyl N/A
ester
Hot-applied PP
tapes/sheets
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
Hot-applied PE
tapes/sheets
TSA N/A Not specified Not specified
Hot-applied N/A Needle penetration: 26–50 at 25°C (ASTM D1321) Not specified
microcrystalline wax
Coal tar N/A 100 g at 25°C (ASTM D5) N/A
Table 6 Requirements of penetration resistance for various coatings.
– ASTM F372, Standard Test Method for “Water Vapor Standards describing the procedure to measure gas
Transmission Rate of Flexible Barrier Materials Using permeation include
an Infrared Detection Technique” – ASTM D1134, Standard Test Method for “Determining
– ASTM D95, Standard Test Method for “Water in Gas Permeability Characteristics of Plastic Film and
Petroleum Products and Bituminous Materials by Sheeting”
Distillation” – ASTM D3985, Standard Test Method for “Oxygen Gas
– ASTM D2247, Standard Test Method for “Testing Transmission Rate Through Plastic Film and Sheeting
Water Resistance Coatings in 100% Relative Using a Coulometric Sensor”
Humidity” – ASTM D737, Standard Test Method for “Air
Permeability of Textile Fabrics”
Table 7 presents the water permeation resistance as None of the type 2 standards require evaluation of gas per-
required by type 2 standards. meation through pipeline coatings.
Gas permeation: Permeation of corrosive gases (e.g., Chemical resistance: Polymeric coatings should be
oxygen, CO2) through pipeline coatings results in the onset resistant to chemical contaminations from the environ-
of corrosion; therefore, the measure of gas permeation ment. The resistance of polymeric coatings to chemicals
through coatings is important (Papavinasam, Attard, & is determined by visual examination and by tests for any
Revie, 2006). loss of mechanical or bonding properties.

Coatings Water permeation

(standards)

Polymeric Not specified Reinforced polymeric tape: Water Not specified
vapor transmission rate: 0.006 g/h/m2
maximum (ASTM E96 method B)
Cold-applied tape coatings with tension,
field applied, bonded multilayer: water
vapor transmission rate, inner and outer
layer: maximum 0.35 g/24 h/100 cm2
(ASTM E96 method B)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A Not specified Not specified
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A Coating properties: Moisture Not specified
permeation: Rating of 1–3 (NACE
RP0394, 28 days, tap water at 24°C,
35°C, and 65°C)
Liquid polyurethane Not specified N/A Not specified
Fiber-reinforced epoxy N/A Not specified
Fiber-reinforced vinyl ester N/A Not specified
Cast polyurethane N/A Water absorption at
7 days, 23°C (ISO
62): ≤ 0.1 mass%
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
Hot-applied N/A Not specified Not specified
microcrystalline wax
Coal tar N/A Water vapor permeability: 6.5 × 103 perms N/A
(ASTM E96)
Table 7 Requirements of water permeation for various coatings.
Standards that provide procedures to determine the samples in hot water (Kellner & Serra, 1995; Tsuru, Sagara,
chemical resistance of polymeric materials include & Haruyama, 1987). A standard providing the procedure to
– ASTM G20, Standard Test Method for “Chemical evaluate the degree of blistering is
Resistance of Pipeline Coatings” – ASTM D714, Standard Test Method for “Evaluating
– ASTM D543, Standard Test Method for “Resistance of Degree of Blistering of Paints”
Plastics to Chemical Reagents”
None of the coating standards require the evaluation of
Type 2 standards do not consider chemical resistance as the blister-forming tendency of the coatings.
important for coating performance. Weathering: During construction, coated materials
Blistering: Blister formation is one of the common may be stored outdoors. During outdoor exposure, the
modes of failure of FBE coatings when immersed in water coatings may be affected by ultraviolet radiation, rainwa-
(Papavinasam, Attard, & Revie, 2009). The tendency ter, and temperature. The effects of outdoor exposure are
to form blisters is evaluated by immersing the coated determined by comparing the properties of samples kept

indoors and exposed outdoors. Standards that provide Resistance to oxidation: The environment surrounding
procedures to evaluate the susceptibility of coating to a coating can range from a relatively inert environment,
weathering include such as sandy soil, to a more hostile environment, such
– ASTM G154, “Standard Practice for Operating as acidic marsh. When oil and gas infrastructure operates
Fluorescent Light Apparatus for UV Exposure of at elevated temperatures (up to 85°C) in a hostile environ-
Nonmetallic Materials” ment, antioxidants are incorporated into the coatings. It
– ASTM G151, “Standard Practice for Exposing is advantageous to have a rapid and reliable laboratory
Nonmetallic Materials in Accelerated Test Devices method to determine the resistance to degradation of anti-
that Use Laboratory Light Sources” oxidants. However, no standards (either type 2 or 3) exist
– ASTM D822, “Standard Practice for Filtered Open- to evaluate or specify this property.
Flame Carbon-Arc Exposures of Paint and Related Compressive properties: It is useful to determine the
Coatings” changes in the mechanical properties of coatings, includ-
– ASTM G11, Standard Test Method for “Effects of ing modulus, under various loading conditions. A stand-
Outdoor Weathering on Pipeline Coatings” ard providing the methods to determine compressive
properties is
Cohesion: Adhesive forces bond a coating onto metal, – ASTM D695, Standard Test Method for “Compressive
whereas cohesive forces bond a coating with itself. Cohe- Properties of Rigid Plastics”
sion tests are similar to adhesion tests except that the speci-
men plates are designed so that the adhesion area is greater No type 2 coating standard requires the measure of com-
than the specimen’s cross-sectional area, thus assuring a pressive properties.
cohesion failure within the coating rather than an adhesion Thermal expansion: Coating materials should have
failure at the steel-coating interface (Partridge, 2000). very low thermal expansion so that the adhesion to steel
The test methods to evaluate cohesion are same as is not lost. A standard providing the methods to determine
those for evaluating adhesion. Standards describing the thermal expansion is
procedures to determine cohesion include – ASTM D696, Standard Test Method for “Coefficient of
– ASTM D1000, Standard Test Method for “Pressure- Linear Thermal Expansion of Plastics Between -30°C
Sensitive Adhesive-Coated Tapes Used for Electrical and 30°C”
and Electronic Applications”
No type 2 coating, however, requires the measure of
– ASTM D879, “Specification for Communication and
thermal expansion.
Signal Pin-Type Lime Glass Insulators”
Film thickness: Coating thickness is an important
– ASTM D1002, Standard Test Method for “Strength
factor in determining the service life and cost of coatings.
Properties of Adhesive in Shear by Tension Loading
The nondestructive measurement of the dry film thick-
(Metal-to-Metal)”
ness of the coating on an external surface is important.
– ASTM D2197, Standard Test Method for “Adhesion of
Variations in magnetic flux or magnetic attraction due to
Organic Coatings by Scrape Adhesion”
the presence of a coating can be calibrated into a thick-
– ASTM D3359, Standard Test Method for “Measuring
ness measurement. Standards providing the procedures
Adhesion by Tape Test”
to measure coating thickness include
– ASTM D4541, Standard Test Method for “Pull-Off
– ASTM G12, Standard Test Method for “Nondestructive
Strength of Coatings Using Portable Adhesion Testers”
Measurements of Film Thickness of Pipeline Coatings
on Steel”
The requirements to evaluate cohesion per type 2 coating
– ASTM D4138, Standard Test Method for
standards are same as those for adhesion.
“Measurement of Dry Film Thickness of Protective
Environmental stress-cracking resistance: Due to soil
Coating Systems by Destructive Means”
stress and wet-dry cycles, coatings may crack during oper-
– ASTM D4414, Standard Test Method for “Measurement
ation. Under certain conditions of stress, a coating may
of Wet Film Thickness by Notch Gages”
crack or become brittle. Standards providing the proce-
– Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper
dures to determine cracking resistance of coatings include
Industry, TAPPI T414, “Thickness (Caliper) of Paper,
– ASTM D746, Standard Test Method for “Brittleness
Paperboard, and Combined Board”
Temperature of Plastics and Elastomers by Impact”
– ASTM D1693, Standard Test Method for Table 8 presents the film thickness requirements for
“Environmental Stress-Cracking of Ethylene Plastics” various coatings as required by type 2 standards.

Coatings Thickness, mm (mil)

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A minimum 1.3 mm (50 mils) (ASTM D1000) ≥ 0.9 mm × nominal value
Petrolatum N/A N/A ≥ 0.9 mm × nominal value
Wax N/A N/A > 1.75 mm (ASTM D1000)
Polymeric 0.15 mm Cold-applied laminate polymeric tape: minimum ≥ 0.9 mm × nominal value
0.89 (35) (ASTM D1000)
Reinforced polymeric tape: minimum 0.89 (35)
(ASTM D1000)
Optional outer layer: minimum 0.8 (3)
Cold-applied thin backing polymeric tape:
minimum 0.76 (30) (ASTM D1000)
Cold-applied tape coating with tension, field
applied, bonded multilayer:
Inner layer: minimum 0.5 (ASTM D1000)
Outer layer: minimum 0.76 (ASTM D1000)
Total tape system: minimum 1.2 (ASTM D1000)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A Not specified ≥ 0.85 mm × nominal value
PE backed, primer ≥ 0.85 mm × nominal value
PP backed, primer ≥ 0.85 mm × nominal value
FBE powder N/A 0.64 mm (25 mil) Type 3A: 0.35–0.7 mm
Type 3B: minimum
thickness = plant-applied
coating thickness
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A In accordance with supplier’s specification Minimum thickness = by
Liquid polyurethane 0.35 mm N/A agreement between end
Fiber-reinforced epoxy N/A user and applicator
Fiber-reinforced vinyl N/A
ester
Cast polyurethane N/A 20 mm
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A Minimum thickness = by
Hot-applied PP tapes/ agreement between end
sheets user and applicator
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
Hot-applied PE tapes/
sheets
TSA N/A N/A 0.2–0.375 mm (ISO 2178)
Hot-applied N/A 0.5 mm (20 mil) Primary wax layer:
microcrystalline minimum = 0.5 mm
wax Outer wrap: minimum =
0.3 mm
Elastomeric N/A N/A Same as plant-applied
coating unless otherwise
agreed (ISO 2178)
Coal tar N/A 3.0 mm (120 mil) N/A
Table 8 Requirements of thickness of various coatings.
Brittle temperature test: Below certain temperatures, Composition: The composition of coating is specific to the
polymer coatings their lose elasticity and become brittle particular product. Some ingredients of the coating may
or crack. A standard providing the procedures to measure be confidential. However, a composition test may be used
brittleness temperature is to determine the general composition of a coating material
– ASTM D746, Standard Test Method for “Brittleness for quality control purposes. For example, a good-quality
Temperature of Plastics and Elastomers by Impact” control test for FBE and epoxy coatings is to determine the

epoxy content in the resin. A standard providing the pro- Porosity: A coating must be as nonporous as possible.
cedures to determine epoxy content is The measure of porosity is a good quality control test for
– ASTM D1652, Standard Test Method for “Epoxy coatings. Standards providing the procedures to measure
Content of Epoxy Resins” porosity of coatings include
– NACE Standard RP0394, Standard Recommended
Sag: As the coating, especially coal tar coating, ages it will Practice, “Application, Performance, and Quality
sag (i.e., stretch and droop). To simulate the effect of aging, Control of Plant-Applied, Fusion-Bonded Epoxy
the sag test is conducted at temperatures higher than the External Pipe Coating”
normal operating temperature. A standard providing the – CSA Z245.20, “Plant-Applied External Fusion Bond
procedures to determine sagging tendency of coating is Epoxy Coating for Steel Pipe”
– NACE Standard RP0602, Standard Recommended – ASTM D1134, Standard Test Method for “Determining
Practice, “Field-Applied Coal Tar Enamel Pipe Gas Permeability Characteristics of Plastic Film and
Coating Systems: Application, Performance, and Sheeting” (the gas permeability of pipeline coatings
Quality Control” can be used to evaluate their porosity)
Pliability: Pliability is a measure of the strength of the Viscosity: The viscosity of the coating determines the
external layer of a protective coating. A standard provid- wetting and spreading of the coating on the substrate
ing the procedures to determine pliability of coating is during application. A standard providing the procedures
– NACE Standard RP0602, Standard Recommended to measure viscosity of coating is
Practice, “Field-Applied Coal Tar Enamel Pipe – ASTM D4212, Standard Test Method for “Viscosity by
Coating Systems: Application, Performance, and Dip-Type Viscosity Cups”
Quality Control”
Flow: To apply a coating uniformly at different locations and
Gel time: The measurement of the gel time is important to maintain the efficiency of the spray gun, a steady flow
for thermal set coatings, e.g., FBE and epoxy. It provides should be maintained. In the flow test, the rate of extru-
information on the duration of coating application. Stand- sion of the molten resins through a die of a specified length
ards providing the procedures to measure gel time include and diameter is measured under prescribed conditions of
– NACE Standard RP0394, Standard Recommended temperature, load, and piston position in the barrel. This is
Practice, “Application, Performance, and Quality a good quality-control test for thermoplastic coatings, e.g.,
Control of Plant-Applied, Fusion-Bonded Epoxy two-layer, three-layer, and composite coatings. A standard
External Pipe Coating” providing the procedures to measure flow of coating is
– CSA Z245.20, “Plant-Applied External Fusion Bond – ASTM D1238, Standard Test Method for “Flow Rates
Epoxy Coating for Steel Pipe” of Thermoplastics by Extrusion Plastometer”
Softening point: The softening point is a measure of the

Particle size: The particle size of the raw material deter-
fluid property of pipeline coatings, especially coal tar
mines the density of a finished coating. For this reason,
coatings. Standards providing the procedures to measure
the particle size of raw material is controlled and meas-
softening point of coating include
ured during the application of the coating. A standard pro-
– ASTM D36, Standard Test Method for “Softening
viding the procedures to measure particle size is
Point of Bitumen (Ring-and-Ball Apparatus)”
– CSA Z245.20, “Plant-Applied External Fusion Bond
– ASTM E28, Standard Test Method for “Softening
Epoxy Coating for Steel Pipe”
Point by Ring-and-Ball Apparatus”
– ASTM D1525, Standard Test Method for “Vicat
Total volatile content: The release of volatile substances
Softening Temperature of Plastics”
from a coating leads to the formation of voids. In addition,
from the environmental perspective, the release of certain Shelf life: Shelf life is a measure of the duration for which
volatile substances is prohibited. For this reason, the vola- the raw material can be stored before applying. Meas-
tile content of the coating is kept to a minimum. A stand- urement of the shelf life of a coating material is a good
ard providing the procedures to measure volatile contents quality-control test. A standard providing the procedures
of coating is to measure shelf life of coating raw materials is
– CSA Z245.20, “Plant-Applied External Fusion Bond – CSA Z245.20, “Plant-Applied External Fusion Bond
Epoxy Coating for Steel Pipe” Epoxy Coating for Steel Pipe”

Filler content: Filler materials are added to certain coating determine the status of the steel-coating interface include
raw materials, especially during the application of coal adhesion, cathodic disbondment (CD), and flexibility.
tar coating. The filler content determines the property and Adhesion: Adhesion is a summation of a wide variety
performance of coating. A standard providing the proce- of forces that hold a coating onto a substrate. Although
dures to measure filler content of coating is adhesion is a single property, it can neither be identified
– ASTM D2415, Standard Test Method for “Ash in Coal as a single property nor can be directly measured. It is
Tar and Pitch” measured by the force required to remove the coating from
the surface. Both adhesive and removal forces depend on
Density/specific gravity: The density of coating raw mate- the same factors, including surface conditions, surface
rial is another property to maintain the quality of the geometry, wetting, and brittleness of the coating.
coating. Therefore, it is measured during the manufacture Numerous test procedures have been specifically devel-
of raw material and during the application of coating. oped for evaluating adhesive strength. Adhesion can be
Standards providing the procedures to measure the characterized by hot-water sock resistance, peel strength,
density of coatings include shear strength, pull-off resistance, resistance to scraping,
– ASTM D71, Standard Test Method for “Relative and other properties. It is difficult to rate the various adhe-
Density of Solid Pitch and Asphalt (Displacement sion tests on their merits to accurately simulate the adhe-
Method)” sive force. Many adhesion tests produce numerical results,
– ASTM D792, Standard Test Method for “Density and and some are subjective in nature. Normally, a test produc-
Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of Plastics by ing results in numerical values is more useful than a test
Displacement” relying solely on the subjective assessment of the tester
– ASTM D1505, Standard Test Method for “Density of (AGA, 1978b; Hamner, 1970). Standards providing the pro-
Plastics by the Density-Gradient Technique” cedures to determine the adhesive strength include
– ASTM D1002, Standard Test Method for “Strength
Tear strength: Tear strength is used as a quality-control test Properties of Adhesive in Shear by Tension Loading
for coal tar coating. The tear strength is measured both in the (Metal-to-Metal)”
longitudinal and the transverse directions. A standard pro- – ASTM D2197, Standard Test Method for “Adhesion of
viding the procedures to measure tear strength of coating is Organic Coatings by Scrape Adhesion”
– NACE Standard RP0399, Standard Recommended – ASTM D3359, Standard Test Method for “Measuring
Practice, “Plant-Applied External Coal Tar Enamel Adhesion by Tape Test”
Pipe Coating Systems: Application, Performance, and – ASTM D4541, Standard Test Method for “Pull-Off
Quality Control” Strength of Coatings Using Portable Adhesion Testers”
– ASTM D1000, Standard Test Method for Pressure-
Curing: The extent of curing determines the strength of Sensitive Adhesive-Coated Tapes Used for Electrical
thermal-set coatings. Several methods, including shear and Electronic Applications
rheology measurement, differential scanning calorimetry, – NACE Standard RP0394, Standard Recommended
and differential thermal analysis and solvent extraction Practice, “Application, Performance, and Quality
are used to determine the extent of curing (Gray, Lunn, Control of Plant-Applied, Fusion-Bonded Epoxy
& Mcardle, 1983; Mills, 1984; Neal, 1993, 1994; Temple & External Pipe Coating [Hot-Water Sock (to provide an
Coulson, 1985). A standard providing the procedures to accelerated assessment of the coating’s adhesion to
determine the extent of curing is the substrate in a hot, wet environment)]”
– ASTM D3418, Standard Test Method for “Transition – CSA.Z245.20 (Adhesion of the Coating)
Temperature of Polymers by Thermal Analysis.” – CSA.Z245.21 (Peel Test – Constant Rate or Hanging
Mass)
– ANSI/AWWA C213 (Adhesion Using Knife Blade)
2.3.3 Steel-coating interface – ANSI/AWWA C293 (Water Sock)
Coating failures initiate normally at the steel-coating inter- Because of the different types of tests, no meaningful
face. As long as this interface is intact, no failure occurs by comparison can be made either within standards from
corrosion. The development of chemical and electrochem- one organization or among standards devised by various
ical conditions at this interface is therefore critical for the standards-making organizations. Table 9 presents adhe-
overall performance of the coating. The properties that sion tests as required by type 2 coating standards.

Coatings Adhesion

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A Tape at 10°C, pipe at 27°C, 150-mm test area: pass if Not specified
fabric tears at point of stripping or fabric strips from the
underlying coating materials leaving < 10% of liquid
adhesive/primer/bare metal exposed
Polymeric Peel adhesion: ≥ 90% of Cold-applied laminate polymeric tape: Not specified
manufacturer’s specified Adhesion to primed surface: 2.6 N/mm (15 lb/in. width)
values (N/2.54 mm) (ASTM D1000)
Adhesion 24 h: ≥ 80% of Reinforced polymeric tape:
original value (N/2.54 mm) Adhesion to primed surface: 3.15 kN/m (18 lb-force/
75°C: Test specimen should in.) minimum
be full-ring sections with Cold-applied tape coatings with tension, field applied,
ends capped or sealed. bonded multilayer:
Inner layer, adhesion to metal: 2.8 N/mm (16 lb/in.
width) minimum (ASTM D1000)
Outer layer, adhesion to backing and inner wrap:
minimum 0.88 N/mm width (5 lb/in. width) (ASTM
D1000)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no N/A Use an electronic hand peel gauge and control the Not specified
primer conditions as closely as possible (ASTM D1000)
PE backed, Not specified
primer

PP backed, Not specified
primer
FBE powder N/A Push a sharp knife blade through the fully cured coating At 20°C ± 5°C: rating 1 or 2
to the surface of the pipe in a whittling motion (should

not easily strip, chip, or peel)
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A Adhesion to steel: In accordance with supplier’s Adhesion to pipe surface:
specification At 20°C: ≥ 10 MPa (ISO 4624)
Qualification requirements: For NACE RP0394: rating of At 2°C: rating 1
1–3 inclusive at 66°C Adhesion to plant coating:
For ASTM D6677: rating of 6–10 at 20°C At 20°C: ≥ 3.5 MPa (ISO 4624) or rating 1
Adhesion to pipe surface, 28-day hot water immersion test at Tmax:
At 20°C: ≥ 7 MPa (Annex I plus ISO 4624)
Liquid 24 h, rating 1–3 N/A Adhesion to plant coating, 28-day hot water immersion test at Tmax:
polyurethane Rating 2 (Annex I plus annex C) or ≥ 2 MPa (ISO 4624)
(Table 9 continued)
Coatings Adhesion

(standards)
Fiber- N/A Adhesion to pipe surface: at 20°C: ≥ 10 MPa (ISO 4624)
reinforced Adhesion to plant coating: at 20°C: ≥ 3.5 MPa (ISO 4624)
epoxy Adhesion to pipe surface, 28-day hot water immersion test at Tmax:
at 20°C: ≥ 7 MPa (Annex I plus ISO 4624)
Adhesion to plant coating, 28-day hot water immersion test at Tmax:
≥ 2 MPa (ISO 4624)
Fiber- N/A
reinforced
vinyl ester
Cast N/A Adhesion to pipe surface: at 20°C: ≥ 10 MPa (ISO 4624)
polyurethane Adhesion to plant coating: at 20°C: ≥ 3.5 MPa (ISO 4624)
Adhesion to plant coating, 28-day hot water immersion test at Tmax:
at 20°C: ≥ 2 MPa (Annex I plus ISO 4624)
Adhesion to pipe surface, 28-day hot water immersion test at Tmax:
at 23°C: ≥ 7 MPa (ISO 4624)
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed N/A N/A Adhesion to pipe surface and plant coating, 28-day hot water
PP immersion test at Tmax: at 20°C, rating 3
Hot-applied
PP tapes/
sheets
Injection-

molded PP
Flame-sprayed
PE
Hot-applied PE

tapes/sheets
TSA N/A N/A Pull-off laboratory method (ISO 4624) ≥ 14 MPa
Pull-off field method (ASTM D4541) ≥ 7 MPa
Hot-applied N/A At the 12-, 3-, and 6-o’clock positions, using a utility At maximum design temperature, 6- and 12-o’clock positions, using
microcrystalline knife utility knife: no evidence of adhesive failure, coating should leave a
wax film of wax on substrate
Elastomeric N/A N/A Adhesion (peel strength): at 20°C, cohesive, and > 12 N/mm
Adhesion to pipe surface and plant coating after 28-day hot-water
immersion test at Tmax limited as per Annex I: at 20°C, cohesive,
and > 10 N/mm
Coal tar N/A Minimum: 2.4 MPa (350 psi) (ASTM D4541) N/A
Tested in accordance with ANSI/AWWA C203
Table 9 Specifications for determining adhesion of various coatings.

Cathodic disbondment: The CD test is a very old and – ASTM G10, Standard Test Method for “Specific
most versatile test. It was known in the earlier days as Bendability of Pipeline Coatings”
the salt crock test (Shepperd, 1961). The test is an accel- – ASTM G70, Standard Test Method for “Ring
erated method for determining the compatibility between Bendability of Pipeline Coating (Squeeze Test)”
external polymeric pipeline coatings and cathodic protec- – ASTM D522, Standard Test Method for “Mandrel Bend
tion. This test measures the CD caused by electrical stress Test of Attached Organic Coatings”
during cathodic protection. The test evaluates the coating – ASTM D638, Standard Test Method for “Tensile
ability not to loosen or disbond in long-term underground Properties of Plastics”
use. – ASTM D1737, Standard Test Method for “Elongation of
Over the years, several standards-making organiza- Attached Organic Coatings with Cylindrical Mandrel
tions have developed various procedures to conduct this Apparatus”
test. Standards providing the procedures to perform CD – ASTM D882, Standard Test Method for “Tensile
tests include Properties of Thin Plastic Sheeting”
– ASTM G8, Standard Test Method for “Cathodic – ASTM D146, Standard Test Method for “Sampling and
Disbonding of Pipeline Coatings” Testing Bitumen-Saturated Felts and Woven Fabrics
– ASTM G19, Standard Test Method for “Disbonding for Roofing and Waterproofing”
Characteristics of Pipeline Coatings by Direct Soil – ASTM D790, Standard Test Method for “Flexural
Burial” Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics
– ASTM G42, Standard Test Method for “Cathodic and Electrical Insulating Materials”
Disbonding of Pipeline Coatings Subjected to – ASTM D4145, Standard Test Method for “Coating
Elevated Temperatures” Flexibility of Prepainted Sheet”
– ASTM G80, Standard Test Method for “Specific – ASTM D1000, Standard Test Method for “Pressure-
Cathodic Disbonding of Pipeline Coatings” Sensitive Adhesive-Coated Tapes Used for Electrical
– ASTM G95, Standard Test Method for “Cathodic and Electronic Applications”
Disbondment Test of Pipeline Coatings (Attached Cell
Method)” Table 11 presents the flexibility requirements of various
– CSA Z245.20 coating as prescribed in type 2 coating standards.
– CSA Z245.21
– NACE RP394
– British Gas BGC/PS/CW6 2.3.4 Coating-environment interface
– British Gas BGC/PS/CW2
– British Standard BS 3900: F10 The coating-soil interface is a naturally formed interface
– British Standard BS 3900: F11 where events that lead to the deterioration of coatings
– British Standard BS 3164 start. This interface must be adequately protected at the
time of construction using backfill materials. The factors
Some of the variations produce results that can be cor- affecting this interface include chemicals, microbes,
related, whereas some variations are specific to the test abrasion, impact, freeze-thaw cycle, and temperature
procedure and the coating type. Table 10 presents the CD variation.
tests as required by type 2 coating standards. Microbial resistance: Microbes can degrade the
Flexibility: Oil and gas infrastructure expand and con- coating materials because the coating components can
tract in response to temperature changes. Therefore, it is serve as neutrients to microbes. A mixed population of
essential that coatings have some flexibility. The methods microorganisms, including sulfate-reducing bacteria and
to assess flexibility involve bending a coated substrate acid-producing bacteria (APB), may be involved in coating
over a mandrel and determining the amount of bending degradation. Sandy soils favor APB, and high-clay soils
that takes place before the coating cracks. The effects of support populations of both kinds of organisms. Fungi
short-radius bends on a coating are determined, which also alter the optical, mechanical, and electrical proper-
reflects on the ability of the coating to resist cracking, dis- ties of polymeric coatings. The resin portion of the coating
bonding, or other mechanical damage. Coating failures is generally fungus-resistant, but other components such
can be detected both visually and electrically. Standards as plasticizers, stabilizers, and coloring agents may be
providing the procedures to measure the flexibility of the susceptible to microbial attack (Jack, Boven, Wilmott, &
coatings include Worthingham, 1996).

Coatings Maximum cathodic disbonded area radius, mm (in.)

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A 25 mm (1.0 in.) (ASTM G8) ≤ 20 mm (at 23°C, for 28
days)
Petrolatum N/A N/A ≤ 20 mm (at 23°C, for 28
days)
Wax N/A N/A < 12 mm (at 23°C, for 28
days)
Polymeric 25 mm (20°C, for 28 days) Cold-applied laminate polymeric ≤ 15 mm (at 23°C and Tmax,
tape: < 14 mm (0.55 in.) (ASTM for 28 days)
G8)
Reinforced polymeric tape: < 10
mm (0.39 in.) (ASTM G8)
Cold-applied thin backing
polymeric: < 645 mm2 (1.00 in.2)
(ASTM G8)
Cold-applied tape coatings with
tension, field applied, bonded
multilayer: total system: 25 mm
(1.0 in.) (ASTM G8, 30 days) or
ASTM G42 tested at maximum
design operating temperature
(30 days)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A At 23°C: < 15 mm (ASTM G8) ≤ 10 mm (at 23°C) (Tmax
limited to 95°C, for 28
days and determined by
agreement)
PE backed, primer At 23°C: ≤ 8.0 mm
At Tmax: ≤ 15 mm (Tmax
days)
PP backed, primer At 23°C: ≤ 8.0 mm
At Tmax: ≤ 15 mm (Tmax
days)
FBE powder N/A Not specified 8 mm (at 23°C, for 28 days,
-1.5 V), 8 mm (at 65°C, for
24 h, -3.5 V), or 15 mm (at
65°C, for 28 days, -1.5 V)
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A < 10 mm (0.4 in.) (23°C for 28 ≤ 8 mm (at 23°C)
days) No blisters ≤ 10 mm (at Tmax limited to
95°C, 28 days)
Liquid polyurethane 8.5 mm (20°C for 28 days) N/A ≤ 10 mm (at 23°C)
6.5 mm (65°C for 24 h) ≤ 20 mm (at Tmax limited to
95°C, 28 days)
Fiber-reinforced N/A ≤ 8 mm (at 23°C)
epoxy ≤ 15 mm (at Tmax limited to
95°C, 28 days)
Fiber-reinforced vinyl N/A ≤ 8 mm (at 23°C)
ester ≤ 15 mm (at Tmax limited to
95°C, 28 days)
Cast polyurethane N/A ≤ 10 mm (at 23°C)
≤ 20 mm (at Tmax limited to
95°C, 28 days)
≤ 10 mm (at 60°C, 48 h)
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A ≤ 7 mm (at 23°C, 28 days)
95°C, 28 days)

(Table 10 continued)
Coatings Maximum cathodic disbonded area radius, mm (in.)

(standards)
Hot-applied PP
tapes/sheets
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE ≤ 7 mm (at 23°C, 28 days)
Hot-applied PE ≤ 10 mm (at Tmax, 28 days)
tapes/sheets
Hot-applied N/A Not specified ≤ 14 mm (25°C, 28 days)
microcrystalline
wax
Elastomeric N/A N/A ≤ 7 mm (at 23°C, 28 days)
95°C, 28 days)
Coal tar N/A 8 mm (0.3 in.) at 60 days (ASTM N/A
G8)
Table 10 Requirements of CD resistance of various coatings.
The general protocol to evaluate the resistance of – ASTM D968, Standard Test Method for “Abrasion
coating to microbes involves exposing the coating mate- Resistance of Organic Coatings by Falling Abrasive”
rial to the environment containing microbes, then con- – ASTM D1044, Standard Test Method for “Resistance
ducting performance test (e.g., the CD test), and finally of Transparent Plastics to Surface Abrasion”
comparing the test results with those of the coating mate- – ASTM D4060, Standard Test Method for “Abrasion
rial not exposed to microbes. Standards providing the Resistance of Organic Coatings by the Taber Abraser”
procedures to evaluate microbial resistance of polymeric
coatings include Impact resistance: The coating should be resistant to
– ASTM G21, Standard Test Method for “Determining mechanical damage during shipping, handling, instal-
Resistance of Synthetic Polymeric Material to Fungi” lation, and impact from backfilling. Damage to coatings
– ASTM G22, “Standard Practice for Determining caused by backfilling rocks can be determined visually or
Resistance of Plastics to Bacteria” electrically by measuring the amount of dropped material
– ASTM E2180, “Standard Test Method for required to penetrate through the coating to bare metal.
Determining the Activity of Incorporated Standards providing the procedures to measure impact
Antimicrobial Agent(s) in Polymeric or Hydrophobic resistance of coatings include
Material” – ASTM G13, Standard Test Method for “Impact
Resistance of Pipeline Coatings (Limestone Drop
No type 2 standards, however, require the evaluation of Test)”
microbial resistance of coating. – ASTM D14, “Specification for Jacketed Rubber-Lined
Abrasion resistance: Slurry and coarse materials Wire Hose for Public and Private Fire Department Use”
abrade coatings, especially during horizontal drilling – ASTM D256, Standard Test Method for “Determining
under river and road crossings. The abrasion resistance of the Pendulum Impact Resistance of Notched
polymeric coatings therefore should be evaluated. Infor- Specimens of Plastics”
mation from the abrasion resistance test is used to deter- – ASTM D2794, Standard Test Method for “Resistance
mine optimum coating thickness. Standards providing of Organic Coatings to the Effects of Rapid
the procedure to evaluate abrasion resistance of coatings Deformation (Impact)”
include
– ASTM G6, Standard Test Method for “Abrasion Table 12 presents the minimum resistance to impact for
Resistance of Pipeline Coatings” various coatings as required by type 2 coating standards.

Coatings Flexibility

(standards)

Polymeric 2.5° at -30°C, Cold-applied thin backing Not specified
no cracking of polymeric tape: 12.7 mm
polyolefin radius at -29°C (no cracking)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no N/A Low temperature: mastic Not specified
primer sleeve, -10°C minimum Not specified
PE backed, primer (14°F minimum) Not specified
PP backed, primer Hot-melt sleeve: -15°C
minimum (5°F minimum)
FBE powder N/A Not specified By agreement, no visible cracks
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A Not specified By agreement, no visible cracks
Liquid polyurethane 1.5° at 23°C, 10°C, N/A
0°C, or -30°C,
No cracking at test
temperature
epoxy
vinyl ester
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A By agreement, no visible cracks
Hot-applied PP
tapes/sheets
Injection-molded PP
Flame-sprayed PE
Hot-applied PE
tapes/sheets
TSA N/A N/A Bend test (SSPC CS 23.00, except
25-mm-diameter mandrel and 3-mm-thick
coupon)
No peeling off
microcrystalline
wax
Table 11 Requirements of flexibility of various coatings.
Freeze-thaw stability: This test determines the effect – ASTM D2243, Standard Test Method for “Freeze-Thaw
of freezing and thawing on coating adhesion. This test is Resistance of Water-Borne Coatings”
important for operation in low-temperature climates, e.g., – ASTM D2337, Standard Test Method for “Freeze-Thaw
construction of pipelines in arctic environment. Freeze-thaw Stability of Multicolor Lacquers”
tests can be performed by changing either the frequency
of the freeze-thaw conditions or the temperature differen- Both standards are useful to evaluate the freeze-thaw
tial. Coating properties (usually adhesion) are determined stability of coating materials before application. No type
before and after the freeze-thaw test. Standards providing 2 coating standard, however, requires the evaluation of
the procedures to evaluate freeze-thaw stability include freeze-thaw stability.

Coatings Impact resistance

(standards)
Tape Bituminous N/A Not specified At 20°C: ≥ 2 J/mm

Petrolatum N/A N/A At 20°C: ≥ 0.8 J/mm
Wax N/A N/A At 20°C: ≥ 0.8 J/mm
Polymeric Not specified Reinforced polymeric tape: At 20°C: ≥ 4 J/mm
Tape system: minimum 2.3 N m (20
lb in.) (ASTM G14 when using system
with specified outer wrap material)
Outer layer impact strength: minimum
900 kg mm (78 lb in) (ASTM D781,
spherical head)
Cold-applied tape coatings: minimum
2.8 N m (25 in.-lb), no holidays (ASTM
G14)
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A At 23°C: At 20°C: ≥ 5 J/mm
PE backed, primer Mastic sleeve: 4.5 J/mm (40 ft lb/in.) At 20°C: ≥ 5 J/mm
PP backed, primer Hot-melt sleeve: 5.6 J/mm (50 ft lb/in.) At 20°C: ≥ 8 J/mm
FBE powder N/A Not specified At 20°C: ≥ 1.5 J
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A Coating properties: in accordance with At 20°C: ≥ 3 J/mm
supplier’s specification (ASTM G14) At -5°C: ≥ 1.5 J/mm
Qualification requirements: minimum
1.5 J (13 in.-lb) at 20°C, no cracking
or holidays (NACE RP0394 or CSA
Z245.20) or minimum 3.5 J (30 in.-lb)
at 24°C (ASTM G14)
Liquid polyurethane ≥ 1.5 J N/A At 20°C: ≥ 5 J/mm
At -5°C: ≥ 2.0 J/mm
Fiber-reinforced epoxy N/A At 20°C: ≥ 5 J/mm
At -5°C: ≥ 1.5 J/mm
Fiber-reinforced vinyl N/A At 20°C: ≥ 5 J/mm
ester At -5°C: ≥ 1.5 J/mm
Cast polyurethane N/A Not specified
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A At 20°C: 7 × α × β J/mm
Hot-applied PP tapes/ α = 0.7, coating thickness ≤ 2
sheets mm
Injection-molded PP α = 1, coating thickness
> 2 mm
β = 0.7, PD < 65 mm
β = 0.85 for 65 < PD < 200 mm
β = 1.0 for PD > 200 mm
Flame-sprayed PE At 20°C: 5 × α × β J/mm
Hot-applied PE tapes/ α = 0.7, coating thickness
sheets ≤ 2 mm
α = 1, coating thickness
> 2 mm
β = 0.7, PD < 65 mm
β = 0.85 for 65 < PD < 200 mm
β = 1.0 for PD > 200 mm
microcrystalline
wax
Table 12 Requirements of impact resistance for various coatings.

Resistance to elevated temperature: The operating 3 Discussion

temperatures of oil and gas infrastructure continue to
increase, e.g., pipelines that carry oils operate at temper-
When a new coating is developed by a coating manu-
atures up to 150°C. The performance of coatings should
facturer, they develop a procedure to evaluate it. The
therefore be evaluated at operating temperatures. Stand-
company that intends to use that coating first evaluates it,
ards providing the procedures to evaluate operating tem-
either in its own laboratory or in a third-party laboratory.
perature of coatings include
If the results between the coating company and the pipe-
– ASTM D2485, Standard Test Method for “Evaluating
line company match, then the pipeline company starts
Coatings For High Temperature Service”
using the coating, taking into account the cost and other
– ASTM D3012, Standard Test Method for “Thermal-
considerations. However, if the results do not match, then
Oxidative Stability of Propylene Plastics Using a
questions of whether the coating is good or whether the
Biaxial Rotator”
methodologies used to evaluate the coating in different
laboratories are correct will to arise. To avoid such a situ-
Table 13 provides the maximum operating temperature of
ation, the industry relies heavily on standards. Coating
various coatings.
standards are mutually agreed upon – minimum perfor-
mance requirements with which coating suppliers, pipe-
line companies, and third-party laboratories are comfort-
2.3.5 Structure-environment interface able with. Coating standards developed by associations,
including NACE, ASTM International, ISO, CSA, and SSPC
A coating will protect an infrastructure as long as it does are extensively used in the industry. Some of the coatings
not allow the infrastructure to come in contact with the standards are as old as the coatings themselves.
environment, i.e., the structure-environment (e.g., pipe- A previous review (Papavinasam & Revie, 2008) on
soil) interface does not form. The pipe-soil interface can standards to evaluate mainline coatings found that
form when the coating is completely removed (resulting – Some coating properties for which different
from the formation of holidays) or when the coating is standards have essentially the same requirements
disbonded, creating the coating-soil interface beneath the include blast cleaning, surface profile, penetration
disbonded coating. resistance, chemical resistance, dielectric strength,
Holiday detection: It is important to detect and repair electrical conductivity, and impact resistance.
the holiday during the construction. During operation, – The properties for which standards from different
the holidays may form, and it is important that the loca- organizations have different requirements include
tions in which the holidays form are protected by cathodic CD, adhesion, cohesion, water permeation,
protection. A standard providing the procedure to detect flexibility, and abrasion resistance. These properties
holidays is are also important for coating performance; thus,
– ASTM G62, Standard Test Method for “Holiday the harmonization of the standards used to evaluate
Detection in Pipeline Coatings” these properties would be very useful.
– The properties for which no adequate standards
have been developed include quantification of visual
2.3.6 Coating-coating interface and nonvisual contaminations of steel surface, pH
measurements at the disbonded coatings, blister
The girth weld coating should be compatible with main- formation, holiday detection using above-ground
line coatings. The performance of the girth weld coatings techniques, and compatibility and repairability of
depends on the bonds to the substrate as well as to the joint and mainline coatings.
mainline coatings, the moisture seal at the joints, and – The properties for which adequate standards are
water absorption. available but are not utilized in standards to evaluate
Standards providing the procedures to evaluate com- pipeline coatings include microbial resistance,
patibility between mainline and joint coatings include weathering, gas permeation, and freeze-thaw stability.
– ASTM G18, Standard Test Method for “Joints, Fittings,
and Patches in Coated Pipelines” Standards are constantly being developed or updated to
– ASTM G55, Standard Test Method for “Evaluating include areas not presently covered by existing standards.
Pipeline Coating Patch Materials” The availability of standards to include more areas will

Coatings Tmax °C (°F)
Tape Bituminous N/A Not specified 30

Petrolatum N/A N/A 30
Wax N/A N/A 30
Polymeric Not specified Not specified 50 or 80
Heat-shrinkable PE backed, no primer N/A Mastic Mastic adhesive based: 50
80°C (180°F) High-shear-strength
Hot-melt mastic adhesive, bitumen,
120°C (250°F) or butyl-based: 80
High-shear-strength-
strength hybrid or hot-melt
adhesive: 120
PE backed, primer 120
PP backed, primer 130
FBE powder N/A Not specified By agreement
Liquid Liquid epoxy N/A In accordance with Not specified
supplier’s specification
Liquid polyurethane Not specified N/A
Fiber-reinforced vinyl ester N/A
Polyolefin-based Flame-sprayed PP N/A N/A 110
Hot-applied PP tapes/sheets 110
Injection-molded PP 110
Flame-sprayed PE 70
Hot-applied PE tapes/sheets 80
Hot-applied microcrystalline N/A 43 50
wax
Table 13 Requirements of maximum operational temperature of various coatings.
reduce the burden of the engineer who writes company coatings are considerably different. Some of these differ-
specifications and the regulator who oversees the safety of ences are obvious, as certain properties required for main-
infrastructure. In the modern world, where an increasing line coatings may not be applicable to girth weld coatings
number of companies have operations across the globe, and vice versa. However, the procedures for evaluating
it would be useful if the standards developed by various the same properties and requirements for mainline and
associations are harmonized and joint standards are pub- girth weld coatings are different, even within standards
lished. Some associations have already taken steps in developed by the same association. The harmonization of
this direction. It is anticipated that more associations will requirements for various properties in standards from not
cooperate to create joint coating standards. However, at only the same association but also from different associa-
this stage, standards from different organizations show tions will serve the global industry better. In general, the
considerable differences for mainline coatings (Papavina- number of properties evaluated for mainline coatings are
sam & Revie, 2004, 2005; Papavinasam, Attard, Arseneult, higher than for girth weld coatings.
& Revie, 2008a; Papavinasam, Attard, & Revie, 2008b). In addition, the current girth weld standards do not
When compared with mainline coating standards, explicitly specify that tests must be carried out using
the importance of developing standards for field-applied panels containing both mainline and girth weld coatings.
girth weld coatings has only been recently recognized Consequently, many test results evaluate the compatibil-
by the industry. As presented in this article, such stand- ity between girth weld coating and the steel, not necessar-
ards have been developed or are being developed by CSA, ily on the three-way interaction among mainline coating,
NACE, and ISO. The standards for mainline and girth weld girth weld coating, and steel interaction.

4 Summary girth weld coatings has been emphasized. Furthermore,

it is advantageous to harmonize standards developed by
Standards developed to evaluate field-applied girth various associations.
weld coatings by various associations have been
Acknowledgements: The authors would also like to
reviewed, and the standards for field-applied girth weld
acknowledge the members of CanmetMATERIALS includ-
coatings and plant-applied mainline coatings have been
ing Alex Doiron, Clinton DeRushie, Tharani Pannersel-
compared. In general, the number of properties evalu-
vam, Jennifer Collier, Maggie Matchim, and Bill Santos
ated for mainline coatings are more than those evalu-
for their helpful discussion and technical contributions.
ated for girth weld coatings. The standards developed
The Federal Interdepartmental Program of Energy R&D
by the same association to evaluate mainline coatings
(PERD) partially funded this project.
and girth weld coatings are sometimes different. To
evaluate a total external protection system, the impor- Received August 15, 2012; accepted October 4, 2012; previously
tance of harmonization of standards for mainline and published online November 23, 2012
References
American Gas Association (AGA). Appendix A: background and Papavinasam S, Revie RW. Pipeline protective coating. Workshop
data for the characterisation of basic coating materials and on Advanced Coatings R&D for Pipelines and Related Facilities,
free films. In: Line pipe coating analysis volume 1: laboratory June 9–10, 2005. NIST Special Publication 1044. Gaithersburg,
studies and results. AGA Catalog L00036. Washington, DC: MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST),
AGA, 1978a. 2005.
American Gas Association (AGA). Line pipe coating analysis Papavinasam S, Revie RW. Review of standards for evaluating
volume II: topical report on adhesion. AGA Catalog L00037. coatings to control external corrosion of pipelines. Corros Rev
Washington, DC: AGA, 1978b. 2008; 26: 295–370.
Beavers JA. Assessment of the effects of surface preparation and Papavinasam S, Attard M, Revie RW. Modes of failures of
coatings on the susceptibility of line pipe to stress-corrosion external polymeric pipeline coatings. Mater Perform 2006; 45:
cracking. PR186-917, 1992. 28–30.
Buchanan R, Tacoma E. Innovations in field joint coatings to meet Papavinasam S, Attard M, Arseneult B, Revie RW. State-of-the-art
rigorous specifications for offshore pipelines. NACE Corrosion of thermal spray coatings for corrosion protection. Corros Rev
Conference 2004, Houston, TX. Paper 4020, 2004. 2008a; 26: 105–146.
Gray D, Lunn WH, Mcardle O. Evaluation of epoxy pipeline coatings. Papavinasam S, Attard M, Revie RW. Evaluation of external pipeline
Mater Perform 1983; 22: 9. coatings for corrosion protection – a review. Corros Rev
Hamner N. Adhesion fundamentals and methods of testing organic 2008b; 26: 371–438.
coatings. Mater Perform 1970; 9: 31–36. Papavinasam S, Attard M, Revie RW. Determination of blister
Jack TR, Boven GV, Wilmott M, Worthingham RG. Evaluating formation of external pipeline coatings based on current
performance of coatings exposed to biologically active soils. spikes in the cathodic disbondment test. Corrosion 2009; 65:
Mater Perform 1996; 35: 39–45. 639–644.
Kellner J, Serra JM. Recent developments in polymer pipeline Partridge PE. Maximizing the accuracy and precision of cure
coatings. Pipes Pipelines Int 1995; 40: 30–39. determination of fusion bonded epoxy by differential scanning
Mills G. Interpretation of differential thermal data analysis for calorimetry. NACE Corrosion Paper 0770, 2000.
fusion bonded epoxy powder coatings. Mater Perform 1984; Shepperd LR. Determining the effect of formulation on physical
23: 45. properties of asphalt mastic coatings. Corrosion 1961; 17: 157t.
Neal P. Fusion-bonded epoxy coatings – cure and glass transition Temple G, Coulson, KEW. The use of differential scanning
temperatures. Mater Perform 1993; 32: 49–52. calorimetry to determine coating cure. Mater Perform 1985;
Neal P. Fusion-bonded epoxy cure by solvent extraction. Mater 24: 17.
Perform 1994; 33: 26–30. Tsuru T, Sagara A, Haruyama S. Acoustic emission measurements to
Papavinasam S, Revie RW. Pipeline coatings. Proceedings of evaluate the degradation of coating films. Corrosion 1987; 43:
the International Workshop on Advanced Research and 703–707.
Development of Coatings for Corrosion Protection, Biloxi, MS, Vincent L. Surface preparation standards. NACE Corrosion
April 14–16, 2004. White Paper, 2004. Conference 2001, Houston, TX, 2001.

Jennifer Pollock is in her final year of Materials Engineering at

Sankara Papavinasam is a senior research scientist and project McMaster University with a minor in economics. She recently
leader at CanmetMATERIALS, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. He has completed a co-op term at CanmetMATERIALS, Hamilton, Ontario,
been involved in pipeline corrosion-control issues for two decades. Canada, where she assisted Dr. Papavinasam in pipeline-based
He has developed three software packages for prediction and corrosion. She will graduate with a Bachelor of Engineering in May
control of internal and external corrosion of oil and gas pipelines. 2013 and hopes to study corrosion in the future.
He has an MSc (1984), MPhil (1985), and PhD (1990). He was named
a NACE Fellow in 2008 and an ASTM Fellow in 2011.
Natashah Zaver recently graduated with a Bachelor of Applied

Science in Nanotechnology from the University of Waterloo. As part
of her undergraduate degree program, she has undertaken several
innovative and successful projects over four co-op work terms involv-
ing engineering research and development. Her most recent experi-
ence with the CanmetMATERIALS Laboratory at Natural Resources
Canada focused on analyzing data from different pipeline coating
suppliers to develop new industry standards for pipeline-coating
compatibility. Natashah is currently pursuing a master of engineer-
ing degree in Chemical Engineering at the University of Toronto.


Papa Vian Sam 2012

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Papa Vian Sam 2012

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

DOI 10.

1515/corrrev-2012-0024 Corros Rev 2012; 30(5/6): 171–197

Sankara Papaviansam*, Natashah Zaver and Jennifer Pollock

Comparison of international standards to evaluate

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Over the past 60 years, several different pipeline coat-

Urethane and epoxy

Fusion bonded epoxy

Coal tar enamel/asphalt

1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

2.2.4 Liquid epoxy – NACE Standard RP0375, Standard Recommended

– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – 2.3.1 Steel

– ISO 21809, Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Coating/

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Surface preparation requirements

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Surface preparation requirements

As required by CSA NACE ISO

TSA N/A N/A Steel substrate: ISO

Table 1 Requirements of surface preparation for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Surface profile requirements, mil (μm)

As required by (standards) CSA NACE ISO

Tape Bituminous N/A 2–3 (50–76) Not specified

Table 2 Requirements of surface profiles for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Dielectric strength requirements

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Tape Bituminous N/A Not specified Not specified

Table 3 Requirements of dielectric strength for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Insulation resistance

As required by (standards) CSA NACE ISO

Tape Bituminous N/A Not At 23°C: ≥ 106 Ω m2 for RS100

Table 4 Requirements of insulation/electrical resistance for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Indentation hardness

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Table 5 Requirements of indentation hardness for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Penetration resistance

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Table 6 Requirements of penetration resistance for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Water permeation

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Tape Bituminous N/A Not specified Not specified

Table 7 Requirements of water permeation for various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Coatings Thickness, mm (mil)

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Table 8 Requirements of thickness of various coatings.

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Softening point: The softening point is a measure of the

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

As required by CSA NACE ISO

Download Date | 11/15/13 5:00 AM

Brought to you by | Heinrich Heine Universität Düsseldorf

As required by CSA NACE ISO