Thermally Sprayed Aluminium 1

• Jul 14, 2016

• #2

IRstuff

Aerospace

Jun 3, 2002

44,908

US

I wouldn't expect the paint to survive bolting, not sure about the aluminum

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
faq731-376 forum1529

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 28, 2016

• #3

Duwe6

Industrial

Jul 27, 2010

2,189

US

The aluminum will require touch-ups due to handling damage [or the damage will be hidden by the epoxy paint]

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 28, 2016

• Thread starter
• #4

drawoh

Mechanical

Oct 1, 2002

8,974

CA

Duwed,

The whole point of the epoxy being two different colours is that we can see damage to the finish. Is it really that delicate?

This does not sound easy to touch up.

--
JHG

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 29, 2016

• #5

racookpe1978

Nuclear

Feb 1, 2007

5,995

US

Will the Al sprayed metal actually bond to the stainless?

Never heard of that being tried before.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 29, 2016

• Thread starter
• #6

drawoh

Mechanical

Oct 1, 2002

8,974

CA

racookpe1978,

We think our customer knows what they are doing and we have found a vendor that does it. The aluminium coating makes sense as a sacrificial coating, since aluminium and stainless steel are at opposite ends of the galvanic scale. This is all assuming we deliver the system with the coating intact.

--
JHG

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Jul 31, 2016

• #7

tbuelna

Aerospace

Aug 10, 2002

4,026

US

I doubt the painted surfaces will survive the high local contact stresses around the fastener holes or at the flange faces. It will also be difficult to spray the aluminum coating on the ID surfaces of the bolt holes.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 4, 2016

• #8

CoCoE

Petroleum

Mar 9, 2012

118

JP

The finish coat is never going to survive this for sure. Please note the below.

1. 1st coat : Sealer- to seal the pores
2. Top coat : for finishing purpose

Please keep in mind that even though the external coating to TSA is damaged, the pores will be still filled with the sealer (1st coat) if the damage is not so severe. So only a minor touch up on the top coat to be expected always.

In my opinion, I give importance to sealer more than top coat. By seeing this coating requirement on SS, I perceive that the customer concerned about corrosion protection (ESCC). Technically I think sealer will do it.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 5, 2016

• #9

SJones

Petroleum

Apr 22, 2001

3,946

GB

If the end use is in a reasonably high wet time environment the customer may want to worry about a little more than a bit of damage: see NACE Corrosion 2004, Paper 04203;

T A Sumon et al, Corrosion Engineering, Science & Technology, Vol 48, (7), 2013 pp 552 - 557

for example.



Steve Jones
Corrosion Management Consultant

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/8/83b/b04

All answers are personal opinions only and are in no way connected with any employer.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote

• Aug 5, 2016

1
• #10

GGedge

Civil/Environmental

Mar 10, 2003

54

GB

For many years TSA and epoxy topcoats were used by the UK Highways Agency as the preferred means of protecting steel bridges which are often exposed to wet conditions and road de-icing salts. Handling and erection damage was never a particular issue for the specifications. However, long-term performance became something of an issue (see paper referred by Steve Jones) and many structures coated with TSA/Epoxy represent a legacy corrosion problem. In 2014 the UK HA updated the standard specifications and those no longer include TSA and epoxy over coats for protection of steel bridge structures.

 

Upvote 0 Downvote