ICorr Training:, Institute News
Powder coating is a type of coating that is applied as a dry, fine powder to produce high-quality and durable finishes. Unlike conventional liquid coatings and paints, which are typically applied via a brush or roller, powder coatings are applied as a free-flowing powder that streams smoothly and evenly.
This application can either be conducted through electrostatic spraying or a fluidised bed dipping process, followed by a necessary heat (or UV) curing process.
Since their early development in the 1940’s, powder coatings have come to take large swathes of the protective coatings industry by storm. Today, they enjoy a dominant position in a range of markets (including architectural, industrial and transport), and this dominance is only predicted to intensify. Indeed, whilst the current global powder coatings market stands at a significant $15.2 billion in 2024, this is projected to grow by a whopping $9 billion to reach $24.26 billion in a mere eight years’ time (Chemicals & Materials Industry – Fortune Business Insights).
The soaring popularity of powder coatings can be attributed to their many advantages over alternative protective coating materials. Firstly – and perhaps most importantly, given our ongoing climate crisis – powder coatings are significantly more sustainable than their traditional liquid counterparts.
This is in large part due to their exceptionally low (or often
non-existent) Volatile Organic Content (VOC), eliminating the health hazards and air pollution associated with solvent emissions. Additionally, the limited overspray powder produced in the application process can be recycled and reused, ensuring minimal waste.
Powder coatings are often more economical options than their liquid counterparts. Whilst initial set-up costs can be high, their transfer efficiency is streaks ahead of traditional liquid paint methods, reaching an impressive 95% when applied using the fluidised bed technique. Furthermore, the equipment used for powder coating requires relatively minimal maintenance, making it more convenient and cost-effective.
Remarkably, the huge environmental and economic benefits powder coatings incur do not lead to diminished performance. In fact, many powder coatings – when applied as a single layer and cured by heat – provide comparably exceptional durability, chemical resistance, toughness and flexibility. Taking all this into account, it appears evident that powder coatings constitute the future of the protective coatings industry.
It is in this context that Corrodere Academy is proud to announce its new Powder Coatings application course. Expertly crafted, engaging, and informative, the course is designed to ensure high-quality training is available within the industry – an availability that is essential as the powder coatings market continues to boom. Following the course’s launch, we sat down with Brendan Fitzsimons – Corrodere’s Technical Director and leading industry expert – to hear his thoughts.
- What Motivated Corrodere to Design the Powder Coatings Course?
Our primary goal is to address the rapidly growing demand within the industry, driven in large part by increasing sustainability concerns. As the industry expands, more and more manufacturers are looking to bring powder coating capabilities in-house. However, the surge in demand has outpaced the availability of skilled professionals. Many companies have invested in powder coating units but find themselves without the trained staff necessary to operate them effectively. This is where we step in, providing the high-quality training needed to equip these companies with the expertise required.
- Who is This Course Targeted At?
This course is primarily targeted at powder coating applicators and associated workers involved in the powder coating process. Our training is designed to be highly practical and hands-on, focusing on the real-world skills needed on the job rather than delving too deeply into technical or scientific theory. The theoretical components of the course are digestible, ensuring applicators gain the necessary knowledge without being overwhelmed by complex concepts.
The course will also be helpful for powder coating technical and sales staff from powder suppliers and equipment suppliers.
While the applicators are the primary recipients of this training, it’s essential for companies to recognise that powder coating is a team-driven process. From pre-cleaning to application, each step requires careful coordination and expertise. Therefore, it’s crucial for companies to invest in training across the entire team, ensuring that every stage of the process is executed with precision – a need our course is designed to fulfil.
- Why Should Industry Professionals Take the Powder Coatings Course?
As the powder coatings market continues to boom, skilled application of powder coatings is an increasingly vital proficiency for anyone in the industry. Corrodere’s course ensures that students fully understand the many stages and intricacies of the powder coatings process, verifying their competence to carry out this high-skilled work effectively
and safely.
For employers, offering the course to staff defends against potential costly coating failures by ensuring application is done correctly, first-time around. Investing in training is also a way to boost job satisfaction (and, by extension, job performance), ensuring employees know they are rightly perceived as an invaluable resource. Any registered Train the painter company that is engaged in powder coating application can – and should – deliver the course.
- How Valued do You Foresee the Powder Coatings Course Being by the Industry at Large?
Ultimately, we foresee our powder coatings course becoming an industry norm. The benefits of the course are simply innumerable for applicators, companies and clients alike. Applicators benefit from verifiable expertise and enhanced confidence in their work; companies benefit from well-trained staff and an elevated reputation as a consequence of staff investment; clients benefit from knowing they are enlisting highly qualified trade personnel. Indeed, the failure of powder coatings can be costly – Corrodere’s course (the only one of its kind) ensures that rather than relying on reputation, companies and clients alike can trust their powder coating Applicators to have certifiable, accredited skills and expertise.
- Who Endorses the Course?
We’re delighted to say that the British Coating Federation (BCF) has endorsed the programme. Their endorsement highlights the high-quality and necessity of the course, and we’re excited to be working with them.
The Powder Coating Application course is available globally through the Corrodere Academy’s Train the Painter programme. To find out more, please get in touch with the team at.
Contact: Email: lucy@corrodere.com Tel: +44 (0) 1252 732 236
Ask the Expert, Uncategorized
Why is Effective MIC Control Still a Major Challenge for Many Oil and Gas Assets?
by Dr Ali Morshed, Consultant Corrosion Engineer, UK.
Meet the Author
Dr. Ali Morshed
Dr. Ali Morshed holds a PhD in corrosion engineering from University College London, an MSc in corrosion engineering from Imperial College London, and a DIC and CEng. He is the author of five corrosion management books and one MIC book with NACE/AMPP between 2012 and 2022. Ali is a corrosion engineer with more than 21 years of experience and started his professional career in the oil and gas industry back in 2002. Since the introduction of the Morshed Corrosion Management Model (MCMM) in 2012, he gradually expanded his work to many other industries. Ali has worked in the North Sea, North Africa, the Persian Gulf Region, and South Asia. He provides corrosion management and MIC consultancy and training services for various industries.
Background
MIC remains a major integrity threat and a common cause of failure for many upstream, midstream and downstream assets – in spite of the significant technological advances in the areas of oilfield microbiology, metallurgy and used chemicals.
Extensive field experience from both the UK’s North Sea sector and the Persian Gulf region indicates that the main root cause of the encountered MIC cases has been either the total lack of, or inadequate, knowledge and expertise in relation to bacteria and MIC fundamentals among the pertinent personnel. Simultaneously, it has also been observed that oil and gas assets which successfully managed the MIC integrity threat were the ones whose relevant personnel (particularly those managing operations and turnarounds’) possessed adequate competency, mainly through the MIC training they had received.
While MIC incompetency remains the main root cause of a number of highly expensive failures, timely, practical and adequate MIC training is regarded as the key for tackling the spiralling MIC incidents for the oil and gas and other industries assets.
What is MIC?
MIC can be defined as corrosion influenced by the presence, or activity, of micro-organisms [1]. Micro-organisms can cause corrosion problems for various oil and gas assets by their metabolic activities. The corrosion damage inflicted by microbes can be considered “direct” when they create or further increase the environment’s corrosivity (e.g., acid production through their metabolism). The damage is considered “indirect” when they negate a corrosion control measure already in place, thus further promoting corrosion. Such affected corrosion control measures include surface coatings and some dosed chemicals, such as certain types of oxygen scavengers.
A section of failed in-service sea water piping with evidence of metal loss along the bottom of the piping, between the 5 and 7 o’clock positions, is shown in Photo 1. The morphology of pitting suggested that MIC was the cause of the failure. Later laboratory analysis of the corrosion product and biofilm taken from the failed piping section confirmed that the main cause of failure were the sulphate-reducing bacteria (SRB).
Micro-organisms are divided into different groups, of which bacteria are the most encountered in the oil and gas industry. Bacteria are further divided into various categories or families, and sulphate-reducing bacteria (SRB), remain the most predominant and insidious type.
MIC rates, provided that suitable growth conditions exist for bacteria, can be localised and up to several millimetres per year, which is quite severe compared to other corrosion mechanisms often encountered in the oil and gas industry. Corrosion rates have proven hard to predict accurately by modelling. Locations or systems most susceptible to MIC include, but are not limited to:
- Sea water injection
- • Fire water
- Drains
- Stagnant zones such as a by-pass
- Cooling water
- Sand wash water (where treated sea water is used to wash the sand accumulated in various pressure vessels)
- Water displacement systems (where treated sea water is used to empty a product storage tank)
• Wet product transfer pipelines
• Wet product storage tanks
The important caveat regarding MIC is that prevention is always less expensive than cure, because microbial control, once lost, may take years to restore, if at all!
The MIC Mitigation Process
Bacteria and associated MIC mitigation process as depicted in Figure 1 refers to a cyclic—and continuous—process composed of three stages [2]:
-
MIC bacteria monitoring stage—The necessary sampling (both liquid and biofilm [sessile]) is carried out along the pertaining inspections and corrosion rate monitoring activities (in order to produce the required input data for the assessment stage).
-
MIC bacteria assessment stage—The input data produced in the first stage are evaluated, trended, processed, analysed, and interpreted to determine bacteria types, density, and the concentration of various compounds consumed or produced by bacteria. The input data are also used to estimate or calculate the associated MIC risk although it should be noted that the presence of high bacterial numbers, does not alone confirm that MIC will occur. The microbial investigation is only one aspect of MIC identification and risk assessment.
-
MIC bacteria control stage—In this stage, various activities are carried out to reduce the existing bacteria populations and to decrease the associated MIC risk.
In other words, the MIC bacteria mitigation process consists of three stages, and each stage is composed of two components, one component pertaining to bacteria and the other to MIC. Table 1 provides the associated description and justification for each of the pertaining components.
| Stage |
Components |
Justification |
| Stage 1:
MIC and Bacteria Monitoring |
Bacteria
Monitoring |
To produce both liquid and biofilm
(sessile) samples for the next stage
(assessment stage). |
| MIC Monitoring |
To produce predominantly wall thickness inspection and corrosion rate monitoring data for the next stage (assessment stage). |
| Stage 2:
MIC and Bacteria Assessment |
Bacteria Assessment |
To determine types (i.e., metabolism) and density of the bacteria encountered in the system, along with the concentration of compounds consumed and produced by the bacteria. |
| MIC Assessment |
To determine whether or not the encountered wall losses or corrosion rates are due to bacteria activities, and also to help estimate the encountered MIC risks. |
| Stage 3:
MIC and Bacteria Control |
Bacteria Control |
To use methods to either kill bacteria or retard their activity. |
| MIC
Control |
To use methods to reduce or totally arrest the encountered corrosion rates due to bacteria activities. |
Why MIC Still Remains a Predominant Cause of Failure?
Extensive field experience from the North Sea’s UK sector and the Persian Gulf region has demonstrated that the majority of the observed or studied MIC cases were caused by poor, erroneous, impractical, or late decisions and activities associated with the existing bacteria and MIC. Some of such erroneous decisions and activities included:
- Selecting sampling locations where no water was present
- Not capping or sealing the filled sample bottles
- No chlorination at the sea water inlet
- Intermittent chlorination at the sea water inlet
-
Increasing chlorination injection rate significantly to kill sessile bacteria and remove biofilms
-
Using biocide chemicals only effective against planktonic bacteria but incapable of killing sessile bacteria
-
Not coordinating sampling activities with biocide treatments (hence, not being able to determine biocide effectiveness)
- Injecting biocide upstream of the oxygen scavenger injection point
-
Using chemicals which act as nourishment for the exiting bacteria groups
However, the “masterpiece” MIC case belongs to a seawater treatment site that stopped biocide injections for two years. Such a decision induced numerous MIC leaks with an associated repair and replacement cost of more than 100 million US Dollars, just for the first year! Their justification for doing so was that because bacteria are too tiny to be seen by the naked eye, the integrity threat they posed was accordingly negligible; hence, there was no need for any MIC mitigation treatment!
MIC Incompetency Under Closer Scrutiny
The above examples clearly demonstrate that the lack of or inadequate knowledge and expertise in regard to bacteria activities and MIC fundamentals has been the root cause of the majority, if not all, of the observed MIC cases across many oil and gas assets. More precisely, MIC incompetency has been the main culprit behind the encountered leaks and failures. In general, the observed MIC incompetency can be divided into the following four subject areas:
- Bacteria nourishment and growth conditions
- MIC and bacteria monitoring
- MIC and bacteria assessment
- MIC and bacteria assessment
The last three items, when are incorporated with each other comprise the overall bacteria and MIC mitigation process, as was mentioned earlier. Therefore, any shortcomings in properly carrying out any single one of them, could adversely affect the overall bacteria and MIC mitigation process, leading to more problems.
Conclusions
-
MIC remains to be one of the most prevalent and insidious corrosion mechanisms affecting many oil and gas assets.
-
MIC management incompetency has been the main culprit behind
the observed MIC leaks and failures.
Recommendations
-
Timely, proper and practical bacteria and MIC training is crucial for the pertinent personnel and managers, both in engineering and operations.
References
- Standard Test Method: Field Monitoring of Bacterial Growth in Oil and Gas Systems, TM0194-2014, NACE International, 2014, ISBN 1-57590-192-7
2. A. Morshed, A Practical Guide to MIC Management in the Upstream Oil and Gas Sector, AMPP, 2023, ISBN 978-1-57590-424-5.
Photo.1: Failed Sea Water Piping Due to MIC, as Indicated by the Severe Pitting Corrosion at the Bottom Line and Later Lab Analysis.
Figure 1: Bacterial and MIC Mitigation Process and Its Three Stages [2].
Table 1- The Components Associated with Each Stage of the MIC and Bacteria Mitigation Process and Their Associated Justifications [2].
Table 1- The Components Associated with Each Stage of the MIC and Bacteria Mitigation Process and Their Associated Justifications [2].
Industry News
Project Background
Holyhead station, a prominent railway station situated in Wales. Strategically located near a harbour and high street, it serves as a key transport hub, seamlessly connecting the region’s rail and maritime networks. Situated on the harbour, the Grade II listed train station has endured persistent exposure to salty sea air, high humidity, heat from the trains and diesel fumes. This relentless environmental assault has resulted in significant corrosion of the structural steel canopies, causing progressive deterioration of the exposed steel.
The Challenge
Network rail’s current coatings manufacturer could not guarantee their product’s effectiveness due to the harsh location. They needed to find an enhanced paint system that outperforms the currently specified paint system to: Maintain structural integrity Preserve the station’s historical features Reduce maintenance and repair costs.
Solution
The solution implemented was Hexigone’s “smart” corrosion inhibitor, Intelli-ion® AX1, chosen for its superior corrosion protection in harsh environments. Achieving C5-level corrosion resistance, AX1 effectively combats corrosion in highly aggressive environments, such as coastal areas, while delivering longer-lasting corrosion protection. Intelli-ion® AX1 has also endured 1440 hours in salt spray testing (ASTM B117), and offerred enhanced adhesion and colour retention in both laboratory and live testing.
Methodology
To compare performance, two protection systems were applied simultaneously:
• 50% of the train station was painted with astandard system.
•
The remaining 50% was painted with a system enhanced
with Intelli-ion®
Laboratory Test Results
Panels with both standard paint and paint enhanced with
Intelli-ion® AX1, were tested side by side. The addition of AX1 improved corrosion resistance, significantly increased adhesion levels and the bonding of the aluminium primer to the metal surface. 1000 Hours Salt Spray ASTM B117.
Real-World Results
The addition of intelli-ion® AX1 significantly enhanced the 50% repainting process of the mile-long station’s surface, comprised of tool-prepared Victorian cast iron. Contractors observed the following improved application properties; “the paint applied more easily, spread more evenly, and provided more coverage.” By enhancing surface tolerance, AX1 improved adhesion by 163.16%, resulting in a 33% increase in performance. This improvement led to reduced maintenance requirements, delivering a highly efficient, cost-effective solution with enhanced long-term asset protection.
3 Years After Application
Intelli-ion® AX1 demonstrated superior performance compared
to the standard system – designed to provide 15 years of
corrosion protection.
Industry News
ProClad Systems has been working recently in partnership with Jotun paints for the last two years to develop a new pre-cast PFP system that is a composite of ProClad UV-cured GRP + Jotachar JF750 XT intumescent epoxy. The company has recently released the system to the market and is receiving excellent feedback. The greatest interest for the product so far is for the encapsulation of failing cementitious PFP on structural steel, something which is endemic in aged European and North American refineries.
Contact:
Further information, please contact:
David Chalk, Technical Director
UK Mobile: 07484 784 150
Email: david@procladsystems.com
Web: www.procladsystems.com
Photo: Repair of Failed PFP Using ProClad Composite PFP.
Industry News
Esso Australia Resources Pty Ltd (‘Esso Australia’, a subsidiary of ExxonMobil Australia Pty Ltd) has announced a nearly $200 million dollar investment in the Kipper 1B Project which will bring online much-needed additional gas supplies from the Gippsland Basin. Co-venturers for this project are MEPAU A Pty Ltd (‘Mitsui’), and Woodside Energy (Bass Strait) Pty Ltd (‘Woodside’).
“Esso Australia continues to invest in multiple projects that ensure our Gippsland operations sustain gas production well into the 2030s,” says ExxonMobil Australia Chair Simon Younger.
Drilling into the Kipper field is set to begin later this year, with upgrades to the West Tuna platform happening simultaneously.
Source: https://corporate.exxonmobil.com
