Paper No.

612244

THE EFFICACY OF AERIAL ROBOTIC SYSTEMS (DRONES) FOR TAKING

DRY FILM THICKNESS (DFT) MEASUREMENTS AT HEIGHT
CONSISTENT WITH SSPC-PA2 STANDARDS

Robert Dahlstrom, Founder & CEO, Apellix

Keywords: Dry Film Thickness, Nondestructive Testing, Aerial Robotics, SSPC-PA2 standards

Abstract

Dry Film Thickness (DFT), Surface Profile (SP), Ultrasonic Testing (UT) and other Non-Destructive
Testing (NDT) measurements often need to be taken at heights, sometimes utilizing cranes, lifts, scaf-
folding and ladders. There is new technology platform utilizing aerial robotics systems to take DFT, and
potentially other, readings and measurements at height when the measurement device is required to be
placed in contact with the surface being measured. In this paper, we evaluate the efficacy of one of these
systems in a simple use case consisting of taking DFT measurements on a facsimile of a ship by asking
the question; “Are DFT readings from an aerial robotic system equivalent to those taken by a person”.
One would expect there to be little difference between the numerical values of the readings with the ro-
botic system holding an electronic DFT measurement device vs. a person holding the device, unsurpris-
ingly the statistical proof agreed.

Introduction
Dry Film Thickness (DFT) measurements are frequently required to ascertain the thickness of coatings
and may be taken to determine whether a structure needs recoating, or if the structure has recently been
coated to ensure that it conforms to specification. DFT measurements provide insight into how a surface
may be impacted by rust, corrosion or incidental damage and how successful coatings perform or may
perform over time.

The Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC) publishes the accepted standard on coatings. The current
standard for DFT measurements is the Society for Protective Coatings Paint Application Standard No. 2
(SSPC-PA 2)1.

Highlights for SSPC PA-2 are as follows:

• For Structures Less Than 300 sq. ft., take 5 spot readings per 100 sq. ft.
• For Structures not exceeding 1,000 sq. ft., select 3 random 100 sq. ft. areas to test.

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

1
• For Structures exceeding 1,000 sq. ft., select 3 random 100 sq. ft. areas to test in the first 1,000 sq. ft.
and for each additional 1,000 sq. ft. test one random 100 sq. ft. area.
• If any area is not in compliance, the non-compliant area should be determined.

The measurement process using SSPC PA-2 is consequently, in many cases, a massive undertaking.
However, as author Rob Francis shows in his article Dry Film Thickness Measurements: How Many Are
Enough (2009)2 SSPC PA 2 standards take spot readings of a smaller percentage of the surface area than
other standards such as ISO 19840 or IMO PSPC, 14% vs 100% (see table 1). Thus, standards other than
SSPC-PA2 are more rigorous, testing a larger percentage of the surface area. As the number of spot
readings increases, an automated measurement process could have even larger benefits under the more
rigorous standards.

Method Number of Number of Total num- Average Percentage

spot meas- readings in ber of spot number of of area
urements in each subse- readings in readings per tested
first 100 sq m quent 100 sq 500 sq m 100 sq m
area m area
SSPC- 15 5 35 7 14%
PA2
AS 15 5 35 7 14%
3894.3
ISO 30 10 70 14 100%
19840
PSPC 20 20 100 20 100%
flat
Table 1: Number of Spot DFT Readings Required by Different Standards for Flat Areas (Francis, Rob 2009)

Other Measurement Standards

In addition to SSPC as a “standards body” there are other entities, both international and nation based,
that set paint and coatings DFT measurement standards. This includes: The International Standards Or-
ganization (ISO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO) which is a United Nations specialized
agency with responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of marine pollution
by ships, and Standards Australian.

The names and titles of the DFT standards from these entities are as follows:

• International Standard ISO 19840 for paints and varnishes, corrosion protection of steel structures –
measure of thickness of dry film3
• International Maritime Organization (IMO) resolution MSC 215(88) on performance standards for
protective coatings (PSPC) on ships (with an emphasis on ballast tanks)4
• Australian Standard AS 3894.3 for site testing protective coatings, Method 3: Determination of dry
film thickness5

Some of the above listed standards require more DFT readings than SSPC-PA2 as can be seen in table 2
showing the number of readings required for 300,000 square meters of ships ballast tanks. The number
of spot measurements ranges from 15,000 to as many as 300,000.

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

2
 Measurement Type SSPC-PA 2 AS 3894.3 ISO 19840 PSPC
Number of spot meas- 15,000 15,000 30,000 300,000
urements
Number of gauge read- 45,000 15,000 30,000 300,000
ings
Table 2: DFT Measurements Required for 300,000 Square Meters of Ballast Tanks (Francis, Rob 2009)

Taking DFT Readings Using

SSPC-PA2 Standards via Manual and Aerial Robotics Methodologies

This paper examines how DFT measurements at height are taken by both people (current methodology)
and an aerial robotics system (potential future methodology). We utilize both methods to take measure-
ments at height and then statistically compare the results.
Prevailing “Manual” Measurement
Methodology
Presently, DFT measuring processes at height require workers, with handheld digital testing devices, to
access measurement points using scaffolding, rappelling equipment, ladders, lifts, catwalks etc.

Image 1 Current “State of the Art” for obtaining

DFT Measurements

Regulatory View on Potential Hazards of “Manual” Measurements at Heights

The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) maintains safety regulations
that cover, amongst other things, working at height. OSHA maintains that the hierarchy of fall protection
starts with completely eliminating the hazards and risks of falling by engineering them out and away
from the workplace6. If that is not a reasonable possibility, then preventing falls from happening is to be
considered next. And if that is also not a suitable solution, then implementing a fall protection program
and a rescue plan is a must.

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

3
Even after having taken what an operator may believe to be every precaution and complying as best it
could to the mandate, OSHA may still find the business in violation, as what is reasonably possible can
be subjective.

Image 2 Aerial Robotics DFT Measurements Testing

New Aerial Robot (Drone) Measurement Methodology

An Aerial Robotics and Safety Company has developed a way to take DFT measurements at height us-
ing computer controlled heavy-lift multi-rotor drones outfitted with various sensors and functions to al-
low precisely controlled flight close to structures. Manual control of such systems is unable to accom-
plish the precise flying and maneuvers require, thus software controlled flight is crucial. These aerial
robots utilize the existing electronics and digital probes to perform DFT measurements. The DFT meas-
urement electronic systems are identical those used for “manual” measurements. This innovation was
named a 2017 Corrosion Innovation of the year by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers
(NACE) 7

The Aerial Robotics Platform contains onboard DFT measurement electronics from a leading manufac-
turer of these products and both, streams the DFT readings and date in real time to the system operator
displaying results on the computer or tablet, as well as stores the full data in the onboard computer
and/or in the local operations computer.

Future iterations of the Aerial Robotics system are scheduled to include the ability to conduct statistical-
ly valid random samples of a predefined surface area and automated sampling consistent with various
measurement standards.

The Aerial Robotics DFT measurement system works as follows.

• The tethered (for data and power) or untethered (battery power and wireless data) robotic system
is located close to the structure where DFT measurements are to be taken.
• The operator / pilot opens the computer or tablet and with the software interface chooses to begin
the test and enters the job information (operator, job name, upper and lower limits for the DFT
readings, etc.). In this example, it is set for SSPC-PA2 standards to take 5 spot readings within a
10’ by 10’ area.
• The aerial robotic system takes off vertically to approximately 2 meters in height, hovers and
completes self-checks.

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

4
 • The operator then uses a standard handheld radio frequency transmitter8 to manually fly the sys-
tem close to the where the DFT readings are to be taken. i.e. the “gate”.
• Once the aerial robotic system is within the “gate” (i.e. 2 meters from the target part of the struc-
ture) the operator chooses “Start Test” on the software interface.
• The system then operates under full computer control (no manual input allowed) fly’s in, touches
the surface with the probe and takes a minimum of three DFT measurement readings (typically 1
to 5 seconds). It then backs away, repositions, and repeats the process until 5 spot measurements
have been recorded.

The operator is able to see, in real time, the DFT readings data and whether or not they are in compli-
ance with the pre-programmed standards. After landing the operator has the option to download the full
data record which in addition to all the DFT readings, includes additional information such as GPS and
other locational coordinate data, weather and environmental data, etc.

Test Setup and Methodology

Background on Ship’s Hull Construction

A simple use case for DFT measurements is a large ship. Most modern large ships have hulls that are
constructed of welded steel9. The American Buru of Shipping (ABS) designates shipbuilding steel in a
number of thicknesses and grades10. All ABS steels are standard carbon steels (i.e. ferrous metal).

Background use of Electronic DFT Measurement Devices

Electronic DFT measurement devices have a long history of measuring ferrous sub straights with the
first ultrasonic thickness gauge being made in 196711. Electronic DFT devices (aka magnetic film gages)
are used to nondestructively measure the thickness of a nonmagnetic coating on ferrous substrates. Ac-
cording to one manufacturer of these devices; “Most coatings on steel and iron are measured this
way12”. Nondestructive testing magnetic gauges work via magnetic/electromagnetic induction and
measure the change in magnetic flux density at the surface of a magnetic probe as it nears a steel sur-
face. By measuring the flux density, the thickness of the coating can be determined13.

Electronic magnetic gages use a constant pressure probe to provide thickness readings frequently shown
on a liquid crystal display (LCD) with measurement tolerance of ±1%14.

Creating Replication of Ships Hull for DFT Testing

To test our hypothesis we constructed a 10 ft. sq. ferrous metal test area. Steel panels were coated with a
marine primer and attached to the back of a cinderblock warehouse with a 1 meter by 1 meter grid pat-
tern overlay. The bottom of the overlay started 1 meter off the ground. The bottom of the 10’ by 10’ grid
is approximately 1.5 meters off the ground. The steel panels are mounted on the south facing wall of a
cinder block warehouse structure in Jacksonville Florida. The wall is vertical.

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

5
 Image 3 The 10’ x 10’ coated ferrous metal “test” area
for DFT Measurements

The test area allowed us to 1) take manual measurements of the paint thickness by holding an electronic
DFT measurement device and climbing a latter to take readings and 2) use the Aerial Robotics DFT
measurement system to take measurements.

DFT Data Collection on “Test” Structure

Base measurements of DFT thickness were taken utilizing a common commercially available handheld
electronic magnetic gauge15. The tester climbed a ladder and took 50 DFT spot readings from random
locations using the handheld electronic DFT measurement device. The 50 spot readings represent well
over 250 data points as a minimum of 5 valid data points are required per spot reading. The DFT read-
ings were then downloaded into a spreadsheet.

Subsequent to the “manual measurements” the Aerial Robotics system was used to gather 50 DFT spot
readings from random locations on the same test area utilizing the operational process for the robotic
device previously described. The DFT readings were then downloaded into a spreadsheet. The aerial ro-
botics system incorporates the exact same electronics used by the handheld electronic magnetic gauge
used to take “manual” readings16. Both devices were calibrated and certified by the manufacturer.

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

6
 Image 4 Screenshot of some of the data

DFT Data
The data, in both instances, was collected from the electronic DFT measurement device in “continual
readings mode”. Continuous readings were sent to the electronic measurement device from the probe tip
wherein they were all stored as raw data into a file.

The raw unfiltered data from the files were then imported into a spreadsheet for analysis. For illustrative
purposes “raw data” is the individual data points/measurements provided by the device, not data that
was processed in any way by the software on the handheld electronic device. The data for each touch of
the probe to the surface was processed as follows:
• Outliers in the data were removed. This included any negative number or any number less than
one (1) or greater than three (3). The millage thickness greater than three was chosen for reason-
ableness as the test surface areas were bare metal with a single coat of primer (sprayed from 12
oz. spray cans of enamel spray paint, Rust-Oleum or similar brand).
• Next, the first five (5) valid measurements were used to calculate the mathematical average. This
average was then recorded as the DFT reading for the spot reading (i.e. that “touch” of the probe
to the surface).

Fifty (50) spot readings were taken utilizing both the prevailing “Manual” measurement methodology
and the new Aerial Robot (Drone) measurement methodology. The average millage thickness data val-
ues for the 50 spot readings from each method are shown below. This represents a numerical difference
of .089 mils.

Measurement Method Millage

Handheld device 5.8585
Robotic Device 5.7596
Table 3: Statistical Average of DFT measurements
from each of the two collection methods

The author chose to complete a two-sample t-Test to determine if the statistical means of the two popu-
lations of data (handheld and robotic collected measurements) are equal. Our null hypothesis is that the
difference between the two groups is 0, i.e. the difference between the mean of the measurements by the
handheld device taken by a person and the mean of the measurements taken by the handheld device on
the robotic system is zero. Our test on a sample of 50 average reading measurements from each group
(d.f. = 49) produces a t score of 0.000000013. Using the t score with a value of 49 for the degrees of

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

7
freedom, a .05 significance level and a two-tailed hypothesis, the resulting P-Value is 1. Thus, the re-
sult is not significant at p < .05. The P-Value is the probability that the difference between two sam-
ples, or the difference between a sample and the theoretical result, is entirely due to chance.

Statistic Treatment (robotic) Control (manual)

average 5.7694 5.8585
SD .0966 .0289
n 50 50
Table 4: T-Test

Conclusion
A company has developed a way to take DFT measurements at height by transferring the handheld elec-
tronic DFT measurement device to an aerial robotic system. We evaluated the efficacy of one of these
systems in a simple use case consisting of taking DFT measurements on a facsimile of a ship by asking
the question; “Are DFT readings from an aerial robotic system equivalent to those taken by a person”.
We did this by taking 50 spot readings using two methods to collect the readings, the manual and the
aerial robotic system collection methods.

One would expect there to be little difference between the value of the readings with the robotic system
vs. a person holding an electronic DFT measurement device and the statistical proof agreed.

Author contact information is r.dahlstrom@apellix.com or +1-904-647-4511

Authors Note: This paper is copyrighted by SSPC

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

8
 References

1
The Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC) Marketplace. Standards, Paint Application (PA), PA 2,
Determining Compliance to Required DFT http://www.sspc.org/ST-000PA2
2
Rob Francis “Dry Film Thickness Measurements: How Many Are Enough? A Close Look at Four Ma-
jor International Standards and Requirements” Paint Square News, pp 22-31, JPCL December 2009
3
International Organization for Standardization. ISO 19840:2012 Paints and varnishes -- Corrosion pro-
tection of steel structures by protective paint systems -- Measurement of, and acceptance criteria for, the
thickness of dry films on rough surfaces
https://www.iso.org/standard/59523.html
4
RESOLUTION MSC.215(82) (adopted on 8 December 2006) PERFORMANCE STANDARD FOR
PROTECTIVE COATINGS FOR DEDICATED SEAWATER BALLAST TANKS IN ALL TYPES OF
SHIPS AND DOUBLE-SIDE SKIN SPACES OF BULK CARRIERS
http://www.imo.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/IndexofIMOResolutions/Maritime-Safety-Committee-
(MSC)/Documents/MSC.215(82).pdf
5
Standards Australia is the nation's peak non-government, not-for-profit Standards organization respon-
sible for the development and adoption of standards in Australia. They also facilitate Australian partici-
pation in international standards development https://infostore.saiglobal.com/en-us/Standards/AS-3894-
3-2002-R2013--306255/
6
Elimination of fall hazards is the first and best line of defense against falls from heights
https://www.osha.gov/dte/grant_materials/fy11/sh-22230-11/FallHazardManual.pdf
7
Materials Performance Announces Winners of the 2017 Corrosion Innovation of the Year Awards
http://nacecorrosion.org/news/mp-announces-winners-of-the-corrosion-innovation-of-the-year-awards
8
The radio transmitter is the standard operations control for the aircraft. Its sole use in this case is for
positioning the aircraft close to the area where the DFT measurements are to be taken. It is also on
standby in case manual operational flight controls are need, for example in case of a failure of the soft-
ware flight operations.
9
Wikipedia - Retrieved 25 Sept 2018
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shipbuilding#Modern_shipbuilding_manufacturing_techniques
10
Wikipedia - Retrieved 25 Sept 2018
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABS_Steels

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

9
11
Wikipedia - Retrieved 25 Sept 2018
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasonic_thickness_gauge
12
Website for Defelsko - Retrieved 25 Sept 2018
http://www.defelsko.com/technotes/coating-thickness/coating-thickness-measurement.htm
13
Ibid
14
Ibid
15
The DFT device used was a Fischer Technologies DUALSCOPE FMP 40C system. Technical speci-
fications for it are available at http://www.fischer-
technology.com/fileadmin/documents/broc/EN/BROC_FMP100_150_902-110_en.pdf
16
Ibid

The materials and the views expressed in this document are solely those of the author(s) and are cleared for public release.

10