Chapter 4.

1
Coatings for Industrial Steel Structures

Richard W. Drisko

Introduction Shop Vs. Field Painting

This chapter provides basic information on Painting contractors have more choices today
coating systems used on industrial steel structures. than in the past for using shop instead of field painting
Subsequent chapters will describe coating systems for to coat many steel products in part or in whole. Deci-
different types of steel structures. sions on the use of shop painting facilities are usually
Engineering standards maintained by corpora- based on both the quality of the work and the
tions or organizations provide specification writers with economics involved. Shop painting is covered in a
lists of the coating system options for plant structures. separate chapter.
These options always include a recommended surface
preparation level as part of each coating system. This
chapter follows this good practice and also includes
information on coating selection for different environ-
ments. Obviously, different environments require
different coating systems with significantly different
chemical and physical properties.

Background
Over the years, notable developments have
been made both in surface preparation methods and in
coating materials to provide longer protection to steel
structures. More recently, health, environmental, and
safety regulations affecting surface preparation
methods, particularly abrasive blasting, and coating
materials have greatly restricted the selection of
coating systems for steel. These regulations have also
made many systems more difficult to apply. Thus,
coating contractors must be able to use all of the
available information on coating systems to make
selections that will result in long-term economical
protection.
Removing deteriorated coatings for either
repair or replacement can be very expensive. In both
cases, the debris removed in surface preparation often
requires containment, collection, on-site storage,
laboratory analysis, and special treatment or disposal.
In the past, decisions were sometimes made
to use cheaper coating materials with shorter protec-
tion times and replace them more often. Since the
costs of coating materials today may constitute no
more than 20% of the total coating costs, a high-
performance system that is readily maintained usually
provides the lowest life-cycle costs.
Figure 1. Checking wet-film thickness after shop
painting steel. Courtesy HIgh Steel Structures.
Surface Preparation of New Steel
Abrasive blasting is usually the preferred
method of preparing steel surfaces for coating be-
cause it can provide both the desired level of cleanli-
ness and the desired profile height. The recommended
level of steel surface abrasive blast cleaning depends
upon three basic factors:
• Generic type of primer
• Severity of environment
• Desired service life
Different generic coatings require different
levels of surface cleanliness. Thus, while commercial
blast cleaning (SSPC-SP 6/NACE 3) may be adequate
for alkyd, drying oil, or water-borne coatings in a mild
atmospheric environment, a higher level of cleanli-
ness, such as near-white blast cleaning (SSPC-SP 10/
NACE 2) is usually required for higher-performance
coating systems in immersion or severe atmospheric
service.1, 2 Manufacturers of primers for steel coating
systems always state both their recommended clean-
ing levels and profile heights.
Figure 2. Abrasive blasting of railcar in fabrication plant
prior to coating.
Waterjetting is water cleaning at high or
ultrahigh pressure (above 70 MPa [10,000 psi] to
prepare a surface for recoating.3 Because it will not
produce an etch or profile of the magnitude currently
recognized by the surface preparation industry, it is not
normally used for surface preparation of new steel.
SSPC-SP 12/NACE 5 is a standard for waterjetting.3
Abrasive may be injected into the steam of
water or used separately after waterjetting to remove
mill scale and provide a surface profile. SSPC-TR 2/
NACE 6G198 describes procedures, equipment, and
materials involved in a variety of air/water/abrasive,
water/abrasive, and water-pressurized abrasive blast
cleaning systems. It also discusses equipment usage
212
and safety.4
Lower levels of surface preparation may be
adequate for a cheap coating formulated to provide
only temporary corrosion protection to steel during
construction. This coating may be removed and
replaced with a higher-performance coating after the
construction is complete.
Surface Preparation for Repair of
Damaged Coatings
There are several alternatives available for
surface preparation to repair damaged coatings on
steel structures. The selection of the most appropriate
system usually depends on several factors including
the extent and distribution of coating damage, the
need for containment of surface preparation debris,
and the remoteness of the location to power and other
support.
Abrasive blasting usually provides the best
level of cleaning and profiling of steel, but it often has
limitations:
• Impractical or prohibitively expensive for small areas
• Expensive containment of blasting debris
• Requirement for a power source that may not be
readily available
• Difficulties in feathering edges of damaged areas of
existing coating
Waterjetting is excellent for total removal of
coatings and will restore the initial profile height.
However, it has many of the same limitations of
abrasive blasting for spot repair of coatings.
Power tool cleaning to bare metal (SSPC-SP
11) provides a level of cleanliness that approximates
commercial blast cleaning (SSPC-SP 6/NACE 3) and
a profile of 1 mil or more.5 However, the process is
slow and thus expensive.
Power tool cleaning according to SSPC-SP 3
is faster than power tool cleaning to bare metal, but it
does not clean as well and leaves a burnished rather
than a profiled surface.6 Chemical cleaning can be
used effectively for removal of many but not all coat-
ings. It is also slower and thus more expensive than
other cleaning systems.
Primers for Steel Surfaces
Primers for steel surfaces are formulated to
bond well to the prepared steel and provide a suitable
surface for topcoating. Their most common mecha-
nism for corrosion control is by barrier protection, but
they may also protect steel by using corrosion inhibi-
tors or by the cathodic protection provided with a
heavy zinc loading.
Surface-Tolerant Primers
Surface tolerant-primers are typically chosen
when abrasive blast cleaning cannot be done. Their
use is not recommended solely to reduce surface
preparation costs because coating performance may
be significantly compromised. These primers for steel
have been prepared to a lesser degree of cleanliness
than provided by SSPC-SP 6/NACE 3 (Commercial
Blast Cleaning). They also exhibit a greater propensity
toward satisfactory service performance than conven-
tional coatings not intended for such applications.
Thus, topcoating with a barrier coat is recommended.
Surface-tolerant coatings are commonly used
on surfaces contaminated with rust, soluble salts,
petroleum products, and moisture, often occurring
together. High concentrations of these contaminants
are likely to cause most coatings to fail. There are
several types of these primers:
• Low-viscosity (penetrating) coatings such as oil-
based, alkyd, and water-borne acrylic coatings that
contain corrosion-inhibitive pigments. Some oil-based
and alkyd coatings can absorb small amounts of oil.
• Barrier coatings such as epoxy mastics and mois-
ture-cured polyurethanes containing laminar pigments
(e.g., aluminum flake and micaceous iron oxide) to
impede moisture transmission.
• Unpigmented, low-viscosity (penetrating) two-
component epoxy and polyurethane coatings with
barrier-type topcoats.
Additional information on surface-tolerant
coatings is available in SSPC-TU 1.7
Pre-Construction Primers
For more than 30 years, the marine industry
has routinely applied pre-construction primers (PCPs)
to stock plates and shapes using automatic abrasive
blasting (typically to SSPC-SP 10/NACE 2) and
coating application equipment.8-9
Epoxy, acrylic, alkyd, moisture-curing polyure-
thane, and solvent-borne and water-borne inorganic
zinc PCPs have all been used successfully in ship-
building. After construction is complete, the PCP-
coated surfaces are given a secondary surface
213
preparation. Secondary surface preparation may
include complete removal of the PCP but more com-
monly consists of:
• Surface preparation of weld and areas of damaged
PCP (abrasive blasting to SSPC-SP 10/NACE 2 or
power tool cleaning to SSPC-SP 3 or SSPC SP 11)
• Light (sweep) blast cleaning of the PCP to remove
surface contaminants
Desired properties of PCPs include:
• Corrosion protection of steel during fabrication
• Ease of application in thin continuous films
• Resistance to damage from welding
• Minimal health and safety factors
• Compatibility with high-performance coating system
to be applied after secondary surface preparation
Thin films (e.g., 0.6-0.8 mils/15-20 microme-
ters) of inorganic zinc-rich coatings are commonly
used in the U.S. After secondary surface preparation,
epoxy systems adhere quite well to them.
Universal Primers
Universal primer is a general term that means
different things to different people. Most think of it as a
tie coat that permits the use of a topcoat normally
incompatible with an existing coating. Others think of it
as a surface-tolerant coating.
Coating Systems Used on Steel
Coating systems commonly applied to new
steel will be discussed in this chapter. Coating systems
used to repair damaged coatings are usually identical
or of the same generic type as the original coating
system in order to be compatible with it.
Alkyds and Other Systems That Cure by Oxidation
of Drying Oils
Alkyds and other drying oil coating systems
have been used extensively on steel structures in mild
atmospheric interior and exterior service. A silicone
alkyd finish coat is often used in exterior service to
provide a greater resistance to weathering. It is
expected that the use of alkyd systems in the future
will decrease significantly because of greater VOC
restrictions.
Epoxy Systems
A wide variety of epoxy coating systems are
being used today on steel structures in both atmo- to weathering. Anticipated lower VOC limits should not
spheric and immersion service. These include: adversely affect the availability of epoxy coatings.
• Epoxy polyamides for atmospheric and water and
petroleum immersion service
• A range of amine-cured epoxies for chemical immer-
sion service
• Epoxy mastics for use as tie coats, surface-tolerant
coatings, etc.
• Phenolic epoxies for a hard, chemically resistant
system
• Novolacs for combined chemical, solvent, and heat
resistance
• Solvent-free epoxies for edge retention

Figure 4. Epoxy-lined water tank after five years of

service.

Coal-Tar Epoxy Systems

Figure 3. Elevated water tank with two coats of alkyd
and a silicone alkyd finish.
When epoxies are specified for exterior
atmospheric service, aliphatic polyurethane finish
coats are frequently used to impart greater resistance
Coal-tar epoxy coating systems have been
used extensively on underground piping, interiors of
waste-water tanks, and on steel pilings immersed in
water because of these these good properties:
• Good water and chemical resistance
• Good film build
• Relatively low VOC content
• Relatively low cost
Coal-tar epoxy use seems to be diminishing
because of concerns about adverse health effects.
Polyurethane Systems
Polyurethane coating systems, both two-

214
Figure 5. Coal-tar epoxy system on waste water facility.

component thermosetting and single-component

moisture-curing, are used extensively on steel sur-
faces. Polyurethane coatings can range in physical
properties from hard to elastomeric. The elastomeric
formulations have less chemical resistance than
harder formulations, so a compromise must frequently
be made to obtain the best available combination of
properties for a specific service. Advantages of poly-
urethane coatings on steel are:
• Available in hard or flexible films
• Good water resistance
• Aliphatic formulations have good gloss and color
retention
• Aromatic formulations have good chemical resis-
tance
• Low-temperature curing formulations available
Figure 6. Polyurethane finish coat on elevated water
• Currently available in low VOC formulations
tank.

There is concern about the toxicity of the

Siloxane Coating Systems
isocyanates in some formulations, and polyurethanes
Siloxane coatings, sometimes called siloxirane
are more expensive than epoxies.
coatings, have good chemical, weather, and heat
resistance. They are relatively low in VOCs and have
Zinc-Rich Coatings
been used successfully on steel bridges, storage
Inorganic and organic zinc-rich coatings may
tanks, stacks, anchor chains, and chemical process
provide cathodic protection to steel surfaces. These
equipment. Siloxane coatings are relatively slow to
coatings are used mostly in mild atmospheric service.
cure and relatively high in cost, as comparted to other
Their zinc pigment is subject to attack by both acidic
coatings.
and alkaline chemicals. Organic zinc-rich coatings are
almost always topcoated to provide longer protection
Water-Borne Acrylic Systems
to steel. Inorganic zinc-rich coatings may be used with
Several water-borne acrylic coating systems
or without topcoats. Care must be taken during
are formulated for use on steel surfaces in relatively
topcoating of inorganic zinc coatings to prevent small
mild atmospheric environments. Also, a water-borne
bubbles from forming.
acrylic finish coat can be applied to an exterior epoxy

215
system to impart good weathering properties. Table 1. SSPC Environmental Zones.
Water-borne acrylic coatings have the advan-
tages of low VOC contents and reduced fire and
explosion hazards. However, they do not cure well
below 50°F (10°C) and are not as durable as high-
performance coatings.

Figure 7. Zinc-rich system on steel tank exterior.

Coating Selection by Environmental Zone

The choice of a suitable coating system is
often not easy. One of the chief factors to be consid-
ered is the environment in which the protection is to be
provided. SSPC defines twelve distinctly different
environmental zones and a matrix of coating systems
appropriate for each of the zones as shown in Tables
1 and 2.10
Actual costs for commercially available coating
materials can be obtained by contacting manufacturers
at the addresses listed in the Annual Buyer’s Guide
that appears each June in the Journal of Protective
Coatings and Linings.

216
Table 2. Environmental Zones For Which SSPC Painting Systems are Recommended.

217
References
1. SSPC-SP 6/NACE 3. Commercial Blast Cleaning;
SSPC: Pittsburgh and NACE: Houston.
2. SSPC-SP 10/NACE 2. Near-White Blast Cleaning;
SSPC: Pittsburgh and NACE: Houston.
3. SSPC-SP 12/NACE 5. Surface Preparation and
Cleaning of Steel and Other Hard Materials by High-
and Ultrahigh-Pressure Waterjetting Prior to
Recoating; SSPC: Pittsburgh and NACE: Houston.
4. SSPC-TR 2/NACE 6G198. Wet Abrasive Blast
Cleaning; SSPC: Pittsburgh and NACE: Houston.
5. SSPC-SP 1. Solvent Cleaning; SSPC: Pittsburgh.
6. SSPC-SP 3. Power Tool Cleaning; SSPC: Pitts-
burgh.
7. SSPC-TU 1. Surface-Tolerant Coatings for Steel;
SSPC: Pittsburgh.
8. Fultz, B.S. Retaining Pre-Construction Primers
Under Standard Lining Systems. Journal of Protective
Coatings and Linings, February 1999, pp 30-44.
9. Buesing, Kirby. Installing Marine Pre-Construction
Primer Spray Lines: The Basics. Journal of Protective
Coatings and Linings, February 1999, pp 17-21.

About the Author

Dr. Richard W. Drisko
Dr. Richard W. Drisko has been the senior technical
advisor to SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings
since January 1995. Prior to this, he was employed for
over 40 years at the Naval Civil Engineering Labora-
tory, Port Hueneme, California, where he conducted
research, evaluation, and testing, and served as the
Navy’s center of expertise on coatings for shore
structures. He is a professional corrosion engineer in
the state of California, an SSPC certified protective
coatings specialist (PCS), and a NACE International
certificated corrosion specialist. Dr. Drisko received his
BS, MS, and PhD degrees from Stanford.

218