Paper No.

2015-6414

ADVANCES IN SURFACE PREPARATION STANDARDS

Aimée E. Beggs
SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings
40 24th Street, 6th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4656
USA

ABSTRACT

This presentation will update owners and specifiers on recent revisions and ongoing developments in
surface preparation standards for steel substrates and options they provide for selecting the surface
preparation technique most appropriate for a specific project. Revisions to standards for solvent
cleaning, power tool cleaning, and waterjet cleaning and a guide to methods for assessing levels of
soluble salts on the surface following surface preparation will be reviewed, and attendees will also
receive an update on the status of the wet abrasive blast cleaning standards now in development.

In addition to standards for surface preparation, the presentation will describe two guides, one for
selecting requirements for containment of the debris generated by surface preparation for coating
application and the second for specifying the requirements of the containment enclosures themselves.

Key words: abrasive blast cleaning, containment, power tool cleaning, steel profile, surface preparation
standards, waterjet cleaning

INTRODUCTION

The first U.S. standards for surface preparation of steel prior to the application of protective coatings
were developed in the 1950s. In the years since these standards were first issued, there have been
many advances in the equipment and procedures used for surface preparation of steel substrates;
however, the original cleanliness requirements have remained quite consistent. With few exceptions,
the original standards are still being maintained and updated to reflect these changes, and new
standards are being developed in response to industry needs. This paper will summarize the existing
U.S. standards for surface preparation of structural steel in preparation for the application of coatings,
and will also describe related guidance documents that are useful to specifiers.

SOLVENT CLEANING

Solvent cleaning is performed to remove visible deposits of oil, grease, dirt, and other soluble
contaminants that could be forced into the profile of a metal surface during mechanical methods of
surface preparation and adversely affect the adhesion of protective coatings. The solvent cleaning

1 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 standard was developed to ensure that these deposits have been removed prior to performing
mechanical cleaning, and is required by reference in each of the dry abrasive blast cleaning standards
and the power tool cleaning standards described later.1

Surfaces that meet the SSPC-SP 1 standard, when viewed without magnification, shall be free of
visible oil, grease, dust, dirt, drawing and cutting compounds, and other visible soluble contaminants.
These requirements have changed very little since the standard was first issued in 1952.

The 2015 revision of SSPC-SP 1 permits the standard to be used for preparation of “metallic
substrates” (all previous versions were limited to preparation of steel substrates). The revision also
clarifies that “any liquid or vapor, permitted by the owner of the item to be cleaned and used in
compliance with health safety and environmental regulations applicable at the job site that will dissolve
or emulsify visible deposits of soluble contaminants on the surface” can be used.

Complete removal of soluble contaminants is beyond scope of the standard. However, the 2015
revision has included a series of non-mandatory notes describing several additional verification
methods often included in procurement documents to verify more stringent requirements for removal of
soluble contaminants. These methods include using ultraviolet light or ASTM(1) F222 to detect thin
hydrocarbon films on the surface; testing to meet a required dust level in accordance with ISO (2) 8502-
3,3 or wiping with a clean white cloth.

DRY ABRASIVE BLAST CLEANING STANDARDS

Dry abrasive blast cleaning is used to remove mill scale, rust, coating, oxides, corrosion products, and
other foreign matter from carbon steel substrates. The process also creates peaks and valleys in the
steel substrate that promote adhesion of subsequently applied coatings. Dry abrasive blast cleaning is
the most frequently used method for preparation of structural steel surfaces for coating, for both new
construction and maintenance.

Each of the five joint standards for dry abrasive blast cleaning defines one level of surface cleanliness.
In addition, each standard contains requirements for the materials and procedures used to achieve the
defined cleanliness level. The definitions are summarized below.

White Metal Blast Cleaned Surface (SSPC-SP 5/NACE No. 1):4 A white metal blast cleaned surface,
when viewed without magnification, shall be free of all visible oil, grease, dust, dirt, mill scale, rust,
coating, oxides, corrosion products, and other foreign matter.

Near-White Metal Blast Cleaned Surface (SSPC-SP 10/NACE No. 2):5 A near-white metal blast
cleaned surface, when viewed without magnification, shall be free of all visible oil, grease, dust, dirt, mill
scale, rust, coating, oxides, corrosion products, and other foreign matter. Random staining shall be
limited to no more than 5 percent of each unit area of surface (approximately 5,800 mm 2 [9.0 in.2] (i.e.,
a square 76 mm x 76 mm [3.0 in. x 3.0 in.]), and may consist of light shadows, slight streaks, or minor
discolorations caused by stains of rust, stains of mill scale, or stains of previously applied coating.

Commercial Blast Cleaned Surface (SSPC-SP 6/NACE No. 3):6 A commercial blast cleaned surface,
when viewed without magnification, shall be free of all visible oil, grease, dust, dirt, mill scale, rust,
coating, oxides, corrosion products, and other foreign matter. Random staining shall be limited to no
more than 33 percent of each unit area of surface (approximately 5,800 mm2 [9.0 in2]) (i.e., a square 76
mm x 76 mm [3.0 in. x 3.0 in.]) and may consist of light shadows, slight streaks, or minor discolorations
caused by stains of rust, stains of mill scale, or stains of previously applied coating.

(1)
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.
(2)
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Case Postale 56, Geneva CH-1211, Switzerland.

2 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 Industrial Blast Cleaned Surface (SSPC-SP 14/NACE No. 8):7 An industrial blast cleaned surface,
when viewed without magnification, shall be free of all visible oil, grease, dust, and dirt. Traces of tightly
adherent mill scale, rust, and coating residues are permitted to remain on 10 percent of each unit area
of the surface (approximately 5,800 mm2 [9.0 in2]) (i.e., a square 76 mm x 76 mm [3.0 in. x 3.0 in.]) if
they are evenly distributed. Traces of mill scale, rust, and coating are considered to be tightly adherent
if they cannot be lifted with a dull putty knife. Shadows, streaks, and discolorations caused by stains of
rust, stains of mill scale, and stains of previously applied coating may be present on the remainder of
the surface.

Brush-Off Blast Cleaned Surface (SSPC-SP 7/NACE No.4):8 A brush-off blast cleaned surface, when
viewed without magnification, shall be free of all visible oil, grease, dirt, dust, loose mill scale, loose
rust, and loose coating. Tightly adherent mill scale, rust, and coating may remain on the surface. Mill
scale, rust, and coating are considered tightly adherent if they cannot be removed by lifting with a dull
putty knife after abrasive blast cleaning has been performed.

The dry abrasive blast cleaning standards are undergoing periodic review and revision in 2015.

Guide and Reference Photographs for Dry Abrasive Blast Cleaning9

These reference photographs were developed to supplement, but not replace, the written standards.
The original version, issued in 1989 contained photographs of initial uncoated substrate conditions
cleaned to white metal, near-white metal, commercial, and brush-off levels. It also provided an
appendix containing images of surfaces prepared to white metal cleanliness using three metallic and
three non-metallic abrasives to illustrate variations in coloration that different types of blast cleaning
media can impart to the cleaned surface. Photographs of two additional initial conditions, illustrating
steel substrates with deteriorated multi-coat coating systems prepared to each of the five written blast
cleaning standards, were added in 2002.

Figure 1. Dry abrasive blast cleaned surfaces

(left to right: initial condition, brush-off, industrial, commercial, near-white, white metal)

To use the reference photographs as a supplement to the written standard, the user first identifies the
photograph of the initial substrate condition that most closely resembles the actual substrate being

3 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 prepared, and then selects the photograph that illustrates the specified cleanliness level for that initial
condition.

POWER TOOL CLEANING STANDARDS

Alternative surface preparation techniques that can be used to achieve levels of cleanliness close to
those created by abrasive blast cleaning but without requiring use of large equipment and loose
abrasive media are the standards for Power Tool Cleaning to Bare Metal10 and Commercial Grade
Power Tool Cleaning.11 Both standards require the prepared surface to be free of all visible oil, grease,
dirt, dust, mill scale, rust, paint, corrosion products and other foreign matter. Trace residues of rust and
paint may remain in the bottom of pits if the substrate is pitted. In order to avoid burnishing the
substrate, the prepared metal surface must have a minimum 25-micrometer (1-mil) profile. The
standards state that several different power tools may be required to create the specified cleanliness
and profile on the substrate.

Power tool cleaning to bare metal requires removal of all staining from the substrate. As the name
implies, commercial grade power tool cleaning allows staining on no more than 33% of each unit area
of surface (approximately 5,800 mm2 [9.0 in.2]). The percentage of staining permitted is identical to the
percentage required in the Commercial Blast Cleaning standard, which will be discussed later
.
Although the requirements for cleanliness in the 2012 revision did not change, three important revisions
were made to both of the above standards:

 The default method to be used for profile measurement was changed from ASTM D4417
Method C (replica tape) to ASTM D4417 Method B (depth micrometer) unless otherwise
specified. Method B permits more accurate measurement of low profiles.12

 The compressed air used for driving the tools must be free of oil when tested in accordance with
ASTM D4285 to prevent contamination of the substrate by oil used to lubricate the tools.13

 The types of power tools are categorized as impact tools (including wire bristle impact tools) and
grinding tools to address developments in tool technology.

Figure 2. Power Tools

(clockwise from left, rotary flap tool, abrasive disc, needle gun).

Guide and Reference Photographs for Hand- and Power-Tool Cleaned Surfaces

These color photographs were developed as a way to illustrate the requirements of the appropriate
written power tool cleaning standard.14 Their use may be specified to supplement the requirements of

4 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 the hand and power tool cleaning standards. Steel specimens showing seven initial substrate
conditions frequently encountered during surface preparation were cleaned to illustrate the various
cleanliness levels of hand- and power-tool cleaning. When using the photographs of the lowest level of
power tool cleaning, which removes only the loose contaminants and coating, the user should also
consider the type of tool being used, as the cleaning tools will create patterns in the adherent material
that remains on the substrate. Therefore there are two illustrations of a power tool cleaned surface,
showing the variations in pattern caused by a sanding disk and a powered wire brush. The photographs
illustrating the commercial and bare metal cleanliness levels, which remove nearly all of the extant
coatings and contamination, were prepared using a nonwoven abrasive disk for the initial cleaning, and
a needle gun to provide the required profile after cleaning was completed.

Figure 3. Power Tool Cleaned Steel

(initial condition [top]; left to right: power tool wire brush, power tool sanding disk
commercial, and bare metal cleanliness levels)

WATERJET CLEANING (WJ) STANDARDS

Surface preparation using high and ultrahigh pressure water jets (>207 MPa [30,000 psig]) is used
primarily on maintenance coating projects for removal of deteriorated coatings and other contaminants
from substrates on which adequate profiles already exist. Although the spent water must be properly
contained, tested, and filtered prior to disposal (especially if hazardous coatings are being removed),
the volume of solid debris generated is reduced, as are dust emissions.

Each of the WJ standards contains requirements for a specific level of visual surface cleanliness to be
evaluated immediately prior to coating application. In addition, each standard also contains general
information about WJ equipment, water cleanliness, water pressure, flash rust and methods for
assessing it, and other information that the specifier should consider when specifying WJ as a removal
technique. Although high- and ultrahigh-pressure WJ can reduce and could completely remove soluble
surface contaminants, the WJ standards do not contain requirements for removal of chemical
contaminants. Instead, a brief discussion of nonvisible contamination has been added as a
nonmandatory appendix in each standard to alert specifiers that nonvisible contaminants can affect
coating performance. Examples of language that can be used to specify a maximum level of nonvisible

5 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 contamination on the substrate immediately prior to coating application are also provided in the
appendix. Further discussion on soluble contaminants is deferred to Reference 18.

The cleanliness definitions contained in the WJ standards are summarized below.

 Clean to Bare Substrate:15 The cleaned surface is totally free of visible contaminants and stains.
 Very Through Cleaning:16 Each unit area of the cleaned surface shows no more than 5%
staining or tightly adherent thin coatings.
 Thorough Cleaning:17 Each unit area of the cleaned surface shows no more than 33% staining
or tightly adherent thin coatings.
 Light Cleaning:18 Loose contaminants and coatings are removed from the surface.

Any carbon steel surface that is cleaned using water may develop flash rust as the water evaporates
unless the surface is dried immediately after completion of cleaning. Because coatings vary in their
tolerance of flash rust, each standard contains definitions of four levels of flash rust (None, Light,
Medium, Heavy) that the specifier may use to establish requirements for the amount of flash rust that
can remain on the surface. If the surface does not meet the specified cleanliness and flash rust level
immediately prior to coating application, the flash rust must be removed.

The 2012 revisions of the WJ standards for Thorough and Very Thorough Cleaning now contains
clarification that staining and tightly adherent matter must be evenly distributed over each 5800 mm 2
(9 in2) “unit area” of the cleaned surface. A nonmandatory appendix was added to each of the four
standards, describing two methods (a cloth wipe test and a pull-off tape test) that may be used to
assess the amount of flash rusting present on the surface.

Visual Reference Photographs for Waterjet Cleaning

The reference photographs for waterjet-cleaned surfaces illustrate six steel specimens, each having a
representative initial surface condition.19 Two specimens with multiple layers of coating are included.
The specimen showing each initial condition has been cleaned to illustrate each of the four WJ
cleanliness levels. Surfaces showing four levels of flash rust (from no flash rust to heavy flash rust) are
also illustrated.

6 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 Figure 4. Waterjet Cleaning Cleanliness Levels
(left to right: initial condition [at top], light, thorough, very thorough, bare substrate)

Figure 5 Flash rust levels on pitted waterjet-cleaned steel

(Left to right: no flash rust, light flash rust, moderate flash rust, heavy flash rust.

Recommended Guidelines for Evaluating Flash Rust

The National Shipbuilding Research Program Surface Preparation and Coatings Panel (NSRP SP-3)
developed a set of flash rust evaluation guidelines suitable for field use in 2009.20 The document
describes and illustrates the “wipe test” included in the Appendix B of the WJ standards. A clean white
cloth is folded around a 4-inch paintbrush. The paintbrush is then swept over the surface as if one were
painting a door, but using only one motion. The amount and color of the rust transferred to the cloth are
evaluated and compared to a series of photographs that illustrate light, moderate, and heavy flash rust.
The guidelines and illustrations are a valuable field assessment tool.

7 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 Figure 6. Flash rust levels assessed by “wipe test.”

Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning (WAB) Standards

These five standards are still in development as of April 2015. 21 They will combine elements of the WJ
cleaning standards and the existing dry abrasive blast cleaning standards. Wet abrasive blast cleaning
combines water and abrasive and may be used in place of dry blast cleaning when dust suppression is
critical and the substrate does not have adequate profile for the coatings to be applied. Each WAB
standard will define a single level of visual cleanliness required immediately prior to coating application
and will also include definitions of flash rust levels and nonmandatory appendices that describe
methods of assessing the amount of flash rust that are identical to those in the WJ standards.

Each of the WAB standards will also describe the materials and methods for achieving the specified
cleanliness level, including requirements for abrasive media and surface preparation water. However,
instead of containing appendices describing equipment, the reader will be referred to a separate
SSPC/NACE Technology Report that discusses the various configurations of WAB equipment
available.

Visual Reference Photographs for Steel Surfaces Prepared by Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning

Due to the difference in the processes by which WJ and WAB cleaning remove material from the
surface, a separate set of photographs illustrating WAB cleanliness levels was developed. 22 These
photographs illustrate two commonly specified WAB degrees of surface cleanliness, WAB cleaning to
near-white metal cleanliness (similar to SSPC-SP 10/NACE No. 2) and WAB cleaning to commercial
cleanliness (similar to SSPC-SP 6/NACE No. 3). Two initial conditions are included: completely rusted
steel and completely rusted steel with pitting visible. Three levels of flash rusting are included for each
degree of cleanliness. The photographs are reproduced with permission of International
Paint/Courtaulds Coatings (Holdings) from their Hydroblasting Standards, issued in 1995. 23 When the
written WAB standards are completed, a new set of photographs will be prepared.

RETRIEVING AND EVALUATING SOLUBLE SALTS FROM SUBSTRATES

There are many ways to evaluate the amount and type of soluble salts that remain on a surface after
visible contaminants have been removed to a specified level. “Field Methods for Extraction and
Analysis of Soluble Salts on Steel and Other Nonporous Substrates” is a guide containing generic
descriptions of the commercially available test equipment for retrieving soluble salts from non-porous
surfaces, and the methods used to analyze the retrieved solution.24 The guide was originally issued in
1997 and has been revised in 2007 and 2012, including new methods in each revision. The methods
are categorized according to the degree to which the process is automated. Each of the three methods
in the fully automated category employs a single instrument that extracts the soluble material, analyzes
it internally, and then reports the analytical results.

8 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 The three methods in the second category each require two steps to obtain results. The first step is the
extraction procedure, the second step is analysis of the extract for conductivity. Several methods, each
using a specific instrument, are available to perform the extraction. A separate instrument is used to
analyze the extracted material.

The third group of methods is used for extraction and analysis for one or more specific ions (chloride,
sulfate, nitrate, or all three). Each of the eleven methods in this category requires once instrument or
technology to perform the extraction, and a separate analysis procedure to analyze the extract for one
or more ions.

The guide contains summary tables providing a generic description of each instrument or method for
performing the extraction, the extraction medium (which may be a proprietary liquid), and the type of
analysis performed on the extracted sample, and the units in which the results are reported. Each of the
methods listed is then described as a step-by-step process.

A laboratory procedure for performing extraction is also described, as are several laboratory processes
for analyzing the results, both for conductivity and for specific ions. These procedures are included as a
way of benchmarking results from the field methods. Because each field extraction method varies in
extraction efficiency, it is difficult to make a valid comparison of values obtained using different
methods.

CONTAINING SURFACE PREPARATION DEBRIS

Categories of field containment structures that are used to control dust and other emissions from
surface preparation are described in the “Guide for Containing Surface Preparation Debris Generated
During Paint Removal Operations”.25 This guide was developed to establish sets of criteria for field
containment structures that could be referenced in procurement documents. Containment structures
are classified according to characteristics of the materials used for construction (rigid vs. flexible
material, permeable or impermeable walls, ceilings and floors, fully or partially sealed seams, airlock or
overlap entryways), and the ventilation of the structure (use of forced or natural ventilation, type of
exhaust filtration required, and amount of air movement required). Categories of containment structures
for dry abrasive blast cleaning, wet abrasive blast cleaning, power tool cleaning, and chemical cleaning
are included.

Earlier versions of the guide included a large section that discussed methods that could be used to
monitor emissions, including visible assessment, two methods of ambient air monitoring, occupational
monitoring of workers, and water and soil sampling.

The most recent revision of the guide, issued in 2015, has removed all information on field monitoring
methods and techniques, and moved it into the 2015 revision of a technology update entitled
“Conducting Ambient Air, Soil, and Water Sampling of Surface Preparation and Paint Disturbance
Activities.”26 Other revisions include moving minimum airflow recommendations for crossdraft and
downdraft ventilation into the body of the guide, and eliminating the recommendation for a minimum
volume of air to ventilate a given volume of containment, since airflow and volume are affected by the
design of the containment, which is project-specific.

GUIDE FOR DETERMINING CONTAINMENT CLASS AND

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING STRATEGIES FOR LEAD-PAINT REMOVAL

This guide describes a six-step process to determine the type of containment system and the level of
environmental monitoring that should be specified on a project that requires removal of lead-containing
coatings.27 The selection of containment and monitoring strategies is based on an assessment of the
paint removal method that will be used and the potential impact of the operations on the public, other
workers in the area, and the environment. Note that local and state codes and regulations must be

9 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 reviewed and take precedence to any guidance provided in this document. A set of tables and a sample
worksheet guide the user through the steps of analyzing risk to workers, the public, and the
environment, and selecting the appropriate containment class and monitoring methods to use based on
the methods to be used for removing the coating.

PROCEDURES FOR FIELD MEASUREMENT

OF SURFACE PROFILE OF BLAST-CLEANED STEEL

ASTM D4417 was originally issued in 1984 and most recently revised in 2014. It describes three
methods for measuring surface profile (visual comparator, depth micrometer, and replica tape). The
significant revisions in 2014 include revisions to the procedure for use of the depth micrometer and to
the procedure for use of replica tape.

The 2014 revision of the depth micrometer procedure requires recording only the single maximum
reading of 10 gage readings at each location where measurements are taken. The mean of the location
readings is reported as the measurement, which significantly reduces the number of readings to be
recorded.

Figure 6. Depth Micrometer

The replica tape procedure has also been revised to reduce the number of replica tapes to be prepared
at each location from three to two. The average of these two readings is reported as the measurement
for that location.

The precision and bias statements for the replica tape method have been completely revised based on
results from an interlaboratory study conducted in 2011.

Figure 7. Replica Tapes and Micrometer

10 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 MEASUREMENT OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF ABRASIVE BLAST CLEANED METAL
SURFACES USING A PORTABLE STYLUS INSTRUMENT

ASTM D7127 uses a portable stylus profile tracing instrument to measure roughness characteristics of
a surface prepared for painting using abrasive blast cleaning.28 It was first issued in 2005, and revised
in 2013. The instrument is pulled across the prepared surface to be measured and the stylus traces the
substrate profile. This test method captures information on the number of peak and valley pairs within a
given evaluation length, often referred to as “peak density,” which is considered by some experts to be
a critical factor in coating adhesion. Therefore it provides an option to Methods A, B, or C of ASTM
D4417, which evaluate only the peak/valley distance.

Figure 8. Portable Stylus Instrument

The 2013 revision of ASTM D7127 adds requirements for the vertical measurement range capability of
the apparatus, and revised its precision and bias statement based on an interlaboratory study. It
requires reporting of the number of peak/valley pairs in each of five traces, and their averages, and the
distance between the highest peak and lowest valley in each of five traces, and their averages.

DETERMINING CONFORMANCE TO
STEEL PROFILE/SURFACE ROUGHNESS/PEAK COUNT REQUIREMENTS

In addition to the measurement procedures described in ASTM D4417 and ASTM D7127, evaluation
criteria for determining compliance with specified profile ranges on a steel substrate were developed in
2012. The SSPC-PA 17 standard requires identification of three locations on the prepared surface in
which to acquire a measurement in accordance with the procedure in the ASTM test method specified
in the procurement documents.29 The average of the measurements at each of the three locations must
be within the specified profile range. Each area of the surface that is prepared using a given tool (or
blast pot) must be evaluated independently. The standard also includes a procedure for identifying the
extent of a non-conforming area if one of the location measurements is out of compliance.

SUMMARY

There have been many advances in the equipment, techniques, and measurement methods used for
surface preparation of steel substrates since publication of the first versions of the surface preparation
standards discussed in this paper. Though these standards are constantly being updated to reflect
these changes, many of their fundamental requirements have remained consistent over the course of
many years, despite multiple revisions. This indicates that owners, specifiers, and contractors within the
protective coatings industry in the U.S. continue to find that core requirements of these standards
remain useful and valuable. Nonetheless, these standards will continue to be refined and updated, and
new ones will be added as required by the continuing evolution of surface preparation technology for
protective coatings.

11 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Many thanks to Kenneth Trimber (KTA-Tator, Inc.), Dr. Lydia Frenzel (The Advisory Council), and Jeff Theo
(Vulcan Painters) for their assistance in the preparation and editorial review of this paper.

REFERENCES

1. SSPC-SP 1 (latest revision), “Solvent Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

2. ASTM F 22 (latest revision), “Standard Test Method for Hydrophobic Surface Films by the Water-
Break Test.” (West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM).

3. ISO 8502-3, “Preparation of steel surfaces before application of paint and related products–Tests for
the assessment of surface cleanliness, Part 3: Assessment of dust on steel surfaces prepared for
painting (pressure-sensitive tape method)”

4. SSPC-SP 5/NACE No. 1 (latest revision), “White Metal Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, and
Houston, TX: NACE).

5. SSPC-SP 10/NACE No. 2 (latest revision), “Near White Metal Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA:
SSPC, and Houston, TX: NACE).

6. SSPC-SP 6/NACE No. 3 (latest revision), “Commercial Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, and
Houston, TX: NACE).

7. SSPC-SP 14/NACE No. 8 (latest revision), “Industrial Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, and
Houston, TX: NACE).

8. SSPC-SP 7/NACE No. 3 (latest revision), “Brush-Off Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, and
Houston, TX: NACE).

9. SSPC-VIS 1 (latest revision), “Guide and Reference Photographs for Steel Surfaces Prepared by Dry
Abrasive Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

10. SSPC-SP 11 (latest revision), “Power Tool Cleaning to Bare Metal.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

11. SSPC-SP 15 (latest revision), “Commercial Grade Power Tool Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

12. ASTM D 4417 (latest revision), “Standard Test Methods for Field Measurement of Surface Profile of
Blast-Cleaned Steel.” (West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM).

13. ASTM D 4285 (latest revision), “Standard Test Method for Indicating Oil or Water in Compressed
Air.” (West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM).

14. SSPC-VIS 3 (latest revision), “Guide and Reference Photographs for Steel Surfaces Prepared by
Power- and Hand-Tool Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

15. SSPC-SP WJ-1/NACE WJ-1 (latest revision), “Waterjet Cleaning of Metals: Clean to Bare
Substrate.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC, and Houston, TX: NACE).

12 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.
 16. SSPC-SP WJ-2/NACE WJ-2, “Waterjet Cleaning of Metals: Very Thorough Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh,
PA: SSPC, and Houston, TX: NACE).

17. SSPC-SP WJ-3/NACE WJ-3, “Waterjet Cleaning of Metals: Thorough Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA:
SSPC, and Houston, TX: NACE).

18. SSPC-SP WJ-4/NACE WJ-4, “Waterjet Cleaning of Metals: Light Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC,
and Houston, TX: NACE).

19. SSPC-VIS 4/NACE VIS 7 (latest revision), “Guide and Reference Photographs for Steel Surfaces
Prepared by Waterjetting.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC and Houston, TX: NACE).

20. “Recommended Guidelines for Evaluating Flash Rust,” National Shipbuilding Research Program
Technical Panel SP-3, Surface Preparation and Coatings (2009).

21. SSPC/NACE Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning Standards (work in progress by SSPC C.2 Surface
Preparation Committee and NACE TG 350A Proposed SSPC Surface Preparation Standard/NACE
Standard Practice, “SSPC-SP-10 (WAB)/NACE WAB-2, Near-White Metal Wet Abrasive Blast
Cleaning, ” NACE TG 350B Proposed SSPC Surface Preparation Standard/NACE Standard Practice,
“SSPC SP-5 (WAB)/NACE WAB-1, White Metal Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning,” NACE TG 350C
Proposed SSPC Surface Preparation Standard/NACE Standard Practice, “SSPC SP-6 (WAB)/NACE
WAB-2, Commercial Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning,” NACE TG 350D Proposed SSPC Surface
Preparation Standard/NACE Standard Practice, “SSPC SP-14 (WAB)/NACE WAB-8, Metal Wet
Abrasive Blast Cleaning,” and NACE TG 350E Proposed SSPC Surface Preparation Standard/NACE
Standard Practice, “SSPC SP-7 (WAB)/NACE WAB-4, Brush-Off Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning.”

22. SSPC-VIS 5/NACE No. 9, (latest revision), “Visual Reference Photographs for Steel Surfaces
Prepared by Wet Abrasive Blast Cleaning.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC and Houston, TX: NACE).

23. 3/HS/6/95, “Hydroblasting Standards” (out of print), (Houston, TX: Courtaulds Coatings (Holdings)
Ltd., 1995),

24. SSPC-Guide 15 (latest revision), “Field Methods for Extraction and Analysis of Soluble Salts on
Steel and Other Nonporous Substrates.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

25. SSPC-Guide 6 (latest revision), “Guide for Containing Surface Preparation Debris
Generated During Paint Removal Operations.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

26. SSPC-TU 7, “Conducting Ambient Air, Soil, and Water Sampling of Surface Preparation and Paint
Disturbance Activities.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

27. SSPC-Guide 18 (latest revision), “Specifier's Guide for Determining Containment Class and
Environmental Monitoring Strategies for Lead-Paint Removal.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

28. ASTM D7127 (latest revision), “Standard Test Method for Measurement of Surface Roughness of
Abrasive Blast Cleaned Metal Using a Portable Stylus Instrument.” (West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM
International).

29. SSPC-PA 17 (latest revision), “Procedure for Determining Conformance to Steel Profile/Surface
Roughness/Peak Count Requirements.” (Pittsburgh, PA: SSPC).

13 work published by NACE International with permission of the author(s).

Government
The material presented and the views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author(s) and are not necessarily endorsed by the Association.