British Corrosion Journal

ISSN: 0007-0599 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ycst19

Use of fly ash in high performance industrial

coatings

S. Tiwari & M. Saxena

To cite this article: S. Tiwari & M. Saxena (1999) Use of fly ash in high performance industrial
coatings, British Corrosion Journal, 34:3, 184-191, DOI: 10.1179/000705999101500824

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1179/000705999101500824

Published online: 18 Jul 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 46

View related articles

Citing articles: 15 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ycst20
Use of fly ash in high performance industrial
coatings
S. TIWARI T he extender properties of fly ash, a waste byproduct of thermal power stations, were
M. SAXENA assessed and compared with those of conventional extenders. T he development of protective
and decorative industrial coatings as solvent borne, cold curing, two pack epoxy systems,
using fly ash as an extender, is reported. T he eVects of fly ash on coating properties and film
characteristics are also discussed. A two body (high stress) abrasion test was conducted to
assess the abrasion resistance of the coatings. It is concluded that the properties of fly ash
that contribute to its usefulness as an extender are its abrasion resistance, chemical inert-
ness, low oil absorption, and low specific gravity. T he coatings that were developed have
shown improved corrosion and abrasion resistance and also better resistance to chemicals
(5%Na CO , 1%NaOH, and 2%H SO ) and organic solvents (toluene and mineral spirit).
2 3 2 4
Fly ash can be a cost eVective substitute for conventional extenders in high performance
industrial coatings.
T he authors are at the Regional Research L aboratory, Council of Scientific and Industrial
Research, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal 462 026, India. Manuscript received 28 January
1998; accepted 21 December 1998.
© 1999 IoM Communications L td.

INTRODUCTION companies, has been used as an inhibitive pigment in

Most industrial establishments and construction industries
are faced with the problem of deterioration in metallic
structures and components owing to corrosion and abra-
sion.1,2 Generally, all metals are prone to corrosion damage
except for gold and platinum. The commonly applied
methods of protection are modification of the metal or the
environment, the introduction of a barrier between the
metal and the environment such as paint, or through
design. Painting is one of the most suitable, less expen-
sive, and more efficient techniques of corrosion and wear
control.3,4 In industrial atmospheres, coatings may be
subjected to continuous severe corrosive conditions in the
form of corrosive vapours, gases, or moisture, and also to
mechanical wear such as sanding, rubbing, or scraping.5
Therefore, industrial coatings have to be formulated with
great care in order to have an effective life.6
Each raw material in a coating formulation plays a
significant role in deciding the performance of a coating
system. Extender pigments are an integral part of almost
all coating formulations, contributing significantly towards
modifying various coating properties such as flow character-
istics, gloss, abrasion resistance, settling tendency, etc.7
They differ from true pigments as they do not impart
opacity to the coating, being practically transparent in
the oil medium. Selection and proper blending of suitable
extenders helps to optimise several engineering properties
and the aesthetics of a coating. Keeping pace with the
technological advances in coatings, the technical demand
on extenders has grown tremendously.8 The conventional
mineral extenders require long processing, including grind-
ing, levigation, chemical treatments, etc., from ore to final
stage, resulting in significant loss of material.9 Available
information indicates a yield loss of 75% in the processing
of china clay and of 30% in the case of calcite.8 Such
extenders, and several other processed extenders, are
expensive and are also not available indigenously, leading
to increase in cost of the resulting coating systems.10 It is
a matter of concern to the paint formulators and technol-
ogists to find technically and economically viable pigments
and extenders of indigenous origin for use in coatings and
thus bring down the cost of painting to acceptable limits.
Earlier work has been reported on the use of industrial
waste byproducts as pigments and extenders in coatings.
Red mud, a byproduct of aluminium manufacturing
protective coatings.11,12 Several patented processes are
available for the surface treatment of red mud particles
for improved pigment properties and for use in concrete
formulations.13–16 The preparation of iron oxide pigment
from the waste sludge of a dye intermediate manufacturing
company has also been discussed.17 Corrosion resistant
pigment has also been developed from the iron–chromium
waste of cooling tower effluents from fertiliser plants by
Subramanium et al.18
The utilisation of fly ash, a waste byproduct of thermal
power stations, as an extender in water based coating
formulations has also been reported.19,20 However, there
are certain disadvantages of water based coatings that limit
their applications.21 The major problem associated with
such coatings is their greater tendency towards increasing
corrosion of the substrate material owing to the presence
of water. The addition of surfactants to reduce the higher
surface tension of water leads to the formation of films
with poorer water resistance. Hence, they cannot be used
where protection against severe corrosive and abrasive
environments is required, as in industrial coatings. In this
context, solvent based coatings have been observed to offer
the advantages of better corrosion, chemical, and water
resistance, which accounts for the diversity of their potential
applications.
The present study explores the possibility of using fly
ash as an extender in solvent borne coatings for high
performance industrial applications. Characterisation of fly
ash and the comparison of its properties with those of
conventional mineral extenders were carried out. Coatings
based on fly ash were developed, as solvent borne two
pack epoxy systems, for protection (primers) as well as for
decoration (enamels). Priming compositions were formu-
lated using fly ash in three varying proportions. For
comparison, similar coatings were formulated with mineral
whiting (a conventional extender) by replacing fly ash in
equal amounts, without varying the proportion of other
constituents. This gave an indication of the influence of fly
ash on various coating properties and film characteristics.
The formulated coatings were characterised and compared
with two commercial coatings. A two body ( high stress)
abrasion test was conducted for selected coating compos-
itions. The corrosion resistance, abrasion resistance, and
resistance to water, chemicals, and organic solvents of the
fly ash coatings are reported in this study. The effect of fly

184 British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3 ISSN 0007–0599

 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings
ash on coating properties and film characteristics is also
discussed. To study the effect of fly ash on the colour
shades and gloss of enamels, two shades of enamel (deep
blue and pale yellow) were prepared. Three compositions
of each shade were formulated and prepared with varying
amounts of fly ash. Similar characterisation was carried
out on these enamels as for the priming coatings. Tests
for corrosion and abrasion resistance were not, however,
conducted for the enamels because they are intended
exclusively for decorative purposes.
EXPERIMENTAL
Raw materials
A solvent borne two pack epoxy, Bis-A from Ciba-Geigy
of India Ltd, was employed as the base resin. Mineral
whiting, a conventional extender, was obtained from Vosh
Enterprises for comparison with fly ash. Other raw
materials used in priming formulations were pigment grade
red oxide of iron and zinc chrome. Pthallocyanin blue and
lemon chrome were incorporated for pigmentation in
enamels. A small amount of titanium (Anatase) was also
incorporated in the enamel formulations. Two commercial
coatings were taken for comparison; one was a polyurethane
based two pack priming coat and the other was an air
drying, alkyd base metal primer.
Characterisation of fly ash
Fly ash was characterised using wet chemical analysis to
determine its chemical composition. Phase identification
was carried out by an X-ray diffraction technique using a
Philips diffractometer (PW 1710). The extender properties
of fly ash, including pH, oil absorption, and specific gravity,
were determined by standard procedures (ASTM D
1208–89, ASTM D 281–89, and ASTM D 153–89 respect-
ively) and compared with those of conventional extenders.
Preparation of coatings
The preparation of primers and enamel coatings, as
discussed earlier, was done using a laboratory ball mill.22
The process involved the preparation of a mill base by
mixing pigments, extenders, and other additives, as per the
formulation, with quantities of resin and solvent just
sufficient to make a smooth paste. The mill base was then
ground in a ball mill until the desired fineness of dispersion,
as assessed using a fineness of grind gauge (ASTM D
1210–1988), was achieved. A curing agent was added to
the prepared coatings just prior to their application.
Sample preparation technique
For the purpose of characterisation, coatings were applied
on mild steel panels measuring 15·24×10·16 cm using a
hand held spray gun, in accordance with standard specifica-
tion ASTM D 823–92a. The surfaces of the panels were
cleaned with emery to remove rust and were then degreased
with toluene/xylene before painting. Coatings were applied
in a single coat on one side of the panel for the evaluation
of film properties and on both sides for the determination
of corrosion resistance (in which case the sides were also
sealed with wax to prevent moisture from entering the
coated film). For the abrasion resistance test, a similar
method was adopted for sample preparation except that
the size of the samples was 4×4 cm, as required by the
particular test.23
Property characterisation of coatings
Characterisation of the coatings before application was
carried out for properties such as viscosity and density.
Determination of film properties such as drying time, dry
film thickness, gloss, scratch hardness, and impact resistance
was carried out after application to the mild steel panels,
185
as described above. All of the tests were conducted in
accordance with standard techniques.24
Humidity and salt spray resistance of
coatings
The corrosion resistance of the priming coats was evaluated
as resistance to humidity and salt spray.24 Coatings were
exposed to 95% relative humidity in a chamber for seven
days and a temperature cycle of 42–48°C was maintained.
Each cycle was of 70 min duration, so there were approxi-
mately 140 cycles during the test period. Visual observations
were made at intervals of 24 h for any colour change,
blistering, loss of adhesion, softening, or embrittlement.
After the specified period, the coating was removed and
the surface was observed for any signs of corrosion.
Resistance to salt spray was determined by exposing the
coated panels to a fine spray of 3% salt solution in a
chamber for seven days. Similar observations were made
as in the humidity test.
Resistance to water, chemicals, and
organic solvents
Immersion tests were conducted in distilled water,
5%Na CO , 1%NaOH, 2%H SO , and organic solvents
2 3 2 4
such as toluene and mineral spirit for different durations.25
Visual observations were made for the appearance of
any blisters (ASTM D 714–87) or other film defects such
as chalking, checking, cracking, etc. as described in
ASTM D 659, D 660, and D 661 respectively. Also any
colour change, gloss reduction, or loss of adhesion was
recorded.
Test for abrasion resistance
The abrasive wear resistance of the selected coatings was
evaluated by conducting high stress (two body) abrasion
tests on the coated mild steel specimens (prepared as
described earlier), using a Suga abrasion tester (type
NUS-1, Japan).23 The abrasive medium used was an emery
paper bonded with SiC particles of the desired size. The
abrasive was fixed rigidly to a metallic wheel of 50 mm
diameter and 12 mm width with the help of double sided
tape. Load was applied on the wheel by a cantilever
arrangement. One revolution of the wheel corresponded to
400 cycles and a sliding distance of 26·0 m. Fresh abrasive
was used in all cases. The specimen was held in contact
with the wheel with the help of a locking arrangement.
With the movement of the wheel, the coated film was
gradually abraded and the loss in weight of the specimen
was recorded. This continued until the coating had been
removed and the substrate became visible. The wear rate
of the coatings was calculated using weight loss and density
values. The variation in wear rates with varying sliding
distances was studied at a constant load of 1 N. In another
case, the sliding distance was kept constant at 3·25 m and
the variation in wear rates with load applied was observed.
Microstructural study
The microstructure of the fly ash and fly ash based coatings
was studied using a Jeol JSM–35 CF scanning electron
microscope (SEM). Fly ash specimens were prepared by
dispersing them in carbon tetrachloride and then spreading
them over a stud fixed to a specimen holder. The state of
dispersion of the fly ash in coatings was studied in the
SEM using a surface view of the coated mild steel panels.
Cross-sectional views of the dried coatings were used to
study film thickness and dispersion characteristics.
Specimens were mounted vertically in polyester resin and
polished before examination in the SEM and all specimens
were sputtered with gold before observation.
British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3
186 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Properties of fly ash
Chemical constitution
The results of wet chemical analysis of the fly ash (Table 1)
indicate the presence of 65·13% silica and 20·58% alumina
as major constituents. Among the other constituents, 6·23%
iron oxide is present together with oxides of sodium,
calcium, and magnesium in smaller proportions. The
presence of these alkaline oxides imparts alkalinity to the
ash which shows a pH value of 8·1 (Table 2). X-ray
diffraction studies of fly ash showed a-quartz (SiO ) and
2
mullite (Al Si O ) as the major crystalline phases. These
6 2 13
are abrasive in nature, imparting abrasion resistance to the
ash. Haematite, corundum, albite, augite, lazurite, and
tenorite are other crystalline phases also present in the
ash (Fig. 1).
The mineral whiting used for comparison contains mainly
oxides and carbonates of calcium and magnesium with
CaCO as the major constituent (Table 1). This shows an
3
alkaline pH of 8·74 (Table 2). It is widely used as an
extender, especially in solvent borne industrial and marine
coatings and in anticorrosive coatings.26
1 Mineral phase composition of fly ash
Extender properties
As indicated in Table 2, the oil absorption for fly ash is mainly to their particle shape and the nature of the particle
19%, which is lower than the value for whiting (i.e. 29%) surface. The microstructural study of fly ash revealed its
and most of the other conventional extenders. The oil spherical structure and smooth outer surface (see below),
absorption of an extender directly gives an idea of the both of which contributed to a relatively small surface area
amount of base resin required. Less oil absorption indicates and low oil absorption capability. Hence, more fly ash can
less resin demand without compromising other coating be incorporated as compared with other mineral extenders
properties.27 The oil absorption depends mainly on the and a reduction in the amount of resin required is achieved.
physical structure, i.e. size and shape, of the extender The specific gravity of fly ash is 2·14, somewhat less than
particles, which also affects several other coating properties that of whiting (2·80) and many other conventionally used
including flow characteristics, settling tendency, film dura- extenders. This again gives the advantage of being able to
bility, etc.27 The particle size of both fly ash and whiting use a higher percentage of ash without any adverse increase
was kept the same by sieving them to remove all >38 mm in the bulk density of the formulation,7 as also indicated in
particles for the determination of oil absorption. Thus, the the results.
difference in their oil absorption values can be attributed Other major advantages of fly ash as an extender are the
simplicity of processing and the absence of the need for
chemical treatments, unlike other mineral extenders. In the
Table 1 Composition of extenders case of fly ash, the loss in yield is only 9–10% during the
sieving which must be done to achieve the required particle
Composition, wt-% size. This loss in yield is remarkably small in comparison
with the 75 and 30% loss in yield values for china clay and
No. Constituents Fly ash Mineral whiting calcite, respectively, as reported elsewhere.8
1 Silica 65·13 1·50
2 Alumina 20·58 0·50 Influence of fly ash on coating properties
3 Iron oxide 6·23 ... Viscosity values of the primer and enamel coat formulations
4 Calcium carbonate ... 97·5 (Tables 3 and 4) in comparison with those of commercial
5 Magnesium carbonate ... ... compositions are shown in Figs. 2 and 3 respectively. The
6 Calcium oxide 5·38 ... viscosity of any coating system is the result of interaction
7 Magnesium oxide 0·46 ...
8 Sodium oxide 0·24 ...
between its various constituents.28 In the present study, the
9 Others Traces 0·50 percentage of fly ash was varied without changing the
proportion of other ingredients, as stated earlier, which

Table 2 Comparison of fly ash with conventional mineral extenders

Common name Oil absorption, Specific Refractive

No. (composition) Colour pH % gravity index Reactivity

1 Fly ash (SiO .Al Si O ) Whitish grey 8·15 19·0 2·15 ... Chemically inert
2 6 2 13
2 Whiting (CaCO ) Off-white 8·74 29·0 2·80 1·58 Soluble in dilute
3
mineral and acetic acid
3 China clay
(Al O .2SiO .2H O) White ... 30–60 2·60 1·56 ...
2 3 2 2
4 Barytes (BaSO ) Off-white ... 10–14 4·50 1·67 Chemically inert
4
5 Gypsum
(CaSO .0·5H O) White ... 20–24 2·34 ... ...
4 2
6 Talc (Mg H (SiO ) ) Off-white 9–9·5 25–35 2·65–2·85 1·59–1·64 Partly soluble
3 2 34
in dilute HCl
7 Quartz (SiO ) White ... ... 2·80 1·53 Chemically inert
2

British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3

 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings 187

VISCOSITY (Pa s)

DENSITY (g cm_3)
2 Influence of fly ash on viscosity of priming coats: values
within box are in poise 4 Influence of fly ash on bulk density of priming coats

Table 3 Formulation of priming coats

Parts (by weight)†

No. Ingredients* FP1 FP2 FP3 WP1 WP2 WP3

Base
VISCOSITY (Pa s)

1 Bis-A 20 20 20 20 20 20
2 Solvent 20 20 20 20 20 20
3 N-Butyl alcohol 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 Fly ash 30 35 40 ... ... ...
5 Whiting ... ... ... 30 35 40
6 Zinc chrome 8 8 8 8 8 8
7 Iron oxide 16 11 6 16 11 6
8 Aerosil 1 1 1 1 1 1
Curing agent
9 HY-848 14 14 14 14 14 14
10 Xylene 6 6 6 6 6 6

* Base/curing agent mixing ratio 5 : 1.

† FP1, FP2, and FP3 – with 30, 35, and 40% fly ash; WP1, WP2,
and WP3 – with 30, 35, and 40% mineral whiting.

3 Influence of fly ash on viscosity of enamel coats: values

within box are in poise Table 4 Formulation of enamel coats
gives an idea of the effect of fly ash on coating viscosity. Parts (by weight)†
Viscosity affects the application and flow properties of a
coating and is generally adjusted according to the intended No. Ingredients* BE1 BE2 BE3 YE1 YE2 YE3
application.29 A nominal increase in viscosity has been
observed with increasing quantity of fly ash. The formu- Base
lation containing the maximum percentage (40%) of fly 1 Bis-A 35 35 35 35 35 35
ash (FP3) has a viscosity of 0·24 Pa s which is similar to 2 Xylene 15 15 15 15 15 15
that of the formulation containing 35% whiting (WP2). In 3 N-Butyl alcohol 5 5 5 5 5 5
the case of whiting based formulations, the viscosity shows 4 Fly ash 22 20 18 22 20 18
5 Titanium dioxide 1·5 2·5 4·5 1·5 2·5 4·5
an undesirable increase when more than 35% whiting is 6 Ptallocyanin blue 0·5 1·5 1·5 ... ... ...
used, giving inferior flow properties to the coating which 7 Lemon chrome ... ... ... 0·5 1·5 1·5
render it unsuitable for brush or spray application. Fly ash 8 Aerosil 1 1 1 1 1 1
based formulations have viscosities comparable with those
Curing agent
of the commercial formulations CP1 and CP2 (0·225 and
9 HY-848 14 14 14 14 14 14
0·257 Pa s respectively). A similar trend was observed in 10 Xylene 6 6 6 6 6 6
enamel coats. The viscosities of the fly ash based formu-
lations render them suitable for application by brush * Base/curing agent mixing ratio 4 : 1.
or spraying. † BE1, BE2, and BE3 – blue enamel with 22, 20, and 18% fly
Variation in coating density with percentage fly ash ash; YE1, YE2, and YE3 – yellow enamel with 22, 20, and 18%
addition is shown in Figs. 4 and 5. The density of fly ash fly ash.

British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3

188 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings
DENSITY (g cm_3)
5 Influence of fly ash on bulk density of enamel coats
based formulations varies from 1·21 to 1·28, whereas the
density of whiting based formulations varies from 1·22 to
1·40. The increase in bulk density of the coatings is less in
the case of fly ash than in the case of whiting. Obviously,
more fly ash can be incorporated as compared with whiting
and other extenders.
Influence of fly ash on film properties of
coatings
The film properties of the coatings were assessed on dried
films applied on mild steel panels. Specimen preparation
has been described above. The drying time was recorded
for surface drying. The drying times of fly ash coatings
compared with other formulations are reported in Tables 5
and 6. It was found that fly ash has no adverse effect on
the drying properties of the coatings. Film thicknesses
obtained for fly ash based coatings range from 20 to 25 mm.
This compares with 18–25 mm for whiting based formu-
lations, and 25 and 20 mm for commercial formulations
CP1 and CP2 respectively. The film thickness directly
affects its durability. As reported elsewhere, weight loss due
to weathering is proportional to film thickness up to 20 mm,
above which the rate of weight loss becomes independent
of the thickness.29 Thus, a film thickness of more than
20 mm performs well as a barrier resistant to weathering.
The results indicate that the film thickness of fly ash based
formulations is in a desired range that is comparable with
that of the commercial coatings. The gloss values obtained
for fly ash based enamel coats vary from 52 to 56% and,
Table 5 Characterisation of priming coats
Observed values†
No. Parameter FP1 FP2
1 Fineness of grind, mm 7 7
2 Drying time (surface dry), h 6 6
3 Dry film thickness, mm 23 25
4 Percentage gloss (45°) 10 10
5 Maximum scratch hardness, g 1700 1800
6 Impact resistance (12 lb ft−1)* P P
* P=pass.
† FP1, FP2, and FP3 – with 30, 35, and 40% fly ash; WP1, WP2, and WP3 – with 30, 35, and 40% mineral whiting; CP1 and CP2 –
commercial coatings.
British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3
hence, can be classified as semiglossy. The gloss of a paint
film depends mainly on particle size30 and the state
of dispersion of pigments and extenders in the resin.29
The presence of aggregates and agglomerates in a poorly
dispersed coating leads to loss of gloss and mechanical
breakdown of the film. The gloss values of the fly ash based
enamel coats indicate a good state of dispersion which has
also been confirmed by measurements on Hegman’s gauge
(a fineness of grind gauge) and the SEM observations. The
readings obtained on Hegman’s gauge for different coating
systems are listed in Tables 5 and 6.
Corrosion resistance
The coatings under study were evaluated for humidity and
salt spray resistance (Fig. 6), as described earlier. Visual
observations at regular intervals indicated no blistering in
FP1 and FP2 (priming coats with 30 and 35% fly ash,
respectively). Negligible blistering on the edges was
observed in FP3 containing 40% fly ash. In the salt spray
test, no blistering was found in any of the fly ash coat-
ings. No other film defects were found and the gloss and
adhesion of the coatings were also unaffected. Two formu-
lations prepared with whiting, WP1 and WP2 (with 30
and 35% whiting, respectively), showed no film defects
or blistering in the humidity cabinet test, but medium
blistering occurred in WP3 (with 40% whiting) after six
days of exposure. In the salt spray cabinet, slight blister-
ing was observed in WP2 and WP3 after seven days of
exposure. The commercial compositions, CP1 and CP2,
passed both the humidity and salt spray cabinet tests,
except for one sample of CP2 which developed fine blisters
near the edges after seven days in the humidity cabinet.
Overall observations indicate better performance of fly ash
coatings in both humidity and salt spray tests. The
performance of any coating system is the product of its
individual raw materials and their mutual interactions.31 As
the proportion of other raw materials was kept constant
except for the extenders, an idea about the performance of
fly ash in corrosion inhibition is obtained. The results indicate
that fly ash has no adverse effect on the corrosion resistance
of coatings. Rather, it delays the phenomenon of corrosion,
probably by slowing down the diffusion of corrosive species
owing to the presence of unreactive oxides of Si, Al, Fe, etc.
As reported elsewhere, silica and alumina are used to coat
titanium dioxide pigment to improve its durability character-
istics.31 Also, one of the reasons alumina is preferred for high
performance coatings is its surface inertness.32 The obser-
vations show that fly ash does not directly inhibit corrosion
as phosphate and chromate inhibitors do but delays corrosion
by providing a barrier between the corrosive species and the
surface of the substrate material.
Resistance to water, chemicals, and
organic solvent
The visual changes that occurred on the specimens after
immersion in distilled water, chemicals, and organic solvents
FP3 WP1 WP2 WP3 CP1 CP2
7 7 7 7 7 6
6 6 6 6 3 2
20 25 21 18 25 20
5 10 7 5 8 5
1800 1700 1800 1700 1500 1100
P P P P P P
 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings 189

WEAR RATEx10_9 (m3 m_1)

SLIDING DISTANCE (M)

1 corrosion; 2 complete blistering; 3 medium blistering; 4 slight
blistering; 5 no blistering
6 Resistance to humidity and salt spray
8 Wear rate versus sliding distance plots of coatings
from the substrate in H SO solution. No visual changes
2 4
were observed in any of the specimens in organic solvents,
except slight yellowing of the solution for CP1 in toluene.
A similar change was observed for CP2 in mineral spirit.
The improved chemical and solvent resistance of fly ash
coatings is attributable to the chemical inertness of the fly
ash constituents. On the other hand, the chemical reactivity
of whiting owing to its decomposition by certain mineral
acids restricts its use where high durability against corrosive
atmospheres is required, and also it cannot be used with
pigments or additives sensitive to alkaline conditions.33

0 complete failure; 1 slight blistering; 2 medium blistering;
3 yellowing of solution; 4 dulling of gloss; 5 few blisters; 6 no effect
7 Resistance to water, chemicals, and organic solvents
are reported in Fig. 7. Owing to the presence of inert oxides
in fly ash, the performance of fly ash based coatings was
found to be good in acidic as well as in basic solutions and
organic solvents. However, in whiting based formulations
the film became completely detached from the substrate in
2%H SO because of the chemical reactivity of whiting,
2 4
which also led to poor results in 5%Na CO and 1%NaOH
2 3
solutions. One of the commercial specimens, CP2, showed
complete failure, with swelling and detachment of the film
Abrasion resistance
The wear rates of the coatings are shown as functions of
sliding distance and load applied in Figs. 8 and 9
respectively. In the graph showing wear rate against sliding
distance (Fig. 8), the fly ash coating (FP2) shows an initial
decrease in wear rate up to 13 m, after which it becomes
constant. The constant wear region continues up to 58·5 m,
after which the film is removed and the substrate first
becomes visible. A similar trend is observed for the whiting
based formulation, except that the wear rate is higher and
the constant wear region starts from 16·25 m and continues
until removal of the film occurs at 48·75 m. A comparison
of the two indicates the contribution of the extenders to
the abrasion performance of the coating since the rest of
the formulation is identical. Higher rates of wear indicate
poor abrasion resistance. In this particular case, SiC
particles were the cutting medium, causing the softer

Table 6 Characterisation of enamel coats

Observed values†

No. Parameter BE1 BE2 BE3 YE1 YE2 YE3

1 Fineness of grind, mm 7 7 7 7 7 7
2 Drying time (surface dry), h 6 6 6 6 6 6
3 Dry film thickness, mm 21 23 20 22 25 22
4 Percentage gloss (45°) 55 52 54 56 54 55
5 Maximum scratch hardness, g 1800 1800 1700 1800 1700 1700
6 Impact resistance (12 lb ft−1)* P P P P P P

* P=pass.
† BE1, BE2, and BE3 – blue enamel with 22, 20, and 18% fly ash; YE1, YE2, and YE3 – yellow enamel with 22, 20, and 18% fly ash.

British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3

190 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings
WEAR RATEx10_9 (m3 m_1)
LOAD APPLIED (N)
9 Wear rate versus load applied plots of coatings
particles to abrade faster than the harder ones. As indica-
ted in the results, fly ash contributes positively towards
improving the abrasion resistance of the coatings owing
to its abrasive constituents such as silica and alumina. In
the case of the commercial coatings, a linear increase in
10 Micrograph (SEM) of fly ash particles dispersed in solvent
11 Micrograph (SEM) showing magnified view of fly ash
particle
British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3
12 Micrograph (SEM) showing surface view of dried fly ash
coating on mild steel panel
wear rates is observed. The wear rates of CP1 and CP2
(commercial specimens) were very high, with CP1 showing
the highest wear rate. Both the coatings were removed,
exposing the underlying mild steel substrate at a sliding
distance of 13 m. Figure 9, a plot of wear rate versus load
applied, shows that the lowest wear rate was observed for
the fly ash coating which can withstand a load of up to
5 N, after which the film abrades completely and the surface
is exposed. The whiting formulation also withstands a 5 N
load, but the wear rate is higher compared with fly ash
coatings. The commercial coatings CP2 and CP1 were fully
abraded at loads of 3 and 2 N respectively. The results for
both test conditions are in agreement, indicating the better
abrasion resistance of fly ash coatings.
Microstructure
Figure 10 shows the fly ash particles dispersed in solvent.
No aggregates or agglomerates that would otherwise need
more time for dispersion are evident. The particles are
spherical in shape, as seen in Fig. 11 which shows a single
fly ash particle. Fly ash has a smooth outer surface,
indicating its smaller surface area (as compared with a
rougher surface) in accordance with its reduced oil
absorption value. In Fig. 12 a surface view of a dried fly
ash coating on a mild steel panel is shown. Fly ash particles
are seen to be uniformly dispersed within the resin matrix,
with no film breaks or discontinuities. In a cross-sectional
view of the coated panel (Fig. 13), three layers are clearly
differentiated (marked as A, B, and C on the micrograph).
Layer A is the mild steel substrate on which the coating
was applied. The middle layer (B) represents the coating
13 Micrograph (SEM) showing cross-sectional view of dried
fly ash coating on mild steel panel
 Tiwari and Saxena Use of fly ash in high performance industrial coatings
and the uppermost layer (C) is formed by the mounting
material in which the panel was vertically mounted. The
thickness of the coating (the middle layer) can be measured
in cross-section and in this particular case is 24 mm,
confirming the results obtained by the non-destructive
thickness measurement technique. Again, fly ash particles
are seen to be uniformly dispersed in the resin.
CONCLUSIONS
As indicated by the results, fly ash based coatings have
improved resistance to corrosion, chemical attack, and
abrasion without any adverse effect on other coating
properties such as drying time, thickness, brushability,
and gloss. Fly ash is therefore suitable for use in high
performance coatings where resistance to severe corrosive
and abrasive environments is required. Semigloss enamels
can be formulated with fly ash in darker shades. However,
the lighter shades may be affected by the whitish grey
colour of the ash. No hard settling occurs in fly ash
coatings, which is otherwise seen in many commercial
compositions and is easily dispersed by mechanical stirring.
The best results are obtained by using 35% fly ash in
primers and 18% fly ash in enamels. The properties of fly
ash that contribute to its usefulness as an extender are
abrasion resistance, chemical inertness, low oil absorption,
and reduced specific gravity. Also, it is of low cost,
indigenously available in abundance, and easy to process.
The present study demonstrates the opportunity gainfully
to utilise a waste byproduct while simultaneously providing
a solution to its safe disposal.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to Professor T. C. Rao, Director,
Regional Research Laboratory (RRL), Bhopal, India, for
his encouragement and for the provision of Institute
facilities. The authors are also grateful to Mr A. K. Basu,
Mr J. M. Modawell, and Mr Rajkumar, BHEL, Bhopal,
for their valuable suggestions and for providing experi-
mental facilities. Dr B. K. Prasad, RRL, Bhopal, is gratefully
acknowledged for his valuable comments. One of the
authors (ST) is thankful to CSIR, New Delhi, India, for
providing financial assistance.
REFERENCES
1. . . : Proc. Conf. ‘Current status of surface coatings
technology’, Kanpur, India, November 1997, Oil Technologists’
Association of India, Paper 4.
191
2. . ’: Paintindia, 1975, 25, (12), 14–16.
3. . . : Paintindia, 1979, 29, (7), 21–27.
4. . , . , . , and . : Prog.
Org. Coatings, 1995, 25, (4), 339–355.
5. . . : Paintindia, 1997, 47, (6), 83–89.
6. .  and . . van : ‘Paint formulation,
principles, and practice’, 93–94; 1980, London, George Godwin.
7. . : ‘Principles of paint formulation’, 51–52; 1991,
New York, NY, Chapman & Hall.
8. . . : Paintindia, 1996, 46, (1), 17.
9. . . : ‘Outlines of paint technology’, 43–51; 1990,
London, Edward Arnold.
10. . : Paintindia, 1995, 45, (3), 27–28.
11. . : Paintindia, 1963, 13, 23–27.
12. .  and . . : Paintindia, 1966, 16, 31–34.
13. . : Germany Patent No. 803360, 1951.
14. . , . , and . : Hungary Patent
No. 42116, 1987.
15. . .  and . . : ‘Red mud – analysis and utilisation’,
195–200; 1994, New Delhi, Publications and Information
Directorate and Wiley Eastern.
16. .  and . . : India Patent No. 91431, 1964.
17. . , . , and .  : Paintindia,
June 1989, 39, (6), 41–42.
18. .  and . : Paintindia, June 1985,
35, (6), 30–31.
19. .  and . . : Res. Ind., 1971, 16, (2), 93–94.
20. . .  and . : Paintindia, 1994, 44, (10), 51–56.
21. . . , r, . . , and . . : ‘Organic coatings,
science and technology’, Vol. 2, 208–217; 1992, New York,
NY, Wiley.
22. . . , . , . . , and . . :
‘Surface coatings’, Vol. 2, 2nd edn, 439–444; 1984, London,
Chapman & Hall.
23. . . , . . , . . , . , and . .
: Mater. T rans., JIM, 1995, 36, (8), 1048–1057.
24. .  and . : Paintindia, 1995, 45, (7), 19–35.
25. .  , . . , . .  ,
. . , and . . : Paintindia, 1984, 34,
(11), 13–18.
26. . : Paintindia, 1997, 47, (5), 63–64.
27. . . : ‘Outlines of paint technology’, 33–35; 1990,
London, Edward Arnold.
28. .  and . : ‘Modern surface coatings’; 1965,
London, Interscience.
29. .   : Paintindia Annu., 1995, 84–93.
30. . .  and . . : J. Coatings T echnol., 1994, 66,
93–98.
31. . . : Paintindia, 1994, 44, (10), 35–40.
32. . . : Paintindia, 1995, 45, (2), 21–22.
33. .  and . : Paintindia, 1997, 47, (5), 65–66.
British Corrosion Journal 1999 Vol. 34 No. 3