OATINGS+ February 11 - 14, 2019 | Orlando, FL

“Abrasive Selection Economics – Cost or Price?”

By Brad Gooden, BlastOne USA

Presented at Coatings+ 2019

February 11 - February 14, 2019
Orlando, FL

Notice: This paper was presented by the author(s) or assigned speakers at the Coatings+ 2019 conference as
indicated above. SSPC: The Society for Protective Coatings (“SSPC”) has a worldwide, royalty-free, fully paid up,
perpetual, and irrevocable limited license (with the right to sublicense) to do any and all of the following: Publish this
paper in the official proceedings for the conference; Record the related presentation on film, tape, disk or other forms
of media for sale; Publish the paper or presentation in the Journal of Protective Coatings and Linings; SSPC reserves
the right of first publication of the paper or presentation; Distribute printed copies of your presentation on-site to
meeting attendees.

In addition, SSPC shall have the right to sublicense to its third party designees some or all of the rights as set forth
above, in the sole and exclusive discretion and under the direction and control of SSPC. As such, distribution or
sharing of this content in any print, digital or verbal format is not permitted without the consent of SSPC.
Abrasive Selection Economics – Cost or Price?
By Brad Gooden

BlastOne USA

Introduction

The easiest way to compare abrasives is to look at the price per unit (i.e. price per ton or price per
pound). If only it were that easy! Unfortunately comparing the price per unit assumes that all abrasives
perform the same – and we all know that is not the case.

Many contractors find an abrasive that works for them and that becomes their default abrasive for
every project – however that approach assumes that there is one “silver bullet” abrasive that suits all
projects. Unfortunately, every job that contractors face are different, and abrasive choice should be a
standard consideration before starting every new project.

The choice of abrasive can have a surprising impact on the cost of a project. The natural decision is to
decide on the abrasive based on the price per ton. What the leading companies are doing is looking at
the cost of the project. When you look at your project P&L, what is the biggest line item? Generally
labor right?

What cost would you like to affect the most?

Total Project Cost

Labor Consumables Equipment Disposal Abrasive

Figure 1. Breakdown of project costs.

However, the financial aspect isn’t the only consideration when deciding on abrasive. There is actually
three key decision points to make when choosing abrasive:

1. Project Cost. What abrasive will result in this project being completed most cost effectively?
2. Regulations & Health Effects. It’s only prudent to consider the health & environmental impacts
of the different abrasives.
3. Specifications. What abrasive will produce the desired surface finish with the correct profile and
cleanliness?

We will cover all 3 points in detail, however lets first do a basic overview of all the common medias used
for surface preparation of industrial structures.

Abrasive Media Types & Properties

There are four properties of abrasive worth considering:

1. Hardness. Harder = faster blasting, and greater surface profile. Measured in Mohs.
2. Friability. Less friable = more recyclable and less dusty.
3. Bulk density. Higher bulk density generally means higher specific gravity which generally means
faster blasting, but not always.
4. Shape. This determines the type of profile created.

Abrasive Description Hardness Friability Bulk Shape Common Uses

Type Density
Commonly called Very Low 105 – Angular Nonferrous
“Alox”, Aluminum high. 9.0 125 lbs surfaces including
Oxide is a Mohs. per stainless steel,
manufactured cubic ft precision
Aluminum abrasive otherwise blasting, turbine
Oxide known as fused blasting, etc.
alumina. Brown Normally always
Fused Aluminum recycled in blast
Oxide is the most cabinets, etc.
common type.
Coal Slag is a by- Medium High 75 – 90 Angular Not typically
product waste from a 6.0 – 7.0 lbs per recycled. Bridges,
coal fired power Mohs. cubic ft water tanks,
plant. The molten ships, industrial
ash comes from the structures.
bottom of a wet
Coal Slag bottom boiler, is
quenched and
vitrified with water,
and then
crushed/processed
for abrasive blasting
applications.
 Also known as Iron Medium High 90 – Angular Not typically
Silicate. Also a by- 6.0 – 7.0 115 lbs recycled. Bridges,
product, Copper Slag Mohs. per water tanks,
is made of cubic ft ships, industrial
granulated slag from structures.
a Copper Smelting
process. During
smelting, impurities
in the copper
Copper
become slag which
Slag
floats to the top of
the molten metal.
Slag that is quenched
in water produces
angular granules
which are disposed
of as waste or
utilized as blasting
media.
Crushed glass is Medium High 70 – 80 Angular Not typically
mostly made from 6.0 – lbs per recycled. Bridges,
recycled glass bottles Mohs. cubic ft water tanks,
and less often from ships, industrial
Crushed
recycled plate glass. structures.
Glass
The recycled glass is
crushed, sieved and
bagged for blasting
applications.
Naturally occurring High. 7.5 Low 140 – Sub- Can be used on
mineral. Mined and – 8.5 150 lbs Angular ferrous or
typically has 2 stages Mohs. per and nonferrous
of processing: wet cubit ft Angular surfaces.
processed to remove Commonly used
impurities, and dry on petrochemical
processed to remove tanks, pipelines,
dust and sizing. industrial
Garnet
facilities, water
tanks, ships,
bridges. Often
recycled in blast
rooms, blast
cabinets, etc.
New Steel
applications.
Manufactured Low 5.5 – Medium 100 – Spherical Nonferrous
abrasive. Small 6.0 Mohs 120 lbs surfaces including
Glass Bead
spheres of glass per stainless steel,
manufactured by cubic ft precision
 molten glass being blasting, turbine
atomized. blasting, etc.
Normally always
recycled in blast
cabinets, etc.
Beach sand. Naturally Medium Low 100 lbs Sub- The use of silica
occurring quartz 6.0 – 7.0 per Angular sand as an
silica sand. Mohs cubic ft abrasive Blasting
material is not
Silica Sand
recommended at
it presents a
serious health
hazard.
A by-product from a Medium Medium 120 – Sub- New steel
rutile mine. A 7.0 Mohs 130 lbs Rounded applications, light
naturally occurring per coating removal.
Staurolite mined mineral that cubic ft
needs to be
processed in order to
remove impurities.
A manufactured High. 8.0 Low 230 – Angular Bridges, water
abrasive. Steel grit is – 8.5 270 lbs tanks, blast
typically Mohs. per rooms
manufactured by cubic ft
Steel Grit
molten steel being
atomized and
crushed to produce
different sizes.
A manufactured High. 8.0 Very Low 285 – Rounded Wheel machines.
abrasive. Steel shot is – 8.5 300 lbs Often used in
typically Mohs. per peening
Steel Shot manufactured by cubic ft applications as it
molten steel being will give a
atomized by high rounded profile.
pressure water jets.

Table 1. Characteristics of various abrasive types.

Project Cost

The single biggest key driver of project cost is the timeline of the project. As per Figure 1, labor usually
accounts for around 60% of a project cost, and has the biggest impact on overall project costs. Different
abrasives perform differently directly impacting time and labor. Abrasives each need to be evaluated in
three areas:

1. Hourly blasting speed given the specific project circumstances

2. Hourly consumption
 3. Disposal cost

The true cost of blasting is the finished cost per ft2 of a blasted surface. There is a simple formula that
can be used to determine the cost per ft2 that takes into account abrasive, labor, equipment, clean up
disposal, and production rates. The formula is below:

True cost per square foot = A (B+C) + D + E

X
A = Abrasive consumed per nozzle per hour (in pounds)
B = Abrasive cost delivered per pound
C = Clean up and disposal costs per pound
D = Labour cost per nozzle per hour
E = Equipment running cost per nozzle per hour (compressor, diesel, nozzle, lenses, hoses and
general wear and tear)
X = Square feet blast cleaned per nozzle per hour

By using the above costing sheet, you can quickly see how on complex projects, a small variable
in production can very quickly make significant impacts in cost.
Regulations and Health Effects

Health factors are a very important decision. The workers going home safe each and every day is the
business owner’s prime responsibility. The most important regulation around abrasive blasting media
worldwide is the level of free silica in the abrasive. Crystalline silica is recognized world-wide as a Class 1
Carcinogen. The silica sand type abrasive media when used in abrasive blasting, typically fractures into
fine particles and becomes airborne. When workers inhale the crystalline silica, the lung tissue reacts by
developing fibrotic nodules and scarring around the trapped silica particles [Silicosis and Silicate Disease
Committee 1988]. This fibrotic condition of the lung is called silicosis.

The other consideration is the level of heavy metals present in abrasive. When blasted against a surface
at 450 miles per hour, some abrasives are pulverized into extremely fine dust, and some slag abrasives
release heavy metals. Many countries have regulations around this, of note is the current US beryllium
rule.

Abrasive Generic Indicator

% of Free
Name of Health Health notes
Silica
Hazard
Aluminum Oxide Low dust
>0.1%
No heavy metals
Coal Slag Low silica, but could have
>0.1% some heavy metals
Dust levels high
Copper Slag Low silica, but could have
>0.1% some heavy metals
Dust levels high
Crushed Glass >0.1% Medium dust
Garnet Low dust
>0.1%
No heavy metals
Glass Bead Low dust
>1.0%
No heavy metals
Staurolite 1.0% – The standard Starblast has
5.0% up to 5% silica
Silica sand 70% -
#1 Carcinogenic Material
100%
Steel Grit Low dust
0%
No heavy metals
Steel Shot Low dust
0%
No heavy metals

Table 2. General health hazards of various abrasives.

Specifications
Different abrasives cause different surface conditions, cleanliness and surface profiles. Below is a chart
that gives a comparison of the different abrasive types, however it would be useful to first understand
the basics of surface conditions:

Figure 2. Understanding surface profile and cleanliness.

Figure 3. Factors effecting surface profile.

Abrasive Type Surface Shape Surface Profile Surface Cleanliness

 Aluminum Sharp & rugged 1.0 mils – 6.0 mils depending Clean surface
Oxide on abrasive size
Sharp & rugged 2.0 mils – 6.0 mils depending Embedment is common
Coal Slag
on abrasive size
Sharp & rugged 2.0 mils – 6.0 mils depending Embedment is common
Copper Slag
on abrasive size
Sharp & rugged 1.0 mils – 4.0 mils depending Embedment is possible with
on abrasive size larger grades. Due to being
Crushed Glass made of recycled glass
Chlorides can be high,
recommend verifying.
Sharp & rugged 0.5 mils – 5.0 mils depending Clean surface. Some types of
Garnet on abrasive size Garnet have high Chlorides,
recommend verifying.
Polished 0.1 mils – 1.0 mils depending Polished surface. Will struggle
Glass Bead
on abrasive size to remove contaminants.
Sharp & rugged Not recommended for blasting Not recommended for blasting
Silica Sand
due to health hazards due to health hazards
Semi-Sharp & 1.0 mils – 2.5 mils depending Surface Smearing/Fine Particle
Staurolite
rugged on abrasive size Embedment is possible
Sharp & rugged 1.0 mils – 8.0 mils depending Embedment is possible with
Steel Grit
on abrasive size larger grades
Rounded & 0.5 mils – 3.5 mils depending Peened surface. Will struggle
Steel Shot
peened on abrasive size to remove deep contaminants.

Table 3. Profile shape generated by various abrasives.

Summary

When choosing Abrasives for your project is it important to consider three key topics:

1. Project Cost. What abrasive will result in this project being completed most cost effectively?
2. Health Effects. It’s only prudent to consider the health & environmental impacts of the different
abrasives.
3. Specifications. What abrasive will produce the desired surface finish with the correct profile and
cleanliness?