PROCESS AND ENGINEERING SERVICES

ATLAS FERTILIZER CORPORATION

Daanlungsod, Toledo City, Cebu

Date : August 30, 2022

To : RCA
Thru :
From : ERMR/ ICBA/ JTMJ/ RNGS/ MTT
Subject : EVALUATION OF COATING MATERIAL FOR FERTILIZER INDUSTRY SETTINGS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The focus of this study is to evaluate the coating material and its suitability for fertilizer
manufacturing environment. This does not include coating composition investigation,
compatibility of coating with different raw materials, and economic evaluation. The coating is
within the standards established by ASTM A153M – 03 and was found out to have a coating
grade of 100, the highest grade of galvanized coating. The coated materials corroded at a rate
of 0.000421 mmpy or which can last about 235 years on normal conditions, 0.020304 mmpy in
the AFC Port which can last about 5 years, and at a rate of 0.009527 mmpy in the granulation
plant crushing facility which last about 10 years. Uncoated materials are prone to a significant
reduction (5%) in its factor of safety within a year in the AFC Port and within 1-2 years in the
granulation plant. Based on the investigation, material can resist tiny splashes of base and acid.
Laboratory test also shows that the corrosion rate of the coating decreases with time. Authors
of this study mainly recommend to conduct similar evaluation to the current coating used in the
plant site, conduct study for coating compatibility with the raw materials, and/or to repeat the
study with an increased number of specimens for accuracy purposes.

1. Methodology

1|Page
 The study was conducted at the premises of Atlas Fertilizer Corporation in Toledo, Cebu.
Two methods were implied for corrosion resistance of the coating. First is the exposure of the
coated material (ASTM A36) to the actual field of interest and second is through laboratory
immersion test. The locations of the field test are identified by the authors noting the most
corrosion prone areas in the plant and those that are proximate to the production condition.
Chemical composition and concentration for the laboratory immersion tests are set to mimic
the extreme conditions that a material could be exposed in the plant. Due to lack of available
resources, most methods are established by the authors without violating the set guidelines.
Qualitative analysis is evaluated using ocular inspection and standard test method for
weight of coating (ASTM A90M).
Quantitative analysis for this study is focused on the corrosion rate of the coated
material when exposed to different condition within a set period of time. The general equation
below is used to calculate the corrosion rate of the material.

(K xW) 3.1
Corrosion rate=
A xT x D
K = constant, 8.76 x 104 for mm/year
W= weight loss, g
A =area, cm2
T = time of exposure, h
D = density, g/ml
Field and laboratory test were repeated using the same material without coating.

1.1. Standard Specification for Hot-Dip Coating (ASTM 153M)

1.1.1 Standard coating thickness (ASTM A90/A90M)
The purpose of this test is to determine the thickness of the coating ma-
terial using the stripping method and to also identify the coating grade. Result
was converted to thickness based on Table 2 from ASTM A123 (see appendix
5.1.2).
C=
[W 1−W 2
A ]xN 3.2
C = weight of coating, g/m2
W1 = Original weight of specimen
W2 = weight of stripped specimen
A = area in mm2
N = constant 1 x 106

2|Page
 1.1.2 Scratch Test
This is to test the adhesiveness and abrasion resistance of the coating.
Stout knife is use to evaluate coating adhesiveness. Adherence is considered to
be inadequate if the coating flakes off in such a manner that the surface of the
metal is exposed in advance of the knife point. A No. 150 sandpaper was used to
evaluate abrasion resistance of the material

1.2. Field Test

Field tests execution in this study are according to the set guidelines of ASTM G4
– 95. Samples are usually exposed to the field of interest for a minimum of 50 hours,
however to increase this study’s accuracy, test subjects are exposed for 672 hours. Care-
ful considerations of the location are made to maximize the limited number of samples.
Visual inspection was used to compare the sample before and after field exposure.
1.2.1. Atmospheric condition exposure
A sample was subjected to atmospheric conditions. The average room
temperature is about 20 degrees Celsius and 50% humidity. This is to determine
the behavior of the coating material under controlled conditions.
1.2.2. Exposure to the AFC Port
Materials with similar properties with the test subject are located in the
pier. They are exposed to raw materials, humid conditions, sea breeze, and sun-
light and thus, are prone to corrosion. It is a good location to evaluate coating
effectiveness.
1.2.3. Exposure to crushing facility in GP1
Granulation plant 1 has a crushing facility for all the materials. Crushing
area is exposed to different raw materials. It is also in a proximate location with
the dryer and a dedusting facility making it an ideal location for a field test in
production.

1.3. Laboratory Immersion test

Laboratory immersion tests are conducted with guidelines according to ASTM
G31-12a. These tests can give additional information about the coating reaction when
subjected to extreme acidic and basic solutions.
1.3.1. Exposure to liquid ammonia solution (base: pH = 11)

3|Page
 Liquid ammonia is a weak base with a corrosive property. Most of the
raw materials are ammonium-based solids. Generation of ammonia is highly
probable in the plant. Since ammonia is a weak corrosive liquid, the duration of
the test is set at 672 hours for an increased accuracy.
1.3.2 Exposure to nitric acid (acid: 15%)
The purpose of this test is to evaluate the susceptibility of the coating to
acid corrosion. Due to its extreme corrosive nature, test subjects are immersed
for a short period of time.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Standard Specification for Hot-Dipped Coating (ASTM 153M)

Coating thickness is above the minimum value for castings. Calculated value for
weight of coating is 772 g/m 2 or above 3.9 mils (0.09906 mm) of thickness. This corre-
sponds to a coating grade of 100 which is the highest grade of coating (see appendix
5.1.2).
Coating adhesiveness was found to be satisfactory since the coating did not peel
off the surface of the metal when scratched with a stout knife. The coating also with-
stood the abrasion from the No.150 sandpaper.

2.2. Field Exposure Test

Corrosion rate, m m /y r
Corrosion rate, m m /y r

Atmospheric exposure AFC Port Exposure

0.02 0.50
0.40
Coated Coated
Uncoated 0.30 Uncoated
0.01
Corrosion rate, m m /y r

0.20
0.10
0.00 0.00
GP1 Exposure
0.12
Figure 2.2a 0.10 Figure 2.2b
0.08 Coated
Uncoated
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.00

4|Page
 Figure 2.2c

Area of Exposure Corrosion rate mm/yr Reduction factor

Coated Uncoated
Atmospheric 0.000421 0.011279 26
AFC Port 0.020304 0.447128 22
GP1 0.009527 0.113789 12
Table 2.1: Rate of corrosion based on different areas

Above data are the calculated values based upon the mass loss of each specimen
after testing. The coated material corroded at a rate of at least 1/26 of that of the un-
coated in an office setting. Based on the result, the most corrosive environment is the
AFC Port. However, a reduction in corrosion rate of about a factor of 22 was observed in
the coated specimen exposed to the port. The rate of corrosion of the coated material is
1/12 to that of the uncoated material in the granulation plant. However, crushed raw
materials seemed to adhere to the coating (see appendix 5.2.3). Nevertheless, coated
specimens exhibit lower corrosion rate over the uncoated samples in the field test expo-
sure.
PES Mechanical engineers suggested that 5% is the maximum deviation for the
Factor of Safety (FOS) of an equipment. This is to provide a suitable allowance for unac-
counted loads and factors other than that of corrosion. An analysis on a conveyor
stringer was made to show the effects of corrosion to an uncoated material’s quality
over time.

Factor of Safety for Conveyor Stringer

16
14
12
Factor of Safety

10
8
6 AFC
Port
4
2 GP1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Years

Figure 2.2d

5|Page
 FOS deviation
30.0%
25.0%
20.0% AFC
15.0% Port

10.0% GP1
5.0%
0.0%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Years

Figure 2.2e

It is estimated that an uncoated stringer deviates from the designed factor safety
of about 5% within a year. Stringer in GP1 is also estimated to deviate 5% from its factor
of safety between 1-2 years. It is found out that a coating is necessary for the materials
in the plant.

2.3 Laboratory test

Cumulative mass loss Corrosion rate

1.4 0.8
1.2
grams

1 0.6
f(x) = −Coated Linear (Coated)
0.125428456083404 x + 0.745167405098509
0.8 Coated Linear (Coated) Uncoated
0.4
mm

0.6 Uncoated Linear Linear

0.4 0.2(Uncoated) (Uncoated)
0.2
0 0 f(x) = − 0.00238834942424018 x
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 + 0.0613083229794857
2 3 4 5
Weeks Years

Figure 2.3a Figure 2.3b

6|Page
 Figures above described the behavior of the specimen when immersed with liq-
uid ammonia. Corrosion rate is significantly reduced in coated material as shown in the
cumulative mass loss. The rate of corrosion of the coated specimen increased for the
first week and declined after the following weeks (figure 2.3b). Corrosion for the un-
coated material however decreases with time.
The coated material is susceptible to acid attack when exposed to nitric and hy-
drochloric acid. However, it should resist corrosion when exposed to low concentration
and minimal volume of acid since it took time to strip the coating off the metal when it
was immersed in nitric and hydrochloric acid unlike with uncoated material that imme-
diately corroded after a brief exposure to acid.

3. Conclusion
Standard test showed that the coating thickness is more than adequate with a coating
grade of 100. The scratch test showed that the coating had good adherence and abrasive resis-
tance.
Field tests showed that the coating (hot-dip) effectively reduced the corrosion rate in
the AFC port, granulation plant, and in the ambient office condition. Corrosion reduction is evi-
dent in the coated material. The rate of corrosion is reduced by a factor of 26 in atmospheric
condition, 22 in the AFC Port, and 12 in the granulation plant (see table 2.1).
If linear corrosion rate will be the basis, the coating will last in corrosive environment for
about 5 years in the AFC Port and 10 years in the granulation plant (coating thickness over rate
of corrosion). Structural evaluation is necessary prior to the estimated life expectancy of the

7|Page
coating to assess the integrity of steel members and recommend whether the structural steel
member shall be retained for usage, for repainting, or should be considered for replacement.
Based on mechanical process engineers, the reduction on FOS of the steel members of
conveyor stringers shall be limited to 5% only to account for uncertainty especially on unac-
counted loads and other factors excluding corrosion. Structural evaluation for uncoated steel
member shall be done yearly for the AFC Port and Granulation plant as shown on Figure 2.2e
that the FOS reduction for both AFC Port and GP already exceeded the 5% limit within a span of
one year only. In addition to structural evaluation, appropriate actions shall be made whether
the steel member shall be retained for usage, for coating application, or should be subjected for
replacement.
Laboratory test showed that the coating is susceptible to basic and acid attack but with
reduced corrosion rate. The test also showed that the rate of corrosion decreases with time.
This means that the coating could potentially last longer than the estimated number of years.

4. Recommendations
a. It is recommended to evaluate coatings that are currently used in the plant site such as
epoxy-based coatings.
b. The authors recommend to conduct a study about the compatibility of the raw materials to
that of the hot-dip coating since it was observed that some of the raw materials adhered to the
coating specimen (appendix 5.2.3).
c. It is recommended to repeat the same study with a higher number of samples to increase the
study’s accuracy.
d. Without considering the economic aspect, it is recommended that the steel members be hot-
dipped galvanized since it is evident on this study that it significantly reduces corrosion.

8|Page
5.Appendix
5.1 Tables
5.1.1 As received properties of the sample

Coated Material
Expo- Other Weight
Sample Area, Weight, Uncoated Material
Test sure, hr test after ex-
Code cm2 g Expo- Other Weightg
Sample Area, Weight, posure,
Test sure, hr test after ex-
C1Code 62.860
cm2 154.4423
g Atmospheric 672 Weight 154.4405
posure, g
E1 62.860 152.6298 AFC Port 672 - 152.5429
C1 62.860 151.8647 Atmospheric 504 - 151.823
E2 64.000 156.9865 Ammonia Soln. 672 - 156.9573
D1 62.860 139.2578 AFC Port 504 - 138.4183
E3 63.980 154.8403 GP1 672 Scratch 154.7988
D2 64.000 151.7011 Ammonia Soln. 504 - 150.3724
E4 65.140 154.4189 Nitric Acid 1.3 - 128.0050
D3 63.980 140.5102 GP1 504 - 140.1113
5.1.2 ASTM

5.2.3 Stress of Uncoated Stringer

9|Page
 Mmax 5.84 51690.93 lb-in  
AFC Port
Mmin 1.2 10621.42 lb-in  
year Sn =
(n) Smax Smin Sm Sy Sa 0.5SU N = F.S. Deviation
0 6939.563 1425.938 4182.75 36000 2756.813 29000 4.733728 0%
1 7344.295 1509.102 4426.698 36000 2917.596 29000 4.47286 6%
2 7791.802 1601.055 4696.428 36000 3095.373 29000 4.21597 11%
3 8289.11 1703.242 4996.176 36000 3292.934 29000 3.963031 16%
4 8844.87 1817.439 5331.155 36000 3513.716 29000 3.714017 22%
5 9469.856 1945.861 5707.859 36000 3761.998 29000 3.468902 27%

16463.2
Mmax 1.86 1 lb-in  
GP1
6726.90
Mmin 0.76 2 lb-in  
year Sn = Devia-
(n) Smax Smin Sm Sy Sa 0.5SU N = F.S. tion
2210.20 0.10203 1105.15 1105.05 14.5340
0 3 1 3 36000 1 29000 7 0%
2241.82 0.10349 1120.96 14.3290
1 3 1 3 36000 1120.86 29000 7 4%
2274.23 0.10498 1137.16 1137.06 14.1248
2 4 7 9 36000 4 29000 6 9%
2307.46 0.10652 1153.78 1153.67 13.9214
3 3 1 5 36000 8 29000 5 13%
2341.54 0.10809 1170.82 1170.71 13.7188
4 3 4 5 36000 7 29000 3 17%
2376.50 0.10970 1188.30 1188.19 13.5170
5 5 8 8 36000 8 29000 1 21%

10 | P a g e
5.2 Documentation
5.2.1 Field test observation

11 | P a g e
5.2.2 Laboratory test

5.2.3 Adhering of crushed raw materials to the coated specimen during GP1 Exposure

12 | P a g e