Delamination of

Coating from a Ship’s

Hull
ROBERT B LEGGAT, PHD
JPCL WEBINAR 18 JULY 2018
Aircraft Carrier in Dry Dock

Freeboard
Deep Load Line (DLL)
Boot Top
Light Load Line (LLL)
Underwater
Hull

U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Joshua J. Wahl
Coating Application Sequence
Field Investigation

U.S. Navy photo by Photographer's Mate 2nd Class Steven King

Coating Peeling on Boot Top

Starboard side facing aft Portside facing aft

Coating Peeling on Freeboard

Portside- grey polysiloxane peeling in band within 1 ½ feet of DLL

Sampling Locations
Upper:
Intact Coating
in Freeboard

Middle: All samples mechanically

Peeling Coating
in Freeboard
chipped to bare metal and
Near DLL showed cohesive failure within
red anti-corrosion primer

Lower:
Peeling Coating
in Boot Top
Laboratory Investigation

1. Why did the gray polysiloxane

coating disbond in the freeboard
just above the DLL?

2. Why did the anti-fouling coating

disbond from the anti-corrosion in
the boot top?
Paint Chips from Freeboard
Upper location:
Grey polysiloxane /
Grey anticorrosion /
Red anticorrosion

Middle location:
Grey polysiloxane /
Red antifouling
Grey anticorrosion /
Red anticorrosion

10 mils
Paint Chips from Boot Top

Solvent rub test confirmed

that disbonding occurred
between red anti-fouling
and gray anticorrosion layers
Black
Antifouling
Coating

Red
10 mils
Antifouling
Coating
Mix Ratio Analysis
Nitrogen Analysis of Gray Anticorrosion Layer

Catalytic
Oxidation Detection
NOx Reaction N2
In Furnace by IR
with Copper

Hardener component of the gray anticorrosion coating

contained polyamide and polyamidoamine

Compared to properly mixed 1:1 control sample, 2 out of 7

gray anticorrosion coating chips had a proper mix ration of 1:1,
while 5 out of 7 had excess nitrogen with mix ratios ranging
from 1.05 : 1 to 2 : 1.
Mix Ratio Analysis
FTIR Analysis of Gray Anticorrosion Layer

Band Intensity Comparison

1506 cm-1 (epoxy) vs
1454 cm-1 (hardener).

Confirmed results of
Nitrogen Analysis

Indicating excess hardener

in gray anticorrosion coating
Recoat Interval Study

2 Hours 4 Hours 40 Minutes

6 Hours 8+ Hours

Adhesion markedly better for recoat window between

gray anticorrosion coating of 2 hour vs longer times
Tack Time Test
Time from AC Time from AC
Ratio of
Substrate Application until No Application until No
A to B
Longer Wet Longer Tacky

Steel Panel- 1 hour and 45 4 hours and

1:1
Same as Recoat Study minutes 15 minutes

Steel Panel-
1.4 : 1 2 hours 3 hours
Same as Recoat Study

Glass Panel - 1 hour and 4 hours and

1:1
6 mil WFT Drawdown 45 minutes 15 minutes
Glass Panel - 1 hour and
1.05 : 1 4 hours
6 mil WFT Drawdown 45 minutes
Glass Panel - 1 hour and
1.1 : 1 4 hours
6 mil WFT Drawdown 45 minutes
Glass Panel - 1 hour and
1.4 : 1 3 hours
6 mil WFT Drawdown 30 minutes
Conclusions

 Disbonding above the deep load line (DLL) was caused by application of the
polysiloxane over the antifoulant coating (AF), instead of the anti-corrosion
coating (AC).

 There was off-ratio mixing of the gray epoxy AC in some cases.

 Spontaneous disbonding and poor adhesion of the AF below the DLL resulted from
exceeding the tack time of the AC which was aggravated by the off-ratio mixing
Recommendations

 The shipyard and coating contractor should review QA/QC records to determine in
which areas tack time was likely to have been exceeded.

 The coating should be removed in the areas where peeling is observed or have
been identified as being susceptible.

 Coating should be removed by hand or mechanical tool cleaning and/or high

pressure/ ultrahigh pressure water blast cleaning.