CORROSION SCIENCE
Factors Influencing the Rate
of Cathodic Disbonding of Coatings
U. Steinsmo* and J.I. Skar**
ABSTRACT
Cathodic disbonding on coated steel panels was studied.
The coating was applied by airless spraying on blast-
cleaned steel surfaces. The importance of electrolyte,
polarization potential, dry film thickness, and temperature
was investigated. The time dependence of disbonding was
determined in a long-term test in natural seawater.
Implications of the test results for the relevance of the
ASTM G 8 test were reviewed.
KEY WORDS: ASTM G 8, British Standard 3900, carbon
steel, cathodic disbondment, coatings, electrolyte, film,
organic coatings, polarization, potential, seawater, steel,
temperature
INTRODUCTION
Cathodic disbonding (i.e. Ioss of adhesion as a result
of a cathodic reaction underneath a paint film) is the
main degradation mechanism for cathodically
protected coated steel exposed to seawater. The
28-day ASTM G 8 test usually is applied to structures
off the Norwegian coast to assess the ability of a
paint to resist cathodic disbonding.1 The ASTM G 8
test generally is considered an accelerated test
because the applied potential is as low as 1,450 mV
to 1,550 mV vs a copper-copper sulfate (Cu-CuSO4)
reference electrode.
Submitted for publication February 1994; in revised form, May 1994.
* SINTEF Corrosion Center, N-7034, Trondheim, Norway.
** Norsk Hydro a.s., Box 2560, N-3901, Porsgrunn, Norway.
0010-9312/94/000213/$5.00+$0.50/0
934
However, the relevancy of the ASTM G 8 test
has been questioned. The necessity of using high-
quality, thick-film coatings for installations under
water also has been questioned. Costs for these
systems are high (i.e., $60/m2 to $70/m2).
Hence, the quality, economy, and environmental
impact of coatings must be optimized. To do this,
reliable test methods are needed to qualify new
systems for seawater application.
In the present work, the importance of film
thickness, potential, temperature (T), electrolyte, and
time dependence on the cathodic disbonding process
were investigated. The data were compared with
available literature data. Test results were reviewed
with respect to the relevancy of the ASTM G 8 test. A
comparison with the British Standard (BS) 3900 test
also was made.2
EXPERIMENTAL
Specimen Preparation
The steel specimens were made of cold-rolled
low-alloy carbon (C) steel (max. 0.18% C, 0.60%
lithium, max. 1.1% manganese) Specimens were
degreased and blast-cleaned prior to coating. The
maximum roughness was 66 m 10 m.
The coatings were applied by airless spraying at
a pressure of 140 bar (14 MPa) to 150 bar (15 MPa)
with an 18/80 nozzle. Two coats were applied to get
the desired dry film thickness. The first coat was
cured 1 day before the second coat was applied. The
final curing time varied, but was never < 60 days and
1994, NACE International CORROSIONDECEMBER 1994
 CORROSION SCIENCE

was always the same for the panels used to study the
influence of one parameter. The coatings included
two model paints made in the laboratory and two
commercial paints.3 The dry film thickness was
measured using a magnetic coating thickness gauge.
The variation in thickness on each test panel was
found to be < 8%.

Test Setup
Test specimens 75 mm by 75 mm were given an
intentional circular holiday 4 mm in diameter in the
center. The specimens were exposed to the electro-
FIGURE 1. Test setup. (A, plastic cell; B, steel specimen;
lyte at the free corrosion potential or were polarized
C, coating; D, rubber gasket; E, salt bridges; F, rubber stopper;
using a potentiostat. To avoid contamination with
G, H-inlet/outlet of circulating electrolyte; I, beaker with Pt
chlorine (Cl2) at potentials below 1,000 mVSCE, the counter electrode; J, saturated calomel reference electrode;
platinum (Pt) counter electrode was kept in a and K, potentiostat).
separate beaker. The beaker was connected to the
cell containing the working electrode by means of a
salt bridge. The effect of Cl2 contamination was
investigated in a separate test. The exposed area
was limited by pressing a plastic cell with a rubber
gasket against the coated steel surface (Figure 1).
The cells were mounted in a series forming a loop.
The electrolyte was circulated through the loop by a
pump to keep T constant during the test. The
electrolytes were 0.25 M sodium chloride (NaCl),
0.5 M NaCl, ASTM D 1141 artificial seawater,4 and
the ASTM G 8 solution.
A long-term exposure test in natural seawater
also was performed. In this test, panels 200 mm by
200 mm were coupled to a zinc sacrificial anode
with a potential varying from 1,000 mVAg-AgCI to
1,040 mVAg-AgCI (silver-silver chloride electrode in
seawater).
Specimens then were removed from the test
loop, and the disbonded area was determined by
lifting with a knife, according to the ASTM G 8 test.
The border between the disbonded and nondisbonded
area was distinct. The diameter of the disbonded
area was determined using a slide calliper. For each FIGURE 2. Average disbonded area for: Epoxy 1 (), Epoxy
specimen, 8 diameters were measured. The average 2 (+), vinyl-tar (), and epoxy-tar (). Exposure time = 21 days,
diameter was used to calculate the disbonded area potential = 1,400 mVSCE, T = 25.0C 0.5C.
(excluding the area of the holiday).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Importance of the Electrolyte
The ASTM G 8 test specified an electrolyte
consisting of 1 wt% of the following salts: NaCI,
sodium sulfate (Na2SO4), and sodium carbonate
(Na2CO3), which is quite different from seawater. The
electrolyte had pH = 10 and conductivity = 34 mS/cm.
During the test, Cl2 gas (potentiostatic polarization)
was produced at the counter electrode. To determine
the importance of the electrolyte, four paint films were
tested in 3% NaCI, artificial seawater (ASTM D
1141), ASTM G 8 solution with Cl2 gas, and ASTM G
8 solution without Cl2. The paints tested were two
commercial products (epoxy-tar and vinyl-tar) and
two model paints (desginated Epoxy 1 and Epoxy 2).
Results are shown in Figure 2. The data shown are
the average of three specimens. The variation in the
disbonded area most likely was a result of variation in
the average dry film thickness from one electrolyte to
another.
A consistent finding was that thicker coatings
had lower disbonding rates. For the thickness range

CORROSIONVol. 50, No. 12 935

CORROSION SCIENCE

The similarity between the results obtained in the

four different electrolytes tested could be explained
by the fact that the Na concentration and O2
concentration was about the same in seawater, in
3 wt% NaCI, and in the ASTM G 8 solution (Table 1).
However, the chloride (Cl) concentration
increased as the electrolyte was changed from ASTM
G 8 and from NaCl to seawater (Table 1). Studies by
Leidheiser and Wang have indicated that the type of
anion in the electrolyte had no significant influence
on cathodic disbonding. This conclusion was based
on a comparison of NaCI, sodium bromide (NaBr),
and sodium fluoride (NaF).5 The present test results
were in accordance with this observation.
The difference in pH between the electrolytes
(Table 1) and the Cl2 gas produced at the counter
electrode was found to have no effect on the rate of
disbonding for the coatings studied.

Temperature Dependence
The disbonded area as a function of T is shown
FIGURE 3. Cathodic disbonding for Epoxy 1 vs dry film thick- in Figure 4 in an Arrhenius plot. There is some
ness in 0.25 M NaCl. T = 20.0C 0.5C, potential = free scatter in the data as a result of variation in dry film
corrosion potential ( 700 mVSCE), and exposure time = 191 h.
thickness and paint film properties. The correlation
coefficient for the straight line was 0.88. The slope of
the curve gave the activation energy for the disbond-
ing process. For the paint studied, the activation
TABLE 1 energy was found to be 33 kJ/mol 5 kJ/mol.
O2, Na, Cl Concentration, This was lower than the values obtained by
and pH for the Electrolytes Studied Leidheiser and Catino for a 12.5 m polybutadiene
O2 Na Cl coating in 0.5 M NaCI (i.e., 56.5 kJ/mol).7 The
Electrolyte (ppm) (M) (M) pH polarization potential in this case was 920 mVSCE.
Applied on galvanized steel and exposed to 0.5 M
ASTM D 1141 6.8 0.45 0.56 8.2
3 wt% NaCl 6.9 0.51 0.51 7 NaCI, polybutadiene has been found to have an
ASTM G 8 6.7 0.50 0.17 10 activation energy of 39.8 kJ/mol.9
Hence, data available indicated the disbonding
process has an activation energy from 30 kJ/mol to
60 kJ/mol. The data implied that increasing T from
75 m to 300 m, the disbonded area was linearly 10C to 20C would increase the disbonding rate
dependent on the dry film thickness (Figure 3). 1.5 to 2.4 times, respectively. In spite of the strong
Figure 3 also shows that decreasing the dry film dependence of the cathodic disbonding process on T,
thickness of Epoxy 1 from 300 m to 100 m the ASTM G 8 test specifies T between 21C and
increased the disbonded area 4 times. 25C. Testing at 25C rather than 21C may give a
Taking the variation in the dry film thickness into 40% larger disbonded area. Hence, testing at
account, it was concluded that there was no ambient T should be avoided.
significant difference in disbonding rates in the four The disbonding rate for the Epoxy 1 coating
electrolytes for any of the coatings investigated. tested was ~ 100 times higher than the disbonding
Studies on the effect of the electrolyte on the rate rate of the commercial paints applied offshore. T
of cathodic disbonding have shown that cations have dependence observed was in agreement with test
a strong influence on the rate of cathodic disbond- results obtained for commercial paint films,
ing.5-8 The rate increased as the electrolyte changed however.10
in the order: calcium chloride (CaCI2)-lithium chloride
(LiCI)-NaCl-potassium chloride (KCI)-rubidium Effect of Polarization Potential
chloride (RbCI)-cesium chloride (CsCI). The rate of Results showed the disbonded area increased
cathodic disbonding also has been found to increase as the polarization potential decreased (or became
with increasing oxygen (O2) concentration.6 more negative), as illustrated in Figure 5. The data

936 CORROSIONDECEMBER 1994

 CORROSION SCIENCE

indicated there might be a linear relationship between

polarization potential and disbonding rate. The
scatter in the data, however, were significant, at least
at the lower potentials (i.e., < 1,000 mVSCE). A linear
relationship between potential and disbonded area
was in accordance with results obtained by Jin,
et al.11 Kendig, et al., also found that the disbonding
rate increased as the potential decreased to more
negative values, but he also found that the rate
leveled at ~ 1,000 mVSCE. The lowest potential
studied by Kendig was 1,050 mVSCE.12
The most important result common to all of the
investigations was the strong potential dependence
shown for the cathodic disbonding process. Results
from the present study showed that decreasing the
potential from 1,000 mVSCE to 1,400 mVSCE
increased the disbonding rate 1.6 times (Figure 5).
Jin, et al., found that decreasing the potential from
1,000 mVSCE to 1,400 mVSCE increased the
disbonding rate 2 times.11
However, the ASTM G 8 test does not specify
the polarization potential. The test specifies an FIGURE 4. Cathodic disbonding for Epoxy 1 vs 1/T in 0.5 M
applied potential in the range 1,450 mVCu-CuSO4 to NaCl. Polarization potential = 700 mVSCE, exposure time =
1,550 mVCu-CuSO4 and specifies that the reference 240 h, dry film thickness = 233 m 13 m.
electrode may be positioned anywhere in the beaker,
except that it should be at least 38 mm from the test
specimen.
Because of the potential drop, the specimen may
be polarized to a potential higher than the applied
potential. If Method B in the ASTM G 8 test is
specified, the dwell potential should be determined.
This potential corresponds to the polarization
potential, assuming that a storage oscilloscope with a
high sampling rate is used to measure the potential.
In many cases, however, the dwell potential is not
measured. Even when dwell potential is measured, it
often is not taken into account when test results are
interpreted.
In addition, the method described for determina-
tion of the dwell potential can give too positive a
potential value. The lack of information regarding the
polarization potential implies that the test results give
only limited information about the ability of the paint
film to resist cathodic disbonding. For example, it is
difficult to compare results from different tests.
On a cathodically protected steel structure, the
polarization potential may be as low as 1,000 mVSCE. FIGURE 5. Disbonded area vs potential in 0.5 M NaCl at
The BS 3900 test specifies a polarization potential of 25.0C 0.5C. Exposure time = 240 h, dry film thickness =
1,000 mVSCE 5 mVSCE.2 Hence, the BS 3900 test is 255 m 12 m.
not accelerated with respect to the potential, and the
test period is considerably longer than for the ASTM
G 8 test (26 weeks and 30 days, respectively).
the time it takes for the cathodic disbonding process
Time Dependence to initiate). After the delay time, the disbonded area
Time dependence of the cathodic disbonding has been found to increase linearly with time or the
process is characterized by an initial delay time (i.e., disbonded distance from the defect to increase

CORROSIONVol. 50, No. 12 937

CORROSION SCIENCE
FIGURE 6. Disbonded area for Epoxy 1 vs 0.5 M NaCl.
Polarization potential = 700 mVSCE, T = 20C 1C, and dry
film thickness = 252 m 6 m.
linearly with the square root of time. Figure 6 shows
the time dependence for the model paint Epoxy 1 in a
short-term test. These data were in accordance with
results obtained by several authors.6-7,11-13
Extending the test period to 500 days, however,
indicated that a shift occurred in the disbonding rate
after ~ 200 days of exposure (Figure 7). Because of
the scatter in the data, an exponential or linear
increase in the disbonded area over time could not
be excluded. The indicated shift in the disbonding
rate over time implied that the coating found to be
superior during a 28-day test might not have been
found superior after a longer and more relevant
exposure time.
Reproducibility of Test Results
An essential question with respect to testing is
the reproducibility of the test results.
In the present study, care was taken with
respect to T, potential, curing, dry film thickness,
and surface treatment to ensure that the test
conditions and the test specimens were as identical
as possible. Nevertheless, significant scatter in the
data was observed, particularly at lower potentials
(Figure 5).
Above 1,000 mVSCE, the standard deviation for
the disbonded area was ~ 15% to 20% of the mean
value. Below 1,000 mVSCE, the deviation was ~ 40%
to 50% of the mean value. This corresponded to a
maximum variation of the disbonded distance from
938
FIGURE 7. Disbonded area vs time for Epoxy 1 in natural
seawater. Polarization potential = 1,020 mV Ag-AgCl
20 mVAg-AgCl (seawater), T =10C 2C, and dry film thickness
= 239 m 2 m.
12 mm to 21 mm (i.e., a difference of 9 mm). How-
ever, this result was far better than the reproducibility
given for the ASTM G 8 test. According to the ASTM
G 8 test, results should not be considered suspect
unless they differ by > 25 mm.
A New Approach for Testing Susceptibility
to Cathodic Disbonding
The acceptance criteria for the cathodic
disbonding test in the Norwegian offshore sector
today is 5 mm max. Only one specimen has to be
tested. The reproducibility of the ASTM G 8 test is
claimed to be no better than 12.5 mm. This is not
satisfactory if a high level of accuracy is desired.
To improve reproducibility of the test, the
following additional requirements should be included:
The polarization potential should be specified
and controlled;
Variations in T should be 0.5C max.; and
Three parallel specimens should be tested
simultaneously.
The ASTM G 8 test is a relatively short-duration
test (i.e., 28 days vs 26 weeks for the BS 3900 test).
For the high quality paints used on offshore
structures, the delay time may even exceed 28 days.
Thus, test results available after 28 days may not be
relevant to long-term exposure.
However, there is a demand for even shorter
tests, which implies that alternative test methods may
be of interest.
CORROSIONDECEMBER 1994

One approach in this respect could be the use of
sensitive measuring techniques, such as electro-
chemical methods. Another approach might be new
alternative accelerated tests. The most important
requirement for an accelerated test is that the
degradation rate is increased without an alteration
of the degradation mechanism. Further work is
necessary to understand the disbonding process and
thereby improve the test methods.
A model has been proposed that describes
cathodic disbonding as a process controlled by
charge transport through the disbonded paint film.8
Based on this model, it could be assumed that
accelerating the cathodic disbonding process by
decreasing the potential should not alter the ranking
of paint films with respect to their ability to resist
degradation by cathodic disbonding, rather than
accelerate the disbonding process by increasing the
T. However, this issue remains to be investigated.
CONCLUSIONS
The influence of potential, T, electrolyte, and
time dependence on the cathodic disbonding process
was studied. Most of the investigations were on a
model paint film with a disbonding rate about 100
times higher than paints used on offshore subsea
structures. With respect to T and potential effects, the
results were in agreement with results obtained for
commercial paint films.
The disbonding rate was approximately the same
in 0.5 M NaCI, ASTM G 8 solution, and ASTM D
1141 seawater.
An increase in T from 10C to 20C increases the
disbonded area ~ 2 times.
A decrease in the potential from 1,000 mVSCE
to 1,400 mVSCE increased the disbonded area ~ 2
times.
In the thickness range 75 m to 300 m, the
disbonded area decreased linearly with increasing
dry film thickness.
The standard deviation for the disbonded area
was ~ 15% to 50% of the mean value (three
parallels) if care was taken with respect to control of
test parameters and specimen preparation.
CORROSIONVol. 50, No. 12
CORROSION SCIENCE
Time dependence of the cathodic disbonding
process was characterized by an initial delay time
followed by a linear increase in the disbonded area
with time. The data also indicated a shift in the
disbonding rate after ~ 200 days of exposure.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors acknowledge financial support of the
Norwegian Institute of Technology, the Royal
Norwegian Council for Scientific and Industrial
Research (NTNF), Statoil, Vegdirektoratet, and
Jotungruppen A/S. The authors also acknowledge
the assistance of R. Berntzen and O. Vonen at
Jotungruppen A/S.
REFERENCES
1. ASTM G 8-85, Standard Test Method for Cathodic Disbonding of
Pipeline (Philadelphia, PA: ASTM, 1985).
2. British Standard 3900, Part F10, 1985, Determination of Resistance to
Cathodic Disbonding of Coatings for Use in Marine Environments
(London, England: British Standard Institution, 1985).
3. J.I. Skar, Cathodic Disbonding of and Transport of Charge Through
Paint Films (Ph.D. diss., Norwegian Institute of Technology, 1990).
4. ASTM Standard D 1141-90, Standard Specification for Substitute
Ocean Water (Philadelphia, PA: ASTM, 1990).
5. H. Leidheiser Jr., W. Wang, J. Coat. Tech. 53, 672 (1981): p. 77.
6. H. Leidheiser Jr., W. Wang, L. Igetoft, Prog. Org. Coat. 11 (1983):
p. 19.
7. H. Leidheiser Jr., J. Catino, The Activation Energy for Cathodic
Delamination of Polybutadiene from Steel in Chloride Conditions, in
Proc. Symp. Corrosion Protection by Organic Coatings (Pennington,
NJ: The Electrochemical Society, 1987), p. 60.
8. J.I. Skar, U. Steinsmo, Cathodic Disbonding of Paint Films
Transport of Charge, in Advances in Corrosion and Protection, ed.
R.P.M. Procter, Proc. Int. Conf. 20th Anniversary of the UMIST
Corrosion and Protection Centre, Oxford, England (Oxford, England:
Headington Hill Hall, 1992).
9. H. Leidheiser Jr., W. Wang, Rate Controlling Steps in the Cathodic
Delamination of 10-40-m-Thick Polybutadiene and Epoxy-Polyamide
Coatings from Metallic Substrates, in Corrosion Control by Organic
Coatings, ed. H. Leidheiser Jr. (Houston, TX: NACE, 1981), p. 70.
10. R. Berntsen, Jotun Laboratory, personal communication to U.
Steinsmo, SINTEF, May 20, 1993.
11. X.H. Jin, K.C. Tsay, A. Elbasir, J.D. Scantlebury, The Adhesion and
Disbonding of Chlorinated Rubber on Mild Steel, Proc. Symp.
Corrosion Protection by Organic Coatings (Pennington, NJ: The
Electrochemical Soc., 1987), p. 37.
12. M. Kendig, R. Addison, S. Jeanjaquet, The Mechanism of Cathodic
Disbonding of Hydroxy-Terminated Polybutadiene on Steel from
Acoustic Microscopy and Surface Energy Analysis, in Advances in
Corrosion Protection by Organic Coatings, eds. M. Kendig, D.
Scantlebury, Proc. Int. Symp., Cambridge, England, 1989 (1989), p. 2.
13. J.D. Kellner, Temperature Dependence of Cathodic Disbondment of
Tape Pipeline Coatings, Proc. Symp. Corrosion Protection by Organic
Coatings (Pennington, NJ: The Electrochemical Soc., 1987), p. 48.
939