Coatings Inspection 2

Coating Inspection 2 Page 1
Coating Inspection 2
Quality Control is a necessary function if coatings are to be
successfully applied. Their long-term performance is much
more likely to meet expectations if the factors that affect
performance can be improved. Experience shows that
inspection is a significant element in achieving desired
quality levels.
Quality Control (or inspection) may be performed by any

individual trained in the necessary skills. Operators are
always responsible, to some extent, for the quality of the
work they perform, and Contractors agree to perform work in
accordance with the specified quality requirements.
Nevertheless, the availability of a dedicated inspector is an
asset to the project, and likely to lead to improvements in the
overall quality of the work. This, in turn, leads to long-term
savings for the customer, as coating performance is
significantly improved.
In an earlier module of this program, a number of basic

coating inspection test instruments used by coating
inspectors worldwide were reviewed. More coating
inspection test instruments and test methods are described in
this module.
We will focus particularly on instruments used for

destructive testing, on the condition of surfaces prior to
coating application, and some less common diagnostic test
methods, used to evaluate the condition of coatings.
© NACE International, 2003

Coating Inspection 2
Index
Non-destructive Test Instruments and Methods .................... 4
Surface Preparation ................................................................ 5
pH Measurement.............................................................. 5
The pH Meter................................................................... 6
Magnifiers ........................................................................ 6
Visual Standards for Evaluation of Coating Defects .......... 7
Evaluation of Checking ................................................... 8
Evaluation of Cracking .................................................... 9
Evaluation of Erosion ...................................................... 9
Evaluation of Blistering ................................................... 9
Evaluation of Flaking..................................................... 11
Rusting Standard............................................................ 12
Detection of Moisture—Indicators and Tests................... 12
Moisture Meters for Wood, Plaster, and Concrete ........ 13
Other Tests for Moisture in Concrete ............................ 15
Tests for Water-Soluble Chemical Salts........................... 16
Origin of surface salts .................................................... 16
Qualitative Test for Water-Soluble Ferrous Salts.......... 18
Semi-quantitative Tests.................................................. 19
Tests for sulfate ions & nitrous ions .............................. 25
Conductivity Testing...................................................... 25
Applicable Limits .......................................................... 26
Dry Film Thickness Measurements .................................. 28
Magnetic Pull-Off Gauges ............................................. 28
Electromagnetic DFT Gauges........................................ 29
Accuracy ........................................................................ 30
Eddy current DFT gauges .............................................. 32
Destructive Instruments and Tests ....................................... 35
Solvent Sensitivity Testing ............................................ 36
Paint Inspection (Tooke) Gauge .................................... 39
Precision Groove Grinder .............................................. 42
Saberg Drill.................................................................... 43
Adhesion Tests.................................................................. 44
Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test ................................ 45
Adhesion Testing Using Portable Pull-Off Tensile
Testers ............................................................................ 48
Other Tensile (Adhesion) Testers .................................. 53
Reporting Tensile Test Results ...................................... 53
Non-Destructive Adhesion Testing ............................... 56

Measuring Adhesion by Peel Strength .......................... 57

Hardness Testing............................................................ 57
Pencil Hardness.............................................................. 58
Indentation (Impressor) Hardness.................................. 60
Barber-Colman (Barcol) Impressor ............................... 61
Boroscopes..................................................................... 63
Other Laboratory Tests .................................................. 64
Coating Inspectors’ Duties................................................ 65
Coating Inspector’s Attestation ..................................... 68
Instrument Calibration ................................................... 70
Test frequency................................................................ 72
Quality Assurance.......................................................... 73
Electro-magnetic gauges (Type 2)................................. 77

Non-destructive Test Instruments

and Methods
Instruments described in this section include:
• Those instruments that are more sophisticated or more

complex, and that may, because of their nature, be used
less often
• And non-destructive test instruments that are generally

used only when required by the specification or otherwise
authorized by contract
The inspection tests and instruments to be discussed include:
For Atmospheric monitoring and safety
o The Solvent vapor meter
o And the Drager meter
For Surface testing
o The pH meter
o Magnifiers
o Visual standards for evaluation of coating condition
o The Moisture indicator
o And Water-soluble chemical salt tests
For Coating integrity: nondestructive instruments
o Comprising the Type 1 magnetic pull-off gauge
o The Type 2 electromagnetic DFT gauge
o And the Eddy current DFT gauge

Surface Preparation
When coatings are applied, surface preparation is considered
to be the single most influential factor that determines the
potential performance of the coating system. Quality control
of surface preparation includes:
o Observation or inspection of the surfaces to be coated
o Pre-cleaning, which includes inspection of design or

fabrication defects and re-evaluation after specified
corrections are made
o Cleaning operations
o Evaluation of the cleaned surfaces prior to application

of the coating, and of the coated surface before and
after each coat of material.
The emphasis placed on surface preparation has been

discussed in other modules of this program, and the basic
tools of quality control have been examined. Techniques for
surface testing will be detailed here using the following
inpection tools.
o The pH meter
o Magnifiers
o Visual standards for evaluation of coating condition
o Moisture measurement
o And Water-soluble chemical salts
pH Measurement
Measurement of the pH level provides an indication of the
acidity or alkalinity of an aqueous solution. The pH scale
ranges from 0 to 14; the range 0 to 7.0 is acidic, and the
range from 7.0 to 14 is alkaline, with a pH of 7.0 being
neutral.
Most organic coatings provide their best performance when

applied to a neutral surface. Although acid washes are often
used to promote adhesion, they should be allowed to

complete their reaction, and/or be neutralized by fresh water

rinsing, prior to coating application.
pH tests may be performed on the prepared surface, or on

aqueous solutions prepared from the surface, from abrasives
or wash media used for surface preparation. The size of the
aqueous test sample is not important, provided the probe can
be completely immersed. The area (or quantity of abrasive)
from which the sample is collected is important. When pH
tests are required, the details of sampling and testing must be
agreed by the parties concerned.
The pH Meter
A pH meter is an electronic gauge, often pocket size, with a
scale that provides a numerical value for pH. The probe of
the pH meter is placed in the aqueous solution to be tested.
The pH meter is calibrated, using a standard buffer solution

of a known concentration at a specific temperature.
Calibration should be performed at frequent intervals,
generally no less than once each calendar month.
Larger and more sophisticated pH meters may be used in a

laboratory, but are not generally used in conjunction with
coatings application.
Magnifiers
Magnifiers may sometimes be useful to the coating inspector.
These devices may be used for examining a blast-cleaned or
coated surface for:
o Contamination
o Rust
o Mill scale
o Blisters
o And pinholes
Pocket magnifiers, which fold up and can be easily carried

are available.

Surface Microscope
A surface microscope may be used for the same purpose as a
magnifier, but generally provides more magnification, and
perhaps better optics. Various magnifications are available
in simple (and cheap) pocket microscopes. A microscope
that provides 20 times magnification is probably the best for
general purposes, and anything more than 30 times is
unlikely to provide an adequate view of any defects.
(The magnifier on a Tooke gauge can be used, although its’

50 times magnification is not ideal)
When viewing a surface at relatively high magnification,

some form of illumination is required, and most portable
microscopes have battery operated light sources built in to
the instrument.
It should be remembered that visual standards for surface

preparation, for example, NACE number one, White Metal,
do not allow the use of magnification as a form of
assessment. Surfaces that appear to be blemish-free, when
viewed unaided, are often surprisingly contaminated with
dust, embedded abrasives, or other small particles when
examined under magnification.
Binocular Microscope
Binocular microscopes, also called stereo microscopes,
provide a three-dimensional image. These microscopes are
laboratory grade instruments with superior optics, and are
available with magnifications up to 500 times. Many can be
fitted with a camera or a digital image capture device, and
are widely used in laboratory testing of paints.
The high quality instruments have accurate scales and

graduated adjustments, and can be used to measure the
thickness of coatings in a cross-sectional view, and many
other small dimensions.
Visual Standards for Evaluation of

Coating Defects
Many visual standards are available for inspectors and others
to evaluate coating defects. The benefit of using a visual

standard is that the defects can be related to a standard

definition, and identified, using pictures. Communication of
the observed condition is then easily understood by others
with access to the same standard.
Visual, or pictorial, standards are available to evaluate:
o The checking of Exterior coatings (ASTM D 660)
o Cracked Coatings (ASTM D 661)
o Erosion of Coatings (ASTM D 662)
o Blisters (ASTM D 714)
o Flaking, or scaling of Coatings (ASTM D 772)
o And rusting of painted surfaces (ASTM D 610)
Many of these visual standards are available with different

designations from other standards authorities. For example,
the entire series of these standards is provided by the British
Standards Institute as parts H1, H2, H3, etc of BS 3900,
Methods of Test for Paints).
Evaluation of Checking
ASTM D 660 Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree of
Checking of Exterior Paints defines checking as ‘slight
breaks in the film that do not penetrate the film’. It lists 8
types of checking, including:
o An Irregular pattern type
o A Line & short parallel type
o A Crow foot type
o And a Shrinkage type
Each type is illustrated in line drawings, with 4 degrees of

the defect, labeled ASTM 2, 4, 6 and 8, with 8 being the least
defect and 2 being the most.

Evaluation of Cracking
ASTM D 661 is the Standard Test Method for Evaluating the
Degree of Cracking of Exterior Paints and defines cracking
as ‘breaks in the film that penetrate the film’. It lists 3 types
of cracking, which are:
o Irregular pattern type
o Line type
o Sigmoid type
Photographs of 4 degrees of cracking (labeled 2, 4, 6 & 8)

are shown for illustrative purposes. You can refer to the
‘Pictorial Standards of Coating Defects Handbook1’ for more
accurate pictures. In the usual way, grade 2 is the most
dense, and 8 the least dense of the illustrated degrees of
cracking.
Evaluation of Erosion
ASTM D 662 is the Standard Test Method for Evaluating the
Degree of Erosion of Exterior Paints and defines erosion as
‘wearing away of the finish to expose the substrate or
undercoat’. Only one type of erosion is recognized.
Photographs of 4 degrees of erosion (labeled 2, 4, 6 & 8) are

shown for illustrative purposes, and you can refer to the
‘Pictorial Standards of Coating Defects Handbook’ for more
accurate pictures. Grade 2 is the most dense standard
illustrated, and 8 the least dense.
Evaluation of Blistering
ASTM D-714 is the Standard Test Method for Evaluating
Degree of Blistering of Paint and provides a method and
photographs to standardize evaluation of blistering. This test
is often used to evaluate the degree of blistering which
results from testing coatings under laboratory conditions,
such as in an “Atlas Cell Test”, or to evaluate blistering that
occurs in the field.
1
Pictorial Standards of Coating Defects Handbook, published by the Federation
of Societies for Coatings Technology, 492 Norristown Road, Blue
Bell, PA, 1942, USA

The test method uses a set of glossy black-and-white print

photographs to evaluate the degree of blistering of coatings
by both the size and frequency of the blisters.
There are 11 numeric categories of blisters, ranging from 0,

(complete detachment) to 10 (representing zero visible
blisters). Four sizes of blisters are illustrated by the standard,
ranging from large blister size 2 to small blister size 8.
The frequency of blisters is rated in four categories, ranging

from dense to few, as follows:
o Dense (D)
o Medium dense (MD)
o Medium (M)
o Few (F)
According to the test method, reports of blistering should

define the following items:
o Size - from 0 to 10
o Distribution frequency per unit area - Dense, Medium

Dense, Medium or Few
o Pattern of distribution - spotty, local, or general – used

when the distribution is not uniform
Quantitative descriptions of blistering may also include a

measured frequency, stating the number of blisters per unit
area. Smaller areas are indicated in square inches or square
centimeters, while larger areas are indicated in square feet or
square meters
The shape of blisters may also be stated where this feature is

distinctive.
Accurate description of physical defects may be a crucial

factor in determination of their causes. Standards such as
ASTM D714 assist in consistent and accurate descriptions.

More important than determining the size and frequency of

blisters is an understanding of what causes them to occur.
Common causes of blistering include:
o The presence of water-soluble ferrous salts or

hygroscopic chemical residues on the bare or coated
substrate, or osmotic blistering.
o Solvent entrapment
o Temperature gradients across the film
o Incompatible coating materials, resulting in poor

adhesion between coats, or softening of the base coat.
o Chemical attack
o Excessive cathodic protection voltage potential, or

Cathodic Disbonding.
Some causes of blistering on porous substrates may include:
o Moisture in the substrate
o Entrapped air in the substrate
When the air or moisture expand, due to changes in

temperature and/or barometric pressure, the coating is
likely to become detached from the substrate
Evaluation of Flaking
ASTM D 772 is the Standard Test Method for Evaluating
Degree of Flaking (Scaling) of Exterior Paints defines
flaking as ‘detachment of pieces of the film from the
substrate or from paint previously applied’. Only one type of
flaking is recognized
Photographs of 4 degrees of flaking (labeled 2, 4, 6 & 8) are

shown, and you can refer to the ‘Pictorial Standards of
Coating Defects Handbook’ for more accurate pictures. In
the usual way, grade 2 is the most dense, and 8 the least
dense of the degrees of flaking shown.

Rusting Standard
ASTM D 610 is the Standard Test Method for Evaluating
Degree of Rusting on Panted Steel Surfaces provides a
pictorial guide to help judge the quantity of rust. Ten grades
are defined, ranging from Rust Grade 10 – no rusting – to
Rust Grade 0 – approximately 100% of the surface being
rusted.
Four colored photographs are available to help correctly

judge the degree of rusting. ASTM D610 is also known as
SSPC Vis-2.
Other standards are also available, including the European

Scale of Rusting, and proprietary standards such as that
defined by a protective coatings company.
European Scale of Rusting

The European Scale of rusting is a series of photographs, that
provides a standard pictorial guide to the quantity of rust on a
painted surface. Grades of rusting are shown on a scale of
Re0 (no rust) to Re9 (total rust).
Proprietary rusting standard

Computer generated diagrams of various degrees of rusting
provide a pictorial guide to help evaluate the quantity of a
surface that has begun to rust. The standard illustrated,
shows 20 variations, ranging from no rusting to complete
rusting
Detection of Moisture—Indicators
and Tests
As indicated previously, moisture in porous surfaces may
lead to poor adhesion and blistering of coatings. This effect
is particularly likely if the moisture is present when coatings
are applied.
Moisture in porous surfaces such as wood, concrete or

plaster can be measured with a moisture meter, which
indicates moisture level related to paint on the substrates.
Moisture may also be determined by other specialized tests,

such as those using plastic sheeting or calcium chloride, to

measure moisture in concrete.
Moisture Meters for Wood, Plaster, and

Concrete
One moisture meter is an electronic instrument that measures
the electrical resistance between two probes. It may be used
to determine moisture levels in plaster and gypsum walls,
brick, concrete, and wall and roof insulation. The absolute
measurements provided, have different significance
depending on the substrate material. For example, coatings
applied to wood may tolerate different amounts of moisture
than coatings applied to concrete. In addition, the natural
electrical resistance of the substrate differs, even between
different types of wood, so the measurement is not simply of
the moisture present. The results are therefore qualitative,
comparative readings, and knowledge of the specific
substrate is essential.
The meter shown here features two scales, one marked

“wood” and the other marked “plaster-concrete” with 0 to
100 markings to be used as a reference scale. When testing
wood, the readings are made on the “WOOD” scale and they
indicate the percentage of moisture content.
When testing concrete, plaster, or brick, the readings are

taken on the “plaster-concrete” reference scale. These
readings are to be considered a qualitative indication of the
moisture level. Readings at the low end of the scale indicate
a “drier” condition, which becomes progressively more
“wet” as readings show toward the upper end of the scale.
It may be difficult to decide the precise measurement, as the

scale has few markings. It may also be difficult to decide
what is an acceptable level of moisture for the specific
coatings to be applied and for the specific substrate. These
decisions should be made by the specifier working together
with the coating manufacturer.
Test Procedures
For the specific instrument shown The Delmhorst moisture
meter, first, check calibration by pushing “Cal Check.” The
needle pointer should move to “20” on the scale. If it does

not or if it pegs to the left, replace battery and check

calibration again. Connect the electrode, or probe, to the
instrument. Place the electrode pins on the surface of the
material to be tested. Note that when using special electrode
pins, it may be possible to obtain measurements beneath the
surface layer by driving the pins into the surface rather than
simply placing them on the surface.
Wood: Read the wood scale. Drive or push electrode pins

into the wood, and read the percentage moisture directly off
the scale.
Plaster: Insert electrode pins into the plaster. Take readings

on the plaster scale. A “dry” reading indicates that the plaster
is dry enough for safe application of paints or adhesives.
A “wet” reading indicates excessive moisture unsafe for any

paint. A borderline condition is indicated by a reading in the
small yellow section between the “dry” and “wet” section of
the dial.
As a guideline, when testing plaster and ‘dry wall’ or

construction board, readings in the green section indicate the
moisture level is less than 4 to 5%, while readings in the red
section indicate moisture is greater than 6%.
Concrete: Place the electrode pins on the surface. Read

plaster/concrete scale, remembering that results are
qualitative only.
Special Considerations for Concrete

Moisture detectors, such as the Delmhorst type, use the
relationship between electrical resistance and moisture
content in porous materials. In some cases, this relationship
is reliable to the point that a specific calibration curve can be
developed, and the meter reads the moisture in terms of
percentage.
In the case of concrete, bricks, and insulation foam,

calibration of this type of instrument in specific terms – for
example, percent moisture, is unreliable. The measurements
obtained, can only be used as a guide for the specific
substrate concerned

Concrete has a high level of electrical conductivity, even

when it contains a minimum amount of moisture. Relatively
small quantities of moisture can be measured using
conductivity meters.
When testing concrete slabs, especially on grade or sub-

grade, the moisture content should be tested not only on the
surface but also within the body of the slab. Evaporation
from the surface layer may cause a “dry” reading when the
surface is tested.
Concrete Test Procedure

To test for moisture within a slab, one successful method is
to drive two hardened masonry nails into the concrete about
3/4 in., 18 mm apart. Touch the meter electrode to the nails
and make a measurement. If the meter reads “wet,” the
concrete is not satisfactory for painting.
To make a subsurface test, drill two holes 1/4 in. - 6 mm in

diameter, 3/4 in. -18 mm apart, to a depth of about 4 inches -
10-cm. Use long, insulated probes to reach the bottom of the
holes.
It is necessary to allow the concrete to reach equilibrium

after drilling, since local heating, and therefore drying, will
occur when the holes are drilled.
Other Tests for Moisture in Concrete

Other tests for the presence of moisture in concrete include:
o ASTM D-4263 Standard Test Method for Indicating

Moisture in Concrete by the Plastic Sheet Method
o And the Calcium chloride test
Both of these tests are described in the advanced module

dealing with concrete, ‘Surface Preparation 2’.

Tests for Water-Soluble Chemical

Salts
Water-soluble chemical salts in the form of soluble ferrous
ions and chloride, sulfate, carbonate, or other ions may be
present on any uncoated steel surface. Experience has shown
that dry blast-cleaning does not easily remove those salts.
Origin of surface salts
Potentially damaging chemical salts are deposited from
environmental outfall. These include:
o Sulfurous compounds generated by industry,

particularly those that burn fossil fuels for energy.
o Chloride compounds, particularly sodium chloride,

may be deposited near to a marine environment or
chemical facilities.
o Nitrogenous compounds are mostly generated in

urban environments, particularly near to roads and
bridges where heavy traffic is prevalent.
These compounds may themselves encourage corrosion, and

should, wherever possible, be washed from surfaces to
reduce corrosive effects. In their natural state, these
compounds are not, however, at their most dangerous.
Chemical reaction between the compounds and the
underlying substrate, most often steel, creates a new set of
compounds, many of which are bound to the surface. These
include:
o Sulfur dioxide which reacts with moisture to form

sulfurous and sulfuric acids. These may in turn react
with steel to form ferrous sulfate, Fe2SO4 a water-
soluble compound of iron.
o Sodium chloride reacts with iron to form ferrous and

ferric chlorides.
o Nitrogen compounds react with iron to form iron

nitrates

As we have already said, reacted salts, bound with the

substrate iron, are not easily removed by dry blast-cleaning.
Contaminated surfaces may be blast-cleaned thoroughly, and
have the appearance of clean metal, but in high relative
humidity can be seen to turn dark rapidly, often within
minutes of completion of blasting.
When coatings are applied over such contaminanation, the

salts may act as a focus for corrosion activity under the
coating, drawing and holding moisture, and increasing the
tendency to form blisters.
This situation can be more critical when the steel is severely

pitted. In such cases, a combination of “wet abrasive
blasting” or “high-pressure water jetting”, followed by “dry
abrasive blasting”, may be required to reduce the amount of
contamination to an acceptable minimum.
The effect of soluble salts as contaminants, has long been

recognized. Unfortunately, the industry has not yet arrived at
a consensus on acceptable minimum levels of contamination.
Nor has industry developed a standard procedure for the
detection and evaluation of these soluble salts. Currently
NACE, jointly with SSPC and ISO, is working to develop
such a standard test method. It is expected that this joint
effort will lead to some recommendations for an acceptable
minimum level of soluble salts contamination prior to
coating.
Test methods described in this section represent the current

‘state-of-the-art’, but do not constitute standards or
recommendations made by NACE International. Written
guidelines produced by the standards authorities are
generally in draft form as at August 2001.
Tests for soluble salts are most often performed after surface
preparation, and before the application of coatings. Tests
may also be performed prior to any surface preparation work,
when decisions regarding the work may be influenced by the
results. For example, tests for the presence of chlorides may
be performed on pipe delivered to a pipe coating plant as
deck cargo on a ship or barge. If levels are found to exceed
10 micrograms per sq. cm, pipe should receive extra acid

wash treatment prior to normal surface preparation. If levels

are measured as less than 10 micrograms per sq.cm., the pipe
can proceed to the coating plant in the usual way.
Levels of surface salt contamination are generally measured

in metric units, most often micrograms per square
centimeter.
If salts are detected, and perhaps measured as exceeding

specified minimum levels, further action may be required by
the specification. It should be understood that the coating
specification must clearly define both acceptable limits of
salt contamination, and any action to be taken if limits are
exceeded.
Tests to be discussed include:
o A Qualitative Test for Water-Soluble Ferrous Salts
o A Semi-quantitative Test for Water-Soluble Ferrous

Ions
o Tests for Chloride Ions
o Tests for sulfate ions
o Tests for Nitrous ions
o Combination tests for various salts
o Chlor-Test Kits for Chlorides, sulfates and nitrous

salts
o And Conductivity Testing
Qualitative Test for Water-Soluble

Ferrous Salts
The qualitative test for water-soluble ferrous salts, or ions, is
designed only to detect the presence of this substance - iron
in soluble form - on a steel substrate. It is not designed to
measure the quantity of these ions.

Test Procedure
A qualitative test for water-soluble ferrous salts was first
described in Appendix G of British Standard BS 5493, and is
now included in ISO 8502-1, Annex A. The method
includes:
o The use of prepared indicator paper. Filter paper is

saturated with 5% potassium ferricyanide and allowed
to dry. This indicator paper is available commercially,
but can be prepared by any inspector, provided they
have a supply of potassium ferricyanide.
o Misting substrate with distilled water. To conduct the

test, spray mist a small amount of distilled water onto
the steel surface, and allow the water to stand for 30
seconds
o Applying test paper to surface. Press the indicator

paper onto the wetted surface, and hold for about five
seconds.
o Dark blue color indicates presence of soluble salts.

Any soluble ferrous salts present will be drawn into
the test paper and will produce blue dots on the paper
corresponding to the contaminated areas of the steel
surface.
This is a sensitive test and minute amounts of soluble iron

can be detected. Users should not over-react to what may
appear to be heavy contamination. If the indicator paper
displays a large amount of blue color, you may make further
tests to attempt to quantify the iron.
The test paper is both photosensitive and moisture-sensitive

and should be stored in a dry, dark place away from light.
Potassium ferricyanide also dissipates with time, so the test
paper should be fresh to minimize false readings. Its shelf
life is very short, probably less than three months even in
good storage conditions.
Semi-quantitative Tests
Quantitative measurement of chemical salts generally
requires accurate laboratory test methods. The most

common methods used to make field measurements are

called ‘semi-quantitative’ because they identify the
representative range of contamination (e.g. 20 to 30
microgrammes per square centimetre), rather than a single
specific number.
To perform tests that attempt to quantify their results (rather

than give a ‘yes/no’ indication, inspectors must be more
precise in the measuring method. Accurate quantities of test
solutions should be used, samples should be carefully
collected, and test methods should be consistent and
standardized.
Sample Collection
For most quantitative or semi-quantitative chemical tests, the
first stage is collection of a representative sample. The
sample is then tested using pre-prepared indicator strips, test
solutions or other test method. Alternatively, samples can be
sent to a laboratory for analysis.
Samples for soluble salt measurement are most often

collected by:
o The ISO swabbing, or similar method
o Or a Proprietary sampling method, such as Bresle

patch or Chlor-Test kits
ISO swabbing method

Mark off a test area 6 by 6 in. - 15 by 15 cm, of the bare
substrate to be tested. Sample collection is easier if the
surface is horizontal, but this may not be representative of
the overall surface.
Using a graduated cylinder, measure 22.5millilitres of

distilled or deionized water. Pour the solution into a 100
to150 millilitre beaker.
Take a ball of cotton wool, and immerse it into the solution.

Note that medical grade cotton balls are suitable for this
purpose, since they are not contaminated with salts prior to
testing.

Use the wetted cotton wool ball to wash the surface of the
test area, being cautious to keep the water within the
inscribed area. Return the cotton wool ball to the beaker
containing the wash solution.
Use a new, dry cotton ball to dry up the test area. Return the
second ball to the beaker containing the test solution, and
repeat the drying process with new cotton balls until the
surface is dry.
Stir the contents of the beaker, which contains all the cotton
balls used, for 20 seconds.
The sample that is gathered in this way is of a suitable

volume for subsequent testing, and allows testing to be
quantitative
A similar test method, using different quantities and area is

described in ISO 8502-1, Tests for the Assessment of
Surface Cleanliness – Part 1: Field Test for Soluble Iron
Corrosion Products.
Bresle Patch
The Bresle patch is a self-adhesive patch about 5cm - 2inch
square, with a latex center that allows injection of test
solution through the surround section, using a hypodermic
needle and syringe. The test solution is most commonly 5-
ml of de-ionized or distilled water.
After a period of contact with the surface, with some

physical agitation by the operator, the sample can be
withdrawn using the same syringe.
The contact area provided by the Bresle patch is 12.5-sq.cm.

To ensure accurate quantification, the volume of test solution
used must be related to the specific test, and is generally 3-
ml.
Chlor-Test Kit
Using a similar principle to the Bresle patch, the self-
adhesive Chlor-Test sampler provides a bigger sample
pouch, and therefore allows a larger test sample. The test

solution is inserted into the pouch before the device is fixed

to the surface to be tested.
The test sample used with the Chlor-Test kit varies

depending on the purpose of the test. To measure the
chloride contamination on the surface, an acidic extract
solution is used, to improve the efficiency of the test sample.
The extract sample is pre-measured, and provided in a sealed

bottle. The sample is collected by detaching the sampling
device from the surface, and tests are generally performed
with the solution remaining in the sample device.
The contact area provided by the Chlor-Test sample device is

10 sq.cm. To ensure accurate quantification, the volume of
test solution used must be related to the specific test, and in
this case is 10-ml. The results achieved with this test
therefore may be quoted in parts per million or micrograms
per square centimeter.
Semi-quantitative Tests for Water-Soluble Ferrous

Ions
Many variations of contaminant are possible on a surface that
has been exposed to corrosion in the environment. To
determine all of them with one test is not easy. An indication
of the total contamination level can be gained, however, by
measuring the total quantity of soluble iron ions (Fe++ and
Fe+++).
(Note: Fe++ and Fe+++ may be combined with chlorides,

sulfates or others, but only the soluble iron is measured in
this test procedure).
Add two or three drops of ascorbic acid to the sample (of

distilled water) collected by any of the above procedures.
This ensures that both Fe++ and Fe+++ ions are measured.
Remove a test strip from the supplied container, for example,

Merkoquant, without touching the test paper zone. Immerse
the test strip for 1 to 2 seconds in the sample solution.
Within 20 seconds, compare the test paper zone with the
color scale on the side of the test strip container.

The color chart indicates the concentration in milligrams per

litre, parts per million, milligrams per square meter or
micrograms per sq. mm. This procedure provides a semi-
quantitative indication of water-soluble ferrous ions.
The term ‘semi-quantitative’ is used to describe any test with

results expressed in a range, or closest to a color sample,
rather than with specific precision.
Indicator Papers
Indicator papers are available for a wide variety of
substances. Of particular interest in the context of surface
preparation for coatings are those used for the detection of:
o Water-soluble ferrous salts
o And Halides, specifically chlorides
Different test papers may be available, depending whether a

qualitative or quantitative result is required.
Generally, contamination with excess quantities of

unexpected salts may interfere with test results. Some test
methods allow for modification of the test method to
compensate for such interference. For example, Merkoquant
test papers may be discolored by the presence of heavy metal
ions, such as chromium or barium. The discoloration can be
eliminated by adding a small quantity of cadmium powder.
Indicator papers are often sensitive to storage conditions, and

have a limited shelf life. Papers should not be exposed
sunlight or moisture. High temperatures may also reduce
storage life, and papers should be stored in a dry place at a
temperature below 90°F - 30°C.
Kitagawa Tubes
Sealed tubes with reagents that are specific to the salts to be
measured are probably more accurate, particularly after
storage, than most other indicators. Kitagawa tubes are
similar in appearance to Draeger tubes.

After sample collection, the tubes are made ready for use by
breaking the sealed ends. When placed in the test solution,
the fluid is drawn up through the tube by capillary action.
Color changes within the reagent crystals indicate the
quantity of salts, for example, chlorides, in the test solution.
Kitagawa tubes are available to measure chloride, sulfate or

nitrate levels.
Tests for Chloride Ions

It is possible to test for the presence of chloride ions with the
same test solution used to determine soluble ferrous salts, but
different indicator papers are used.
In one specific procedure, ‘Quantab’ titrator sticks capable of

detecting chloride in the range of 30 to 600 parts per million,
0.005% to 0.1% as sodium chloride, are used.
These chloride titrators consist of a thin, chemically-inert

plastic sheath. Laminated within the sheath is a strip
impregnated with silver dichromate. When a titrator strip is
placed vertically in an aqueous test solution, fluid will rise up
the strip by capillary action.
The reaction of the silver dichromate with chloride, produces
a white column of silver chloride in the strip. When a strip is
completely saturated, a moisture-sensitive signal string
across the top of the strip turns blue. The length of the white
column in the strip is proportional to chloride ion
concentration
The test is performed as follows.
o Place the lower end of the titrator in the solution to be

tested. Immersion of the entire strip will trigger a
false completion color change.
o Allow sample fluid to completely saturate the strip.
o Determine the height of the white column in measured

titration units between 2 and 30 minutes after the
signal string begins to turn blue.

o There will be a cone-shaped bleached area on the

strip. The number closest to the peak of the bleached-
out portion is recorded.
o This number is then compared to the chart

accompanying the test kit. It is important to use only
matching lot numbers for the specific chart and the
strip, to avoid erroneous readings.
o The concentration of chlorides is given in parts per

million or milligrams per litre.
Chloride ions are considered to be the most significant of the

surface salts contaminants, being several times more
aggressive than any other common surface contaminant.
Tests for sulfate ions & nitrous ions

Tests for sulfate ions are generally performed using titration
methods. Tests using indicator papers, suitable for use on
site may be used. Recent developments include the
CHLOR*TEST “CSN SALTS”, a field test kit capable of
testing nitrates, chlorides and sulfates in the field.
Conductivity Testing
A measure that includes some consideration of the total
soluble salts present on the surface, without specifically
identifying any salt, is conductivity.
When a liquid sample has been gathered, the electrical

resistance of the test solution is measured. The result is
related to the surface area that was sampled, and is then
expressed in micro-siemens per square centimeter. Greater
resistance indicates an increased presence of dissolved salts.
Attempts are sometimes made to relate the conductivity to a

nominal chloride contamination level by mathematical
calculation. Since the chemical composition of the sample is
not known, this can only be an indicator, and not a scientific
measurement. Field measurements of conductivity can not,
therefore, be accurately correlated to the presence of any
specific chemical salt.

Applicable Limits
As mentioned earlier, there is no conclusive or definitive
level of salt contamination that can be used to specify
acceptable limits for coating purposes. Some levels are
defined by the Water-Jetting standards, NACE 5/SSPC-SP
12, as follows:
o SC-1 – Surface contamination below detectable levels

using available field testing methods
o SC-2 – Less than 7 microgrammes per square

centimetre chloride contaminants, less than 10
microgrammes per square centimetre soluble ferrous
ions, and less than 17 microgrammes per square
centimetre sulfate contaminants
o SC-3 – Less than 50 microgrammes per square

centimetre chloride and sulfate contaminants
These levels are the first standardized attempt to define

categories of surface salt contamination that relate to degrees
of suitability or readiness for coating.
Further limits are suggested by a draft NACE/SSPC

standard2, as follows:
o Less than 3 microgrammes per square centimetre

chlorides are suitable for coatings in immersion
service, and less than 5 microgrammes per square
centimetre chlorides are suitable for coatings in
atmospheric service
o Less than 10 microgrammes per square centimetre

sulfates are suitable for coatings in immersion service,
and less than 15 microgrammes per square centimetre
sulfates are suitable for coatings in atmospheric
service
Levels of surface salt contaminants that can be tolerated,

should be specified for specific coatings used on specific
2
“Substrate Contamination by Non-Visible Soluble Salts, Acceptance Levels
Immediately Prior To Coating, Test Schedules and Preparation of
Specifications to Mitigate the Effects of Soluble Salts.”

projects. It should be noted that no extraction method is

100% efficient, and that the samples collected, probably
represent less than 50% of the salts present on the surface.
These are not official NACE International

recommendations. NACE currently has no standard
recommended practices regarding these tests, and these data
are presented for information only.
SSPC-Technical Update Number 4

SSPC-TU 4, published in 1998, describes “Field Methods for
Retrieval and Analysis of Soluble Salts on Substrates”.

Dry Film Thickness Measurements
In basic modules, it was possible to review in detail SSPC-

PA-2 Measurement of Dry Paint Thickness with Magnetic
Gauges, which describes the use of the two basic types of
magnetic gauges:
Type 1, Magnetic Pull-Off Gauges
Type 2, Fixed-Probe, Constant-pressure, Electromagnetic

Gauges
Both Types 1 and 2 gauges are used to determine the Dry

Film Thickness, or DFT, of non-magnetic coatings applied to
magnetic substrates. Frequently non-magnetic and/or non-
conductive coatings are applied over non-ferrous substrates,
such as aluminum, zinc, copper, brass, and some stainless
steels. Test instruments using the eddy current principle are
used to determine the DFT of nonconductive coatings over
these surfaces.
DFT gauges based on the eddy-current principle are very

similar in appearance to those based on the electro-magnetic
principle, with perhaps only a difference in the probe to
distinguish them. Calibration and operation are generally
also similar.
As with all DFT gauges, frequent calibration is essential if

accurate measurements are to be made.
Magnetic Pull-Off Gauges

Mechanical pull-off DFT gauges are based on the principle
of a permanent magnet being attracted to a ferrous surface.
The strength of the attraction varies according to the distance
of the magnet, or probe, from the surface, i.e. the thickness
of coating that lies between the probe and the surface.
Instruments based on the magnetic principle are used to

measure the DFT of non-ferrous coatings applied to ferrous
substrates.

Magnetic pull-off gauges have the advantage of not requiring

any kind of batteries to operate. They are therefore
considered to be intrinsically safe, and suitable for use in
hazardous environments.
They are also relatively robust, and preferred by some users

for their simplicity. Relatively few adjustments are possible.
Electromagnetic DFT Gauges

Electromagnetic gauges use direct current to induce a
magnetic field within the probe. This magnetic field then
interacts with the ferrous metal of the substrate in exactly the
same manner as the permanent magnet of the pull-off gauge.
Instruments based on the electromagnetic principle are used

to measure the DFT of non-ferrous coatings on ferrous
substrates.
Some electromagnetic gauges are calibrated to be accurate at

a single point, generally close to the thickness of coating to
be measured. Others are calibrated to two separate points,
one at or close to zero, the other at some thickness higher in
the scale than the thickness to be measured. Two point
calibration ensures that measurements are reasonably
accurate throughout the range of measurements.
With the increase in sophistication of computer chips, many

electromagnetic gauges are now manufactured with
capabilities that include:
o The ability to store measurements in the memory
o Statistical analysis, for example, averaging,

minimum/maximum measurements.
o The storage of measurements in batches to represent

different areas
o The print-out of measurements to provide a permanent

record
o And pre-set limits, to indicate measurements that fall

outside a specified range

Measurements can be made rapidly with electro-magnetic

gauges, particularly if the measurements are stored in
memory rather than written down. Accuracy of modern
gauges is better than those previously used, but still depends
on accurate calibration for best results.
Instruments based on the electro-magnetic principle are used

to measure the DFT of nonmagnetic films, applied to ferrous
substrates, most commonly to carbon steel or steel castings.
Calibration of the gauge is essential if accurate

measurements are to be made, although the stability of the
circuitry should ensure that calibration, once made, remains
stable for long periods, sometimes weeks. It is wise,
however, that inspectors check accuracy by calibrating the
instrument as least once each day, and whenever the
accuracy is doubted, such as when unusual measurements are
encountered. As always, when a specification dictates a
working method, it should be followed. SSPC-PA2, requires
calibration before and after use, on the same day.
Accuracy
Factors that affect the accuracy of DFT gauges, both
magnetic and electro-magnetic types, include:
o The magnetic properties of the substrate
For the greatest accuracy, the calibration piece should be

of the same metallurgical composition as the coated item
being measured. Different steel alloys, and measurement
of coating thickness on castings have been known to
change the accuracy of the gauge, thereby requiring a
recalibration. Changes in magnetic properties of mild
steel may also be brought about by:
The orientation of the structure - north-south or east-

west.
The work process performed on the structure such as

welding or heat-treatment

And modified properties of the ferrous substrate, such

as work-hardening
The composition of the substrate may also be a factor,

and some difficulties have been encountered with non-
homogenous ferrous materials such as cast-iron.
o Substrate thickness
Depending on the specific instrument, required minimum

substrate thickness will vary. Some instruments require
more “magnetic bulk” or mass than others, to maintain
accuracy.
o Edges
Generally, measurements cannot accurately be made

closer than 1 in. (25 mm) to any edge, due to the
magnetic field changes associated with edges.
o Curved surfaces
When this type of gauge is used to measure DFT on a

curved surface, the probe should be held at right angles to
the surface. If possible, calibration should be made on a
similarly curved surface.
o Magnetic coatings
Measurement of DFT of partially magnetic coatings, such

as those containing micaceous iron oxide pigment, may
be difficult. When inconsistencies are encountered,
magnetic DFT measurements should be crosschecked
with other methods, such as the Tooke gauge.
o Configuration of substrate
The nature of the substrate, whether smooth or roughened

by blast-cleaning, may affect measurement accuracy.
Calibration should be made on a substrate similar to that
being coated, unless otherwise specified.

In every case, the specific instructions and recommendations

of the instrument manufacturer should be carefully studied
and complied with.
Eddy current DFT gauges

Instruments based on the eddy current principle are used to
measure the DFT of nonconductive films applied to
conductive substrates, most often non-ferrous metals such as
aluminum, copper, brass, and stainless steel. The instrument
may look exactly like the electromagnetic gauge, but it
induces an eddy current in the substrate by way of an
alternating current fed to the probe.
Although measurements can be made on any conductive

metal, the shape and size of the probe and the conductivity of
the metal substrate are significant. Calibration of the gauge
should be made on the actual substrate or on a substrate
similar to that being coated.
Instruments capable of operating under both electromagnetic

and eddy current principles usually use a separate probe for
each principle. (note that complex multiple probes are
increasingly common as instruments continue to develop)
Eddy current probes are more specialized than electro-

magnetic probes, and can generally be used over a smaller
range of DFT.
Most eddy current probes have been designed and calibrated

for use over aluminum substrates, and their use for
measurement over other substrates may provide less accurate
results. Probe design is the crucial factor. Uniform response
and guaranteed accuracy is only gained from eddy current
gauges when they are used to make DFT measurements on
aluminum substrates. Re-calibration for other substrates
improves accuracy, but may not guarantee it.
Specific factors that influence the accuracy of eddy current

gauge measurements include:
o The magnetic and conductive properties of the

substrate

For the highest accuracy, the calibration piece should be

of the same metallurgical composition as the coated item
being measured.
o Substrate thickness
Depending on the specific instrument, required minimum

substrate thickness will vary. Some instruments will
work over substrates as thin as a few mils.
o Edges
Generally, measurements may not be accurate when

made closer than 1 in. - 25 mm, to any edge.
o Curved surfaces
If this type gauge is used to measure DFT on a curved

surface, the probe should be held at right angles to the
surface, and if possible, calibration should be made on a
similar curved surface.
o Conductivity of coatings
Measurements of DFT of conductive coatings such as

aluminum pigmented coatings is generally not possible
with eddy-current gauges
Calibration
In every case, the specific instructions and recommendations
of the instrument manufacturer should be carefully studied .
Where specifications provide a reference standard for the use
of DFT measuring equipment, or provide specific
instructions, the methods specified should be followed. Any
conflict between specified methods and the instrument
manufacturer’s instructions for calibration or use should be
resolved before the project starts.
When DFT gauges can be calibrated using shims placed

directly onto the prepared surface, the result is easy
calibration, and provides automatic adjustment to allow for
the roughness and/or significant properties of the substrate.
All other calibration methods are relative compromises.

Users may have some difficulty getting access to the original

surface in its prepared state, particularly if coatings were
applied some time ago, and surface preparation is not taking
place at the time calibration is needed. Alternative
calibration methods include:
o The use of pre-prepared coated sample plates, whose

consistency and configuration are known
o Calibration on a similar bare substrate known to be

similar.
o Or calibration on steel standards, such as those

provided by NIST and some instrument manufacturers
It should be noted that measurements of conductive materials

on a non-ferrous substrate, for example, aluminum
pigmented mastic applied to stainless steel, cannot be made
by non-destructive measurement with either electromagnetic
or eddy current instruments.
Accurate measurement of very thin coatings, such as sealers

for thermal spray coatings, DFT less than 1 mil (25 µm))
may not be possible using magnetic or eddy current gauges.
In such cases, DFT may be estimated from:
o measurements of Wet Film Thickness, or WFT, of the

coating as applied
o calculations based on the volume of coatings applied
o or measurements made on sample coupons placed on

the substrate at the time of coating application.
Alternatively, destructive measurements can be made using a

Tooke gauge or similar instrument.

Destructive Instruments and Tests

Most quality control tests and instruments operate on the
principle of non-destructive testing or NDT; so that the
instrument or test does not destroy or adversely affect the
process while measuring effectiveness. But non-destructive
testing is not always effective or successful.
In some cases, the high-voltage holiday detector can damage

a coating if the voltage is too high. However, when used
correctly, this instrument is regarded as nondestructive,
rather than destructive.
Some instruments or tests used to perform certain inspection

tests or functions may deface or destroy a portion of the
coating. Obviously, these tests or instruments are classified
as destructive.
The coating inspector should not perform any destructive test

or use destructive-test instruments on coatings unless:
o The specification clearly requires specific destructive

testing
o The owner allows or requires such testing
o Or such tests are required in a failure analysis

assignment
Some tests, procedures, and instruments classified as

destructive include:
o Solvent sensitivity test
o Paint inspection by Tooke gauge
o Adhesion tests, including
o Knife, micrometer and microscope
o Tape pull-off
o Dolly pull-off

o Hardness
o Pencil
o Impressor, or indentation
o Cathodic disbondment
o And other laboratory tests for determining coating

performance
Solvent Sensitivity Testing

Coatings that cure by chemical co-reaction develop
resistance to solvents during the cure phase. A simple test
that indicates whether cure has or has not taken place is the
solvent sensitivity, or solvent-rub, test.
ASTM has developed solvent sensitivity standards for both

ethyl zinc-silicate coatings, and for organic coatings in
general. These are:
o ASTM D-4752-95, Test Method for Measuring MEK

Resistance of Ethyl Silicate Zinc-Rich Primers by
Solvent Rub).
o ASTM D-5402-93, Standard Practice for Assessing

the Solvent Resistance of Organic Coatings Using
Solvent Rubs
Both standards involve a rub technique using solvents that a

cured coating will resist, but an uncured coating will not.
The MEK resistance of some two-component ethyl silicate

zinc-rich primers correlates well with the cure of the primer
as determined by diffuse differential reflectance infrared
spectroscopy.
Many industry users have adopted this test, or some

modification of it as an indication of the cure of polymerized
(chemically induced or heat-induced) coatings. A user may
develop special criteria for the coating being tested, and an
inspector involved in such testing should be aware of, and
understand, those criteria.

Test Procedure
The rub-test for inorganic zinc silicate is generally performed
as follows:
o Select areas on the coating surface at least 6 in. or 150

mm long on which to run the test.
o Clean the surface with tap water or dry cloth to

remove any loose material, and measure the DFT in
the selected area.
o Fold a piece of cheesecloth into a pad of double

thickness.
o Saturate the cloth to a dripping condition with MEK.

Do not allow more than 10 seconds to elapse before
proceeding to the next steps.
o Place the properly protected index finger into the

center of the pad while holding the excess cloth with
the thumb and remaining fingers of the same hand.
o With the index finger at a 45-degree angle to the test

surface, rub a rectangular area with moderate
pressure, first away from the operator and then
towards the operator. One forward and back motion
is one double-rub and is completed in approximately
one second.
o Continue rubbing the surface with the saturated MEK,

holding the pad as necessary without lifting it from
the surface until either the metal substrate is exposed
or 50 double-rubs have been completed.
o If the substrate is exposed, record the number of rubs

applied.
o Select an adjacent area as a control. Repeat the above

steps, except use a dry cheesecloth to establish the
effect of burnishing without the influence of MEK.
Use this area as the control to show the visual
appearance of no effect.

To record the test result, a scale of resistance is provided.

Testers are recommended to use this scale or develop
separate criteria.
Scale of Resistance Rating

Resistance Visual Effect
Rating
5 No effect on surface; no zinc on cloth after

50 double-rubs
4 Burnished appearance in rubbed area; slight
amount of zinc on cloth after 50 double-rubs
3 Some marring and apparent depression of the
film after 50 double-rubs
2 Heavy marring; obvious depression in the
film after 50 double-rubs
1 Heavy depression in the film, but no actual
penetration to the substrate after 50 double-
rubs
0 Penetration to the substrate in 50 or fewer
double-rubs
The Test for solvent resistance of organic coatings is similar

to that for ethyl zinc silicate, but less defined. Many of the
details are suggested, but users are allowed to use discretion
to define their own test parameters. For example:
o The suggested number of double-rubs is 25, but more

or less would be allowed
o The choice of solvent is dependent to the coating to be

tested. The manufacturer’s thinning solvent for that
coating may be a good choice.
o There is no scale of resistance provided
In general, a chemically-induced or heat-induced

polymerized coating is considered fully cured if none or only
a trace of the coating comes off after 25 double-rubs.
Additional rating criteria may include:
o Fingernail hardness in the rubbed area

o Gloss, measured immediately after the test is

performed
o And hardness, measured by the pencil hardness test.
Paint Inspection (Tooke) Gauge

The Tooke gauge is named after its inventor, H. Tooke3.
Outside the USA, similar gauges are more often known as
paint inspection gauge, or ‘PIG’ gauge.
The gauge is used to measure total coating thickness and the

thickness of individual layers of coatings in multi-coat films.
The direct physical measurement is not dependent on
substrate characteristics and, therefore, is often used as a
‘referee’ instrument, to resolve disputes that arise over
variations in non-destructive measurements.
The Tooke gauge is a destructive test instrument and test
method used to:
o Measure the total DFT of coatings (generally from 0

to 50 mils [0 to 1250 µms)
o To measure the DFT of each coat of paint in a system

– provided they are of contrasting colors. It may be
difficult to distinguish between multiple coats of
material of the same color.
o To measure thickness of plating and paint on ceramic,

metal, wood, and concrete substrates, and the
thickness of the protective backing on mirrors
o To measure the thickness of paint on plastics. It is the

only gauge available for this.
The microscope may also be useful for close examination of

coatings or substrates.
A Tooke gauge is fitted, on one side, with guide studs in

alignment with a cutting tip or tips.
3
ASTM D-4138-94, Measurement of Dry Film Thickness of Protective Coating
Systems by Destructive Means [Method A]

One side of the gauge, at right angles to the side with the
guide studs, is equipped with an illuminated 50 power
microscope.
The microscope contains a reticle, or optical scale, which is

graduated for measuring.
Test Procedures
To make measurements with a Tooke gauge, or PIG gauge,
the following steps are taken:
o First, estimate or measure the coating thickness in the
area to be tested. Then select a cutting tip according
to the anticipated coating thickness:
Tip DFT Each Reticle division

mils µm mils µm
1x 20 - 50 500 – 1250 1 25
2x 3 – 20 75 – 500 0.5 12.5
10x 0–3 0 – 75 0.1 2.5
Note:
o A 1x 45-degree angle tip is used for coatings of 20 to
50 mils, or 500 to 1250 µm thick. When using the 1x
tip, each line on the reticle scale represents one mil or
25.4 µm.
- A 2x (26.6-degree angle) tip is used for coatings 2

to 20 mils (50 to 500 µm) thick. When using this
tip, each line on the reticle scale represents 0.5
mils (12.7 µm)
- A 10x (5.6-degree angle) tip is used for coatings 0

to 3 mils (0-75 µm) thick, and when this tip is
used, each line on the reticle scale represents 0.1
mil (2.5 µm).
o Use a surface marker of contrasting color to mark a

benchmark line on the surface about 2-in. (5-cm)
long. White-Out™ erasing fluid may be useful as a
marker on dark surfaces.

o To cut a groove, grip the Tooke gauge firmly, with the

guide studs and cutting tip against the coated surface,
ready to scribe across the mark
o Draw the cutting tip straight across at right angles to

the mark, with the guide studs leading the cutting tip.
Increase pressure on the cutting tip until it barely cuts
into the substrate before it crosses the benchmark
o Maintain continuous three-point contact to ensure

precise vertical alignment of the groove, but avoid
excessive pressure on the guide studs. If the groove is
not properly made through the coating to the
substrate, make a new scribe at another location. Do
not attempt to re-cut any previous incision
o Turn the microscope lamp on and view the incision

through the 50 times microscope. Use the focusing
screw in the body below the microscope to adjust the
image. Rotate the chrome eyepiece, to focus the
reticle scale image in the microscope
o The coating will be visible on both sides of the

exposed substrate. One side will appear to have a
smoother edge at the benchmark than the other.
Evaluate only the smoother side of the coating. When
you pull the cutter towards you, line up the
microscope, find the exposed substrate close to the
center, and read LEFT.
o Align the left edge of the cut with any convenient

long line of the scale, and count inwards, left to right,
until the next layer of coating or the substrate is
reached.
Gauge Calibration
The Tooke gauge cannot be “field calibrated”.
Its accuracy depends on the alignment of the cutting tip

determined by the construction tolerance of the instrument
and the condition of the cutting tip. The user should verify
that the cutting tips are in good condition, with a sharply
defined edge. Chipped or worn tips should be replaced.

For very high precision work, the user should maintain

painted panels with a known coating thickness and check the
instrument by measuring on these panels periodically.
Advantages & Disadvantages

The Tooke gauge offers specific advantages, such as:
o It is portable
o Useful in the field or in the lab
o Relatively easy to use
o It is possible to mount camera and take pictures

through the microscope
o It is a reliable referee instrument, in case of arbitration
The Tooke gauge has certain disadvantages:
o It needs battery power, and therefore is not

intrinsically safe
o Sections of coating are detroyed in conducting the test
o It may not produce a smooth cut in filled or fiber

coatings
o Soft or elastic coatings may need to be cooled or

frozen with dry ice to allow a good cut
Precision Groove Grinder

An auxiliary instrument sometimes used with the Tooke - or
PIG gauge is called a precision groove grinder. This
portable, hand-held, battery-operated tool, uses a diamond -
tipped cutting wheel to cut a groove in coatings for
observation with the Tooke gauge.
The regular cutting tip of the Tooke gauge is not a reliable

incisor on certain types of coatings such as soft, rubbery,
highly-filled, or glass fiber-reinforced materials. The
precision groove grinder provides a smooth incision in these
coatings. Coatings that have not fully cured may also be

relatively soft, and may need to be cut with the groove

grinder rather than the Tooke gauge cutting tips.
The incision made with a groove grinder, resembles a half-

moon or crescent shape in the coating. Observations and
thickness measurements should be made at the widest part of
the cut. Once the cut is made, the Tooke gauge may be used
to measure the DFT, as though the cut was made by the
regular cutting tips.
Another instrument similar in effect to the precision groove
grinder is the microgroove – a modified drill - which is
described and pictured in ASTM D-4138. This accessory
may also be used to cut the coating when dragging cutter tips
is not effective.
Saberg Drill
The Saberg drill, - turned by hand - cuts a hole through the
coating with angled sides, like the counter-sunk section of a
normal drilled hole. The hole is cut at 90° to the surface,
until the substrate is reached. The various coatings within
the system can then be seen as layers within the angled hole.
As with the Tooke gauge, the depth of the hole is clearly

related to the width of the hole, the relationship depending on
the angle of the cutter.
The device is equipped with a 50 power microscope and two

hand wheels for holding the cutter/drill in place and turning.
A heavy wheel is used with hard or thick coatings more than

10 mils , 250 microns, in thickness, and a light wheel is used
for soft or thin coatings less than 10 mils thick.
After the hole is cut, the microscope is focused on one side

of the hole, and the number of reticle divisions between the
coating surface and the substrate or the individual layers of
paint is noted.
To calculate the coating thickness:
o For mils, multiply the scale gradations counted by

0.79

o For microns, multiply the scale gradations counted by

20
ASTM Standard D-4138 describes Method C, which

involves the use of a specific angle-tip drill bit to cut a
conical cavity in the coating. This is the method used by the
Saberg Drill
Adhesion Tests
Most coatings properly applied to a well-prepared surface
develop good adhesion to the substrate. When coatings do
not develop good adhesion, this is a likely indication that
some element of the surface preparation and coating process
was defective. Many users elect to conduct adhesion tests to
determine the quality of the coating bond to the substrate, or
between coats.
Commonly used adhesion tests include:
o Knife, micrometer and microscope
o Tape pull-off (ASTM D3359)
o Dolly pull-off, using a fixed-alignment adhesion tester

Type 2, ASTM D4541.
Adhesion tests such as these may be used to investigate

coating failures.
Knife/Micrometer
A pocket knife or a very sharp putty knife or scraper may be
used to perform a quick, but informal, adhesion test. The
knife is used to cut through the coating, and an attempt is
made to peel the coating from the substrate.
This is a very subjective test, and the evaluation of “bond

strength” depends on individual opinion.. An evaluation of
the results may be subject to dispute. Clearly, if the coating
is easily peeled from the surface, then it could be said that
the adhesive bond to the substrate is unacceptable.

If the coating can be dislodged from the surface, but breaks

into small particles by picking with the knife, then the bond
may be adequate.
If larger particles (or flakes) of coating can be removed from

the surface, they can be examined under a microscope or
measured for thickness using a dial gauge micrometer, such
as that used for Testex tape measurements.
If this test is used, then some agreement between the parties

involved must be reached as to how to evaluate the test
results. The test does have some merit, however, and can be
used on an informal basis to determine whether more precise
adhesion testing is required. Inspectors should choose the
location of such tests with care, and ensure that coatings are
not damaged or destroyed unnecessarily.
Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test

The informal cut test described above may be standardized to
get comparative results between tests made on different
coatings by different testers. ASTM D3359-95, Standard
Test Method for Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test describes
two methods for measuring adhesion by cutting the coating
and trying to remove it using adhesive tape:
o Method A, in which an X cut is made in the coating

film. This method is used for coating films thicker
than 5 mils.
o Method B, in which a series of cuts are made at right

angles to each other. For films thinner than 2 mils, 11
cuts 1 mm apart are made in each direction. For
coating films from 2 to 5 mils thick, six cuts are made
2 mm apart at right angles to each other.
The standard refers to Method B as ‘more suitable for use in

the laboratory’, and not suitable for use on coatings greater
than 5 mils in thickness. For most protective coating
systems, Method A is, therefore, likely to be the method of
choice.

Method A
Two cuts are made through the coating, approximately 2
inches, 5-cm long and intersecting at the mid-point to form
an ‘X’-cut. The cut should be a single stroke, completely
cutting through the coating to the substrate.
After the cuts have been made, the area is lightly brushed, to
remove any dislodged coating. Tape, of an agreed type, is
then stuck to the surface
From the roll of tape, two complete laps of tape are removed.
The tape is placed over the cuts and smoothed firmly with an
eraser to ensure good contact. The tape should be removed
within 60 – 120 seconds of application, and ideally at 90
seconds, by seizing the free end and rapidly pulling it off ,
but not jerking, as close to an angle of 180 degrees as
possible.
The ASTM descriptions for rating adhesion by the X cut

method are shown in the following table:-
Rating Description
5A No peeling or removal
4A Trace peeling or removal along incisions or at their
intersectaions
3A Jagged removal along incisions up to 1/16 in. (1.6 mm) on
either side
2A Jagged removal along most of incisions up to 1/8 in. (3.2

mm) on either side
1A Removal from most of the area of the’ X’ under the tape
0A Removal beyond the area of the ‘X’
Method B
A series of cuts through the coating are made at right angles
to each other, forming a series of squares. The number of
cuts depends on the thickness of the coating, as follows:
o If coating thickness is 0 to 2 mils, 0 to 50microns, 11

cuts are made in each direction, with the spacing
between cuts being 1mm.

o If coating thickness is 2 to 5 mils, 50 to 125microns, 6

cuts are made in each direction, with the spacing
between cuts being 2mm.
Cross cuts can be made using a razor-sharp blade and an

appropriate template guide with 1, 2, or 3 mm separation, or
with a special cutting tool. Cuts made with 3-mm separation
are sometimes allowed for coating thicknesses greater than 5
mils (125 µm), but the method, spacing and tape must be
agreed by all parties concerned.
Again, the agreed tape is used. From the roll of tape, two
complete laps of tape are removed. The tape is placed over
the cuts and smoothed firmly with an eraser to ensure good
contact. The tape should be removed within The tape should
be removed within 60 – 120 seconds of application, and
ideally at 90 seconds, by seizing the free end and rapidly
pulling it off , but not jerking, as close to an angle of 180
degrees as possible.
The ASTM descriptions for rating adhesion by method B are

shown in the following table:
Rating Description
5A The edges of the cuts are completely smooth; none of
the squares of the lattice is detached.
4B Small flakes of the coating are detached at
intersections; less than 5% of the area is affected.
3B Small flakes of the coating are detached along the edges
and at the intersections of the cuts. The area affected is
5% to 15% of the lattice.
2B The coating has flaked along the edges and on parts of
the squares. The area affected is 15% to 35% of the
lattice.
1B The coating has flaked along the edges of cuts in large
ribbons, and whole squares have detached. The area
affected is 35% to 65% of the lattice.
0B Flaking and detachment worse than Grade 1.
A tool specially designed for this test, consists of either a six-

blade or an eleven-blade cutter, mounted in a holder. The
edges of the cutter are pressed to the surface to be tested, and
the tool is pulled once in each direction, to intersect at a 90-
degree angle.

It should be noted that some coatings that might give good

“pull-off test” adhesion results, do not give very good “cross-
hatch adhesion” test results. Coatings that are brittle, tend to
fracture badly when tested by this method.
Adhesion Testing Using Portable Pull-Off

Tensile Testers
“Pull-off tape tests” provide an indication of coatings’
adhesion to other coatings or to a substrate. Frequently,
however, a more precise method of measuring coating
adhesion, particularly in multi-coat systems, may be
required. Such a method is described in ASTM D-4541
Standard Test Method for Pull-Off Strength of Coatings
Using Portable Adhesion Testers.
This test method covers a procedure and apparatus for

evaluating pull-off strength or adhesion of a coating by
determining either:
o the greatest perpendicular force, in tension, that a

surface can bear before a plug of material is detached,
or
o whether the surface remains intact at a prescribed

force, pass or fail.
When pull-off adhesion tests are performed, failure will

occur along the weakest plane in the system, which may be
the interface between any of the components, including:
o Test fixture to adhesive
o Adhesive to coating surface
o Coatings to coatings interface
o Coating to substrate
The location of the failure can be identified by examination

of both the detached and exposed portions, by the fracture
surface.

This test method applies tensile stress and minimizes the

shear stress applied by other methods such as scratch or knife
adhesion, and results may not be comparable.
Measurements are limited by the strength of the adhesion

bonds between the loading fixture and the coating surface, or
the cohesive strength of the substrate. The test can be
destructive and spot repairs may be necessary.
In general, the pull-off adhesion test is performed by

adhering a fixture, for example, an aluminum test dolly, to
the surface of the coating. After the adhesive is cured, the
test apparatus is attached to the test dolly and aligned to
apply tension perpendicular to the test surface.
The force applied to the test dolly is increased slowly and

consistently, and monitored until the dolly is released or a
specified value is reached.
When a plug of material is detached, the exposed surface

represents the plane of weakest adhesion within the system.
The nature of failure is defined by the percentage of adhesive
and/or cohesive failures seen at the interface, and which
layers are involved. The pull-off strength, or adhesion, of
the coating is reported in pounds per square inch , or in
kilograms per square centimeter.
Testing
The test is performed as follows:
o The areas selected for testing should ideally be flat

surfaces, large enough to accommodate the specified
number of replicate tests. If the test surfaces are
curved, it may be necessary to provide dollies, or
glued fixtures, with a matching curved surface, and
support for the tensile tester to ensure a straight pull.
Usually, a minimum of three replications is required
to statistically characterize the test area.
o The selected testing areas must have enough

perpendicular and radial clearance to accommodate
the apparatus, be flat enough to permit alignment, and
be rigid enough to support the counter force.

o oil or grease are removed from the test dolly with a

suitable solvent, such as MEK or xylene
o the bottom surface of the test dolly should be lightly

abraded, to ensure good adhesion between the dolly
and the glue
o Coating surfaces to be tested should be cleaned in a

manner that will not affect the integrity of the coating,
or leave a residue. Surfaces should be “solvent
wiped” with a solvent that does not soften the coating.
o Surface roughening by abrasion may introduce flaws

and should generally be avoided. It should be noted,
however, that failure to roughen the surface may
frequently lead to loss of adhesion between the
adhesive and the coating surface. A light abrasive-
coated paper, 400 grit or finer, should be used only if
needed to remove loose or weakly-adhered surface
contaminants.
o Adhesive should be specified and/or agreed upon, and

should be mixed in accordance with the
manufacturer’s recommendation. Apply the adhesive
between the test dolly and the surface to be tested, and
place the dolly on the test area perpendicular to the
surface. Apply sufficient pressure to squeeze out any
excess adhesive.
o Adhesives supplied by the instrument manufacturers

are often cold-cured epoxy materials that require at
least 24 hours to reach testing strength. Many clients
allow Super Glue™ Gel to be used as the adhesive,
because of its rapid curing time. Other adhesives,
such as those that cure by application of heat, may
also be suitable).
o Excess adhesive should be carefully removed from

around the dolly. Caution is called for because
movement, especially twisting, can cause tiny bubbles
to coalesce into large holidays that reduce attainable
adhesion testing.

o Adhesive must set up and reach the recommended

cure. Constant contact pressure may be necessary
during adhesive set and the early cure stage.
Magnetic or mechanical clamping systems may be
used. Clamping systems such as masking tape are not
generally effective
o Scoring around the dolly violates the fundamental in-

situ criterion that an unaltered coating be tested (see
STM D4541, Section 6.7). Nevertheless, there is
often a requirement to cut around the dolly and
through to the substrate below. This procedure is
especially effective when very thick or re-inforced
coatings, for example, FRP are tested
o If the substrate is thin, usually less than 1/4 in. - 6.4

mm in thickness, a bearing ring may be used. The
ring should be placed concentrically around the dolly
on the coated surface.
o After the adhesive is cured and the area is ready for

testing, the adhesion tester should be positioned over
the dolly. The device may require alignment to
ensure a direct pull, and the force indicator should be
set to zero.
o Increase the load in a smooth continuous manner at a

rate not less than 150 pounds per square inch per
second or 1 megapascal per second, so failure occurs,
or the maximum stress is reached in about 100
seconds or less.
o Read along the force indicator scale and determine the

highest value attained at failure, or the maximum
force applied. If a plug of material is detached, label
and store the dolly for qualification of the failed
surface.
o For all “tests to failure”, estimate the percentage of

adhesive and cohesive failures and their respective
areas and locations within the test system comprising
the coating and adhesive layers. One scheme to make
this determination is as follows:

- Describe the test specimen as substrate A, upon

which successive coating layers B, C, D, etc., have
been applied, including the adhesive Y which
secures the dolly Z to the top coat.
- Designate cohesive failures by the layers within

which they occur as B, C, etc., and the percentage
of each.
- Designate the adhesive failures by the interfaces at

which they occur as A to B, B to C, C to D, etc.,
and the percentage of each.
Self-Aligning Adhesion Tester Type III (HATE VII

Hydraulic Tester)
Another type of adhesion test instrument described in ASTM
D4541 is the Self-Aligning Adhesion Tester Type III,
represented by the Hate Mark VII Hydraulic Adhesion
Tester.
Using this tester, a hydraulic load is applied through the
center of the dolly fixture by a piston and pin. The
hemispherical tip of the pin ensures a point loading of the
force. Consequently, the force reached in the dolly is a
uniform, purely tensile load. The design is intended to avoid
shear forces acting on the dolly, which could produce
inaccurate or inconsistent results.
The smooth application of hydraulic pressure provides more
consistent test conditions than some other testers. The
pressures achieved, that is the tensile pull applied, are
relatively higher, and results are less scattered than with
purely mechanical adhesion testers.
The hydraulic gauge on the instrument gives the adhesion
test results in pounds per square inch , or megapascals.
Test dollies which have been machined to fit the specified
Outside Dimension and Inside Dimension of pipe are
available for testing of coating and linings on piping.
Hydraulic forces are also easily applied through flexible
connectors, and adhesion tests can easily be made inside
small diameter pipe, or in other areas with limited access.

Self-Aligning Adhesion Tester - Type IV (Pneumatic

Adhesion Tensile Testing Instrument (PATTI))
This test apparatus is described in ASTM-D4541, Annex 4.
It is self-aligning, and uses compressed air to supply a tensile
load to a 1/2” (13mm) diameter aluminum pull-stub bonded
to the coating surface. Failure occurs in the weakest layer of
the test specimen.
The maximum pressure at failure is measured and converted

to pounds per square inch by reference to a table supplied
with the unit. Test specimens may be flexible or rigid, flat or
curved.
The Patti gauge is widely used in laboratories, but is not easy

to transport or use on site, due to the size and configuration
of the instrument and the need to have a compressed air
source.
Other Tensile (Adhesion) Testers

Many other portable adhesion testers are available for tensile
testing. Each has its own specific features. Manufacturers of
inspection testing equipment are constantly working to
improve the equipment available. Whichever type of
equipment is used, however, there are some significant
issues:
o Adhesion test results may depend on the equipment

used to make the test. Specified adhesion test
requirements should define the equipment and/or the
method as well as any minimum results expected.
o Adhesion values obtained by performing tests with

various types of equipment are not easily or directly
comparable with each other.
o And test methods, including surface treatment before

testing, should be as consistent as possible if results
are to be meaningful.
Reporting Tensile Test Results

When tests are performed until some failure occurs, known
as testing to destruction, the failure occurs at the weakest
point in the coating or test system. Causes may include:

o Loss of adhesion between coating layers
o Loss of adhesion between coatings and the substrate
o Loss of cohesion within a coating layer
o Failure of the glue used to fix the pull-off dolly to the

surface
o Or a complex failure mode, involving a combination

of the above types of failure.
In each case, the type of failure should be reported, together

with the tensile value achieved. ASTM D 4541 suggests that
each layer of the coating system be given a different
designation as follows:
o Substrate = A
o Primer (first coat) = B
o Second coat = C
o Third Coat = D - and so on down to:-
o Glue or adhesive = Y
o Fixture or dolly = Z
The planes of failure can then be described on a report form

by reference to the letters designated. A sample report form,
and an example of reporting are shown in the following
tables:

TABLE 1: ADHESION TEST RESULTS REPORT

(EXAMPLE)
Pull-off Adhesion Testing Results

Test Location Test Type Value % Failure Location of failure Comments
No. of test (psi) Adhesion Cohesion Glue
1 End D4541 630 100 Primer/Steel Clean blasted surface
Flange #3 Type II exposed
2 Pipe 17 D4541 475 30 70 0 30% primer/first coat Zinc silicate primer

Type III 70% within primer
3 Tank D4541 800 100 Coating adhesion > 800

Roof Type II psi
interior
4 Operator C633 2,700 10 90 10% at substrate Delamination of

test 90% within coating thermal spray at overlap
area
5 Slab 2 D4541 380 100 100% within Cohesive failure of

Type IV substrate concrete
TABLE 2: ADHESION TEST RESULTS REPORT

FORM
Site Location Date
Client Name Project
Pull-off Adhesion Testing Results

Test Location of test Test Value % Failure Location of failure Comments
No. Type (psi) Adhesion Cohesion Glue
Note: Location of adhesive or cohesive failure may be described using ASTM D4451 convention, as key below:
A = substrate B = First Coat C = Second Coat D = Third Coat (etc.) Y = Adhesive Z = fixture (dolly)
Inspector Name: ____________________________ Signature: ___________________________

Non-Destructive Adhesion Testing

Tensile testing of adhesion does not have to be performed in
a destructive manner. By ceasing to apply tensile stresses at
a pre-determined value, for example, 700 pounds per square
inch, or 5 megapascals, the strength of the coating may be
shown to be greater than that value, provided failure did not
occur. Test dollies can be removed by heating the glue to
destroy the bond, without damage to the coating system.
Specialized fixtures are also available from some

manufacturers that fail at a pre-determined value, again
without damage to the coating system. Both adhesion and
cohesion may be shown to be better than the value at which
the test fixture failed. Fixture stubs should then be removed
from the coating.
Calibration of Tensile Testers

Tensile testers must be calibrated to ensure that their scale
provides an accurate measure of the force applied.
Calibration is generally performed in a laboratory, by setting
the instrument in opposition to a more accurate tensometer,
and recording the variation between the two instruments.
Scales cannot easily be altered, so accurate results are

recorded by reference to a calibration chart, that shows true
readings applicable against any specific scale readings.
Calibration Chart for Adhesion Tester H3017
1000
Instrument reading (psi)
800
600
Series1
400
200
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
True Value (psi)

Measuring Adhesion by Peel Strength

Thick coatings, such as those used on buried pipelines, such
as polyethylene, coal tar wrap, cannot easily be tested by
standard tensile tests. Such coatings are often tested for
adhesion by measurements of their peel strength. These tests
attempt to measure shear stress, rather than tensile stress.
Because of the need to perform peel strength tests involving

tough coatings on site, the method often appears to be
unsophisticated. One such test is:
o Using a sharp bladed knife, make three cuts through

the coating, direct to the substrate. Two cuts should
be made in parallel, about 2 inches or 50-mm apart.
The third cut should be made at right angles to the
other two, joining one end to create a ‘flap’.
o Raise the end of the flap so that it can be gripped by

an appropriate fixture. Suitable fixtures may include
custom tools, or a modified spring balance. In either
case, measurement of the pull is required.
o Apply a force to the flap, pulling at 180°, parallel to

the surface, and attempt to peel off the coating.
Measure the applied force.
o When used on a suitable surface, this test may be

performed in a vertical mode, and weights hung on to
the flap to apply the force.
Peel strength tests are most useful for thick or reinforced

coatings.
Hardness Testing
The hardness of a coating may be regarded as an indication
of its successful cure, and therefore, to some extent, its
‘normal’ expected performance. There are several laboratory
methods for determining hardness of a coating film, but only
two methods suitable for field use will be explored in this
module. These are:
o Pencil hardness

o Indentation, or impressor hardness
Pencil Hardness
The rapid determination of the film hardness of an organic
coating by the pencil hardness test is useful in coatings
development work, and in establishing performance criteria
for various coatings. This hardness test may be performed
under laboratory conditions or may be performed in the field.
The pencil test for film hardness is based on ASTM D3363-

92a - Standard Test Method for Film Hardness by Pencil
Test. This standard test method describes the procedure for
determining the film hardness of an organic coating on a
substrate, in terms of drawing leads or pencil leads of known
hardness.
The purpose of the test is to determine the hardness of a

coating, as required by the specifications, or as described in
performance data for a specific coating material.
Test Procedure
The pencil hardness test is a procedure that tries to mark or
mar a coating by pushing pencil leads of varying hardness
along the surface of the coating. The test is performed,
according to ASTM D 3363, as follows:
o Conduct the test at 73 ± 4º F, that is 25 ± 2º C, and

50% ± 5% relative humidity.
o Use drawing leads or equivalent calibrated wood

pencils from the same manufacturer which meet the
following scale of hardness: 6H, 5H, 4H, 3H, 2H, H,
F, HB, B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, 6H being the hardest
and 6B the softest.
o Peel the wood or paper away from the point of the

pencil for 3/16 to 1/4 in., or 5 to 6 mm, to expose an
undisturbed smooth cylinder of lead. Rub the lead
against a piece of abrasive paper, maintaining a 90-
degree angle to the paper to attain a flat, smooth
circular cross-section.

o Hold the pencil firmly at a 45-degree angle to the

coating film, with the tip away from the operator.
Push away from the operator in a 1/4-in. or 6.5 mm
stroke.
o Start with the hardest pencil 6H and continue down

the scale to 6B to determine either:
- The pencil that will not cut into or gouge the

coating film, establishing pencil hardness, or
- The pencil that will not scratch the film,

establishing scratch hardness.
o Exert enough uniform pressure downward and

forward, either to cut the film, or to crumble the edge
of the lead.
o Repeat the process down the hardness scale until a

pencil is found that will not cut through the film to the
substrate, or to the previous coat for a distance at least
1/8 in. or 3 mm. This is described as the ‘gouge
hardness’.
o Continue the process until a pencil is found that will

neither cut through nor scratch the surface. This is
described as the ‘scratch hardness’. Any defacement
of the film other than a gouge is considered a scratch.
o Conduct a minimum of two tests for gouge hardness

or scratch hardness for each pencil or lead.
o Record each end point for gouge and scratch hardness,

the make and grade of lead or pencil, and any
deviations from standard conditions, including
roughness in the finish.
Ambient conditions, operator technique such as differences

in the angle of incidence of the pencil, and pressure exerted
on the pencil may affect the accuracy and reproducibility of
the test.
According to ASTM D3363, the two end points are defined

as follows:

Gouge Hardness: The hardest pencil that will leave the

film uncut for a stroke length of at least 1/8 in. or 3 mm.
Scratch Hardness: The hardest pencil that will not

rupture or scratch the film.
Consider, for example, if a coating system consists of two

coats of material, and a 6H and 5H pencil both cut through
the film to the substrate, a 4H pencil cuts through the top
coat to expose the primer, and a 3H pencil leaves the film
uncut. In this example, the gouge hardness is 3H.
Similarly, when defining the hardness scale, if a 2H and an H

pencil both scratch the surface, but the next pencil, F, does
not, the scratch hardness is F.
The pencil hardness test is portable, and relatively easy to

perform. Supplies of suitable pencils can generally be
bought at any artists supply shop. It may be considered a
disadvantage that results may vary between different
manufacturer’s lead, despite having the same designation,
due to manufacturing tolerances.
Because results may vary between different test operators

using different pencil leads, every effort should be made to
standardize the type of lead and the technique used.
Indentation (Impressor) Hardness

There are several hand-held, portable hardness testers
available for use in the field. Most of these instruments rely
on the indentation, or impression, of a plunger or pin into
coatings or sheet materials such as rubber and rigid plastics,
including those that are reinforced, such as FRP. One such
instrument is the Barcol impressor. Another is the Shore
Durometer.
Use of the Barcol impressor is based on ASTM D 2583

Standard Test Method for Indentation Hardness of Rigid
Plastics by Means of a Barcol Impressor. This test method
may be used for both reinforced and non-reinforced rigid
plastics.

Barber-Colman (Barcol) Impressor

The indenter of the impressor consists of a sharp, hardened
steel pin. It fits into a hollow spindle and is held down by a
spring-loaded plunger. The gauge is used by operator
pressure on the body of the instrument, with the impressor
placed against the coating , or rigid plastic sheet.
The indicating dial has 100 divisions, each representing a

depth of 0.0003 in. or 0.0076 mm penetration. The higher
the reading, the harder the material.
Calibration
Hard and soft aluminum alloy disks are supplied as standards
used to verify calibration of the instrument. Each has a range
of measurements, for example, 87-89 Barcol units, that
should be measured when the gauge is impressed on the disk.
If measurements made in this way fall outside the noted
range, adjustments must be made to any measurements
subsequently made.
Accurate calibration is possible by adjustment of the springs

inside the instrument. This task is best performed by a
skilled technician, whenever the verification measurements
fall outside the permitted range on either the hard or soft
alloy disks.
Test Procedure
The test specimen should be at least 0.0625 in. (1.5 mm [63
mils]) thick and large enough to ensure a distance of 0.125
in. or 3 mm, in any direction from the indenter point to the
edge of the specimen.
o Ensure that the test material is adequately supported,

and will not flex when pressure is applied.
o Set the indenter housing on the test surface. Set the

legs on the same surface, or on solid material of the
same thickness so the indenter is perpendicular to the
test surface.

o Grasp the instrument firmly between the legs and

point sleeve.
o Apply increasing force on the case until the dial

indication reaches a maximum. Drift-in readings
from the maximum, may occur in some materials.
o Record this maximum reading.
When using any hardness tester, a phenomenon known as

cold flow, or creep, may occur. This happens when the
hardness tester is held in contact with the test material for a
period of time. The indenter continues to penetrate the
material and the measured indication drifts lower.
Regardless of any cold flow, the maximum reading is

recorded as the hardness rating of the material being
evaluated.
Impression hardness tests are potentially destructive tests,

and leave defects or flaws at the site of the test. When the
impressor hardness test is used on multi-layer coating
materials such as fiberglass-reinforced resins, like polyester,
vinyl ester or epoxy, tests should be performed before the gel
coat is applied, or the gel coat must be repaired.
In general, hardness readings by a given test method will be

affected by:
o Type of coating, sheet, or filled material
o State of cure
o Ambient temperature at time of test
o Thickness of material tested
Hardness Scales
Indentation hardness measurements are numeric, and based
on arbitrary scales created by the manufacturer of the
equipment. Manufacturers of commonly used hardness
testers, include:
o Rockwell

o Vickers
o Brinell
o Barcol, Barber-Colman
Many testers, such as Rockwell, create several scales

(Rockwell B, Rockwell C, etc) depending on the impressor
tip used. There is no direct relationship between the various
hardness scales. One scale, however, may be correlated with
another by use of an appropriate conversion chart. For
example, a review of a Barcol conversion chart shows that a
reading of 73 Brinell units would compare with some other
manufacturer’s values as shown:
Approximate Conversion Chart for GYZJ 934-1

Barcol Brinnell Vickers Rockwell
934-1
B E F H
60 45 49 55 51 83
61 47 51 57 54 84
62 48 53 59 56 86
63 50 55 62 58 88
64 52 57 64 61 89
64 54 58 65 63 90
66 55 60 67 65 91
67 58 62 69 67 92
68 60 64 71 69 94
69 62 67 73 71 95
70 64 69 18 74 73 96
71 67 72 19 76 75 98
72 69 74 28 77 77 99
73 71 76 33 79 79 100
74 73 81 39 81 81 101
75 76 85 45 83 83 102
76 80 88 48 84 84 103
77 84 92 52 86 86 104
78 87 95 56 88 87 105
89 90 99 60 89 88 106
80 94 103 63 90 89 107
81 97 108 65 91 90 108
82 100 111 69 92 91 108
83 105 116 72 94 92 109
84 109 122 75 95 93 109
85 113 127 77 96 94 110
Boroscopes
Boroscopes are optical instruments used to observe the
interior of enclosed spaces. They may be rigid or flexible,
and are generally used for inaccessible interiors such as:
o boiler tubes
o small diameter piping

o hazardous environments
The rigid boroscope can be useful for inspecting long lengths

of coated pipe, either new or pipe that has been involved in
failure investigation. Extension rods may be added to enable
the inspector to survey longer lengths of piping.
The flexible, or fiber optic boroscope operates on the
principle of light being transmitted through optical glass
fibers.
Various attachments are available–to change direction of

rays, vary the light source, or attach 35 mm or video cameras
to make permanent records of any observation.
Other Laboratory Tests

Many laboratory tests for establishing performance criteria of
coatings are described in reference books, including:
ASTM Standards, Volume 6.01 and 6.02.
British Standards BS-3900 (Tests for Paint) Tests for

Formulated Products and Applied Coatings
Paint Testing Manual, by Gardner and Sward
ASTM STP 500: Paint Testing Manual

These references detail many additional field and laboratory
coating test procedures for:
o Permeability
o Hardness
o Penetration
o Melting point
o Adhesion
o Abrasion resistance
o Color retention

o Gloss retention
o Bend
o Salt spray
and other coating characteristics.
Coating Inspectors’ Duties

On different projects, coating inspectors may be required to
perform widely different functions. The exact duties
allocated for a specific project are generally determined by
the owner, and should be written into the specification
document.
The task of inspection is related only to quality control

issues. At its simplest, inspectors – through observation and
measurement – determine whether work complies with the
specified requirements or not, as the case may be. This task
can be performed by trained inspectors, provided the
specification clearly defines work tasks.
Inspectors’ jobs are complicated by several factors,

including:
o Specification often fails to define the inspection task

in detail
o Many specifications are not clearly written
o Inspectors are often asked to perform many ancillary

tasks that are not directly related to quality control.
The first two of these points can be resolved by improved

specification writing. The last point cannot be so easily
resolved. In addition to quality control, inspectors may be
asked to:
o Monitor the manpower and equipment used on the

project, including numbers, hours and quantity
o Resolve specification conflicts

o Determine performance of individual workers, or

provide training services
o Make recommendations for coating materials to

augment the specification or replace a non-performing
material
None of these activities is impossible, but they may or may

not be within the capabilities of individual inspectors.
Without specific individual training, the necessary skills may
have been learned through experience, or may not. Both
employers and inspectors should recognize which duties and
responsibilities are reasonably within the capabilities of all
inspectors, and which require additional skills.
Owners (or other employers) should analyze the duties they

wish inspectors to perform, and recognize the specific
qualities or experience required. By review of experience
shown on inspectors’ resumes, owners can determine if the
individual is suited to the job activities that are required.
Inspectors should analyze the duties that they are being asked
to perform. There are many similarities between coating
inspection performed on various structures, and the
techniques of measurement are essentially similar. If owners
require specific industry knowledge and experience,
inspectors are duty bound to examine their work experience
and determine whether they are sufficiently qualified to
perform the work.
There are good reasons why inspectors should not undertake

work for which they are not adequately qualified. This is
particularly true in the more litigation-oriented cultures such
as is found in the USA. More importantly, inspectors are
employed for the benefit of their specific expertise. Both
employer and employee should be comfortable with the work
process and the results achieved.
Inspectors tend to accept a wider role than that of a quality

control technician in a spirit of support and helpful co-
operation with the specific project. They should recognize
the potential liability of making technical decisions for which
they may not be qualified, and generally for which they are

not paid. The ability to make such decisions requires fine

judgment and integrity.
To perform their work, Inspectors require personal abilities

that are more related to character than to technical skills.
Some of these abilities include:
o Objectivity: Inspectors are required to make

subjective judgments based on facts and
measurements made. It is important to maintain an
independent view, even when it means being slightly
distant from work colleagues.
o Mental strength: Inspectors are often subjected to

significant stress, often due to their relative isolation
on site. On fixed price contracts (‘hard-dollar jobs’)
in particular there is a constant pressure to achieve
production. Delays caused by quality control are a
common cause of friction. The inspectors’ ability to
keep a balanced viewpoint is essential.
o Technical Accuracy: Many of the measurements that

are made by inspectors are subject to some
interpretation. The measurement of Wet Film
Thickness, to take just one example, is much more
related to establishing a guide that leads to the
required DFT than it is to making a scientific and
factual record that can be accurately repeated at a later
stage. Inspectors must make the measurements as
accurately as possible, within the limits of the
measuring technique.
o Diplomacy: Inspectors often have a difficult message

to deliver to the applicators and their supervisors.
They must be able to deliver such messages while
maintaining reasonable communications with the
work-force. Diplomacy and tact are valuable skills in
many work situations.
Conflict of Interest
Coating inspectors are often employed by contractors or by
coatings manufacturers. Many owners write the requirement
into the specification in this way, effectively hoping to gain
true inspection while avoiding the need to write another

contract with a third party – the coating inspector’s company.

Coating inspection is often offered by coating manufacturers
as a service that is part of a turn-key package.
Objectivity is difficult for those inspectors! Inspectors must

aim for compliance with the specification (as indeed should
every other person involved in the contract), but delays
induced by ‘extra’ work that achieves compliance inevitably
appear to reduce the contractor’s profits.
Inspectors working for the coating manufacturer must always

remember that the coatings are supplied by their employer.
In addition, there are commercial considerations, since the
price of the paint must reflect the extra service that is
provided.
In the ideal situation, coating inspectors are directly

employed by the owner (i.e. the person or company that
owns the structure under construction or being maintained)
or are hired by them as a third-party, independent inspectors.
If this is not possible, inspectors must recognize the potential
for conflict of interest, and try to avoid such conflict by
emphasizing the objectivity of the quality control process.
Coating Inspector’s Attestation

Many aspects of the coating inspectors’ jobs require strong
interpersonal skills, and the ability to maintain integrity,
sometimes under intense pressure. Coating Inspectors
participating in NACE International’s Coating Inspector
Program are required to sign an attestation that states:
I, the undersigned, recognize and acknowledge that:
1. Proper coating inspection can be critical to the safety

and welfare of the general public and industrial
facilities.
2. Coating inspection is obligatory to maximize
conservation of our material resources and to reduce
economic losses.
3. The entire field of coatings encompasses many diverse
skills and disciplines and level of technical competence
which must often be taken into consideration.

4. Through continual association and cooperation with

others in the coatings field, the safest and most
economical solutions may be found to many types of
coating problems.
5. The quality of work and personal conduct of each
coating inspector reflect on the entire profession of
coating inspection.
Therefore, I hereby agree to:

1. Give first consideration in my coating inspection work
to safety and public welfare.
2. Apply myself with diligence and responsibility to my
coating inspection work.
3. Pursue my work with fairness, honesty, integrity, and
courtesy, ever mindful of the best interests of the
public, my employer and my fellow workers.
4. Not represent myself to be proficient or make
recommendations concerning coatings related work for
which I am not qualified by knowledge and experience.
5. Avoid and discourage untrue, sensational, exaggerated,
or unwarranted statements regarding my work.
6. Treat as confidential my knowledge of the business
affairs or technical processes of clients, employers, or
customers.
7. Inform clients or employers of any affiliations,
interests, or connections which might influence my
judgment.
8. Accept no money gratuities of any kind nor other
gratuities whose value could cause a questions as to
whether they may have influenced my inspection
activities, decisions, or reports.
9. Be fair, reasonable, and objective in my work, not
allowing myself to be influenced by personalities or
other individual considerations.
10. Completely, accurately, and honestly fulfill the
reporting requirements of the specifications for any
coating operation I may be responsible for inspecting.

11. Take it upon myself to determine from my superiors

the scope of my authority and work within it.
12. Ensure, to the best of my ability, that the terms,
language, and requirements of the coating specification
are clearly understood and agreed to by all parties
involved.
13. Strive to obtain the best possible results under given
conditions with a given coating specification.
Participants in the NACE Coating Inspector Program are

required to observe the principles of the attestation, and to
maintain a code of conduct that upholds these principles.
Instrument Calibration
Calibration might be described as validation of accuracy for
a particular instrument. Measurements made with an
instrument (or instruments) that are not calibrated are not
reliable, and are likely to be misleading.
Calibration may be ‘formal’ or ‘informal’.
Formal calibration is performed by a third party person or

company, and provides independent confirmation that the
instrument is accurate, or at least capable of making accurate
measurements. Instruments may be calibrated at the work
premises, particularly when the instrument is large or
sensitive to movement, or may be sent to a laboratory.
Formal calibration often relates to national standards of
accuracy (NIST traceable standards in the USA), and is
generally confirmed by issue of a calibration certificate.
Calibration certificates are time-limited, the time depending

on the specific instrument, and formal calibration is repeated
when the certificate expires. A time dated ‘sticker’ is often
affixed to the instrument to confirm that it has been
calibrated. Formal calibration is often defined by a Quality
Assurance system (see below).
Informal calibration may be performed at any time, and is

not necessarily documented. Many of the instruments that
are used for coating inspection require frequent checks of
accuracy. DFT gauges, for example, should be checked at

least once each day. Some standards for measurement of

DFT require more frequent calibration (e.g. twice per
working shift).
The method of calibration depends upon the instrument.

Measurements made with the test instrument can be
compared to a known, accurate, alternative. Thermometers
used in a sling psychrometer, for example, are generally
accurate to within about ± 1°F (±0.5°C), but can be checked
by comparison with a more accurate, laboratory thermometer
of the same kind, but accurate to ± 0.2°F (± 0.1°C).
Contact thermometers may be more difficult to test,

particularly those that operate at high temperatures (above
boiling point). These require a source of radiant heat that
can be accurately measured, for comparison purposes
Some instruments require calibration using a test rig that is

set up specifically for calibration. Adhesion testers, for
example, are generally tested by pulling against a hydraulic
tensometer that – itself - has been calibrated to a higher
standard.
Calibration may only be valid at a single point on the

measurement scale. Many simple instruments cannot easily
be adjusted across their entire scale, and in this case they
should be calibrated to the most appropriate point. For
example, magnetic pull-off dial gauges should be calibrated
using a thickness shim that is close to the specified film
thickness they will be used to measure. Other instruments
may be adjustable across the whole scale, and should be
calibrated by an appropriate method to ensure that the scale
accurately represents the measured numbers.
It may be appropriate to draw a chart or compile a table of

results that shows the variation in instrument measurements
from the true values. Adhesion testers are often calibrated in
this way, and a correction factor can be applied to any
measurement by reference to the calibration chart. An
example is shown in the table below.
Calibration Chart for Elcometer adhesion tester model

106/III, serial number 0592

True Value Measured Value Correction Factor

(psi) (psi) (psi)
200 160 Add 40
400 350 Add 50
600 550 Add 50
800 775 Add 25
1000 980 Add 20
Notes:
True Value achieved using tensometer model Elbach 203,
serial number T12, calibrated 12/12/02
Inspectors should verify the accuracy of the instruments they

use whenever possible. The type of calibration that is
achievable on site should be performed at reasonable
intervals. Where several instruments are used for the same
purpose (e.g. two or three DFT gauges), they should be
calibrated together and in the same way, to ensure that their
results are comparable.
Instruments that are used by other inspectors, or by the

operators, should also be checked. Inspectors may verify
that formal calibration has been performed (by reference to
the calibration stickers) or observe the informal calibration
process.
Test frequency
The frequency at which inspection measurements are made is
often not defined in specifications. Inspectors are required to
make measurements of such properties as anchor profile
(surface profile), Wet Film Thickness (WFT), Dry Film
Thickness (DFT) or adhesion, but the number of
measurements is not stated.
Guidance may be found in applicable standards. NACE

RP0188 (Holiday Testing) for example, states that the
holiday detector must be moved across the surface at a speed
of one foot per second (0.3 m/sec), two times in the case of
the low-voltage, wet sponge detector, and one time only in
the case of the high-voltage detector.
ASTM standard D 1186 recommends a minimum of 5 DFT

determinations in each 10 sq. m (100 sq.ft.) of surface area,

each determination being the an average of 3 separate

measurements.
When the test frequency cannot be determined from either

the specification or the reference standards, inspectors should
research a typical value that is appropriate to the project, and
agreement should be made, preferably at the pre-job
conference, and confirmed in writing.
The location of specific measurements is also a topic for

potential resolution. Many specifications and/or standards
refer to ‘random’ locations, but the inspectors’ decisions
when selecting measurement spots may be challenged.
Agreement in writing is again preferred.
Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance is a management system, based on ISO
9000 (or the comparable national standard) that defines a
total quality program. Formal, written procedures attempt to
define all of the actions that companies take to ensure their
products comply with a consistent standard of quality.
Originally conceived for the production industry, ISO 9000

management systems have become an industry norm
throughout the world. There are many different national
standards that are almost identical in wording to ISO 9000.
Most users refer to the ISO standard.
ISO 9000 is applied as a series of standards, intended for

different degrees of complexity within industry. The quality
manual may incorporate up to 19 mandatory sections.
Different levels of qualification are recognized, depending
on the number of sections for which procedures are defined.
These depend on the size and/or complexity of the company.
Recognition according to the standard may include:
ISO 9001: Quality Manual incorporates procedures covering

all sections, including Design, Manufacture, Production,
Testing and Support Services


sections that include Manufacture, Production, Testing and
Support Services.

sections that include Testing and Support Services
Companies seek external verification of their QA system

from national accreditation bodies such as the NACCB
(National Accreditation of Certification Bodies – UK). The
accreditation body in each country recognizes assessors such
as DNV (Det Norske Veritas), ABS (American Bureau of
Shipping), Lloyds Register of Quality Assurance and other,
perhaps lesser known, companies.
Assessors make visits to companies at regular intervals to

assess the quality system in operation. They review the
quality manual and the system in operation, to ensure that it
complies with the written procedures. It has been said that
the ISO 9000 QA system can be summarized in the phrase
“Say what you do, then do what you say”
Assessor approval is required to keep the system current.
Efficiency of the Quality Assurance system is intended to

include less hands-on inspection as a result of better
documentation of the system, and more predictable output.
Clearly, this is more controllable in a factory setting than
when coatings work is performed at site.
Traditional forms of inspection (measuring, verifying,

observing, etc) are only one part of a Quality Assurance
System. Inspection results are documented within the
system, particularly when non-compliance occurs. Records
of non-compliance (known as non-conformance reports) are
submitted to management for review. In this way, the
information can be used to make adjustments to the system
and – hopefully – eliminate those wrong actions or mistakes
that lead to non-compliant output.
Inspectors must follow the QA system procedures for:

o Type of instruments to use
o Calibration process
o Measurement technique
o Measurement frequency
o Reporting system
Where adequate procedures do not exist, they must be

created to ensure that all activities leading toward production
(e.g. completed protective coating system) are documented
and repeatable.
One of the guiding principles of Quality Assurance systems

is that the quality assurance group should operate
independently, reporting directly to senior management.
Inspectors are generally employed by the company that is
producing goods, or providing maintenance services, but
they are – in theory – not influenced by production issues,
and able to provide an objective viewpoint.

Appendix A: Calibration of DFT Gauges

For accurate results, all DFT gauges must be calibrated at
frequent intervals. Depending on the number of
measurements made, at least two calibration checks per day
should be made, ideally at the beginning of the work shift
and again at the end of the shift. Intermediate checks may
also be useful, and should be made when many
measurements are made, or when the measurements appear
to be inconsistent.
The precise details of calibration should match whatever

standard method is specified or agreed on.
Type 1 Magnetic Pull-Off Gauges

As described in the basic modules of this program, the Type
1, magnetic pull-off gauge uses a spring to lift a small
permanent magnet from the surface of the paint. The gauge
translates into coating thickness the force required to lift the
magnet off the surface. The force holding the magnet to the
surface varies with the distance between the magnet and the
steel surface, that is, the thickness of the paint.
The Type 1 gauge may be calibrated according to the
calibration procedure described in SSPC-PA-2, June 1996.
2.2 Calibration Measurements - Type 1 Pull-Off Gages:

2.2.1 For Type 1 gages, the preferred calibration standards
are small, chrome plated steel panels that are available from
the National Bureau of Standards in coating thicknesses from
0.5 to 80 mils (12.5 to 2030 microns) or more. The plated
panels are flat smooth steel 1.125 by 1.125 inches (2.85 by
2.85 cm) in size. They exceed the critical mass of steel
needed to satisfy the magnetic field of the Type 1 (pull-off)
magnets. Shims of plastic or of non-magnetic metals which
are acceptable for calibration of Type 2 (fixed probe) gages
should not be used for calibration of the Type 1 gages.
2.2.2 Using the Type 1 (pull-off) gage, measure the thickness
of a series of calibration standards covering the expected
range of paint thickness. Record the calibration correction
either + or - required at each standard thickness. To guard
against gage drift during use, recheck the gage at least once
during each work shift with one or more of the standards. In

case of dispute the buyer and seller should agree on the

details and frequency of calibrations.
2.2.3 When the gage adjustment has drifted so far that large
corrections are needed, it is advisable to readjust closer to the
standard values and recalibrate. When the gage can no
longer be adjusted into reasonable agreement with the
reference standards, have it rebuilt or replaced.
2.2.4 Measure (A), the bare substrate, at a number of spots to
obtain a representative average value. Note the gage is not to
be calibrated on the bare substrate.
2.2.5 Measure (B), the dry paint film, at the number of spots
specified in Section 3.
2.2.6 Subtract the readings (A) and (B) to obtain the
thickness of the paint film.
When an uncalibrated gage is used, it is necessary to correct
the A and B readings using the corrections as determined
from Section 2.2.2.”
Electro-magnetic gauges (Type 2)

The fixed probe of the Type 2 gauge must remain in contact
with the paint film during measurement. When
measurements stabilize, which is generally very quickly, they
can be read from the digital indicator.
Calibration
According to SSPC-PA-2, plastic or nonmagnetic shims of

known thickness may be used as calibration standards. The
shim thickness should be close to the thickness of the coating
or coating system to be measured. The shims are placed on
the cleaned ferrous surface.
Where possible, calibration should be performed on the same

surface that is to be coated. If this is not possible, then a
similar surface should be found.
The gauge should be held firmly against the shim. Excessive

pressure should be avoided: it might indent plastic, or on a
blasted substrate, would impress the peaks into the plastic
shims.

The instrument is then adjusted, or calibrated, until the

measurement result matches the shim thickness.
Calibration of both electromagnetic and eddy current gauges

follows similar methods:
If allowed by the client, or formally agreed and confirmed in

writing, NIST calibration standards may be used. It should
be noted that a suitable adjustment for the blast-cleaned
profile – as with the BMR applied to the Type 1 gauges –
should be made.
The plastic shims should be placed over a substrate of

sufficient mass for the instrument to be used. Up to 1/8 in. or
3 mm substrate bulk may have a significant influence in the
calibration scheme.
Instruments with multiple scales should be set to the

appropriate measuring scale.
Most gauges use a calibration technique by which

measurements are made at both “zero” and “high”, chosen
DFT, ends of the scale, on a bare substrate and nonferrous,
electromagnetic, or nonconductive, eddy current, shim,
respectively.
Once the calibration has been made, measurements should be

reasonably accurate across the scale, that is, at intermediate
points between the calibration values used.
To achieve accurate calibration, test measurements may have

to be repeated until measurements stabilize. Older
instruments in particular may require a sequence of “zero to
high to zero to high. . .” adjustments until consistent results
are achieved.
There is a wide variety of electronic gauges available, and

the manufacturers’ instructions should always be followed to
ensure accurate measurements can be made.

Coatings Inspection 2

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Coatings Inspection 2

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Coating Inspection 2 Page 1

Quality Control (or inspection) may be performed by any

In an earlier module of this program, a number of basic

We will focus particularly on instruments used for

© NACE International, 2003

© NACE International, 2003

Measuring Adhesion by Peel Strength .......................... 57

© NACE International, 2003

Non-destructive Test Instruments

• Those instruments that are more sophisticated or more

• And non-destructive test instruments that are generally

The inspection tests and instruments to be discussed include:

For Atmospheric monitoring and safety

o The Solvent vapor meter

o And the Drager meter

For Surface testing

o Visual standards for evaluation of coating condition

o The Moisture indicator

o And Water-soluble chemical salt tests

For Coating integrity: nondestructive instruments

o Comprising the Type 1 magnetic pull-off gauge

o The Type 2 electromagnetic DFT gauge

o And the Eddy current DFT gauge

© NACE International, 2003

o Observation or inspection of the surfaces to be coated

o Pre-cleaning, which includes inspection of design or

o Evaluation of the cleaned surfaces prior to application

The emphasis placed on surface preparation has been

o Visual standards for evaluation of coating condition

o And Water-soluble chemical salts

Most organic coatings provide their best performance when

© NACE International, 2003

complete their reaction, and/or be neutralized by fresh water

pH tests may be performed on the prepared surface, or on

The pH meter is calibrated, using a standard buffer solution

Larger and more sophisticated pH meters may be used in a

Pocket magnifiers, which fold up and can be easily carried

© NACE International, 2003

(The magnifier on a Tooke gauge can be used, although its’

When viewing a surface at relatively high magnification,

It should be remembered that visual standards for surface

The high quality instruments have accurate scales and

Visual Standards for Evaluation of

© NACE International, 2003

standard is that the defects can be related to a standard

Visual, or pictorial, standards are available to evaluate:

o The checking of Exterior coatings (ASTM D 660)

o Cracked Coatings (ASTM D 661)

o Erosion of Coatings (ASTM D 662)

o Blisters (ASTM D 714)

o Flaking, or scaling of Coatings (ASTM D 772)

o And rusting of painted surfaces (ASTM D 610)

Many of these visual standards are available with different

o An Irregular pattern type

o A Line & short parallel type

o A Crow foot type

o And a Shrinkage type

Each type is illustrated in line drawings, with 4 degrees of

© NACE International, 2003

o Irregular pattern type

Photographs of 4 degrees of cracking (labeled 2, 4, 6 & 8)

Photographs of 4 degrees of erosion (labeled 2, 4, 6 & 8) are

© NACE International, 2003

The test method uses a set of glossy black-and-white print