Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14773/cst.2018.17.6.257

The Corrosion Behavior of Anti-Graffiti Polyurethane Powder Coatings  

Rossi, S. (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento)
Fedel, M. (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento)
Deflorian, F. (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento)
Feriotti, A. (Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Trento)
Publication Information
Corrosion Science and Technology / v.17, no.6, 2018 , pp. 257-264 More about this Journal
Abstract
Anti-graffiti coatings have become more important. These layers must guarantee excellent corrosion protection properties, and graffiti must be easily removable, without reducing protection and aesthetic properties. In this study, anti-graffiti and corrosion behavior of two anti-graffiti polyurethane powder coatings were studied. These layers were deposited on aluminum substrate, with two different surface finishes, smooth, and wrinkled. The action of four different removers are investigated. Graffiti were drawn on coatings by means of red acrylic spray paint. Methyl-ethyl-ketone (MEK) and a "commercial" remover were the most effective solvents, in terms of graffiti removal capability, producing limited change in aesthetical surface aspect for smooth finishing. The wrinkled surface was less resistant. Corrosion protection properties, after removal action and contact with the remover, were evaluate by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. After approximately 5 hours, coatings were no longer protective due to formation of defects. To simulate the weathering effect, UV-B cyclic test (4 hours of UV exposure followed by 4 hours of saturated humidity at $50^{\circ}C$) were performed for 2000 hours. Gloss and color changes were measured, and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy measurements were performed after aging and graffiti removal.
Keywords
Organic coatings; Anti-graffiti layer; Powder coatings; Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 D. K. Chattopadhyay and K. V. S. N. Raju, Prog. Polym. Sci., 32, 352 (2007).   DOI
2 Y. Zhang, J. Maxted, A. Barber, C. Lowe C, and R. Smith, Polym. Degrad. Stabil., 98, 527 (2013).   DOI
3 F. Schmitt, A. Wenning, and J. V. Weiss, Prog. Org. Coat., 34, 227 (1998).   DOI
4 G. Avar, U. Meier-Westhues, H. Casselmann, and D. Achten, Polym. Sci., 10, 441 (2012).
5 K. McLaren, J. Soc. Dyers Colour, 92, 338 (1976).
6 G. Wyszecki and W. S. Stiles, Colour science; concepts and methods, quantitative data and formulae, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York (2000).
7 S. Amand, M. Musiani, M. E. Orazem, N. Pebere, B. Tribollet, and V. Vivier, Electrochim. Acta, 87, 693 (2013).   DOI
8 D. Perlman and R. H. Black, Anti-graffiti coatings and method of graffiti removal, US Patent 5,773,091 (1998).
9 M. Lettieri and M. Masieri, Appl. Surf. Sci., 288, 466 (2014).   DOI
10 T. Bengtsson, Proc. European Coatings Conference Antigraffiti Coatings, p. 169, Berlin, Germany (1999).
11 R. H. Black, Anti-graffiti coating material and method of using same, US Patent 5,387,434 (1995).
12 M. Licchelli, S. J. Marzolla, A. Poggi, and C. Zanchi, J. Cult.Herit., 12, 34 (2011).   DOI
13 G. N. Manvi, A. R. Singh, R. N. Jagtap, and D. C. Kothar, Prog. Org. Coat., 75, 139 (2012).   DOI
14 A. R. Mohammad, M. Mohseni, S. M. Mirabedini, and M. T. Hashemi, Appl. Surf. Sci., 258, 4391 (2012).   DOI