Metalizing

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 328 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 03:22 pm:    I need to develop a specification for metalizing steel. I've talked to someone at the National Metalizing Association who has never heard of CSI (and may indeed be the only person at the association). He spoke knowledgeably about metalizing and gave me 2 references to obtain (SSPC CS23 and AWS C2.14-74), but I need someplace to start. Has anyone done a metalizing specification? Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 194 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 03:25 pm:    By 'metalizing' do you mean 'metallic deposition'? Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 195 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 03:35 pm:    Lynn, I'm curious why you want to 'metalize' steel. The alternatives are almost certainly more adaptable to project needs. I'm in a learning mode here - it seems the only reason metalizing would be viable (cost efficient) is if the element requiring protection simply could not fit in a galvanizing tank (like an entire bridge). Is this correct? Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 329 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 03:44 pm:    Doug, I don't know if "metallic deposition" is the correct term or not. I've only encountered "metalizing". And yes, the members are too big to fit into a galvanizing tank - at least some of them are. I understand that some of the structural members are "massive" (the project manager's description). The structural engineer is also against galvanizing because it will warp the steel. The other reason the designer/Owner wants to do this is aesthetic. Galvanizing would not be even and consistent, as I'm sure you know. The application is the exterior expressed structure for the Harley-Davidson museum here in Milwaukee. The Schematic Design called for chrome plating the steel, and at the Design Development stage, there are 3 options/alternatives: galvanizing (in spite of the appearance), metalizing, and a 3-stage fluoropolymer coating. Don Harris CSI, CCS, CCCA, AIA Senior Member Username: don_harris Post Number: 61 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 03:47 pm:    Maybe a high quality zinc rich primer, epoxy intercoat and aliphatic urethane top coat? Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 330 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 03:58 pm:    That's sort of option 3, but one of the problems is the re-coat time between the epoxy and the top coat. Metalizing is the first choice right now. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 196 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:06 pm:    Ah, scheme-atic design! Chrome! I so love the designers. Because this is a decorative feature, and not a bridge over the Cuyahoga, I'd opt for a whole different animal. 1) Polished metal. 2) Don's suggestion. 3) Automotive quality materials a la Chip Foose (PPG, House of Color) For Harley though, it's got to be polished structural aluminum. That would look so HOT! (You'll need to protect the finish. Clear anodizing would preserve the look, however, you may be back to the 'too big' issue.) You may want to reconsider the structural aspect because those are two different worlds trying to live together - hence expensive. I'd not consider 'metalizing' a viable means because it was not intended for surfaces that would be subject to aesthetic scrutiny. It's an industrial process to combat corrosion ONLY. (A client of mine is a metal engineer at Boeing. He runs a metallic coating lab. They coat all sorts of funky metal fabrications with exotic alloys using interesting equipment.) George A. Everding, AIA, CSI, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: geverding Post Number: 142 Registered: 11-2004 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:14 pm:    Chrome plated structural steel... sounds like someone has spent too much time watching "American Chopper". In fact, maybe you should have those guys tackle the project. They'd get it done on time without ever mentioning the budget, and you'd have all those wonderful heart-warming family bonding moments to make everyone feel good about the project when it is all done. Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 331 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:14 pm:    What the guy from the NMA recommended was 6 mil aluminum (plus or minus 2 mil) top coated with .5 to 1.5 mil clear sealer. He also recommended an experienced contractor with references. For prep, he recommended blast to SP5 with 2.5 to 4 mil profile. What we're coating is structural steel members, so they're not too funky, and the aluminum probably isn't exotic. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 48 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:23 pm:    6 mil aluminum isn't thick enough to cover any blemishes. Is the steel fabricated to architecturally exposed quality? welds ground, no spatter, etc.? Is this a field or shop process? Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 332 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:26 pm:    Good question. I'll have to ask. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 197 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:27 pm:    Lynn, I can see where the NMA guy is headed. I think though you should consider nixing the high-tech process and 'go dumb' - by using structural aluminum, and avoiding the aluminum over steel situation. Why - prep is very costly. I can highly recommend structural aluminum in such an application. I was PM on a project in LA and we settled on structural aluminum members supporting a 53' high by 36' wall of polycarbonate panels (interior). It was an extraordinary amount of aluminum. But, it's fantabulous! I was SHOCKED at the amount of aluminum - but, it was faster and cheaper than the high-tech process. The NMA may not be considering project schedule impacts - setting up manufacturing runs takes time. Interesting discussion - thank you. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 198 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:30 pm:    I think I can answer Susan's question - the NMA suggestion is highly dependent on remarkably well-conditioned material to start with. That's why I think the NMA's suggestion is not sympathetic with respect to project-type needs. It may be feasible in the manufacturing world, but not in the project world. My theory is that sometimes our industry 'advisors' don't realize all of our projects are 'one-offs'. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 500 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 04:43 pm:    I agree that the surface texture of structural steel would not be compatible with the chrome-plated aesthetic. How about polished stainless steel cladding? Or, a metallic paint finish? Structural aluminum sounds good too, but its color is not like chrome plating. (Think Harley...) I'd be sure to get samples during design before deciding. Sheldon Wolfe Senior Member Username: sheldon_wolfe Post Number: 199 Registered: 01-2003 Posted on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 - 05:17 pm:    Lynn: You may have done this already, but if you're going to put a high-quality coating on structural steel, you should first specify structural steel with a high-quality finish. Fortunately, there is a great guide specification; see AISC's Architecturally Exposed Structural Steel. This document explains all the options, has several standard levels to choose from (makes life easier), and includes a matrix that shows the relative cost range for each option. Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 334 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 03:09 pm:    Thanks for all your help and suggestions. I'm in contact with someone who's knowledgeable AND knows what a specification is! Structural aluminum won't work - the members are too big. We will have a high-quality finish for the structural steel. I am definitely demanding samples! It'll be 8-10 mils aluminum plus a sealer. Shop process. Ronald L. Geren, RA, CSI, CCS, CCCA, MAI Senior Member Username: specman Post Number: 230 Registered: 03-2003 Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 03:18 pm:    Lynn: I'd be very interested in what you find out, or if your willing to share your specification. Although I don't have a project requiring such work at the moment, and since my firm does a lot of exposed steel, it might be something worth investigating for future projects; especially if the cost is somewhat reasonable. Thanks. Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 335 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, April 13, 2006 - 03:44 pm:    I'll do my best to share what I have. Most information came from SSPC 23.00, which is the same document as NACE #12 or AWS C2.23M/C2.23:2003. The 3 organizations collaborated to write the latest version of SSPC 23.00 Coating System Guide for Thermal Spray Metallic Coating Systems. Unfortunately, I used the older version, so my section still needs a lot of editing. The old (1991) version is 4 pages; the new one is 35. Best information came from a person; I'll ask him if he's willing to have his name posted.