Red Oxide Primer

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

Author Message Brett M. Wilbur CSI, CDT, AIA Senior Member Username: brett Post Number: 96 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 11:29 am:    Recently, we had a contractor come back to us with a substitution request for shop-applied red-oxide primer on structural steel, stating that it was banned for use. I immediately new something was not right, I know zinc chromate is a carcinogen and is not allowed in some instances, but had not heard this about red oxide. Needless to say there was some confusion on the contractors part. We straightened it out, but in my research I found that we were specifying an SSPC - Paint 13 primer. When I looked that up, there is no such thing, I guess anymore. Closest I could find was an SSPC - Paint 11, “Red Iron Oxide, Zinc Chromate, Raw Linseed Oil, and Alkyd Primer”. Since that didn’t seem like much help, I went to SpecText. They had Paint 15, Type 1, red oxide listed. It is an old copy of SpecText, but Paint 15 is for “Steel Joist Shop Primer”. Then I found in MasterSpec that they deleted Paint 15, Type 1, red oxide from their primer spec. Now I really am cornfused. Anyone tell me what the correct SSPC designation for shop applied red oxide primer on structural steel? And why is there so much contradictory information in the industry? Who can you trust? It also shows how diligent one must be to keep up with the changes. Lynn Javoroski Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 291 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 11:36 am:    Horse's Mouth: http://www.sspc.org/ Brett M. Wilbur CSI, CDT, AIA Senior Member Username: brett Post Number: 97 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 12:05 pm:    Dead horse, at that. I tried that. I can only find the list, can't access the explanation. Seems these guys aren't willing to share without payment. I guess I will if I must. I'd go broke if I had to join every society and association available just to do my job. Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 300 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 12:18 pm:    Here is my paint resource guy-- great, reliable, straight-forward information and timely. A corrosion engineer located in Indianpolis,IN tippoliti@sherwin.com Lynn Javoroski Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 292 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 12:31 pm:    They shoot horses, don't they? If that's a dead-end (pun intended), I'd contact my coating resource guy; he's with Tenemec (cerickson@tnemec.com and you can mention my name) or you can contact your own Tenemec rep. And I like Ralph's idea, too. These guys deal with preparation of surface all the time and should have the information - and be willing to share. Did you try just asking SSPC a question? You'd think *they'd* be willing to share such important information! Brett M. Wilbur CSI, CDT, AIA Senior Member Username: brett Post Number: 98 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 12:37 pm:    Thanks, Ralph. And Lynn, yes, pun intended. I was hoping you didn't take that wrong. Still, anybody care to comment why two of the guide specs don't seem to agree? Anne Whitacre, CCS CSI Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 287 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 12:53 pm:    Brett: here is the current text from Masterspec, section 05120, revised May of 2004: "A. Primer: SSPC-Paint 25, Type [I] [II], iron oxide, zinc oxide, raw linseed oil, and alkyd." you don't mention the date for the SpecText section. if you go to www.sspc.org site, and their listing of standards, you get: "SSPC-Paint 25, Zinc Oxide, Alkyd, Linseed Oil Primer for Use Over Hand Cleaned Steel, Type I and Type II May 1, 1997 Editorial Revisions November 1, 2004 This specification covers a slow drying French process zinc oxide, raw linseed oil and alkyd primer suitable for use over hand-cleaned steel. This primer is suitable for exposures in Environmental Zones 1A (interior, normally dry) and 1B (exterior, normally dry), and is intended for brush, roller or spray application over steel surfaces prepared in accordance with SSPC-SP 2, Hand Tool Cleaning, or better.Within the limitation stated, it is suitable as a shop primer, field primer, maintenance primer, or intermediate coat, and is to be applied in accordance with SSPC-PA 1, Shop, Field, and Maintenance Painting of Steel. If the primed part of the structure is to be exposed to the weather, it should be topcoated as soon as practical." Brett M. Wilbur CSI, CDT, AIA Senior Member Username: brett Post Number: 99 Registered: 12-2004 Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 01:09 pm:    SpecText, Winter 2004 Actually, I did find access to SSPC at: http://www.sspc.org/standards/scopes.html Now I'm trying to find out what the differnce is between red (iron) oxide and zinc oxide. Lynn Javoroski Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 294 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 10:07 am:    Info from my Tnemec rep (he tried to post here, but something happened): "SSPC – Paint 13 was discontinued in 1995. Paint 11 calls for a zinc chromate as a rust inhibitive pigment and you do not want to use that or Paint 15 which is for joists. Use SSPC – Paint 25. (Tnemec) Series 10-99 or 88HS will be performance equals. And (Tenemec) Series 10-99 is outstanding among primers. Really." Vivian Volz, RA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 61 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Tuesday, March 07, 2006 - 07:40 pm:    SSPC Paint 25 Type I or II? MasterSpec's hidden text tells me that the Type II has lower VOC. So should I plan on using that on my environmentally sensitive project in California? Anybody know how low is "lower VOC?" Following Lynn's lead, I have the VOCs for the Tnemec products, but not the limit, if any, imposed by SSPC's standard. Anne Whitacre, CCS CSI Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 309 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 12:10 pm:    Vivian: if you require everything shop primed, then it does't matter what the VOCS are. just do it that way and save the headache. Anne David Axt, AIA, CCS, CSI Senior Member Username: david_axt Post Number: 633 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 01:23 pm:    Anne, I am not sure I understand about shop priming and VOCs. Can you please explain further? Thanks. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 486 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 01:43 pm:    The limitations on VOC content of paints are for field-applied coatings. Emissions of VOCs for shop-applied coatings are under the control of the facility where the coating is applied, which may even be in a different jurisdiction than the project. Also, emissions from "factory" or shop facilities is regulated differently (I think), and since the facility is a controlled environment there are more options in how to comply. Vivian Volz, RA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 62 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 02:00 pm:    Anne, I take your point. It's a shop coatings spec I'm writing right now, actually, so the VOC question was more about curiosity than actual need. Just wondering if the 350ish g/L that the Tnemec products contain is typical. David, Anne's referring to the fact that the most restrictive VOC regulations are for field-applied coatings, not shop coatings. (What John just said.) http://www.paintcenter.org/newcalc.cfm has a wealth of information on VOC compliance, probably more than you wanted to know, but also a reasonable introduction to the whys and wherefores of VOC regulations. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 45 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 02:47 pm:    Are you sure that field-applied coatings are held to higher standards than shop- or factory-applied? The California regulations I've read do not distinguish. Try www.baaqmd.gov (for Bay Area) and www.aqmd.gov (for South Coast). On the other hand, these are regulations that the shop-applicator must know about, because he is fined if he doesn't comply, so it may not matter what you specify - although it would be good not to explicitly flout the law or open yourself to a change order that could have been avoided. Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 176 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Wednesday, March 08, 2006 - 02:59 pm:    Susan - both field and shop applied coating products and operations are regulated, and I wouldn't say one was any more or less restrictive than the other - because the regulations are different. It's important to 'follow the money' - there are lobbying entities for both the field application and shop application of coatings. For our purposes generally we want to instruct the field applicator more so in my opinion than the shop applicator. The shop applicator generally has a fixed place of business that numerous agencies can utilize in a process of tracking macro/micro compliance. The guy on a jobsite however is much less 'trackable'. Generally I think specs that get into issues with air quality regs applicable to shop applicators are questionable from an enforceability perspective. I think we all want cleaner air, but let's face it, the last I checked, the dry cleaning fluids remain legally acceptable in many coating products despite the high VOCs. Those who have money probably are not subject to the highest levels of enforcement. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 489 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 09:34 am:    Factory emissions are considered point-source, which makes them subject to different methods of regulation, at least in some places. An interesting aside: Here in Boston when they were permitting the famous "Big Dig" project, there was a huge issue over the tunnel ventilation systems. (For those who don't know, we put the main interstate highway through town into several miles of tunnels. Yes, after more than 13 years of huge holes in the ground, it's virtually finished, with landscaping and surface improvements to finish this spring.) There were some who claimed that the exhaust coming from ventilation structures was a point-source of pollution, regulated like a factory. Of course, the same amount of pollution was pouring out of the tailpipes every day on the elevated highway, but it could not be regulated in that "form". It is plausible for the applicator of a shop-applied coating to use technology to remove VOCs from exhaust streams to the outside environment, though they probably wouldn't do that. They can also use powder-coating, which cannot be done in the field. Of course, structural steel cannot be efficiently powder-coated due to its size. (I may be wrong about that, anyone know?) As a practical matter, I'm guessing that an applicator of a shop-applied coating on structural steel is probably complying pretty much with the same VOC issues as in the field. It is also true that specifiers are more interested in trying to control what happens in the field. We are also required by law to specify the right products--technically, we could be charged with a crime for specifying a non-compliant coating. I don't know if any architect or specifier was ever charged this way. Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 313 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 10:55 am:    I learned yesterday at a coating seminar that you want to be careful about what you specify as "shop" coated. You cannot simply leave it to the sub-contractor to give you a quality shop primer, for instance. You do need to specify what you want, or you may get red water that cost the shop about $5 a gallon. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 46 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 11:51 am:    This has all been very interesting. I would be interested in opinions as to to the best approach to specifying shop coatings. Which things absolutely need shop coating? Whether to specify by characteristics (either by referencing a standard or explicitly), or by brand names? Should the specifier specify limits on VOC content? Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 177 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 01:01 pm:    My opinions - Absolutely need: Any 25 year finishes. Brand names: no. Suggest identifying classes of coating polymers (not brands) be shop applied. Specify VOC content: No, not for shop applied coatings. However, review with your LEED consultant about whether you seek to reform the coatings world with your project as the leverage. Incidentally, it is possible and even preferable to coat very large structural steel elements prior to shipping, assembly, and erection. This is reasonable when steel is being ASSEMBLED then erected (a special case). If erection and assemply occurs simultaneously (the case with most building steel), in that case the advantage of shop coating may have been lost. Generally, structural steel indicated to recieve coatings should be finished in place for convenience, thus the VOC content is "our business" as specifiers. Susan McClendon Senior Member Username: susan_mcclendon Post Number: 47 Registered: 01-2005 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 01:34 pm:    Since this thread was originally about shop primers, how about the same questions for them? Doug Brinley AIA CSI CDT CCS Senior Member Username: dbrinley Post Number: 179 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 01:56 pm:    Going back to Brett's original post - APWA/AASHTO 'Standard Specifications' (which accounts for a LOT of structural steel) indicates: "All material classified as structural steel shall be painted with a shop applied, inorganic zinc silicate primer, followed by a field applied two coat paint system....". There are two methods - A & B: Method A is an epoxy second coat with an aliphatic urethane topcoat; Method B is a low ambient temperature system (down to 35 degrees F). Method B, I believe, accepts those moisture-curing characteristics of 'newer' polymer coating systems. Also: "Terminology used herein is in accordance with the definitions used in Volume 2, Systems and Specifications of the SSPC Steel Structures Painting Manual, current edition." (current = Volume 2, 2005 Edition). I consider that APWA/AASHTO spec "the authority" because it is applicable to nearly every structural steel bridge in the US. Vivian Volz, RA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: vivianvolz Post Number: 63 Registered: 06-2004 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 02:08 pm:    Lynn, was your seminar in San Francisco? If so, I think I was at the same one. What I got out of my seminar yesterday was that there are a lot of coating and preparation standards that we can use to get good performance, but "people don't do what you expect, they do what you inspect." Field (or shop) inspection is the way to be sure you're getting what you asked for. The presenter recommends PDCA standard P2-04 for third party inspectors, and some NACE standard I can't find right now for the method of inspection. Susan, I think shop priming should be specified by characteristics, recognizing that a shop probably has products they're comfortable and successful with. As for VOC limits on shop primers, I'm not imposing them for this particular project, but I remain personally curious (for the good of the world) about the typical VOC content of what I'm specifying. Now, if I could just find that NACE recommended practice... Lynn Javoroski CSI CCS LEED AP SCIP Affiliate Senior Member Username: lynn_javoroski Post Number: 314 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Thursday, March 09, 2006 - 02:44 pm:    Vivian, Would that it had been so - I'd like to spend more time in San Francisco! No, my seminar was put on by my local CSI chapter and was held at the county zoo. It concerned coatings in general, but one 45 minute session was on priming and sealing. The presenter spoke of organic zinc rich primer, inorganic zinc rich primer, wash coat primers, etc. He stressed that "shop coat" is not good enough and suggested that we add minimum surface preparation requirements, call for a single component primer with rust inhibitor, watch for a short dry-time (time is money for the shop and if it's too long, they won't do it), and check into cost. Galvanizing isn't necessarily the best process to treat steel, especially that which will be coated in the field. A wash primer should be no more than 1 to 1-1/2 mils thick to enhance adhesion. More than that will crack. Organic zinc rich primer (83% zinc) provides particle to particle galvanic protection. Inorganic zinc rich primers are useful for high tempreature situations and can be stand-alone, but are not recommended in high alkali or high acid situations. Moisture cure primers are good in wet climates or immersion situations. 100% solids epoxy primers are useful for CMU, precast and concrete. And if the steel will be fire-retardant treated, you need a totally different kind of primer. Talk to the Tnemec rep in your area. So it's important to know what you're priming, where and how it will used and treated on the job site, and what's going to happen to it afterwards. Hope this helps. Lynn