DOCSLIB.ORG

Sprayed Zinc Galvanic Anodes for Concrete Marine Bridge Substructures

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sprayed Zinc Galvanic Anodes for Concrete Marine Bridge Substructures SHRP-S-405 Sprayed Zinc Galvanic Anodes for Concrete Marine Bridge Substructures Alberto A. Sagti6s Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics University of South Florida Tampa, Florida 33620 Rodney G. Powers Materials Office Florida Department of Transportation Gainesville, Florida 32601 Strategic Highway Research Program National Research Council Washington, DC 1994 SHRP-S-405 Contract ID-024 ISBN 0-309-05819-8 Product nos. 2034, 4009 Program Manager: Kuppusamy Thirumalai Project Manager: H. Martin (Marty) Laylor Consultant: John P. Broomfield Program Area Secretary: Carina S. Hreib Production Editor: Margaret S. Milhous key words: cathodic protection corrosion galvanic anode sprayed zinc concrete bridges Strategic Highway Research Program National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 7'.0418 (202) 334-3774 The publication of this report does not necessarily indicate approval or endorsement by the National Academy of Sciences, the United States Government, or the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials or its member states of the findings, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations either inferred or specifically expressed herein. ©1994 National Academy of Sciences I .SM/NAP/694 Acknowledgments The research described herein was supported by the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) under contract no. SHRP-88-ID024. SHRP is a unit of the National Research Council that was authorized by section 128 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987. The work was conducted jointly by personnel of the Materials Office of the Florida Department of Transportation and the Department of Civil Engineering and Mechanics of the University of South Florida. The report was prepared by Alberto A. Sagii6s, Rodney G. Powers, Toshiya Murase, and Ivan Lasa. °.. 111 Contents Acknowledgments ................................................. iii List of Tables .................................................... vii List of Figures ..................................................... ix Abstract ......................................................... 1 Executive Summary ................................................. 3 1. Introduction, Objectives, and Approach .............................. 5 1.1 Introduction ............................................ 5 1.1.1 Corrosion Control in Marine Substructures .................. 5 1.1.2 Nature of the Innovation Investigated ...................... 6 1.1.3 Previous Work in Related Areas ......................... 7 1.1.4 Research Needs Addressed by This Investigation ............. 8 1.2 Objectives .............................................. 9 1.3 Approach .............................................. 9 2. Procedure--Laboratory Experiments ............................... 11 2.1 Compact Test Specimens (Slabs) ............................. 11 2.1.1 Galvanic Current Delivery ............................ 13 2.1.2 Instant-Off Potentials ................................ 14 2.1.3 Inter-element Resistance .............................. 14 2.1.4 Polarization Decay .................................. 14 2.1.5 Polarization Diagrams ............................... 14 2.1.6 Microstructural Examination ........................... 15 2.1.7 Surface Wetting Tests ............................... 15 2.2 Instrumented Test Columns ................................. 15 2.2.1 Inter-element Currents ............................... 16 2.2.2 Instant-Off Potentials ................................ 17 2.2.3 Inter-element Resistance .............................. 17 2.2.4 Polarization Decay .................................. 17 2.2.5 Surface Wetting .................................... 17 V 3. Procedure--Field Investigations 3.1 Site Selection .......................................... 23 3.2 Application of the Sprayed Zinc Anode ........................ 23 3.3 Instrumentation ......................................... 25 4. Results--Laboratory Experiments ................................. 31 4.1 Compact Test Specimens .................................. 31 4.1.1 Current Delivery, Galvanic Specimens (No Impressed Current) . .. 31 4.1.2 Potentials, Galvanic Specimens ......................... 31 4.1.3 Potentials, Impressed-Current Specimens .................. 32 4.1.4 Resistance ........................................ 32 4.1.5 Polarization Decay Tests ............................. 33 4.1.6 Polarization Measurements ............................ 34 4.1.7 Microstructural Examination ........................... 34 4.1.8 Anode Surface Wetting .............................. 34 4.2 Instrumented Test Columns ................................. 35 4.2.1 Current Delivery ................................... 35 4.2.2 Potentials ........................................ 35 4.2.3 Resistance ........................................ 36 4.2.4 Polarization Decay Tests ............................. 36 4.2.5 Anode Surface Wetting .............................. 37 5. Results--Field Investigations 5.1 Zinc Bond Strength ...................................... 57 5.2 Anode/Cathode Current Density ............................. 57 5.3 Potential Measurements ................................... 57 5.4 Window to Structure Resistance ............................. 58 5.5 Window to Probe Resistance ................................ 58 5.6 Polarization Decay ....................................... 58 6. Discussion ................................................. 73 6.1 Field Behavior ......................................... 73 6.2 Laboratory Columns ..................................... 74 6.3 Compact Specimens and Anode Polarization ..................... 75 6.4 Surface Wetting of the Anodes .............................. 76 6.5 Durability and Materials .................................... 78 7. Conclusions ................................................ 81 8. References ................................................. 83 vi List of Tables Table 2.1 Compact Test Specimens. Test Conditions and Number of Specimens per Condition .......................................... 12 Table 2.2 Concrete Mix--Compact Laboratory Specimens .................. 13 Table 2.3 Concrete Mix--Laboratory Columns .......................... 16 Table 3.1 Sprayed Zinc Anode Test Sites, U.S. Highway 1, Florida Keys ........ 24 Table 4.1 Steel Polarization Decay Tests, Compact Laboratory Specimens Average Potential Shift (mV) after 4 and 24 Hours Following Disconnection .... 33 Table 4.2 4-Hour Polarization Decay Tests, Laboratory Columns Average Potential Shift (mV) ............................................ 36 Table 5.1 Bond Strength Test ...................................... 59 Table 5.2 Window to Structure Electrical Properties ....................... 61 Table 5.3 Probe (Cathode) Current ................................... 63 Table 5.4 Probe Depolarization Test .................................. 65 vii List of Figures Figure 2.1 Base configuration of compact test specimens (1 in. = 2.54 cm) ....... 18 Figure 2.2 Connections of soil resistance meter used to measure "anode to midpoint" and "steel to midpoint" resistances. C1, C2 and P1, P2 designate current and potential terminals respectively of the Nilsson 400 meter ....................................... 19 Figure 2.3 Instrumented test column (1 in. = 2.54 cm) ..................... 20 Figure 2.4 Schematic connection of the instrumented test columns. Electronic currents flowing in the direction of the arrows are defined as positive ....................................... 21 Figure 3.1 Schematic of test site at Bahia Honda Bridge (1 in. = 2.54 cm; 1 ft = 30.5 cm) ......................................... 26 Figure 3.2 Schematic of test site at Long Key Bridge (1 in. = 2.54 cm; 1 ft = 30.5 cm) .......................................... 27 Figure 3.3 Schematic of test site at Niles Channel Bridge (1 in. = 2.54 cm; 1 ft = 30.5 cm) ......................................... 28 Figure 3.4 Schematic of test site at Seven Mile Bridge (1 in. = 2.54 cm; 1 ft = 30.5 cm) .......................................... 29 Figure 4.1 Average current densities of the galvanic test specimens as a function of exposure time for the three relative humidity (RH) environments (1 mA/ft 2= 1.1 _tA/cm2) ......................... 38 Figure 4.2 Average instant-off potential of the anode (Zn) and steel (Fe) of the galvanic test specimens in the 85% relative humidity environment as a function of exposure time ..................... 38 Figure 4.3 Average instant-off potential of the anode (Zn) and steel (Fe) of the galvanic test specimens in the 60% relative humidity environment as a function of exposure time ..................... 39 Figure 4.4 Average instant-off potential of the anode (Zn) and steel (Fe) of the galvanic test specimens in the 25% relative humidity environment as a function of exposure time ..................... 39 Figure 4.5 Average potential of the anode (Zn) and steel (Fe) of the control test specimens (always disconnected) in the 85% relative humidity environment as a function of exposure time ......... 40 Figure 4.6 Average instant-off potential of the zinc anode of the 1 mA/ft 2 (1.1 i.tA/cm2) impressed-current Type A1 (single anode) test ix specimens in the 25% and 85% relative humidity (RH) environments as a function of exposure time ..................... 40 Figure 4.7 Average instant-off potential of the zinc anode of the 1 mA/fl 2 (1.1 p.A/cm2) impressed-current Type A3 and Type A4 (dual anode uncoated and coated, respectively) test specimens in the 85% relative
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Humectants to Augment Current from Metallized Zinc Cathodic Protection Systems on Concrete
    HUMECTANTS TO AUGMENT CURRENT FROM METALLIZED ZINC CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEMS ON CONCRETE Final Report SPR 384 HUMECTANTS TO AUGMENT CURRENT FROM METALLIZED ZINC CATHODIC PROTECTION SYSTEMS ON CONCRETE Final Report SPR 384 by Gordon R. Holcomb, Bernard S. Covino, Jr., Stephen D. Cramer, James H. Russell, Sophie J. Bullard, and W. Keith Collins Albany Research Center, U. S. Department of Energy, Albany OR 97321 Jack E. Bennett J. E. Bennett Consulting, Inc., Chardon OH 44024 Steven M. Soltesz and H. Martin Laylor Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem OR 97301 for Oregon Department of Transportation, Research Group 200 Hawthorne SE, Suite B-240 Salem OR 97301-5192 and Federal Highway Administration Washington, D.C. December 2002 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-OR-RD-03-08 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Humectants to Augment Current from Metallized Zinc Cathodic Protection December 2002 Systems on Concrete 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Gordon R. Holcomb, Bernard S. Covino, Jr., Stephen D. Cramer, James H. Russell, Sophie J. Bullard, and W. Keith Collins Albany Research Center, U. S. Department of Energy, Albany OR 97321 Jack E. Bennett, J. E. Bennett Consulting, Inc., Chardon OH 44024 Steven M. Soltesz and H. Martin Laylor, Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem OR 97301 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Oregon Department of Transportation Research Group 11. Contract or Grant No. 200 Hawthorne Avenue SE, Suite B-240 SPR 384 Salem, Oregon 97301-5192 12.
    [Show full text]
  • Corrosion Control Plan for Bridges
    Contents Introduction There is essentially no argument that the American infrastructure is in Introduction ................................................. i poor shape and there is little indication that significant improvement is on the horizon. Acknowledgments ....................................ii The amount of money needed to correct this problem is Executive Summary ..................................2 staggering, especially considering the current state of the economy. Crumbling Infrastructure ........................4 One reason for this is the age profile of the nation’s bridges. Figure 1 1 Introduction to Corrosion ......................6 shows this profile taken from the 2010 National Bridge Inventory . It shows bridges are approaching the maximum age distribution of Bridges to Everywhere ............................7 around 50 years. Most bridges were built for a 50 year design life, which means state highway departments will have to maintain those Corrosion Basics ...................................... 11 bridges beyond their original design lives, which will be challenging because they were built to lower design standards than those used Corrosion in Concrete ........................... 14 today. Exposure Conditions ............................. 18 Corrosion Control ................................... 21 The Highway Ahead .............................. 27 References ................................................. 29 Figure 1: Distribution of bridges by age (2010 NBI data) When the Eisenhower Interstate System was created,
    [Show full text]
  • Galvanic Corrosion
    10 GALVANIC CORROSION X. G. ZHANG Teck Metals Ltd., Mississauga, Ontario, Canada A. Introduction graphite, are dispersed in a metal, or on a ship, where the B. Definition various components immersed in water are made of different C. Factors in galvanic corrosion metal alloys. In many cases, galvanic corrosion may result in D. Material factors quick deterioration of the metals but, in other cases, the D1. Effects of coupled materials galvanic corrosion of one metal may result in the corrosion D2. Effect of area protection of an attached metal, which is the basis of cathodic D3. Effect of surface condition protection by sacrificial anodes. E. Environmental factors Galvanic corrosion is an extensively investigated subject, E1. Effects of solution as shown in Table 10.1, and is qualitatively well understood E2. Atmospheric environments but, due to its highly complex nature, it has been difficult to E3. Natural waters deal with in a quantitative way until recently. The widespread F. Polarity reversal use of computers and the development of software have made G. Preventive measures great advances in understanding and predicting galvanic H. Beneficial effects of galvanic corrosion corrosion. I. Fundamental considerations I1. Electrode potential and Kirchhoff’s law I2. Analysis B. DEFINITION I3. Polarization and resistance I4. Potential and current distributions When two dissimilar conducting materials in electrical con- References tact with each other are exposed to an electrolyte, a current, called the galvanic current, flows from one to the other. Galvanic corrosion is that part of the corrosion that occurs at the anodic member of such a couple and is directly related to the galvanic current by Faraday’s law.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Field Installation of Corrosion Monitoring and Cathodic Protection Systems
    Technical Memorandum No. MERL-2012-40 Guidelines for Field Installation of Corrosion Monitoring and Cathodic Protection Systems U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation December 2012 Mission Statements The U.S. Department of the Interior protects America’s natural resources and heritage, honors our cultures and tribal communities, and supplies the energy to power our future. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. Technical Memorandum No. MERL-2012-40 Guidelines for Field Installation of Corrosion Monitoring and Cathodic Protection Systems U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation December 2012 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado Materials Engineering and Research Lab Group, 86-68180 Technical Memorandum No. MERL-2012-40 Guidelines for Field Installation of Corrosion Monitoring and Cathodic Protection Systems 8/2 --------Mfed:r Daryl A. Little Date "Materials Engineer, Materials Engineering and Research Lab Group, 86-68180 Z- Che1648: Jessica D. Tor� Date Materials Engineer, Mats Engineering and Research Lab Group, 86-68180 � Editorial Approval: Teri Manross Date Technical Writer-E 'tor, Client Support and Technical Presentations Office, 86-68010 ( Technic�oval: Lee E. Sears� Date Material ngineer, Materials Engineering and Research Lab Group, 86-68180 ///7 �- Peer Review: William F. Kepler, P.E. Date Civil Engineer, Materials Engineering and Research Lab Group, 86-68180 REVISIONS l l d Date Description d e ica va ke ar c ro iew hn c he Rev Prep Peer C Te App Contents Page Chapter I: Introduction........................................................................................1 Corrosion Monitoring and Cathodic Protection Systems ................................
    [Show full text]
  • DNVGL-RP-0416 Corrosion Protection for Wind Turbines
    RECOMMENDED PRACTICE DNVGL-RP-0416 Edition March 2016 Corrosion protection for wind turbines The electronic pdf version of this document found through http://www.dnvgl.com is the officially binding version. The documents are available free of charge in PDF format. DNV GL AS FOREWORD DNV GL recommended practices contain sound engineering practice and guidance. © DNV GL AS March 2016 Any comments may be sent by e-mail to [email protected] This service document has been prepared based on available knowledge, technology and/or information at the time of issuance of this document. The use of this document by others than DNV GL is at the user's sole risk. DNV GL does not accept any liability or responsibility for loss or damages resulting from any use of this document. CHANGES – CURRENT General This is a new document. Changes – current Recommended practice, DNVGL-RP-0416 – Edition March 2016 Page 3 DNV GL AS CONTENTS CHANGES – CURRENT .................................................................................................. 3 Sec.1 General ......................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Introduction ...........................................................................................5 1.2 Objectives ..............................................................................................5 1.3 Certification ...........................................................................................5 Sec.2 References ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CATHODIC PROTECTION EVALUATION Final Report
    CATHODIC PROTECTION EVALUATION Final Report ODOT CONTRACT PSK28885 CATHODIC PROTECTION EVALUATION Final Report ODOT Contract PSK28885 by John S. Tinnea Ryan J. Tinnea Tinnea & Associates, LLC 2018 E. Union Street Seattle, WA 98122-2836 for Oregon Department of Transportation Bridge Preservation Unit 4040 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, MS 4 Salem OR 97302-1142 October 2014 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Cathodic Protection Evaluation October 2014 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. John S. Tinnea, Ryan J. Tinnea, Carmen Andrade 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Tinnea & Associates, LLC 11. Contract or Grant No. 2018 E. Union Street Seattle, WA 98122-2836 PSK28885 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Oregon Department of Transportation Draft Final Report Bridge Preservation Unit 4040 Fairview Industrial Drive SE, MS 4 Salem, Oregon 97302-1142 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract This research investigates the effectiveness of a new corrosion rate test instrument in making field evaluations of the corrosion condition of several conventionally reinforced concrete coastal bridges. The instrument is the Gecor 9 Corrosion Rate Meter and comes with several sensors. This device is able to perform several techniques to evaluate the corrosion activity of steel reinforcement under diverse conditions. The Gecor’s Sensor A is equipped with three reference electrodes (RE), 1 counter electrode (CE), and 1 guard electrode (GE). Sensor A was used to measure the rebar corrosion current, icorr, using a DC galvanostatic pulse with modulated applied current confinement.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Electrical Design for Cathodic Protection Systems Ezekiel Enterprises, LLC
    Introduction to Electrical Design for Cathodic Protection Systems Ezekiel Enterprises, LLC Introduction to Electrical Design for Cathodic Protection Systems Course# EE410 EZ-pdh.com Ezekiel Enterprises, LLC 301 Mission Dr. Unit 571 New Smyrna Beach, FL 32128 386-882-EZCE(3923) [email protected] Updated - Oct 2015 Introduction to Electrical Design for Cathodic Protection Systems Ezekiel Enterprises, LLC Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION TO CATHODIC PROTECTION ......................................................... 2 1.1 Purpose. ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Corrosion. .......................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Cathodic protection............................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Types of cathodic protection systems. ............................................................................... 3 2. CATHODIC PROTECTION DESIGN ................................................................................... 4 2.1 Required information. ........................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Determining type and design of cathodic protection system. ............................................ 7 3. CURRECT REQUIREMENT TESTING ............................................................................. 16 3.1 Required current. ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • I N Te Rn Ation Al I S O
    پورتال تخصصی مواد مهندســی و فراینـــدهای ساخت و تولیـد www.asremavad.com https://t.me/asremavad I N TE RN ATION AL I S O S TA N D A R D 1 5 5 8 9 - 1 S e c o n d e d i ti o n 2 0 1 5 - 0 3 - 0 1 Pe tro l e um , p e tro che mi cal a n d n a tu ra l ga s i ndus tri e s — C a th o d i c p ro tecti o n o f p i p e l i n e s ys te m s — P a r t 1 : O n - l a n d p i p e l i n e s In du strie s du p étro le , de la p étro ch im ie e t du g a z n a tu rel — Pro tectio n ca th o diq u e de s systèm e s de tra n sp o rt p a r co n du ites — Pa rtie 1 : Con du ites terrestres Re fer e n c e n u m b e r I S O 1 5 5 8 9 - 1 : 2 0 1 5 (E ) I S O 1 5 5 89- 1 : 2 0 1 5 (E) C o n te n ts P a g e Fo r e wo rd .................................................. ................................................... ................................................... ................................................... ............................. vi I n tro d u c ti o n .................................................. ................................................... ................................................... ................................................... .. .. vi i 1 S c o p e .................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Oregon Department of Transportation Research Section 200 Hawthorne Ave
    REPLACING THERMAL SPRAYED ZINC ANODES ON CATHODICALLY PROTECTED STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES Final Report SPR 682 REPLACING THERMAL SPRAYED ZINC ANODES ON CATHODICALLY PROTECTED STEEL REINFORCED CONCRETE BRIDGES Final Report SPR 682 by Xianming Shi, Ph.D., P.E. Jon Doug Cross Levi Ewan Yajun Liu, Ph.D. Keith Fortune for Oregon Department of Transportation Research Section 200 Hawthorne Ave. SE, Suite B-240 Salem OR 97301-5192 and Federal Highway Administration 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington, DC 20590-0003 September 2011 Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA-OR-RD- 12-02 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Replacing Thermal Sprayed Zinc Anodes On Cathodically Protected Steel Reinforced August 2011 Concrete Bridges 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Xianming Shi, Jon Doug Cross, Yajun Liu, Keith Fortune, Levi Ewan 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Corrosion and Sustainable Infrastructure Lab Western Transportation Institute 11. Contract or Grant No. P. O. Box 174250, Montana State University Bozeman, MT 59717-4250 SPR 682 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Oregon Department of Transportation Final Report Research Section and Federal Highway Administration 200 Hawthorne Ave. SE, Suite B-240 400 Seventh Street, SW Salem, OR 97301-5192 Washington, DC 20590-0003 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract This research aimed to address questions underlying the replacement of arc-sprayed zinc anodes on cathodically protected steel reinforced concrete bridges and to develop a protocol to prepare the concrete surface for the new anode, through a combination of literature review, practitioner surveys, laboratory studies, and field investigation (Pier 9 of the Yaquina Bay Bridge, Oregon).
    [Show full text]
  • Intermediate Course
    Intermediate Course Appalachian Underground Corrosion Short Course West Virginia University Morgantown, West Virginia Copyright © 2017 APPALACHIAN UNDERGROUND CORROSION SHORT COURSE INTERMEDIATE COURSE CHAPTER 1 ‐ CORROSION CELLS IN ACTION............................. 1‐1 INTRODUCTION................................................. 1‐1 REVIEW OF BASIC CONCEPTS...................................... 1‐1 Basic Course Reference........................................ 1‐1 A Corrosion Cell Concept....................................... 1‐1 Dry Cell Example of a Corrosion Cell.............................. 1‐3 DEMONSTRATION............................................... 1‐5 Dissimilar Metal Corrosion Cell.................................. 1‐6 Corrosion Cell Showing Effect of Electrolyte pH Characteristics on Dissimilar Metal Corrosion.............................................. 1‐7 Corrosion Cell Demonstrating Corrosion Caused by Differential Oxygen Concentration................................................ 1‐8 Corrosion Cell Demonstrating Corrosion Caused by Dissimilar Surface Conditions on Steel ........................................... 1‐9 Demonstration Showing the Corrosion Cell Resulting from Differences in Electrolyte Concentration..................................... 1‐10 Demonstration to Show the Effect of Anode‐Cathode Ratio on Corrosion Rate....................................................... 1‐11 Demonstration to Show the Corrosive Effect of Stress in Metal . .... 1‐13 Demonstration to Show Effect of Cathodic Protection
    [Show full text]
  • 2017 Rules of Subsea Pipelines-Arial 1..158
    RUSSIAN MARITIME REGISTER OF SHIPPING Corr. RULES FOR THE CLASSIFICATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSEA PIPELINES Saint-Petersburg 2017 The Rules for the Classification and Construction of Subsea Pipelines of Russian Maritime Register of Shipping have been approved in accordance with the established approval procedure and come into force on 1 July 2017. The Rules cover all technical aspects of design and construction of offshore subsea pipelines. In development of the Rules experience of other classification societies has been taken into consideration. ISBN 978-5-89331-260-7 © Российский морской регистр судоходства, 2017 CONTENTS PART I. SUBSEA PIPELINES 7 Corrosion protection 73 7.1 General 73 1 General 5 7.2 Protection against internal corrosion 73 1.1 Scope of application 5 7.3 Protection against external corrosion 74 1.2 Terms and definitions 5 7.4 Electrochemical protection 76 1.3 Classification 6 7.5 Electrical insulating joints 80 1.4 Scope of surveys 7 7.6 Corrosion monitoring systems 81 1.5 Technical documentation 9 8 Pipeline installation and testing 82 2 Design loads acting on subsea pipelines . 12 8.1 General 82 2.1 General 12 8.2 Pipeline routes and seabed soils 82 2.2 Design pressure 12 8.3 Additional measures for protection of the pipeline 2.3 Temperature effects 13 in the areas of intense ice gouging 85 2.4 Weight effects 13 8.4 Marine operations for pipeline laying .... 87 2.5 Current loads 13 8.5 Methods of pipeline laying on seabed .... 88 2.6 Wave loads and wind loads 14 8.6 Subsea pipeline testing by pressure 90 2.7 Variable hydrodynamic loads 14 9 Maintenance and repair 92 2.8 Seismic loads 15 9.1 Maintenance 92 3 Strength of subsea pipelines 16 9.2 Repair of subsea pipelines 93 3.1 General 16 10 Safety assessment 95 3.2 Determination of the steel pipeline wall thickness 16 10.1 Scope of application 95 3.3 Steel subsea pipeline calculations for buckling 10.2 Terms, definitions and explanations 95 (collapse) under hydrostatic pressure ...
    [Show full text]
  • Cathodic Protection of Reinforced Concrete Bridge Elements: a State-Of-The-Art Report
    SHRP-S-337 Cathodic Protection of Reinforced Concrete Bridge Elements: A State-of-the-Art Report ELTECH Research Corporation 625 East Street Fairport Harbor, OH Strategic Highway Research Program National Research Council Washington, DC 1993 PUBL. NO. SHRP-S-337 ISBN: 309-05265-3 Contract C-102D Program Mar.ager: Don M. Harriott Project Manager: Marty Laylor Consultant: dohn P. Broomfield Program Area Secretary: Ann Saccomano Copyeditor: Katharyn Bine Brosseau January 1993 key words: anode bridge cathodic protection chlorides corrosion maintenance Strategic Highway Research Program 2101 Constitution Avenue N.W. Washington, DC 20418 (202) 334-3774 The publicalion of this report does not necessarily ind!cate approval or endorsement by the National Academy of Sciences, the United States Government, or the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials or its member states of the findings, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations either inferred or specifically expressed herein. ©1993 National Academy of Sciences 2M/N'A[/I93 Acknowledgments The research described herein was supported by the Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP). SHRP is a unit of the National Research Council that was authorized by section 128 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987. This report is a compilation of work by ELTECH Research Corporation, Corrpro Companies, Inc., and Kenneth C. Clear, Inc. Each of these organizations is acknowledged for their effort in writing this report. °oo 111 Contents Acknowledgements
    [Show full text]