nt color=blue>the Internet Archive. Yahoo! is not affiliated with the authors of this page or responsible for its content.
Chapter 3 Paint Material Specifications, Procurement, and Testing
EM 1110-2-3400
30 Apr 95
Chapter 3
Paint Material Specifications,
Procurement, and Testing
3-1.
Introduction
This chapter is intended to provide the engineer with an
understanding of how coating systems are specified,
procured, and tested prior to being applied on a large scale
to USACE structures. Generally, coating materials can be
specified by product name and manufacturer; Federal,
military, and other coating formulations; product name or
approved equal; qualified products list (QPL); and
performance.
All have inherent merits and limitations;
exposure to each will give the engineer a basis for preparing
coating specifications.
Procurement of USACE coating
materials for in-house application is conducted either
through the Rock Island Consolidated Paint Acquisition
Contract
or
by
using
the
Government
Services
Administration (GSA), under regular procurement or the
Multiple Award Schedule. Procurement by contractor is the
most common method because most USACE work is
contract painting. This chapter provides the engineer with
an understanding of each of these methods of procurement.
Coatings testingincluding sampling procedures, material
identification, and coating performance testsis critical in
establishing if the supplied coatings meet the formulation
requirement and if they will provide corrosion protection to
the structure. This chapter will provide the engineer with an
understanding of the various tests that can be performed and
what the test data mean in terms of coating performance.
3-2.
Types of Coating Material Specifications
Coatings specifications can be produced by product
name/manufacturer,
standard
specifications/formulation,
product name or approved equal, QPL, and specification by
performance. Each type of specification will be discussed.
a. Specification by product name/manufacturer.
The
product name of a reputable manufacturer is one way to
specify a coating material.
Although private industry
specifies coating material by product name/manufacturer the
USACE currently does not. Specifying a coating material by
product name is suitable (and advantageous) when a specific
coating material has proven successful. If the material is
suited for the service environment, it can be expected to
continue to perform well. The manufacturer usually will
provide technical advice for the application of the material
to ensure that it is applied in the best possible manner. A
drawback to specifying by product name/manufacturer is
that it eliminates competition, and the USACE may pay a
premium price for the product. Refer to 48 CFR 1-10.002
and ER 1110-2-1200 concerning restrictions on specifying
proprietary products.
b. Specification by standard specifications/formulation.
(1) Standard specifications are issued by nationally
recognized authorities (Federal, military, American Society
for Testing and Materials [ASTM], Steel Structures Painting
Council [SSPC], etc.) and can be used in selecting paints for
civil works activities. Some specifications are formulation
based; others are based on product performance. Coating
materials specified by formula require the manufacturer to
follow a recipe during the manufacturing of a coating for
a customer.
In specification by formula, a coating
manufacturer competitively bids on supplying the customer
with
the
product(s)
formulated
as
directed
in
the
specification. No additional expertise is required, and the
manufacturer has no responsibility but to supply the
product(s) as dictated by the formula specification.
For
example, SSPC has developed many formula specification
materials that have been used since 1955. These formulas
were developed because many outstanding coatings that
were being studied did not meet available specifications or
had specifications for limited distribution. Therefore, the
SSPC paint specifications were issued to make it possible
for anyone to specify these materials by formulation. SSPC
formula-specification paints are widely referenced and
accepted throughout the industry. With the exception of
those containing lead (to be withdrawn in 1993/1994), SSPC
formula coating materials are readily available from several
major U.S. manufacturers.
Each SSPC Painting System
Specification combines all of the requirements necessary for
a complete paint job in a single formula.
These
specifications include all of the components for surface
preparation, paint application, paint thickness measurements,
primer, midcoat, topcoat, safety, and inspection. There are
two
methods
of
using
the
SSPC
Painting
System
Specifications:
specifying the use of an SSPC Painting
System Specification by numberrecommended for most
situationsor using painting system guides to prepare
modified systems for special situations. The USACE uses
a similar system to specify special formulation vinyl paints
commonly used on inland hydraulic structures.
(2) There are limitations to formula specifications. The
specified composition may represent a compromise because
it may have been developed through laboratory testing only;
actual field exposure testing may never have been done.
Also, state-of-the-art technology usually is not maintained.
For example, the last revision to the SSPC systems was
made in 1991.
Since then, zinc-filled moisture-cured
urethanes and other innovative coatings types have been
developed but are not included in the listing.
3-1 EM 1110-2-3400
30 Apr 95
(3) Much confusion can result from the use of standard
specifications for paints and ingredients if the project
specification writer does not keep thoroughly up to date and
well informed. When a standard specification covers several
types or grades of material, the project specification writer
may have failed to designate the type and grade of material
to be used; thus the contractor, who will be guided by cost
considerations rather than applicability, will make the
selection. Users of Federal and other standard specifications
should consider the comments (Paragraph 9.0, Notes, in
the SSPC Painting System Specification) at the end of such
specifications. These comments frequently provide valuable
information about intended uses of various classes and
grades.
Standard specifications can lead to minimum
quality manufacturing and materials.
A formula coating
must be manufactured with tight quality control and tested
by the purchaser. When these steps are followed, formula
specifications can be a good method of specifying coatings.
c. Specification by product name or approved equal.
Specification by product name may not be desirable because
it eliminates competition. The product name or approved
equal specification is intended for competitive bidding and
often requires the manufacturer to perform tests to prove
that the listed materials are equal in performance. Although
this type of specification encourages competition, it seldom,
if ever, is workable for paint products.
Similar and/or
equal cannot be satisfactorily proven within the short time
usually available for compliance testing of the products.
Equal means equal performance on the contemplated
surfaces and under the completed exposure conditions. This
type of comparison can be determined only by practical,
long-range exposure testing of the product in question
alongside the standard of comparison.
The or equal
clause sometimes is avoided by writing a highly restrictive
specification around the preferred proprietary product
without naming it.
This procedure is seen as a ruse by
other manufactures and is more likely to create animosity
than if the preferred product is simply specified by name.
d. Specification by QPL.
Coatings specification
classified by a QPL combines the advantages of coating
materials/systems that have been evaluated and approved for
use in a given service environment and competitive bidding.
A QPL is developed by an owner (i.e., USACE) and
implemented by inviting manufacturers to participate in a
coatings evaluation program funded by the USACE; or the
manufacturer may be encouraged to fund the testing for
placement on the QPL. Minimum performance levels are
established, and a determination is made about whether or
not the manufacturer's product/system is qualified for use.
The use of a specification that includes the establishment of
a QPL is workable, but it involves considerable time and
effort. Under this system, a paint product would be tested
for suitability on practical surfaces for a significant period
of time. Those products accepted would be placed on the
QPL with the stipulation that the manufacturer furnish
exactly the same material as was originally accepted.
Failure to do so would result in removal from the list.
e. Specification by performance.
A performance
specification does not designate the material by formula, but
it specifies the required performance of a material. Because
all coating jobs are differentwith different application and
service variablesonly comparative testing of coatings
under actual field operating conditions will provide an
accurate d