Abrasion / isolation coating for steel LNG pipeline  

Posting by joe lee on June 19, 2008 at 09:17:00.

First of all, I want to thank you for this nice discussion facility! The lack of the registration and log-in fuzz, is really handy (I am getting so f**kin tired of all these log-in procedures nowadays, especially on the internet), moreover I like the content of the discussion threads. Secondly maybe you could assist me with the following.

I am looking for a proper isolation / abrasion / corrosion resistant coating for a steel pipe. The pipeline will be used for conveyance of cryogenic (below –150 °C, –238 °F or 123 K) liquids (Liquefied Natural Gas). The polymer or resin based coating must withstand:

- mechanical impact if the pipeline is drawn through rock, gravel, clay or sudden operational impact;
- isolation for cryogenic transport of LNG;
- permeation and corrosion resistant to ground water, salt water;
- permeation and chemical resistance to BTEX and larger organic chemicals;
- the suggested coating must also be suitable for steel pipelines for eventual transport of Natural Gas and Hydrogen.

I am also looking for:
- multilayer plastic-metal laminate or ceramic coating solutions that exhibit an excellent corrosion resistance;
- compare the properties of thermoset (probably reinforced with glass fillers) with thermoplastic chemical resistant coating solutions.


          follow up posts
    On 07 Aug 2008 at 00:04:10 Neal Prescott posts:
    Joe, According to our experts there are about 30 years' track record for the use of FBE as an external pipeline coating. An ISO standard (ISO
    21809-2) has been published this year. However, this standard does not
    refer to cryogenic conditions (which do not normally apply for
    pipelines). For the coating to be qualified for cryogenic conditions, it
    needs to be based on a known code/standard. What code/ standard would a
    qualification (testing) that you refer to be based on?

    If you can provide me this information for a FBE coating, I can supply you with the name of a product that will fit your requirements.

    Best Regards, Neal Prescott

    P.S. Please respond to neal.prescott@fluor.com
    [responses: 4]

      On 09 Sep 2008 at 20:52:25 Joe Lee posts:
      Dear Neil,

      Thank you very much for your suggestion on the Fusion Bonded Epoxy Coating (FBE) solution. Are you familiar with any recent case or case history of the application of FBE (type of material and coating thickness) coating in environmental conditions that resemble the environmental conditions stated as close as possible?

      Thanks Again,
      Joe Lee

      [responses: 3]

        On 28 Sep 2008 at 18:21:22 Neal Prescott posts:
        3M Corporation have developed a FBE coating that can take down to -300 deg F and up to +300 deg F, so it can be used in cryogenic LNG pipeline applications for an offshore environment. Recent tests by 3M have proven that it will work in cryogenic applications. We are using it on the product pipe in a subsea LNG pipe-in-pipe application where the product pipe is protected from corrosion during transit from the mill and during on-site fabrication. The FBE coating actually will then spend its life within the annular space, which is filled with nitrogen and an aerogen high efficiency insulation filling the space. We are obtaining our "Fitness for Service" certification using ABS and DNV and hope to qualify the FBE for this purpose. We have filed for international patents for this configuration. However, the 3M product can be used for other applications as well. It is the first coating that I have found that satisfies our qualifications for subsea applications. It has not yet been used in service, but we hope to use it in the near future.

        In the past I have worked with 3M and Napco to develop "rough-coat", which is a FBE coating that has found extensive use offshore as a corrosion resistant coating for subsea pipelines. Both 3M and Napco offer a brand that fit my needs. We use it beneath a coating that we found to be very good in tests against a host of products as an abrasion resistant FBE coating. This was Sigma Armour Coat and it is very good, as we bottom towed subsea pipelines as long as 7-miles in length over a distance of 400 to 500 miles on the seabottom in water depths of 3,000-feet. I do not know if the Sigma product can be used in this application for cryogenic conditions, but know that the 3M product works well too. The Sigma product is a combination of sand (silica) and epoxy, which gives it good abrasion resistance.

        If I can help you further, please let me know.
        [responses: 2]

          On 09 Oct 2008 at 12:57:51 Composite Agency posts:
          Many many thanks Neal for this valuable follow-up on the use of Fusion Bonded Epoxy coatings for cryogenic LNG pipelines. Specials thanks for the background information on the industrial application of FBE coatings! This post really keeps up the good work.

          Sijmon van der wal
          Composite Agency
          [responses: 1]

            On 09 Oct 2008 at 15:54:22 Neal Prescott posts:
            I just wanted to add that the coating thicknesses commonly used for the subject Fusion Bonded Epoxy (FBE) coatings and the Abrasion Resistant coatings, which I mentioned previously are as follows:
            FBE - we use coating thicknesses of between 14 - 22 mils, which give good corrosion resistance in seawater applications when considering about 5% coating failure for the life of the system (20 - 40 years)when using a cathodic protection system such as aluminum alloy anodes. This would apply to products produced by 3M and others such as Napco.
            Abrasion Resistant Coatings - we commonly use around 150 mils of coating thickness on the bottom 1/3 to 1/2 of the pipeline, if the pipeline is being bottom towed on the seabottom consisting of sand and silt over a distance of 400 to 500 miles, without too much wear of the abrasion resistance coating. This coating (Sigma Armourcoat) is superior to other claimed abrasion resistant coatings such as Ceramcoat (ceramic coating used on the leading edges of fighter jet wings in desert conditions to protect the wing from abrasion), which only lasted one-mile in bottom tow tests of a pipeline on sand along a beach front. Also the Sigma coating is superior to other coatings such as a concrete coating used on the outer casing pipe for pipeline road crossings, which also lasted about one-mile in bottom tow tests of a pipeline on sand along a beach front. Finally, we tested a product commonly used on the bows of ice breakers to resist abrasion to ice, but also found the Sigma product to be much superior. If the Sigma product were to be used in an abrasion situation as described by Joe earlier, I belive that it would be found to be acceptable to him. However, keep in mind that the Sigma coating with a thickness of around 120 to 150 mils is very expensive and found to be about the same cost of the steel pipeline which it is protecting, eventhough the coating is only applied on the bottom 1/2 of the pipe. This is installed cost (cost of material and labor to install). Orignally we installed the material by spraying with a high pressure air hose and equipment, but later transitioned to another method, which was far easier, which was a trowel type application. The over-spray is a problem as you do not want to get it on anything as it will not come off. Troweling is better and allows better control. Good Luck!

            Regards, Neal
            [responses: 0]

    On 30 Jul 2008 at 22:46:29 Mihir Patel posts:
    Hello Joe,

    I work for a company that manufactures and sells nylon 12. There are grades of nylon 12 used in coating metal fuel tubes (Japanese OEMS) to resist corrosion. Also nylon 12 has found use in conveying crude in offshore tubing application. Based on your requirement I think Nylon 12 is also a contender for what you are trying to achieve.

    Below is my contact information, call me if I can be of further help.


    [responses: 0]

    On June 19, 2008 at 16:24:01 Andrew Klein posts:
    Hi Joe, I work for a company called Cornerstone Research Group, and we have several coatings that might fulfill your needs. How can I best contact you?


    [responses: 4]

      On June 21, 2008 at 22:10:29 Joe Lee posts:
      Hi Andrew,

      Thanks for your posting. I already found some helpful information on this website with regard to permeation rates, corrosion resistance and predicted mechanical retention of polymers exposed to BTEX and sea water.

      With regard to the Liquefied Natural Gas pipeline, I'm mainly interested in an appropriate coating for a pipeline exposed to sea water. From the case studies here (see cases section, industrial cases) I noticed that water pressure is not a very important issue for the resins / pps I want to consider.

      Can you suggest me any material with quantified isolation characteristics, good permeation (low sea water diffusion, low solubility, no swelling) and good shrink properties? I just want to have some ball park idea, poly phenylene sulfide / polyurethane / epoxy resin are one of the possible most appropriate materials?

      [responses: 3]

        On June 25, 2008 at 09:10:20 Andrew Klein posts:

        I would recommend a polyurethane coating based on its very high abrasion resistance, good isolation properties and the good water resistance of the coating. Also, it is easily spray applied. If you would like some more information about some polyurethanes we could supply, you can contact me at 937-320-1877 ext 163 or email kleinak@crgrp.com.


        [responses: 2]

          On July 01, 2008 at 10:34:59 Frank posts:
          Hi All:

          What is the common thickness of such a polyurethane based isolation coating for pipeline and tanks? I am interested in the matter because of Natural Gas conveyance to a plant for GTL (Gas to Liquid*).

          Keep up the good work!


          *GTL process produces fuels such as petrol (gasoline) and gasoil from natural gas with the Fischer-Tropsch process. Gas to Liquids is a very promising technology.
          [responses: 0]

          On June 30, 2008 at 12:41:28 Joe Lee posts:
          Dear Andrew,

          Thank you for your suggestion. In this stage, the information you have provided so kindly, is sufficient. As I may want to contact you later on in this project, I also want to say thank you for your contact details.

          Kind Regards,

          p.s. maybe you could cooperate with Composite Agency in the framework of composite, coating, liner material decisions and service life predictions in this - or future projects ;-). You may contact Mr. Sijmon van der Wal at s.van.der.wal@composite-agency.com

          [responses: 0]

Compose your reply to joe lee on June 19, 2008 at 09:17:00 below.
To respond to other postings, please click the respective posting (On ... author x posts) at follow up posts.