UNIVERSITY OF MAURITIUS

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

MECHANICAL AND PRODUCTION ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT
E443 Beng(Hons.) Mechanical Engineering (Minor: Energy Systems)

MECH 3011Y
METROLOGY & SURFACE TECHNOLOGY

ASSIGNMENT:
INVESTIGATION OF THE EFFECT OF SURFACE ROUGHNESS
DUE TO AN ABRASIVE SURFACE PREPARATION ON THE
CORROSION RESISTANCE OF COATED (PRIMER AND
TOPCOAT) MILD STEEL IN SEAWATER

BUNDHUN Aman Kumar 1311863

NUNHUCK M.S. Wasil 1313122
BADULLA M. Twaaha 1311150

- Lecturer: Dr. H. RAMASAWMY

- Date Submitted: 23rd February 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................ 4

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 5

2. OBJECTIVE ....................................................................................................... 5

3. LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................. 6
3.1 Corrosion and polishing ............................................................................................. 6
3.2 Adhesion and cohesion ............................................................................................... 9
3.3 Roughness parameters ............................................................................................. 10

4. PREPARATION OF SAMPLES .................................................................... 12

4.1 Material selection and Dimension ................................................................................. 12
4.2 Turning and chamfering of surfaces ............................................................................ 13
4.3 The automatic polishing machine ................................................................................. 14
4.4 Storage of samples .......................................................................................................... 16
4.5 Surface roughness test ................................................................................................... 16
4.6 Measuring the mass of the samples .............................................................................. 16
4.7 Primer and top coat selection and preparation ........................................................... 17
4.8 Salt solution preparation and immersion of surfaces ................................................. 18
4.9 Storage of the cups ......................................................................................................... 19
4.10 Measuring rate of corrosion .......................................................................................... 20
4.11 Safety precautions .......................................................................................................... 21

5. RESULTS.......................................................................................................... 22

6. ANALYSIS........................................................................................................ 24

2
7. DISCUSSIONS ................................................................................................. 28

8. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 30

9. REFERENCES ................................................................................................. 31

TABLE OF FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURES
Figure 1.0: Corrosion rate values for varying surface roughness, Ra ......................8
Figure 2.0: The horizontal Band saw in operation................................................... 13
Figure 2.1: Completed facing and chamfering on the samples ............................... 14
Figure2.2: The automatic polishing machine .......................................................... 14
Figure 2.3: The parameters set on the polishing machine ....................................... 15
Figure 2.4: Samples after polishing with the 320 grit paper ................................... 16
Figure 2.5: Primer used for the investigation .......................................................... 17
Figure 2.6: Application of primer and top coat on the samples. ............................. 18
Figure 2.7: Immersion of samples. .......................................................................... 19
Figure 2.8: The paint and the primer removed from the sample for measurement . 20

TABLES
Table 1: EN9 Composition (HPS, 2016) ................................................................. 12
Table 2: Surface roughness parameters for each sample using cut-off length of
0.8mm at 2 different random locations: a and b ....................................................... 22
Table 3: Average primer coating thickness for each sample ................................... 23
Table 4: Mass loss for each sample ......................................................................... 23
Table 5: Corrosion rate for each sample .................................................................. 24

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express our heartfelt appreciation to the people who greatly helped us to have
the required useful information for the assignment. We would also like to show our gratitude to
Mr. SEETOHUL Kushanand and Mr. GOBURDHUN Yannick David for their consultations,
helps and guidelines and to all the members of the Workshop division at University of Mauritius
as well for having directly or indirectly guided us for this assignment.

We also seize the opportunity to convey our deepest thanks to Dr. RAMASAWMY
HAREENANDEN who introduced us to the Metrology & Surface Technology module, and
whose passion for the underlying structures had lasting effects.

Last but not the least, heartfelt thanks to our team members for their cooperation and determined
view for successfully completing this assignment.

4
 1. INTRODUCTION

Corrosion is defined as the degradation of materials properties due to either a chemical or an

electrochemical reaction with the environment. Many alloys corrode either due to exposure to
moisture in air or exposure to certain substances. The corrosion process can be concentrated
locally to cause the formation of pits and cracks.

High concentration of anions like Cl- (chloride ions) and low concentrations of oxygen disturb
the givens alloy ability to re-form a passivating film causing tiny fluctuations on the surface of
the material which can lead to the degradation of the oxide film in a few places making it
susceptible to the formation of corrosion pits.

This experiment is being carried out in order to investigate the effect of surface roughness on
corrosion resistance of a primer and topcoat of mild steel in seawater. Therefore, the parameters
being considered are surface roughness and corrosion rate, the primer coating and salt
concentration being the independent parameters.

2. OBJECTIVE

The main objective of this investigation is

To investigate the effect of surface roughness due to an abrasive surface preparation on

the corrosion resistance of coated (primer and topcoat) mild steel in seawater.

5
 3. LITERATURE REVIEW

3.1 Corrosion and polishing

Corrosion is a natural process that causes the gradual degradation of materials by either a
chemical or an electrochemical reaction to the environment. Corrosion has a major impact on
metals and alloys that can cause structural failure endangering safety. Thus, corrosion protection
is of utmost importance and one method of corrosion protection is via coating. Different grit
paper grades can lead to different surface finish obtained via polishing which in turn affects the
adherence of the coating being applied.

Polishing is a process which is carried out in order to obtain a smooth and shiny surface either by
rubbing or via a chemical reaction so as to obtain a significant specular reflection. An unpolished
surface when magnified thousands of times tend to look like mountains and valleys and after
repeated abrasion using different grit paper sizes that those mountains and valleys are worn down
until they are flat. The polishing process generally starts with coarse ones and graduates to fine
ones.

Surface finish is affected by the following variables:

Grit size
Tool load
Condition of tool
Feed rate
Transverse rate condition of metal to be polished
Lubricant

Seawater being chemically aggressive can cause varying degree of corrosion depending upon the
nature of the materials and operational conditions. Materials which are usually subjected to
seawater application are either fully immersed, partially immersed or in a seawater surrounding.
Most corrosion resistant metals rely on an oxide film to provide protection against corrosion.
Seawater, due to its high concentration of Cl- ions, is a most efficient electrolyte.

6
The constant presence of oxygen in marine atmospheres, sea spray and splash zones at the water-
line, and sometimes at much greater depths, all lead to an increase in the aggressiveness of salt
attack thus causing an increase in the corrosion rate. [1]

According, to a study carried out by Zuo, Y., Wang, H. and Xiong, J., it was found that surface
roughness bears a major impact on general corrosion and the evolution of corrosion pits on
stainless steel [2].

Since there is a significant effect of surface roughness on corrosion resistance, it is possible to

obtain the desired corrosion resistance requirements by specifying a surface finish instead of
upgrading a chosen alloy according, to a study carried out by Abosrra, L. Ashour, A., Mitchell,
S.C. and Youseffi, M. [3]. It has also been shown that increasing surface roughness of stainless
steel tend to cause an increase in pitting susceptibility and general corrosion rate which is
attributed to the passive film breakdown [3]. However, an opposite trend has been observed in
the case of mild steels [3].

An investigation of the effect of different surface topographies on the corrosion behavior of

nickel was recently carried out by A. S. Toloei, V. Stoilov & D. O [5]. Northwood. The sample
material used was Nickel and all the specimens were cut to a 15 15 1 mm size.

The 2 types of surface modifications that were carried out were:

Surface grinding
Predesigned surface patterns

The surface grinding process was carried out in only one direction using silicon carbide papers of
different grades, including the following grit numbers: 120, 240, 400, 600 and 1200. The smaller
grit number represents a rougher finish. The 1200 grit surface was further polished using the
0.05m alumina paste. A total of five sets of specimens were prepared and tested to assure
repeatability. Before carrying corrosion testing, each sample were degreased and rinsed with
deionized water and then immersed in a cell containing electrolyte. All corrosion tests were done
in a 0.5 M H2SO4 solution at 231C using a CHI660D, Electrochemical Workstation Beta,

7
(version 11.17) using a standard three-cell electrode. All calculated values for the corrosion
parameters of samples with varying surface roughness were recorded. All surface roughness
parameters were measured using a Wyko Surface Profiling NT-1100. The following graph of
corrosion rate against surface roughness was then obtained:

Figure 1.0: Corrosion rate values for varying surface roughness, Ra (A. S. Toloei, V. Stoilov &
D. O. Northwood, 2013)

8
3.2 Adhesion and cohesion

Adhesion is the strength of the bonds forming between one material and another. Cohesive
failure is usually in the paint film itself (abrasion, cracking due to aging, dissolving in solvent)
although it also could be within the substrate (failure of fibers in wood for example). Adhesive
failure can be blister forming at the interface, lifting of the paint film, or any other situation that
results from low adhesion at the interface. Both cohesion and adhesion is required for a long-
lasting, protective coating. Failures related to adhesion will determine the life of the paint
system.

Good adhesion results when the paint film penetrates the roughness on the substrate surface,
resulting in mechanical interlocking once the paint dries. At one time, adhesion was thought to
occur only by the paint film flowing and filling pores, holes, crevices and micro-voids on the
substrate. When the paint film then hardens, the paint film is held on mechanically. This theory
of adhesion still predominates, especially on surfaces such as wood, concrete, or even metal and
plastic. The surface of a solid material is never truly smooth; rather, it consists of a maze of
peaks and valleys. According to the mechanical theory of adhesion, in order to function properly
the paint film must penetrate the irregularities on the surface, displace the trapped air at the
interface, and lock-on mechanically to the substrate. One way that surface roughness aids in
adhesion is by increasing the total contact area between the paint and the adherent. If interfacial
or intermolecular attraction is the basis for adhesion, increasing the actual area of contact will
increase the total energy of surface interaction by a proportional amount.

Thus, the mechanical interfacing theory generally teaches that roughening of surfaces is
beneficial because of the following:

Gives teeth to the substrate

Increases the total effective area over which the forces of adhesion can develop. [7]

9
3.3 Roughness parameters

Roughness is a component of surface texture which measures the deviations or irregularities of a

real surface compared to its ideal form. Surface roughness indicates the state of a machined
surface.

Significance of the different surface parameters given below:

Ra: Average roughness

It is the average of the absolute values (disregarding its position above or below the mean
line) of the profile heights within the evaluation length. It can also be regarded as the area
between the roughness profile and its mean line divided by the evaluation length.

Ra is a very stable and repeatable parameter, which makes it good for random type
surfaces. However, it cannot provide distinction between peaks and valleys.

Rq: RMS roughness

It is the root mean square average of the profile heights within the evaluation length.
Rq is more sensitive to peaks and valleys due to the reason that the amplitudes are
squared.

Rt: Maximum Height of the Profile

It is the vertical distance between the highest and lowest points of the profile within the
evaluation length.

Ry: Maximum Height within a sampling length

It is the maximum vertical distance between the highest and lowest points of the
roughness profile over a sampling length (cut-off length).

RzDIN: Average Maximum Height of the Profile

Rz is more sensitive than Ra to changes on the surface as the maximum profile heights
are examined rather than average of peak and valleys. In addition, Rzmax is useful for

10
surfaces where a single defect is not permissible (e.g. a seal with a scratch). Rz and
Rzmax are used together to monitor the variations of surface finish in a production
process. Similar values of them indicate a consistent surface finish, while a significant
difference between them indicates a surface defect in an otherwise consistent surface.

It is the average of the maximum vertical distance between the highest and lowest points
within five sampling lengths.

Sm: Mean spacing

It is the average horizontal distance between a peak and a valley, that is, the spacing
between the two consecutive points as the profile crosses the mean line to move above it.

11
 4. PREPARATION OF SAMPLES
Material selection and Dimension
For this investigation, EN9 mild steel rod of 32 mm diameter was chosen as it was readily
available in the University of Mauritius workshop. EN9 steel is a medium carbon steel usually
supplied in the black condition untreated annealed. EN9 can be surface hardened to produce a
high surface hardness with excellent wear resistance for a carbon steel. EN9 is general
engineering applications including blades for axes, knives, and sickles as well as shafts, bushes,
crankshafts, screws, and wood working drills. In the normalised condition EN9 can be used for
gears, sprockets and cams.

Chemical composition of EN9 steel is as such;

Table 1: EN9 Composition (HPS, 2016)

EN9 (070M55) Specification
Chemical composition
Carbon 0.50-0.60%
Silicon 0.05-0.35%
Manganese 0.50-0.80%
Sulphur 0.06 Max
Phosphorus 0.06 Max

The dimension was chosen based on the template of the automatic polishing machine. Templates
of 25 or 30 mm diameter were available for circular sample and 30 mm x 30 mm for squares
samples. A height of 25 mm was chosen for proper grip. According to the Preparation of steel
substrates before application of paints and related products (ISO/TR 15235:2001) a minimum of
3 samples per variant was recommended. As we chose to vary 3 different roughness level, a total
of 9 samples had to be prepared for the experiment.

12
Turning and chamfering of surfaces
A turning process was performed on the lathe to bring the 32 mm mild steel rod to a diameter of
30 mm so that it can fit in the template of the automatic polishing machine. 2 mm of metal
thickness was removed at a spindle speed of 215 rpm.

A horizontal band saw was then used to cut the rod into 9 equal parts (25 mm). Lubricant was
used to prevent overheating and damage of the tools and the samples.

Figure 2.0: The horizontal Band saw in operation

Facing was done on both sides of the samples on a lathe machine operating at a spindle speed of
215 rpm using an HSS carbide tool set at 45O. The facing process was important as a flat surface
was needed to ensure uniform polishing on the samples.

The edge of the samples were chamfered using the lathe machine operating at the same speed
mentioned above using a carbide tool set at 135O. Chamfering was done to prevent the grit paper
from tearing due to sharp edges of the samples.

13
 Figure 2.1: Completed facing and chamfering on the samples

The automatic polishing machine

The machine consists of an arm to hold the template. The arm can be adjusted manually to
position the template above the grit paper. The arm consists of 6 pneumatically actuated single
acting cylinders used to apply uniform desired force on the samples against the grit paper, a
screen and keys to control the parameters such as force applied, time of operation and direction
of rotation. The base of the machine consists of an electric motor which enables a plate on which
the grit paper is placed to rotate at a maximum speed of 300 rpm. The template can hold six
samples at once.

Figure2.2: The automatic polishing machine

14
Note: The inbuilt lubrication system of the machine was broken and thus water had to be added
manually using a water bottle

Polishing

Once the samples were prepared, they were set on the machine for polishing. Starting with the
grit paper of 80, the template was rotated clockwise and the grit paper in the anticlockwise
motion. A force of 50 N was set by trial and error for a period of 40 minutes, stopping at
intervals of 10 minutes. Water had be sprinkled continuously at a constant flowrate to avoid
overheating of the samples. The process was repeated for the 320 and 500 grit paper.

Figure 2.3: The parameters set on the polishing machine

Variation of roughness was done as follows; 3 samples were polished till the 320 grit paper,
(labelled 1A, 1B and 1C) the next 3 samples till the 500 (labelled 2A, 2B and 2C) and the
remaining 3 samples was manually polished using a 6 micrometer grit paper with diamond
paste(labelled 3A, 3B and 3C).

15
 Figure 2.4: Samples after polishing with the 320 grit paper

Storage of samples
The samples were not all completed at the same time, so meanwhile, the completed ones were
stored in a dry and closed vacuum flask which was placed in an air conditioned room of
temperature about 25OC. The relative humidity of the room was kept minimum due to the air
conditioner and also a constant temperature was able to be maintained.

Surface roughness test

Once all the samples were prepared and ready for the experiment, a surface roughness test of the
prepared surface was carried out on all samples using the Surtronic 3+. The surface roughness
test was done in order to have an idea of the magnitude of the different roughness parameters of
9 samples. Since the investigated area was a relatively smooth surface, a small cut off length of
0.8 mm was chosen. The values of the parameters were tabulated.

Measuring the mass of the samples

An electronic ultra-sensitive mass balance was used to measure the mass of the 9 specimen. The
balance had a resolution of 0.001 g. The values of the masses were tabulated accordingly.

16
Primer and top coat selection and preparation
The Epoxy Zinc Phosphate primer was chosen as it was readily available from the workshop.
The primer was mixed thoroughly with the Epoxy thinner to a ratio of 4:1 respectively. The
primer was applied using a paint spray since a very thin layer of 60 microns was required. The
cure time was tentatively set to be about 24 hour due to the atmospheric condition of the
workshop. Two layers of primer had to be sprayed on the investigating area only to obtain the
required thickness. The thickness was later verified at distinct position in all the specimen with
an electronic film thickness measuring instrument. The results were tabulated accordingly.

Figure 2.5: Primer used for the investigation

Epoxy enamel paint of colour white was chosen as a top coat as it was readily available in the
workshop. The epoxy enamel paint had to be mixed with the epoxy hardener to a ratio of 4:1
respectively. Epoxy thinner was added to the mixture until a desired diluted paint was obtained.
The top coat was applied carefully with a paint brush. Thickness of the topcoat was not
considered but uniformity of thickness was instinctively ensured as far as possible. A cure time
of about 4 hours was tentatively set.

17
 Figure 2.6: Application of primer and top coat on the samples

Salt solution preparation and immersion of surfaces

Sodium chloride available at the workshop was used. Below are the steps that were followed in
the preparation of the salt solution:
- 1000 ml of tap water was poured in a beaker.
- 300 g of NaCl was measured using the electronic mass balance and a small beaker.
- The 300g of NaCl was poured into the 1000 ml of water and mixed thoroughly with a
glass rod, to obtain a NaCl solution of 30% concentration.
- It was ensured that all the NaCl had dissolved completely in the water.
- The solution was distributed equally in 9 plastic fairly transparent cups.

Immersion of the samples

The samples were immersed in a way such that only the investigating surface was in contact of
with the NaCl solution. This was done with the help of isolating tape due to its adhesive strength,
allowing the samples hanging to the edge of the cups.

18
 Figure 2.7: Immersion of samples

Storage of the cups

Key factors affecting corrosion in this case were temperature, relative humidity and oxidization.
It was essential to eliminate or at least reduce the effect of these factors. To maintain constant
temperature and low relative humidity, the 9 cups were placed in an air conditioned room of
about 250C. Also the cups opening were sealed with plastic and rubber band as a safety
precaution as well as to avoid air contact such that the samples corrode only due to the NaCl
solution.

19
Measuring rate of corrosion
Corrosion as we know is the loss of metal. Consider samples of the first trial.

- The paint and primer is completely removed from the samples using an abrasive brush.
- The samples are thoroughly washed, cleaned and dried.
- Mass of the samples of first trial is measured using the electronic mass balance and
tabulated.
- The mean of the masses is calculated and compared to mean of initial mass.
- The difference in the mean masses represents the corrosion.
- Primer and paint is re applied in a similar method as mentioned earlier.
- The steps mentioned are repeated and surface immersed again for a period of 2 weeks for
the second trial.
- A graph of mass loss and corrosion against roughness is plotted.

Figure 2.8: The paint and the primer removed from the sample for measurement

20
Safety precautions

Some of the safety precautions taken include:

- Electronic mass balance is always set to zero before measurement to avoid zero error.
- Wearing of lab coat is important when working in the workshop.
- Large application of force was avoided as it tends to tear the grit paper while using the
automatic polishing machine.
- Lubricant such as water or diamond paste is essential to avoid damage of tools and/or
samples.
- Protective goggles and guards were always used while working on the lathe.
- Gloves and face mask were used while painting.
- After the lab work, sanitizer was used to wash our hands.

21
 5. RESULTS
Table 2: Surface roughness parameters for each sample using cut-off length of 0.8mm at 2
different random locations: a and b

Sample Location Surface roughness parameters at cut-off length 0.8mm

Ra/m Rq/m RzDIN/m Rt/m Ry/m Sm/m

A1 a 0.46 0.60 3.1 4.2 4.2 109
b 0.40 0.50 2.4 2.9 2.7 110
Average 0.43 0.55 2.8 3.6 3.5 110

A2 a 0.62 0.63 3.6 5.0 4.0 223

b 0.36 0.68 3.7 10.6 10.6 106
Average 0.49 0.66 3.7 7.8 7.3 165

A3 a 0.34 0.52 2.5 4.8 4.8 88

b 0.36 0.50 2.7 4.5 4.5 102
Average 0.35 0.51 2.6 4.7 4.7 95

B1 a 0.10 0.16 1.0 1.5 1.5 92

b 0.10 0.16 0.8 1.3 1.2 72
Average 0.10 0.16 0.9 1.4 1.4 82

B2 a 0.16 0.26 1.1 2.6 2.6 123

b 0.12 0.18 1.0 1.5 1.5 152
Average 0.14 0.22 1.1 2.1 2.1 138

B3 a 0.16 0.22 1.1 1.4 1.4 107

b 0.12 0.16 0.9 1.5 1.5 111
Average 0.14 0.19 1.0 1.5 1.5 109

C1 a 0.08 0.12 0.3 0.8 0.8 294

b 0.06 0.08 0.2 0.5 0.4 200
Average 0.07 0.10 0.3 0.7 0.6 247

C2 a 0.06 0.08 0.2 0.3 0.3 263

b 0.06 0.08 0.2 0.4 0.3 190
Average 0.06 0.08 0.2 0.4 0.3 227

C3 a 0.06 0.10 0.6 1.8 1.8 247

b 0.07 0.10 0.5 1.0 0.8 178
Average 0.07 0.10 0.6 1.4 1.3 213

22
Table 3: Average primer coating thickness for each sample

Sample Thickness/m Average

A1 70 83 73 80 89 79.0
A2 63 59 56 55 47 58.0
A3 88 62 59 66 61 67.2
B1 56 54 46 56 67 55.8
B2 75 70 84 80 55 72.8
B3 97 45 57 71 59 65.8
C1 54 87 38 44 48 53.6
C2 92 54 63 68 54 66.2
C3 49 65 53 82 56 61.0

Table 4: Mass loss for each sample

Sample Mass/g Mass loss after Mass loss Average mass

Initial First Second first trial /g after second loss/g
trial trial trial/g
A1 138.126 138.102 138.086 0.024 0.016 0.021
A2 136.644 136.609 136.593 0.035 0.016 0.027
A3 136.915 136.888 136.886 0.027 0.002 0.015
B1 142.407 142.335 142.303 0.072 0.032 0.052
B2 142.043 142.019 142.004 0.024 0.017 0.021
B3 135.212 135.175 135.165 0.037 0.01 0.024
C1 142.358 137.382 137.369 4.976 0.013 2.495
C2 137.044 137.016 137.002 0.028 0.014 0.021
C3 142.773 142.733 142.717 0.04 0.016 0.028

23
 6. ANALYSIS

The corrosion rate for all 9 sample was calculated using the following equation obtained from
ASTM G1 standard and the results obtained were recorded in table 4:

(Equation 1)

Where:

K: 1 104 D (ASTM G1 standard)

T: Time of exposure in hours

A: Area in cm2 (2.25)

W: mass loss in grams

D: Density in g/cm3

Note: The density of mild steel EN9 is 7.8 g/cm3 [6]

Table 5: Corrosion rate for each sample

Sample Corrosion rate for first Corrosion rate for Average corrosion
trial (g/m2.hrs) second trial (g/m2.hrs) rate (g/m2.hrs)
A1 0.025262689 0.016841793 0.022104853
A2 0.036841422 0.016841793 0.028420526
A3 0.028420526 0.002105224 0.015789181
B1 0.075788068 0.033683586 0.054735827
B2 0.025262689 0.017894405 0.022104853
B3 0.038946646 0.010526121 0.025262689
C1 5.237797598 0.013683957 2.626267083
C2 0.029473138 0.014736569 0.022104853
C3 0.042104482 0.016841793 0.029473138

24
A graph of Mass loss against surface roughness parameter Rq was then plotted for further analysis:

Mass loss vs Rq
0.045

0.04

0.035

0.03
y = -0.0069x + 0.033
mass loss/g

0.025

0.02 y = -0.005x + 0.0238

0.015

0.01 y = -0.0034x + 0.014

0.005

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Rq/mm
First trial Second trial Average mass loss Linear (First trial) Linear (Second trial) Linear (Average mass loss)

Graph 1: Mass loss vs Rq

 Corrosion rate vs Rq
0.2

0.18

0.16

0.14
Corrosion rate (g/m2.hrs)

0.12 y = -0.0291x + 0.1389

0.1

0.08 y = -0.0141x + 0.0991

0.06

y = -0.0161x + 0.0601
0.04

0.02

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Rq/mm

First trial Second trial Average Linear (First trial) Linear (Second trial) Linear (Average)

Graph 2: Corrosion rate vs Rq

26
Note: Corrosion rate and mass loss for C1 and B1 was excluded from graph 1 and 2 due to its
high deviation from the other samples.

From graph 1and 2, it can be observed that corrosion rate and mass loss tend to decrease with
increasing value of Rq.
 7. DISCUSSIONS

From graph 1 and graph 2, it can be observed that mass loss and corrosion rate both decrease
with increasing value of Rq. Corrosion rate for the diamond polished specimens was observed to
be higher than the specimens polished on the 80 grit paper. The cause for this behavior is mostly
due to mechanical interlocking. Surface roughness aids in the adhesion process by increasing the
total contact area between the paint and the adherent. As mentioned in the literature review, a
rougher surface provides teeth to the substrate and increases the total effective area over which
the forces of adhesion can develop. The 80 grit paper polished specimens contain a higher
number of peaks and valleys thus providing better adhesion between the paint and total contact
area causing the corrosion rate for A1, A2 and A3 to be less than the diamond polished
specimens C1, C2 and C3.

Limitations

1. The inbuilt water sprayer on the polishing machine was not operating. Water had to be
poured manually using a water bottle.
2. The 500m grit paper was tearing apart. Each time that the paper was torn, turning on
samples had to be performed again on the lathe.
3. No information was found on the force that should be applied on the samples during
polishing process.
4. When using Surtronic 3+, presence of dust or other particles could affect the values of
different roughness parameters.
5. Vibrations in the environment could lead to possible errors in roughness measurement.
6. It was hard to apply the same amount of primer over the surface to be tested. The
thickness varied from one point to another.
An appropriate range of 60m (the correct amount according to standard) up to 90m
was determined.
7. The thickness of top coat was not taken into consideration.
8. Dust particles could stick down to surface when allowing the primer and top coat to dry.

28
 9. It was difficult to immerse only the painted surface under investigation. The chamfered
edges as well as small area of the curved part of the samples were found inside the salt
solution.
10. According to the Standard 12944, the surfaces should stay immersed in the salt solution
for at least 5 months for reliable result.
11. According to Standard 12944, a salt solution of 5% should have been used. However, due
to limited time, we found that 30% would be the most appropriate concentration for our
investigation.

Further studies

A wider range of grit paper or other abrasive materials could have been used for the
polishing process to further show the effect of surface roughness on corrosion rate.
The samples could have been placed in different atmospheric or stress loading conditions.
Use of high-quality primers which are more resistant to salt and fresh water. Examples
include marine epoxy or coal tar epoxy primers or else, use of more readily available and
economical primers to easily quantify undesirable defects due to corrosion.
Investigation of the different cracks and pits formed on the metal surfaces subjected to
corrosion through microscope.

29
 8. CONCLUSION

The results obtained cannot be considered as valid since the graphs obtained do not really show
any significant difference in corrosion rate when varying roughness. The limited amount of time
and resources hampered the investigation a great deal. A more reliable result could have been
obtained if the investigation was carried out on a longer duration of time.

30
 9. REFERENCES

[1] MCF - Marine Corrosion Explained. 2016. MCF - Marine Corrosion Explained. [ONLINE]
Available from: http://www.marinecorrosionforum.org/explain.htm. [Accessed 20 October
2016].

[2] Zuo, Y., Wang, H. and Xiong, J., The aspect ratio of surface grooves and metastable pitting
of stainless steel. Corrosion Science, 44, pp. 25-35, 2002.

[3] Abosrra, L. Ashour, A., Mitchell, S.C. and Youseffi, M., Corrosion of mild steel and 316L
austenitic stainless steel with different surface roughness in sodium chloride saline solutions.
WIT Transactions on Engineering Sciences, 65, pp. 161-172, 2009.

[4] Sasaki, K. and Burstein, G., The generation of surface roughness during slurry erosion-
corrosion and its effect on the pitting potential. Corrosion Science, 38(12), pp. 2111-2120, 1996.

[5] A. S. Toloei, V. Stoilov & D. O. Northwood Department of Mechanical, Automotive and

Materials Engineering, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada, 2013.

[6] EN9 Carbon Steel round bar,EN9 Carbon Steel forging,EN9 Carbon Steel sheet,EN9 Carbon
Steel coil,EN9 Carbon Steel flat bar,EN9 Carbon Steel pipe,Lrregular. 2017. [ONLINE]
Available at: http://www.upsteel.com/index.php?c=index&a=show&catid=18&id=9303.
[Accessed 18 February 2017].

[7] Materials Today. 2017. Fundamentals of Paint Adhesion - Materials Today. [ONLINE]
Available at: http://www.materialstoday.com/metal-finishing/features/fundamentals-of-paint-
adhesion/. [Accessed 18 February 2017].

31