Paint and Coatings Industry News

Main News Page

ASTM Introduces Corrosion Cost Tool, Updates Standard Coatings Terms

Monday, February 7, 2011

More items for Coating Materials

ASTM has developed its first standard for evaluating the lifecycle cost of corrosion protection systems and has revised its standard for coatings terms.

“ASTM A1068 - 10 Standard Practice for Life-Cycle Cost Analysis of Corrosion Protection Systems on Iron and Steel Products” covers a procedure for using life-cycle cost (LCC) analysis techniques to evaluate different corrosion protection system designs that satisfy the same functional requirements.

LCC analysis is a method for evaluating alternatives that involve different cash flows over the life of the designated project design.

The method involves calculating the LCC of each alternative capable of satisfying the project’s functional requirement and comparing them to determine the lowest estimated LCC.

The technique measures the present value of all relevant costs of producing and rehabilitating alternative corrosion protection systems—including surface preparation, application, construction, rehabilitation or replacement—over a specified period of time.

ASTM says the method is particularly suitable for determining whether the higher initial cost of an alternative is economically justified by reductions in future costs (for example, rehabilitation or replacement), when compared to an alternative with lower initial costs but higher future costs.

The standard does not purport to address any safety concerns associated with its use.

Coatings, Application Terms Updated

ASTM has also issued its sixth update of “D16 - 11 Standard Terminology for Paint, Related Coatings, Materials, and Applications.”

The standard consists of technical terms used in standards under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D01 (Paint and Related Coatings, Materials and Applications) and of definitions suitable for use in these standards.

Definitions used in other ASTM standards are indicated by following the definition with the designation of that standard. In some cases, a relevant D01 subcommittee is also listed. Definitions influenced by those used by other organizations are indicated by the acronym of the organization.

Comment from James Prevatt, (2/8/2011, 8:11 AM)

Those with control of major rehab of a facility typically do not value the science of maintenance painting. The standard view is "it's just paint," "a disruption" and "an erosion of necessary bottom line profits." After 43 years of trying to convince decision makers not to gut their preventative maintenance coatings programs, I for one will welcome a framework which brings credibility to placing a real value on the deferred cost of not painting. Bruce Woodruff, previously of Progress Energy Florida, provided excellent article and provided speeches to NACE and SSPC conventions around this subject. Good for ASTM in bringing any tool to open the eyes of those controling the purse strings of measurable cost. It will take a professional society to provide the believability. When a coatings individual who has something to gain such as sales, their opinion is often discounted as being biased when in fact they are providing real value.