1 / 23

CO2 Spray Development Activities

CO2 Spray Development Activities . ATS LO Maintainability TIM Oklahoma City, Air Logistics Center Rick Osterman 7 October 1998. John Inks and Rick Osterman 26 May 1999 DOD Low VOC Coatings Application Workshop . N. Equipment Development Activities. Equipment Roadmap Benefit Comparisons

moe
Download Presentation

CO2 Spray Development Activities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CO2 Spray Development Activities ATS LO Maintainability TIM Oklahoma City, Air Logistics Center Rick Osterman 7 October 1998 John Inks and Rick Osterman26 May 1999 DOD Low VOC Coatings Application Workshop N

  2. Equipment Development Activities • Equipment Roadmap • Benefit Comparisons • Equipment Progress • Supercritical Carbon Dioxide • Internal Funding (1998) • Air Force Funding (1999) • Conclusions

  3. Equipment Down Select Equipment Roadmap 1999 1998 3Qtr 4Qtr 1Qtr 2Qtr 3Qtr 4Qtr High Volume Low Pressure (HVLP) Plural Component Spray (PCS) Site 4 Dem/Val & Process Specs Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Convergent Spray Technology (CST) Go/No-Go Process Spec Baseline Program Phases Dem/Val Equipment Development

  4. Equipment Environmental Benefits • In Addition to Reformulating Coatings to Reduce or Eliminate Hazmats, NGC Is Evaluating Spray Equipment for Further Benefits • Carbon Dioxide Spray (CO2) • Applicable to Primers, Topcoats and Specialty Coatings • VOC and HAP Reduction • Solvent Reduction • Cost, Cycle Time, and Film Quality Benefits

  5. Carbon Dioxide Spray Reasons for NGC Consideration • Environmentally Friendly • Reduced VOC Emissions • Higher Transfer Efficiency • Higher Coating Rates • Minimal Solvent Disposal • Improved Performance, Quality, Repeatability • Quicker Curing • Improved Film Smoothness • Similar to a Class A Car Finish • Cost Reduction • Reduced Process Flow & Labor • Less Over-Spray

  6. A Base Manual Weigh & Mix 1 QT Pressure Pot 1 QT Pressure Pot B Catalyst C Thinner High Volume Low Pressure Diagram • Features and Benefits/Draw Backs • Manual Proportioning • Utilizes HVLP Spray Guns • Single Component (Batch) Design • Work Life Limitation

  7. A Base Manual Weigh & Mixing CO2 B Catalyst Admixed Coating Pressure = 1500 PSI C Thinner Supercritical CO2 Diagram HEAT HEAT • Features and Benefits/Draw Backs • Maximum VOC Reduction • Utilizes Airless Spray Gun • Single Component (Batch) Design • Work Life Limitation

  8. Unicarb CO2 Spray System Diagram • Blend Supercritical CO2 with Standard Coating Solvents • Reduces Solvent Content • Improves Coating Finish • Union Carbide Patented and Licensed Technology

  9. Unicarb CO2 Spray Spray Pattern

  10. Advantages VOC Reduction Improved Flexibility Improved Film Finish Reduced Cure Times Faster Coating Build Mandatory For High VOC Materials Low Flexibility Coatings ROM Costs $160K to $320K Can Operate 2 - 4 Spray Guns From Each Unit ATS LO Maintainability TIM CO2 Spray Process Advantage, Mandate and Cost

  11. CO2 Equipment Development Activities • Internal Funding (1998) • Mil Spec Topcoat • Air Force Funding (1999) • Program Baseline Primer and Developmental Conductive and Topcoat • Developmental Primer and Topcoat • Developmental Topcoats • Developmental Waterborne Primer N

  12. 1998 CO2 Coating Evaluations • Objective • Evaluate Supercritical Fluid CO2 Coating Technology for Application of MIL-SPEC Qualified Paint Systems • 1998 Project Goals • Reformulate a Mil-C-85285 Qualified Topcoat For Use in UNICARBÒCoating Application System • Perform Testing & Evaluation of Coated Panels to Selective MIL-C-85285 Requirements • Obtain Sponsorship by Northrop Grumman Programs to Develop, Validate and Transition-to-Production the CO2 Paint Technology • Identify DoD/Industry Partners for CRAD and CRADA Opportunities

  13. 1998 Project Plan Problem / Need Statement UNICARBÒ Environmental Regulations Continue to Lower Allowable VOC Content. This Requirement Is Usually Achieved by Reducing Organic Solvent Content, But Low VOC Coatings Have Poor Surface Finish Quality. Supercritical Carbon Dioxide is Currently Used as a Solvent in Automotive Paint Formulations Producing a Class A Surface Finish. Long Term Benefits • Reduce Paint Cure Times • Improve Finish Quality and Paint Application Rate • 50% VOC Reduction for Paints and Primers Objective Milestones and Products Reformulate a Mil-Spec Qualified Paint System to Use CO2 and Demonstrate Effectiveness 1 2 3 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Approach / Tasks • Reformulate Hentzen Coatings’ MIL-C-85285, Gray Flat Topcoat for Use With Unicarb CO2 Paint System • Spray Coating on Test Panels at Union Carbide • Conduct Coating Performance Testing at NGC for Comparison to HVLP Spray Coatings 1) Complete Reformulation and Delivery of Paint System to Union Carbide 2) Application of Paint Using CO2 Spray System 3) Complete Coating Performance Testing

  14. 1998 Progress • Northrop Grumman Corporation (NGC) Requested Hentzen Coatings, Inc. to Reformulate Their Mil-C-85285 Flat Gray Topcoat for Use in UNICARBÒ Supercritical Carbon DioxidePaint System • Hentzen, In Cooperation With NGC Produced the New Coating in Four Weeks • Test Panels Were Sprayed at Union Carbide One Week Later • Morphology Was Smooth and Continuous • Unaided Visual Appearance of Coated Panels Was Excellent (No Orange Peel) • Coating Performance Tests Completed

  15. Test Results • CO2 Coated Panels Met the Following Specification Requirements • Adhesion • Gloss • Surface Roughness • Heat Resistance • Solvent Rub • Hiding Power • Low Temperature Flex on Four Inch Mandrel

  16. Summary • Exceeded Initial Coating Formulation/Application Goals • Test Results Are Positive Warranting Further Evaluation • NGC Procured Laboratory CO2 Spray Unit • New Unit Will Be Tested to Certify Compliance South Coast Air Quality Management District Requirements • Minimum 65%Transfer Efficiency or Equivalence to HVLP

  17. 1999 Project Plan Problem / Need Statement Environmental Regulations Continue to Lower Allowable VOC Content Current Coating Processes are Time & Labor Intensive Long Term Benefits • Reduce Coating Process Time • Improve Finish Quality and Paint Application Rate • Significant VOC & Emission Reduction Objective Milestones and Products Evaluate Candidate Paint Systems to Use CO2 and Demonstrate Effectiveness 1 2 3 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr Approach / Tasks • Obtain Paint Samples from Various Suppliers • Spray Paint Samples at Union Carbide • Conduct Coating Performance Evaluation at NGC for Comparison to HVLP Spray Applied Coatings 1) Complete Phase I Coating & Spray Development 2) Complete Phase II Coating & Spray Development 2) Complete Equipment Demonstration & Validation

  18. Primer, Conductive, and Topcoat CO2 Baseline Coating Evaluation (24 - 25 August ‘98) at UCC • Sprayed 3 Coatings • Courtauld’s Polyurethane Primer • In-House Formulation Conductive Coating • In-House Formulation Topcoat • Added Small Amounts of Solvents to Coatings • MAK and EEP • Film Spray Properties Were Acceptable • VOC’S Were Reduced Over Baseline Coatings • Coating Cure Rates Were Reduced • Primer Dry Hard Time Decreased From 3 Hrs to 2 Hrs • Test Panels Were Sprayed for Physical Property Testing

  19. High Solids Primer and Topcoat CO2 Coating Evaluation (19 - 23 April ‘99) at UCC • Sprayed 2 Coatings • US Paint’s High Solids Primer • US Paint’s High Solids Topcoat • Added Small Amounts of Solvents to Coatings • MAK and EEP • Film Spray Properties Were Acceptable • VOC’S Were Reduced Over Baseline Coatings • Coating Cure Rates Were Reduced • Primer Dry-to-Touch Decreased 50% • Test Panels Were Sprayed

  20. More TopcoatsCO2 Coating Evaluation (20 - 22 May ‘99) at UCC • Sprayed 2 Coatings • Hentzen’s Moisture Curing Topcoat • Dexter’s Polyurethane Topcoat • Hentzen Topcoat Results • Added Small Amounts of MAK Solvent to Coating • Film Spray Properties Were Acceptable • VOC Was Reduced • Coating Cure Rate Reduced 50% • Dexter Topcoat Panels Results • Required Mixture of Solvents to Meet Film Spray Stds.

  21. Waterborne PrimerCO2 Coating Evaluation (25 May ‘99) at UCC • Sprayed 1 Coating • Spraylat’s Waterborne Primer • No Solvents Were Added to Coatings • Sprayed As Supplied • Film Spray Properties Were Acceptable • Spray Panels Were Coated for Evaluation • Added Salt Spray Test Panels • CO2 Interaction Could Change Coating pH Which Could Affect Corrosion Inhibitors

  22. Conclusions • Coating Reformulation is Not The Only Means of Meeting VOC Reduction Requirements • CO2 Cure Rate Acceleration Factor Dependent Upon Coating Being Evaluated • Not All Commercial Coatings Are Applicable to CO2 Spray • Keys to Reformulating for CO2 • Formulation Stability • Solvent Selection • Film Build • Compatibility • Equipment Design • Single Batch Mix Versus Continuos Plural Mixing • Cold Versus Hot Circulating

  23. Conclusions Continued • CO2 Spray Has Added Benefits Over Reformulation • Cost Reduction • Reduced Touch Labor and Less Material • Cycle Time Reduction • Spray Process Finish Quality Improvements • Must Evaluate Each Use of CO2 Against Need and Benefits • Subsequent Sessions Will Include Cost Analyses • Equipment Development is More Capital Intensive Than Reformulation for HVLP Spray • Additional Costs Should Be Offset Recurring Savings

More Related