| Protecto 401 vs. Polyurethane
|
|
|
Test
|
Protecto 401
|
Two Component
Polyurethane Lining
|
|
SALT SPRAY
5% solution
ASTM B 117-85
|
No undercutting at
scribe. No damage
to panel.
24 months duration
|
1- 1/2" undercutting
at scribe. Damage to
panel.
3-3/4 months duration
Test Terminated
|
|
TAP WATER
IMMERSION
120°F
Rated using
ASTM D714-87
|
No undercutting at
scribe. No damage
to panel.
24 months duration
|
3/4" scribe
undercut
2-1/2 months duration
Test Terminated
|
|
SODIUM HYDROXIDE
IMMERSION
25% solution
140°F
Rated using
ASTM D714-87
|
No effect
24 months
|
Softened film, discoloration
and etched surface
2-1/2 months,
Test Teminated
|
|
CATHODIC
DISBONDMENT
Attached Cell Method
ASTM G-95
30 Days/Average 3 samples
|
0.17 mm disbondment
|
10.0 mm disbondment
|
|
IMPACT RESISTANCE
ASTM G-14
18-month-old linings
Applied to abrasive blasted
Ductile Iron Pipe (non-
ground pipe)
|
72 in/lbs
|
75 in/lbs
|
|
EXTERIOR EXPOSURE
Continuous exterior exposure
to weather and sunlight
Birmingham, Alabama
|
2.5 years
Chalking, negligible
loss of film - No effect
on metal protection.
|
2.5 years
Chalking, negligible
loss of film - No effect
on metal protection.
|
|
HYDROGEN PEROXIDE IMMERSION
25% Solution
|
77°F
ASTM D-1308
|
No effect
Passed
|
Large Blisters
Failed
|
|
|
Note: All materials were tested with an average film thickness of 40 mils on production run ductile iron pipe
|
