Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.rights.licenseLicencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacionalspa
dc.contributor.authorCastellanos-Gonzalez, Luis Marcos
dc.contributor.authorCastilla Jimenez, Javier A.
dc.contributor.authorCabello Eras, Juan Jose
dc.contributor.authorHurtado Marquez, Julio S.
dc.contributor.authorMartinez-Diaz, Leonel
dc.description.abstractThis research defines the best combination of factors (wáter pressure, the use or non-use of washing with fresh water after process, environmental factors (i.e., temperature, humidity, etc.) and type of epoxy Paint) for the high pressure water jetting treatment of naval steels to guarantee the best performance against corrosión. Results show that the epoxy/iron oxide Paint had the best performance when: a water-jetting pressure of 275.8 MP a is used, followed by a low pressure freshwater cleaning. Results also show the best results when the process is developed at the highest environmental temperatures and lowest humidity.eng
dc.publisherMedwell Journaleng
dc.sourceResearch journal of applied scienceseng
dc.sourceVol. 13, No.5 (2018)spa
dc.subjectSurface preparationeng
dc.subjectFlash rusteng
dc.titleAssessment of the Technological and Environmental Factors Influencing the Ultra-High-Pressure Water Jetting Treatment of the Surface of Naval Construction Steel Against Corrosioneng
dcterms.referencesAult, J., 2010. Inspection techniques for flash rust formed after waterjetting. Elzly Technology Corporation, Reston, Virginia.eng
dcterms.referencesAult, J., 2014. Performance of coatings over waterjetted surfaces, paint and coatings industry webinars. Paintsquare Mag., 18: 36-45.eng
dcterms.referencesBierwagen, G., D. Tallman, J. Li, L. He and C. Jeffcoate, 2003. EIS studies of coated metals in accelerated exposure. Prog. Org. Coat., 46: 149-158.eng
dcterms.referencesCalve, P.L., J.P. Pautasso and N.L. Bozec, 2011. Characterizing surfaces after UHP waterjetting in new ship construction. J. Protective Coat. Linings, 28: 36-42.eng
dcterms.referencesFrenzel, L.M., 2010. How does waterjet cleaning affect the surface and surface preparation?. J. Protective Coat. Linings, 27: 44-56.eng
dcterms.referencesKim, G.R., T.S. Kang, Y.H. Cho and J.M. Han, 2008. Effect of flash rust on protective properties of organic coatings. Proceedings of the Conference and Expo on CORROSION, March 16-20, 2008, NACE International, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp: 1-13.eng
dcterms.referencesKnapp, J.K. and T.A. Taylor, 1996. Waterjet roughened surface analysis and bond strength. Surf. Coat. Technol., 86: 22-27.eng
dcterms.referencesRosenberg, B., L. Yuan and S. Fulmer, 2006. Ergonomics of abrasive blasting: A comparison of high pressure water and steel shot. Appl. Ergon., 37: 659-667.eng
dcterms.referencesSchmid, R., 2005. Evolution of UHP waterjetting equipment: Surface preparation process found to yield higherproductivity than gritblasting. Met. Finish., 103: 41-60.eng
dcterms.referencesTeimourian, H., M.R. Shabgard and A.W. Momber, 2010. De-painting with high-speed water jets: Paint removal process and substrate surface roughness. Prog. Org. Coat., 69: 455-462.eng
dcterms.referencesYuin, W. and W. Alan, 1997. Robust design using taguchi methods. Librería Díaz de Santos, Madrid, Spain.eng

Ficheros en el ítem


No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

  • Artículos
    Artículos científicos evaluados por pares

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem