EARLY COATING FAILURES ON OFFSHORE PLATFORMS

Jim Britton
Deepwater Corrosion Services Inc.
10851 Train Court
Houston, TX. 77041
ABSTRACT
This paper describes several common modes of early coating failure that lead to
corrosion problems on offshore platforms. Symptoms are analyzed and solutions
presented. The work is based on the examination of two offshore platforms that had been
in service for less than 18 months.
Keywords:
offshore platforms; crevice corrosion; paint failures; paint inspection; pipe
supports; surface preparation.
INTRODUCTION
This paper provides some examples of how offshore paint systems in atmospheric
service fail to deliver their full life expectancy. Two typical Gulf of Mexico fixed
drilling/production platform structures have been selected as case histories. Both deck
facilities were fabricated on the US Gulf Coast at different fabrication yards. Jackets &
decks were actually set in place in June of 1997. Our investigation was performed in
November of 1998; the facilities had been offshore for only 17 months at the time of
inspection.
WHY DID FAILURES OCCUR?
Analysis of the following examples will show six basic reasons for the poor
performance, some are easy to deal with and others have more elusive solutions. Often it
is one or more of the causes working together to produce the result. In each example I
have attempted to propose a solution that is workable.

-1-

The six causes are as follows:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Poor surface preparation and especially surface cleanliness.

Poor coating application.
Poor or inadequate inspection.
Poor specifications (both construction and coating).
Poor component design.
Murphys Law
FAILURE 1. BEAM EDGES

Problem
Figure 1. illustrates the problem that could be found in many locations on the
structure, in particular where plate gussets had been welded into I-Beams. The sharp
edges of the plate sections are particularly difficult to coat, the edges should have been
radiussed, they are difficult to coat in this condition. However this is not the full extent,
nor is it the single cause of the problem;
Inadequate film thickness is a basic problem that is clearly not given enough
attention by inspectors although one would expect applicators to understand the
requirements. The specifications call for a stripe coat that was obviously not applied.
This failure will progress rapidly, undercutting will soon fail the system (2-3 Years) to
the point that an expensive re-paint is required.
Solution(s).
1.
2.
3.

Select coatings with improved edge retention characteristics.

Ensure correct application of stripe coats at edges as recommended by paint
manufacturer.
Radius all beam edges to improve retention characteristics.
FAILURE 2.

STAINLESS STEEL TUBING ATTACHMENT

Problem 2.1
Figures 2-4 illustrate a common problem in the Gulf of Mexico. The use of
stainless steel bands to attach stainless steel tubing to process equipment, in this case a
pressure vessel. The primary failure is initiated when the band on the buckle punctures
the paint film, and simultaneously provides a galvanic couple with an undesirable area
ratio. Corrosion progresses rapidly and soon undercuts adjacent film. Secondary failure
mechanism is at band where water retaining crevice is formed, paint is softened by
immersion service, film fails and galvanic couple drives corrosion cell at advanced rate.
The consequences here can be more serious and could lead to rapid pitting of the vessel

-2-

shell. This is clearly a case of poor design, neither the painters nor the coating are at fault
here. The need to route tubing on the vessel should have been anticipated.
Solutions
1.
2.

Find an alternate routing for the tubing off of the pressure equipment.
Provide dedicated structural support points on vessel for purposes of tubing
support.

Problem 2.2
Figures 5-6 show the same problem on piping. Here we have more options than
with the vessel in the previous example. Proper tubing trays located off the piping should
be used, there would never be any consideration to using piping as a cable route so why
should it be used for tubing? If it is necessary to route tubing on piping designed
supports are recommended (Figure 7).

FAILURE 3. ID TAGS & FLOAT LEVEL INDICATORS

Problem 3.1
Figure 8. illustrates the problem. The item in the picture is part of a vessel level
control system The offending piece is a riveted plate attached to the hydrocarboncontaining cylinder. The notation on the piece is FLOAT CENTER above and below a
horizontal line. The obvious problem is a complete lack of any coating behind the plate,
crevice corrosion and a galvanic couple. This will soon pop off the tag due to corrosion
product forces exerted from within the crevice. Perforation of the cylinder is not
uncommon, but coating failure and the need for expensive maintenance painting is
guaranteed. The writer has personally seen this problem on hundreds of offshore
platforms.
Solution(s) 3.1
1.
2.
3.

Write specifications that prohibit this type of design.

Lose the tag and weld on a stripe or remove tag, coat the affected area stencil
line.
At the very least attach the tab with a seal weld.

-3-

Problem 3.2
Figures 9-10 show other examples but there are some important differences.
These tags are made of stainless steel and bear critical information about the part that
they occupy a space upon. So, when they pop off into the Gulf the information lost is a
little more than FLOAT CENTER. The loss of these tags can usually proceed to the
aggressive galvanic couple driving the reaction. Progressive coating failure at many
points is also a result.
Solution(s) 3.2
1.
2.
3.

Write specifications that prohibit this method of ID tag attachment.

Stamp information on steel doubler plate seal welded to part.
Attach tag with SS wire lanyard to part.
FAILURE 4 SURFACE PREPARATION / POOR CLEANLINESS

Some of the examples below can and should be prevented with diligent
inspection. The failures will cost the platform operator many tens of thousands of dollars
to correct. The paint system will come up way short of design life expectation.
Figure 11 shows the result of poor surface cleanliness, paint has already
disbonded from surface at six oclock pipe position. Probable cause is that pipe was wet
when painted, gravity driven accumulation at 6 oclock has accelerated failure. This
indicates a poor level of surface condition monitoring during the application process, and
it is likely that more failures will show up in fairly short order.
Figure 12 shows another common problem, premature coating failure on field
girth welds. There are two main contributors here, mainly lack of post weld cleaning and
inadequate blast profile. Field welds are difficult to properly blast and clean by their
geometry, particularly if access is difficult., there may also be a tendency want to
minimize over blast damage to adjacent painted surfaces. These local failures quickly
undercut and spread, soon compromising the entire run of piping.
Possible solutions are to install flanges to minimize field welds, however pipe
flanges provide just as difficult a problem, but at least they can be shop coated. Certainly
it is prudent to minimize the number of field welds, but some are always necessary. The
best solution is to take the time and effort to protect adjacent surfaces and take additional
time to obtain the needed level of blast profile and cleanliness.
Figures 13 & 14 show examples of pin holes at areas of blast medium
contamination of the surface.

-4-

Solutions
The above problems could all be averted with diligent inspection to a well-written
coating specification document.
Ensure that they have the necessary NACE or
appropriate level of certification for the job in hand. Repainting an offshore platform can
cost millions of dollars, 30 or 40% reduction in expected life translates to hundreds of
thousands of dollars in lost asset values.
FAILURE 5 FASTENERS
Figures 15 & 16 show two examples of how fastener coating failure is
contributing to a greater problem, the corrosion products, apart from looking nasty, will
fail the films onto which they fall, and spread the deterioration.
Fasteners have always been a problem, many specialized coatings have been tried
and many have not worked well. Post-installed paint films are very difficult to apply
effectively because of all the edges and crevices involved.
Solutions
1. Use quality fastener coatings or use corrosion resistant alloys. We have seen the
best performance from aluminum ceramic coatings, although metallic plated
coatings can work if correctly selected for service.
2. Protective caps with inhibited grease fills can work well, ensure that they engage
positively on the thread. They are however rather expensive, and will require a
low level of maintenance to ensure complete protection.
FAILURE 6 PIPE SUPPORTS
These two platforms had done a good job with specifying pipe supports, having
specified crevice control systems (Figures 17-18), so the problems found were minimal
(Figure 19). However the isolated points where the supports had been omitted do
demonstrate how quickly the pipe support problem can manifest itself.
Failure 7

Mechanical Damage & Drilling Operations Damage

Figures 20-22 show typical examples of mechanical damage. This type of damage falls
under the Murphys Law category, being impossible to avoid completely. The rate at
which corrosion will progress will be a function of location of the damage. The most
practical solution is to use a soft oxygen barrier type coating to prevent progressive
undercutting, several green brands are available that will do an adequate job.
Figures 23-24 show initial failure that has progressed because of drilling mud falling onto
structural members and piping. This is another situation that is practically impossible to
contain (after all these are drilling platforms). Regular pressure wash down with fresh

-5-

water will minimize the problem, also the use of basic containment within the well bay
will help minimize the extent of the problem areas.
Designers may consider these problems when routing piping in areas where
contamination is unavoidable, and elect to use CRA piping if an alternate route cannot be
found.
SUMMARY LESSONS LEARNED
With the new generation of large floating production facilities, designers and
corrosion engineers alike would do well to learn from these expensive lessons, the cost of
prematurely repainting a large TLP or SPAR type structure could extend into millions of
dollars. The following basic measures will help minimize the risk and maximize return
on investment.
1.
2.
3.
4.

Commission a design phase corrosion review; this will capture many of the
potential problems.
Prepare concise and complete painting and construction specifications.
Employ only certified inspectors and pre-screened applicators.
Utilize proven methods of paint service enhancement such as properly coated
fasteners and crevice control system at pipe supports.

-6-

Figure 1. Beam Edge Failure

Figure 3.

Figure 2. Stainless Banding on Vessel

Buckle Puncture

Figure 4.

-7-

Galvanic Corrosion

Figure 5.

Tubing on Piping

Figure 6.

Galvanic Corrosion

Figure 7. Designed Tubing Support

Figure 8. Float Level Tag

-8-

Figure 9. ID Tag Crevice

Figure 10. Tag on Accumulator

Figure 11. Poor Cleanliness

Figure 12.

-9-

Field Weld Coating

Figure 13. Blast Medium Contamination

Figure 15. Fastener Corrosion Soon Spreads

- 10 -

Figure 14. Corrosion at Pin Hole

Figure 16. Fasteners Are Hard To Coat

Figure 17. Crevice Control In Place

Figure 19. Corrosion Starting Where

Crevice Control is Omitted

- 11 -

Figure 18. No Corrosion at

Pipe Support

Figure 20. Mechanical Damage on

Vertical Diagonal Brace

Figure 21. Unavoidable Mechanical Damage

Figure 23.

Drilling Mud on Members

Under Well Bay

Figure 22. More Mechanical Damage.

Figure 24. Breakdown on Piping

Under Mud.

- 12 -