The True Value of Durable High-Performance Offshore Coatings
The cheapest coating is the one that you don’t have to replace. In an industry where frequent failures and life cycles of just months at a time are the norm, this idea may sound like something closer to a pipe dream than a reality. However, we’re here to turn the industry’s expectations of coating durability on its head with real data which opens a compelling case that:
- Today’s offshore coatings are NOT being formulated for success in real-world applications, and…
- They SHOULD be held to a standard that prioritizes long-lasting durability over short-term strength.
Before drilling into the details, let’s begin by explaining our focus on the value of coating durability in the first place.
Weighing Cost vs. Longevity
Previously, we’ve discussed the advantages of minimizing application and maintenance times. While a coating with a lower up-front cost may be enticing, the cost of a coating system is near-negligible when compared to the costs of labor that accrue during access preparation, surface preparation, coating application, and subsequent maintenance. Part of what makes an ultra-durable coating a smart choice for cost savings is their ability to keep maintenance time to a minimum, thereby reducing costs associated with not only application labor but also preparation labor as well.
With all that being said, choosing a coating which demonstrates longevity is critical to keeping maintenance costs down. Initial spending may be 1% higher up front, but in comparison to frequent and repeated maintenance, an ultra-durable coating is an investment which pays for itself many times over by skipping traditional maintenance cycles. Naturally, the next question to arise is: how does one select the right coating? You would think that the answer should be straightforward, however there is an ugly truth which lies beneath the surface.
Quantifying Durability: Are Today’s Standards Enough?
When it comes to coating durability, there are many hallmarks of quality to look out for. At the top of the list, as far as any specifier is concerned, is adherence to standards set by ISO, NORSOK, AMPP, and the like. All of today’s top coatings manufacturers will proudly showcase these seals of approval, but if you ask us, they don’t mean much. The reason being that most, if not all of these standard test procedures aren’t all they’re cracked up to be. Here’s why:
Today’s standard test methods all fail to neglect one simple truth: coatings age.
Standards like ISO 12044-9, for example, assume there will be damage to the coating. Furthermore, they assume this damage will happen in the exact same way, at the same intensity with the same consistency, no matter how durable the coating system is. When it comes to the offshore environment, physical abrasion and exposure to impacts, extreme heat, and UV rays is simply undeniable. To omit these combined factors when evaluating coating performance– especially in testing procedures which are intended to mirror real-world wear– is careless at best.
Beyond The Standards: Extreme Aging Testing
Now, there’s the possibility that this doesn’t matter and the standards are fine as they are. Maybe these coatings could perform the exact same as they do brand new, even when placed through harsh offshore conditions… but it could also explain why systems are failing prematurely by a magnitude of years at a time. At Tesla NanoCoatings we weren’t satisfied with leaving room for speculation, so we decided to take things into our own hands.
In our latest study, we followed the same standard test procedures that today’s offshore coatings are measured against. However, we did one key thing differently– after coating each sample to the manufacturers’ directions, we subjected them to 1 month’s worth of 158°F/70°C temperatures and UV exposure to mimic conditions recorded on offshore platforms. To say that this adjustment drastically changed the results compared to today’s standard testing procedures would be the understatement of the decade.
Here’s what we found:
- Before UV and heat exposure, a commonly used offshore system maxed out impact resistance at an impressive 160 in-lb.
- Meanwhile, the same system did not cross the minimum threshold of just 25 in-lb after 1 month of aging by UV exposure– indicating at least an 81% decrease in impact resistance.
- After 1 month of aging by UV exposure, our system performed at 60 in-lb.
- 1 month of aging by thermal exposure yielded comparable results.
These findings support what we have suspected all along: that the industry’s top offshore coatings manufacturers are simply formulating to satisfy standard testing procedures, NOT to provide long lasting protection to their customers’ assets. Does that sound like the kind of system that you’d want in your specifications?
TESLAN’s Durability in Action Offshore
In stark contrast, TESLAN systems have been observed to outlast competing offshore coatings by a factor of 2, 3, or even 5 times in some cases. While many of our customers have expressed their expectations of a coating to last for as little as 6 months offshore, our systems have demonstrated capability far beyond their imagination. Take a look at our presence in the Gulf of Mexico, where TESLAN’s first commercial application took place about a decade ago and is still going strong.
Looking back at Tesla NanoCoatings’ inception, our purpose was never to simply adopt emerging technologies or just get by meeting the industry standards. Our goal has always been to make something that the industry needs– something that really works. If you’re tired of dealing with coatings that fail to make (or take) an impact, so are we. Contact Tesla NanoCoatings today to find out more about how our systems can transform your offshore operations with durability you can count on, not just today but for years to come.
