bainzy
Member
- Messages
- 34
- Location
- Yorkshire UK
I would just say hold fire at interpreting things from these jars until the samples have come out. Rusty looking particles in the solution doesn't mean that the paint isn't protecting the steel underneath it, it may just mean that the steel on the other side is corroding when the painted areas may be perfect. The fact that the unpainted steel seems to have about twice as much floaty ginger stuff in than the Bonda Rust and Frost WTP suggests that they are slowing the corrosion rate in some way. I have been informed Bonda Rust isn't porous but that was just second hand information, not from the manufacturer. Even if coatings are non-porous, that doesn't necessarily follow they are impenetrable.
The Electrox jar now has lots of obvious floaty sediment, though it is bright white, not ginger. There is some light yellowy/orange discolouration on the back (uncoated) side of the steel in that particular jar, as well as bits I can see on unpainted steel in the other jars. The race is not over yet!
I think anything known to have a higher % of zinc content is likely to have a higher "throw" of area of steel beyond the paint that it protects by cathodic action. An immersion test like this will probably give an advantage to whatever product has the most zinc, as the water is a very effective conductor. I would be very impressed if the electrox manages to protect the reverse side of the steel that isn't painted with it, but none of these paints claim to have qualities that impressive.
I think the edges of the coatings might be of interest to see once the samples are removed and photographed. Also, what does the steel look like underneath them. At some point I think the best way to test the area of steel under the coatings might be to use a heat gun to remove what's left of them, so my current plan is to do that though I don't want to do it too early.
The Electrox jar now has lots of obvious floaty sediment, though it is bright white, not ginger. There is some light yellowy/orange discolouration on the back (uncoated) side of the steel in that particular jar, as well as bits I can see on unpainted steel in the other jars. The race is not over yet!
I think anything known to have a higher % of zinc content is likely to have a higher "throw" of area of steel beyond the paint that it protects by cathodic action. An immersion test like this will probably give an advantage to whatever product has the most zinc, as the water is a very effective conductor. I would be very impressed if the electrox manages to protect the reverse side of the steel that isn't painted with it, but none of these paints claim to have qualities that impressive.
I think the edges of the coatings might be of interest to see once the samples are removed and photographed. Also, what does the steel look like underneath them. At some point I think the best way to test the area of steel under the coatings might be to use a heat gun to remove what's left of them, so my current plan is to do that though I don't want to do it too early.