; “Fah hole. ISEZ WHO! DOCUMENT COILLECTION \Weaualeal! @ nose NOUG title: REPAIR SYSTEM FOR DAMAGED COATINGS ON NAVY " ANTENNA TOWERS — PART ITI author: L. K. Schwab and R. W. Drisko, PhD date: October 1979 Sponsor: Naval Facilities Engineering Command program MOS: yF54.593.012.01.004 —= WAvy CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY NAVAL CONSTRUCTION BATTALION CENTER BG A, Miele Port Hueneme, California 93043 ast N23 Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. rh Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered) STRUCTIONS REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Sea aa err 1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO.| 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER TN-1562 DN687042 4. TITLE (and Subtitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED REPAIR SYSTEM FOR DAMAGED COATINGS ON Final; Oct 1977 — Sep 1978 NAVY ANTENNA TOWERS — PART II PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER 6. 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(s) AUTHOR(s) L. K. Schwab and R. W. Drisko 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT, PROJECT, TASK AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS 62761N; YF54.593.012.01.004 12. REPORT DATE October 1979 13. - PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY Naval Construction Battalion Center Port Hueneme, California 93043 CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS Naval Facilities Engineering Command Alexandria, Virginia 22332 MONITORING AGENCY NAME & AODRESS/(if different from Controlling Office) NUMBER OF PAGES 50 SECURITY CLASS. (of this report) 15. Unclassified 15a. DECL ASSIFICATION/ DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report) Approved for public release; distribution unlimited. 17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the abstract entered in Block 20, if different from Report) 18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse side if necessary and identify by block number) Coatings, surface finishing, repairs, antenna towers, coating application, coating cleaning, protective coatings. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse side if necessary and identify by block number) Coating materials and cleaning and application procedures and equipment were developed for use in the repair of damaged coatings on Navy steel antenna towers. Experimental coatings were screened by laboratory-accelerated testing before field exposure. In the initial field exposure, 19 of 32 different coating systems provided good protection from corrosion for 3 years to a steel antenna positioner in a marine atmospheric environ- ment. In a later field experiment, 8 of 12 of the better-performing coating systems cont. FORM oe DD | jan 73 1473 EDITION OF 1 Nov 65 Is OBSOLETE Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Data Entered) 0 0301 O040218 b Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(When Data Entered) 20. Continued provided very good protection for 15 months on two steel vortex towers in a very corrosive marine atmospheric environment. Newly developed cleaning and application procedures and equipment were tested during the latter field study. Practices by the Civil Engineering Laboratory currently recommended for coating protection of antenna towers are also presented. Civil Engineering Laboratory REPAIR SYSTEM FOR DAMAGED COATINGS ON NAVY ANTENNA TOWERS — PART II (Final), by L. K. Schwab and R. W. Drisko TN-1562 50 pp illus October 1979 Unclassified 1. Coating systems 2. Steel tower coatings I, YF54.593.012.01.004 Coating materials and cleaning and application procedures and equipment were developed for use in the repair of damaged coatings on Navy steel antenna towers. Experi- mental coatings were screened by laboratory-accelerated testing before field exposure. In the initial field exposure, 19 of 32 different coating systems provided good protection from corrosion for 3 years to a steel antenna positioner in a marine atmospheric environment. In a later field experiment, 8 of 12 of the better-performing coating systems provided very good protection for 15 months on two steel vortex towers in a very corrosive marine atmospheric environment. Newly developed cleaning and application procedures and equipment were tested during the latter field study. Practices by the Civil Engineering Laboratory currently recommended for coating protection of antenna towers are also presented. Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE/When Data Entered) CONTENTS Page JINTRODUGIMNON 2 Sah ses Se se BS me Se es SO sl oo ee Ae 1 BRIEF DISCUSSION OF FIELD TEST ON ANTENNA POSITIONER AT PMTC .. . 1 LABORATORY SALT-SPRAY EXPOSURE OF COATING SYSTEMS ........ 2 MeSibwSEISNES, 2. ce q ne we Gr 1 ewe SE ty ue te he, Gi gre cer er emt tee oe 2 SecondwSerdiGSiin o) ) s,s. oe es, epee oh) st uc e eE ey ep cere 3 CLEANING AND COATING APPLICATION EQUIPMENT . Design of RSD SR st was ee oe Mee, ee. ne Ge eye reese 3 ResilitsMey cy Meet etme? BA eter 5, Sloe Gaente bere: Ee, ace et ea 4 FIELD EXPOSURE OF COATINGS ON VORTEX TOWERS AT PMTC 4 DESDARAEIOM OF Thesis AWOAS oo 5 0 5 6 6 o> 0 6 oo 8 8 8 4 Coating Selection . 5 Results . 5 PRACTICES RECOMMENDED BY CEL FOR PROTECTING ANTENNA TOWERS . 6 Types of Antennas . : Jae RS aS SA SS ee 6 Design for Corrosion Genesel: a Sy IAS SS eel snc a nay 6 Surface Preparation for Coating Renate 7 Coating Selection . ‘ 7 Coating Antenna Guy mes ‘ 8 COST CONSIDERATIONS FOR NEW STEEL CONSTRUCTION .......... 9 SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATION ........... =... «(10 INCKNOWEEDGMENDS® 2 CAE <2 oe Re ks Bs ee es lO REBERENGHS Beye cok crecsta ec ES co ee Ca es ene goa es orgs Pe LO) APPENDIXES A — Type and Sources of Coating Systems Used on Second Series Salt-Spray Exposure . . Fis Chala See mt Or at otek) B — Formulas of eee et Paints weeds on Vortex Towers . . Se iS 3 Gs es ee 40 C — Coating Systems Used on Tose: Towers fo eo oe Ss ee Aa ing oe a st, a wah Savi re aa me ly * wi: rane MUNI, rane! § pure: Ta ie i? " von Ce a) é 7 ¥ Vv a a ‘ wee bod orn i ioe if | wee’. vestige 4 o8 ka’ aga mr \odeerdh eae ele sip d allel tt tel aaah "eo ae Bayt hw tt, Tape a a Ad aoe i reed! ar) et a) se? at ‘ mw td oe = INTRODUCTION Many Navy antenna towers are located in remote locations where maintenance facilities are limited and severe environment, such as marine or tropical exposure, causes rapid, localized, coating damage. The heights and configurations of these towers permit only steeplejacks or repairmen utilizing an aerial-serving platform to reach all areas. Even then, some areas are frequently hard to reach. Repair of damaged coatings by conventional means (e.g., sandblasting and spray painting) is very costly and, in some cases, impossible because of physical limi- tations or environmental regulations. Dry abrasive blasting, for example, is frequently restricted because of particulate emission. Thus, the Civil Engineering Laboratory (CEL) was directed by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command to develop optimum methods for in-place repair of damaged exterior antenna coatings. Reference 1 describes initial laboratory and field studies on antenna coating repair materials and methods. This technical note is the second and final document of the investigation, which included: (1) accelerated, salt-spray testing of experimental and specification coating systems; (2) results of 3 years of field testing of candidate materials from accelerated tests on an antenna positioner at the Pacific Missile Test Center (PMTC), Point Mugu, Calif.; (3) development of cleaning and coating techniques and equipment; (4) testing of developed coating systems and cleaning and coating techniques and equipment on two vortex towers in a very corrosive environment at PMTC; and (5) a summary of currently recommended practices for protecting antenna towers from a corrosive environment. BRIEF DISCUSSION OF FIELD TEST ON ANTENNA POSITIONER AT PMTC Reference 1 provides detailed information on the application and initial ratings of 32 coating systems (all consist of one coat of primer and one coat of topcoat) on an antenna positioner located at the lagoon area at PMTC. Monthly ratings were made for a total of 3 years, at the end of which, 19 of the 32 systems were providing good protection to the steel. As far as is possible, ASTM photographic standards were used to rate these specimens. Table 1 lists coating conditions after years of exposure. Ratings at the end of 3 years for various properties generally ranged from a high of 10 (perfect) to a low of 0. Heavy chalking, common to all exterior epoxies, occurred with all the experimental coating systems. However, this condition does not result in loss of protection unless it leads to coating erosion. Some discoloration, such as yellowing or rust streaking, was evident on all systems. Systems 38 and 39 (mearest the ground) had the most discoloration; systems 16 and 23 (positioned in a more protected area) had the least. Rusting, ASTM Type I (pinpoint), was found on 13 of the 32 systems. Showing the most rusting were systems 38 and 39; while systems 11, 14, 17, 20, 21, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40, and 41 were slightly better. Systems 17, 20, and 21 exhibited peeling, and systems 11, 14, 17, and 20 exhibited cracking. Wrinkling shows on systems 34 through 41. No blistering was observed on any of the coating systems. LABORATORY SALT-SPRAY EXPOSURE OF COATING SYSTEMS Laboratory salt-spray testing (Method 6061 of Ref 2) is often used as a relatively quick procedure for screening coatings for ability to protect steel from corrosion. In such testing, coated panels are exposed in an enclosed chamber in an atmosphere of 5% or 20% salt spray at a temperature of approximately 95°F. The results of salt-spray exposure of systems 42 through 53 were reported in Reference 1. Systems that provided above-average protection in Phase 1, plus 25 additional coating systems, are discussed in this section of this document. This group of coatings, then, form the basis for selection of those coatings that could be used for field exposure on vortex towers at PMIC. First Series Panel Preparation. Prerusted 6x12-inch steel panels were cleaned manually — first by wire-brushing and then by scrubbing in water with a medium-hard bristle brush. The panels were then dipped in methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) to remove water and allowed to dry. No desiccator large enough to hold these panels was available, so they were placed overnight in a slightly warm dry oven to prevent corrosion before use. One-half of the cooled panels received a special surface treatment before coating (see Table 2). This surface treatment consisted of brushing with the same metal conditioner and rust converter used with systems 43, 45, and 47 in the initial study (Ref 1). All coatings were primed, using a l-inch-wide brush. One-half of each set of treated and untreated panels were machine-scribed to bare metal with an "X." This first series used MIL-P-24441 (Formula 150) epoxy-polyamide primer and MIL-P-24441 (Formula 152) epoxy-polyamide topcoat as the coating system standard. Systems 10> OL2e lS lop eoreli8. lO 2 S45 351365 Se 40), sande4iln(Ret 1) iwexe tested. The coated panels were placed in a 5% salt-spray cabinet and rated periodically by the same rating system used in Reference 3. Results. The panels were left in the salt spray for 154 days (Table 3). At the end of this period all the scribed panels had discol- ored from rusting and tuberculation in scribed areas. All systems showed some blistering around the scribed areas, but systems 12, 18, 35, and 38 also had blistering elsewhere. Except for systems 21 and 38, all systems had slight undercutting. All systems, except systems 18 and 30, would probably provide several years of protection to steel under normal exterior exposure. Second Series Panel Preparation. Shop personnel cleaned the prerusted experi- mental panels by power grinding. The panels were then scrubbed in water with a bristle brush, dipped in MEK, and allowed to dry. All coatings were applied by spraying, using the experimental backpack applicator.* Systems 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 60, 66, 67, 68, 69, and 70 comprised this series. The types and sources of the coating systems can be found in Appendix A. Results. The salt-spray conditions and inspections were similar to those of the first series. All systems were exposed to salt spray for 123 days, except systems 55, 57, 67, and 70, which were exposed for only 98 days.** After 123 days, systems 69 and 70 had failed because of delamination of the topcoat from the primer. System 67 performed the best (see Table 4) showing only slight overall blistering and blistering scribe. Second best was system 57, which showed discoloration and rusting, Type I. All the other systems showed discoloration, tubercu- lation, and rusting scribes. Systems 55, 67, 68, and 69 showed slight blistering, and systems 54, 58, 59, 60, 66, and 68 showed undercutting. CLEANING AND COATING APPLICATION EQUIPMENT Three of the most common causes for coating failure on steel towers are: (1) inadequate surface preparation, (2) improper application of the coating, and (3) incompatibility of the new and previous coatings. To reduce coating failures due to (1) or (2) surface preparation and coating application equipment was investigated. As a result of the investigation, special equipment was designed and used in preparation of both the second series laboratory tests and the field tests. Design This special equipment, shown in Figure 1, was designed for mount- ing on a backpack for a painter to carry it to areas to be coated. The backpack was designed and fabricated by Advanced Coatings and Chemicals, South El Monte, Calif., under a contract awarded by CEL. Three criteria were uppermost in its design: light weight, portability, and sufficient *See section on CLEANING AND COATING APPLICATION EQUIPMENT. Janta! we The 25-day difference in exposure time of some of the panels was due to relocating the salt-spray cabinet. After relocating the cabinet, additional panels were added to the test. power for operation. All components of the system were off-the-shelf items. On a typical backpack harness was mounted a 17x8x1/4-inch alumi- num plate to which a Binks O0il-Less Air Compressor Model 34-1051 was attached. This compressor, powered by a 3/4-hp, 1,725-rpm electric motor, produced a maximum pressure of 50 psi. Surface preparation tools included a Chicago Monarch Model 25 chipping hammer/needle gun (Figures 1(b) and (c)) and a Black and Decker 16,000-rpm, air-operated disc sander (Figure 1(d)). The paint gun was a Binks Model 62 with a Binks Model 80 1-quart pot (Figure 1(e)). Six-foot long feedlines extended from the compressor to the pot and from the pot to the gun. The complete system weighed approximately 67 pounds. In the field, tower electrical outlets or extension cords to other outlets were to provide power for operation. Results The backpack surface preparation and paint application equipment was satisfactorily used in the laboratory to clean and coat the experi- mental panels. When the equipment was used for surface preparation and coating application on the antenna towers at PMIC, however, the following problems were noted: (1) the system was too heavy to use for an extended period of time; (2) electric power was not available so air pressure had to be obtained from a portable compressor; and (3) the compressor pro- duced inadequate pressure for satisfactory cleaning with the tools. A larger portable compressor had to be used to provide the necessary pressure. If such alternative equipment were chosen for future use, a diesel- driven air compressor could be used for both cleaning and application. A clamped, rigid line could run from the compressor at the base to the top of the antenna. Quick disconnects for attachment of a flexible pneumatic hose could be located at intervals of 20 feet. This hose could be fitted to a reel mounted on the backpack harness in place of the compressor and motor. While such an alternative system was not tested on the vortex towers, it is believed that all problems encoun- tered with the original backpack system would be eliminated by use of such an system. For instance, a pressure hose was lifted in similar fashion with a cherry picker. FIELD EXPOSURE OF COATINGS ON VORTEX TOWERS AT PMTC Preparation of Test Areas Portions of two steel vortex towers located on a beach at the western perimeter of PMTC were used as substrates for the second field exposure of antenna coating repair. These towers were erected in 1954 and have been painted three times since then. The towers are exposed to periodic wind-blown sand and salt spray from the ocean, with the lower 20 feet subject to sand abrasion at times of high wind. Large areas of the legs and chord braces had extensive coating loss and rusting. Most connectors had significant galvanic corrosion. For the coating tests, all corrosion, loose coating, and dirt were removed from the 10- and 20-foot elevation test areas on each tower before application of the coatings. A pneumatic chipping hammer removed the larger areas of corrosion and loose coating; this preparation was followed by use of a grinder equipped first with coarse-grit (aluminum oxide #36) and then fine-grit (aluminum oxide #60) disks. The connectors and areas surrounding them were cleaned with a needle gun. Two experimental coating systems were applied to each of the chord braces and their leg connectors at the 10- and 20-foot levels of each tower. Appendix B lists the formulations of the experimental coatings. The experimental backpack application equipment was used to apply systems 58, 59, and 60. All other systems were applied with a 2-inch wide brush. Appendix C lists the formulas of each two-coat system used on the towers, the material sources, and the total dry film thicknesses. In accordance with Civil Aeronautics Board Regulations, the different levels of the antennas were alternately painted red and white. Random locations on the test areas were assigned to these systems. Coating Selection The selection of the coating systems for exposure on the vortex towers was two-fold. First, new titanate coupling agents came to the attention of CEL personnel. Coatings containing titanate agents were formulated and exposed in a laboratory salt-spray chamber in accelerated tests discussed earlier in this document. Some of these coatings were selected for long-term exposure on the vortex towers. Second, other coatings selected had proved themselves in applications other than on antenna towers, and it was decided to determine their usefulness as coatings under tower exposure conditions. The coating used for the standard for this exposure test was MIL-P- 24441 epoxy-polyamide (150 for the primer and 156 for the topcoat). Results Inspection and rating of the experimental coatings were made monthly, using the ASTM rating system described previously. Exposure ratings after 15 months are shown in Table 5. At this time the coatings located at the 20-foot elevation on the tower nearest the ocean had somewhat greater deterioration than the other. A brief summary of significant effects on the exposed coatings is listed as follows: Effect Systems Chalking All, except 63 Discoloration 5A, SOs 58, S95, 63 Cracking 58, 62 Slight peeling 56 Rusting, Type I RA, BO, S57, S85 5D Rusting, Type II 56, 58 The overall general protection was very good for systems 55, 57, and 60 through 65 of the 12 systems. PRACTICES RECOMMENDED BY CEL FOR PROTECTING ANTENNA TOWERS* Antenna towers and supporting communication equipment are widely scattered throughout the world. Many are at remote locations that have very corrosive environments (Figures 2 and 3) and very limited mainte- nance services available. Thus, the greatest care must be taken in siting, designing for corrosion control, and planning maintenance if vital communication systems are to be kept operable. Types of Antennas Most antenna towers and supporting equipment are constructed of (1) steel, which corrodes readily (Figure 4); (2) galvanized steel (Figure 5), which can provide several years of protection before requir- ing a coating; (3) or aluminum, which can provide many years of service uncoated but is usually coated in a severe environment. Circularly disposed (Wullenweber) antenna arrays are unique in that wood is used in much of their structural supports (Figure 6). Treated wood is generally used to prevent termite attack. All towers should be coated to provide visibility to aircraft unless acceptabie warning lights are used. Design for Corrosion Control Faulty design is often a major factor leading to the corrosion of structures and equipment exposed to exterior weathering (Ref 4). Loca- tion, structural features, and joining require special consideration in towers and communication equipment construction. Facilities should be located as far as possible from the sea and from winds carrying salt spray. It has been noted that towers located several miles from an ocean have their greatest degree of corrosion at 150- to 200-foot elevations where concentrations of sea salt carried by winds are greatest. Sand borne by winds may cause erosion of coatings or metal on towers. Similarly, towers should not be located downwind from sources of corrosive industrial pollution. Box, rectangular, and tubular beams are much less susceptible to corrosion than tees, channels, and I-beams because the latter permit greater accumulations of salt, moisture, and other contaminants that accelerate corrosion or are more difficult to clean and coat. It is good practice to smooth all welds, edges, and other rough surfaces before coating to permit easier, more uniform coating application. Stairs, railings, ladders, and support trailers present irregular or inaccessible surfaces difficult to coat (Figures 7 and 8). *Based on a paper presented at USAF High Work Safety Conference at Norton Air Force Base, December 5-7, 1978. Crevices may accelerate corrosion and are difficult to coat. Continuous welding is more costly than skip welding, but it eliminates such crevices. Riveted and bolted connections can also produce crevices. Insulation not only minimizes crevices but may also eliminate galvanic corrosion associated with contact of dissimilar metals. Guy lines should be placed so they do not contact each other (Figure 9) or structural members during high winds. The use of protective sleeves to prevent abrasion damage by such action is not an acceptable method of preventing contact (Figure 10). Surface Preparation for Coating Repair Antenna towers and supporting equipment are best coated in a steel fabrication shop and then touched up later in the field, as necessary. Because of the difficulty and cost of coating assembled antenna towers, it is best to obtain as high a level of surface preparation and as good a coating as possible to start with to forestall future maintenance as long as possible. Abrasive blasting, as with almost all steel structures, is the preferred method of cleaning steel towers for coating, either before or after erection, because it produces a good surface texture for bonding (Ref 5). The different levels of surface preparation commonly used for new steel tower construction are given in Table 6. The level of surface preparation desired depends upon (1) the type of coating to be used, (2) the severity of the environment, and (3) the length of protection desired. Exterior abrasive blasting is being restricted in some locations because of air pollution caused by particu- lates emitted into the atmosphere. Thus, greater use may have to be made of different methods of mechanical cleaning (Figures 1(b), (c), (d)). The Tri-Services Painting Manual (Ref 6) describes such cleaning methods as sand and power tools (brushes, grinders, sanders, hammers, chisels, and scalers) and flame and chemical cleaning. Reference 7, published by the Steel Structures Painting Council (SSPC), has standards for hand-tool cleaning (SSPC-SP No. 2) and for power-tool cleaning (SSPC-SP No. 3). Flame and chemical cleaning are not usually practical on tower structures. Galvanized steel and aluminum are solvent-cleaned, if new, and then hand-tool-cleaned or brush-off-blasted (SSPC-SP No. 4) before coating. Coating Selection Coating selection is based on the properties of the coating system; some of these are discussed below. 1. Unmodified drying oil coatings wet steel surfaces very well, but cure very slowly and lack toughness and durability for tower coatings. 2. Alkyds (modified drying oil coatings) wet steel surfaces well, have good curing and protective properties, and are also rather tolerant of incompletely prepared surfaces. 3. Two types of lacquer (vinyl and chlorinated rubber) form tough, durable films and are easily topcoated because solvent in the applied coating softens the existing coating. 4. Chlorinated rubber coatings cure rapidly so that they can be utilized effectively where unpredictable rains or fogs limit times of coating application and curing. 5. Epoxies form tough, protective finishes, but the surfaces chalk freely in sunlight. 6. The polyamide-cured epoxies are more tolerant of incomplete surface preparation than other epoxies. 7. The chemically cured urethanes also produce tough coatings. 8. Aliphatic urethanes have good weathering properties and, thus, are sometimes used over epoxy primers to improve the exterior weathering of the coating system. 9. Zinc-rich coatings can give long-term cathodic protection to steel. 10. Inorganic zinc-rich coatings have better abrasion resistance than the organic zinc-rich coatings, but the latter have better topcoat- ing properties. Coating selection is summarized in Table 7 and discussed in more detail in Reference 8. Coatings applied in three or more coats at dry film thicknesses of 6 mils or more will give optimum barrier protection if free of voids (holidays). Galvanizing is like a zinc-rich coating in that it also protects steel from corrosion by cathodic protection. Zinc-rich coatings weather better in marine atmospheric environments and are more easily applied and topcoated in place (Ref 9) than galvanizing. Thus, a pretreatment (wash) primer is used for alkyd systems on galvanized steel. A zinc dust-zince oxide pigmentation rather than a zine chromate or red lead Pigmentation is generally used in alkyds that are applied over pretreatment-primed galvanized steel (Ref 6). Specially formulated epoxies can also be used over galvanized steel. It is desirable to keep a galvanized or inorganic zinc coating as a permanent primer protected by a topcoat to avoid preparing the underlying steel for coating repairs. If aluminum structures are to be coated, an appropriate pretreatment (wash) primer, a zinc chromate alkyd primer, and an alkyd topcoat can be used (Ref 6). Even greater protection will be received from a coating system of pretreatment primer, epoxy primer, and aliphatic urethane topcoat. Coating Antenna Guy Lines Galvanized steel wire ropes are usually used to guy antennas and other towers, although aluminum-coated wire may be more corrosion- resistant when proper precautions are taken (Ref 10). In a CEL study (Ref 11), thin preservatives formulated to penetrate galvanized steel guy lines provide only temporary protection, especially if applied after weathering of the guy lines. A petrolatum paste which encapsulates the guy line to provide a protective barrier seems more practical. CEL and the Naval Radio Station (1), Cutler, Maine (Ref 12), developed equipment (Figure 11) for the remote cleaning and coating of large diameter (1 to 3-1/4 inches) guy lines with petrolatum paste. A nylon brush (Figure 12) was used for cleaning the line on the ascent (Figure 13) and coating on the descent. This equipment is still performing very satisfactorily at Cutler, Maine. Fiberglass-reinforced epoxy rods (Figure 14) are frequently used on circularly disposed (Wullenweber) arrays (Figure 6) or other systems where high dielectric strength, high tensile strength, and low elonga- tion are required. If their protective coating is lost by weathering and the glass fibers are exposed, a loss in strength can result. It is normally a better investment to replace than recoat such deteriorated rods. Also, the weakest component is the end connector (Ref 13); there- fore, protective coatings are especially important in this area. COST CONSIDERATIONS FOR NEW STEEL CONSTRUCTION Although life cycle coating costs associated with steel antenna towers vary widely with antenna design, remoteness from populated areas, and severity of environment, some conclusions can be made of the cost effectiveness of different coating procedures on new construction. On existing structures, coating maintenance procedures are largely deter- mined by the type and condition of existing coatings. Reference 7 provides much practical information on the repair of existing coatings. Surface preparation and priming of steel tower components is best done in a fabrication shop under controlled conditions. This results in a better quality product and reduces costs, even if touchup of damaged coatings is required in the field before erection of the tower. In Table 8 surface preparation and primer costs in a fabrication shop are compared to those in the field*. Costs of surface preparation and priming are much higher after tower erection (at least double on high towers). Initial costs may be deceiving. Table 9 lists available cost data for five coating systems appropriate for antenna towers. Although the alkyd system is the cheapest of the five, it will ordinarily provide the shortest protection in a severe environment. Table 10 lists typical costs and service lives of these five coating systems in an industrial environment. It can be seen that in such moderate or in severe environ- ments, the alkyd system would be the least cost effective. In selection of a coating system for new construction, ease and cost of coating maintenance should be of great importance. A zinc-rich system will usually be the most cost effective if the zinc-rich primer *If permitted. becomes permanent so that little bare steel is ever exposed. If sig- nificant areas of steel will require spot cleaning and recoating, an alkyd or epoxy-polyamide system that is relatively tolerant of incom- pletely cleaned steel have advantages. Vinyl and chlorinated rubber systems are more easily topcoated than other systems because they are lacquers. Obviously, all significant factors must be considered before an optimum coating and procedure can be chosen for steel antenna towers. SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATION Most of the experimental paints exposed on the antenna positioner at Point Mugu provided excellent protection for 2 years in a marine atmospheric environment. These results correlated well with those from accelerated laboratory (salt-spray) testing. After 6 months of field exposure, eight out of nine experimental coatings containing a butyl titanate corrosion-inhibiting agent provided very good protection. The performances of these materials will be monitored periodically so that results can be used in field tests when the opportunity arises. The backpack equipment seem too heavy and too underpowered to be practical for field use. Reducing the weight by design change or lighter materials appears infeasible. The use of an air compressor on the ground with hose lines connected to the backpack appears to be a feasi- ble alternative for this equipment. It is recommended that the coatings and cleaning methods developed in this investigation be field-tested on a full scale if the opportunity arises. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The assistance of CEL personnel Messrs. R. Staples and L. Underbakke in preparing the experimental specimens is gratefully acknowledged. REFERENCES 1. Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Note N-1516: Repair systems for damaged coatings on Navy antenna towers - Part 1, by L. K. Schwab and R. W. Drisko. Port Hueneme, Calif., Mar 1978. 2. General Service Administration. Federal Test Method Standard 14la: Paint, varnish, lacquer, and related materials; methods of inspection, sampling, and testing. Washington, D.C., Sep 1965. 3. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Report R-786: Per- formance of ten generic coatings during 15 years of exposure, by C. V. Brouillette and A. F. Curry. Port Hueneme, Calif., Apr 1973. 10 4. L. D. Perrigo. "Fundamentals of corrosion control design," 12th Western States Corrosion Seminar, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Katy, Tex., 1978, pp 6/1-6/11. 5. Civil Engineering Laboratory. Techdata Sheet 79-04: Surface pre- paration for coatings, by R. W. Drisko. Port Hueneme, Calif., Apr 1979. 6. Naval Facilities Engineering Command. NAVFAC MO-110: Paints and protective coatings. Philadelphia, Pa., Jan 1969, p. 233. 7. Steel Structure Painting Council. Steel structures painting manual, Vol 2 Systems and specifications, J. D. Keane, ed. Pittsburgh, Pa., IW/35 Do BD. 8. R. W. Drisko. "Introduction to protective coating,” 12th Western States Corrosion Seminar, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Katy, Tex., 1978, pp 7/1-7/6. 9. C. G. Munger. "Practical aspects of coating repair," paper presented at Corrosion/79, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Katy, Tex., 1979, p. 38. 10. J. Larsen-Badse and F. Brackett. "Performance of galvanized and aluminum coated wire strand in marine atmosphere," Materials Performance, vol 9, no. 12, Dec 1970, pp 21-24. 11. Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Report R-/777: Deteriora- tion of guy lines, by R. W. Drisko. Pert Hueneme, Calif., Oct 1972. 12. R. W. Drisko. "Equipment for remote coating of tower guy lines," Materials Performance, vol 16, no. 2, Feb 1977, pp 45-47. 13. Civil Engineering Laboratory. Technical Note N-1321: End connec- tors for glass reinforced plastic (GRP) antenna guy rods, by H. P. Vind and R. W. Drisko. Port Hueneme, Calif., Jan 1974. 14. G. H. Brevoort and A. H. Roebuck. "Simplified cost calculations and comparison of paint and protective coating systems, expected life, and economic justification," paper presented at Corrosion/79, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Katy, Tex., 1979. (NACE paper no. 37) 11 penutquos SuTTYUTIM ¢ ¢ G CG ¢ ¢ 4 G G G G G G G ¢ C 4 G G C G ¢ G G ¢ adh SUT [29g sutyoer) syreusdy SUTIIIST[YG peeoene SuUTYeTA suTyIIYy) SUTYTeYD | UOTZeAOTOIST| ZurTeos | 8utz04e8T TLV Tersuey “JTTe) ‘Wd 7e eansodxy fo sazeax_ very] 19a4ZW STBUOTITSOg euUa\UY UO s3UTJeOD Fo sBuT Jey uo0T}99307g | weaqsds 3ut je0) T 9PL92L 12 SuTTAUTIM SUTTYUTIM SUT TAUTIM SuTT4UTIM SUT [AUTIM SUT TAUTIM SuT[YUTIM syrTewsy suTIa4STTG 3 3 I edéy | 5 utTysny 3 UT [99g suTyoIeI) uTye TA SuTyIIYyO SuTyTeyD | uoT{er0ToOOsTG UT[BOS | suTT0IeBTT TV penutju07) “LT 9T9FL uw0T4993071g [ersuey wa sks 3utze0%9 13 (penutquos) peszns-aptueAjod ‘Axody pAyTe [ro wntpow ut AoT[e IUTZ-5UTZ qeSt-17977e-d-TIn pAyye [TO umtpow ut AoT Te IULZ-IUTZ Jeqqnz payeurz0T yD Zaqqni pezeUurzOTYS YITA-IuUtTZ peaznos-optueAtod ‘Axody pAyje [ro untpew ut AoT[e IUTZ-5UTZ Zeqqnz pszeurz0T YD Zaqqnz paqyeursopTYyo YyoTA-oUutzZ qe st-1797¢-d-TIn pAyTe [To umtpow ut Ao[[e DUTZ-IUTZ pasns-outwe “Axody qoSt-19777-d-TIW perzno-outue ‘Axody peano-sutue ‘Axody peano-outue ‘Axody qOSt-179797¢-d- TIN perzno-outwe ‘Axody peszno-sutue ‘Axody CSL-1777C-d-TIW qOSt-17977¢-d- TI éS1-17777-d-TIW peans-outue “Axody CS1-1777C-d-TIW qOSt-17977¢-d-TIW CSL-L777¢-d-TIW peazno-outue ‘fxody G ¢ ¢ I i i C ¢ I I G 4 I I q q q q S9T1IS qasity (1 Tw) SsouyotyL e wttq Arq qusuq eer], Samar ze05do0], JIUTIg ainsodxg Aertds-qpeg Azoqezoqey °7 2749R], 14 (Tru) SSouyoTyL wtty Arq € € € € € € € € € € ptusuqeer] goeyzang i °ou sueToydsoyd ssouesuew YqTM sueyqoin-Axody Zaqqni payeurszoTy) €ZL18-9-TIW qtSt-1779e-d-TIW sueyqein Axody sueyqein Axodyq qe Sl-1777e-d-TIW €ZL18-9-TIW €ZLL18-9-TIW sueyqoin-Axody V SSe{0 682-a-LL SaTieag puodas qeoodoy, penutquo9) Zaqqnsz zaqqna taqqna Zaqqnsz Zaqqna Zaqqnsz ‘aptweAjod-Axoda st [yyy7-g-TIW SULPUTIZ [eoOTURPYIOW] = € peqeer, ‘paysniq-o1TM puey = Zz poeysniag-9ITM puey = T payeurtrOTYD YoTA-suTzZ PpezeUTAOTYD YOTI-IUTZ pe yeuLAOTYD YyOTI-duUTZ payeUuTIOTYD YOTI-Iutz g0Sl-17977¢-d-TIW oueyjein-Axody guey.oin-Axody sueyqein-Axody peyeuLIOTYD YOTI-IuTz peq.eutTrAOTYD YOTA-duTtz PAYTYV TOUT q eB 15 (panunuos) “Aavay = YH ‘UInIpaul = - Moy = dp OT OT Or Or in . ) do} ur ajoy pue aqtios WIOJJ SUIeIS IsSNYy (oy or (0)! Ot " or do} ur ajoy pure aqiios WIOJj UTES ISNY OL aquios WIOJJ SUIeIS IsSNY OL OL ZI woirsks or OL or Or Or OT Or {0}! or to}! do} ur ajoy pue aqiios wWIOJJ UTeIS IsNyY ; OT Or OT waishs (site) aqlios 3u133n9 aquas uone] eddy | 1 adAL CIEE PLES) uone u01999}01g ssauyoIyL | gi sunaisiid | Buypeyy | ‘“suryoay | Suryjeyo R Woisijg | -l2puq, unsny | -ndJeqn -10]09SIq yeieue (sep) SyIVUIDY wyty Aid pa | ‘Buljeog | ‘su0iest[ Vv eeode - saiiodoig surMmojjoy 107; Buney ainsodxg Avids yes %S Jaizy suloisAs 3uI1vOD JO sola sity Jo ssuneY jourq “¢ 2IqGeL 16 (penuiuos) do} ur ajoy pue aqiios WIOJj UleIs ISNYy do} ul ajoy pue aqiuios WOJj ules IsNYy " do} ul ajoy pur aquios WIOJJ suTeIS IsSNY sjods 1sni jurod utd may SyIVUIOY (sjfut) SsouxsIYL wyty A1q 2qi9S surioisi|q 3unano -Jopuy) es 2quos sunsny OT QT waisks OT OT Oot GI wioashs dé 3 Opel - saijiadoig SUIMO][OY 10; SuNeY panunuoy “¢ 21qeL sulypeip ‘BUIYD9YO ‘BulIOIeSI[V BuryyeyO uone -10]ODsIq_ | 0991014 [etouay (skep) ainsodxq 17 (penunuos) doj ut ajoy pur aqrios WIOIJ SUTEIS IsNY do} ut ajoy pur aqiiss WIOJJ SUIeIS ISNY do} ul ajoy pur aqiios wIOJj SUIeIS ISNY SIBWIDY eS (sjtaz) SsoUSIYL wyty Aid Somos sursaysiq suns -1apun Or OL or Or OL Or Pv 8 Or 6 os 8 Or OT Ot 48 Or OT Or +8 oO} OT oy _6 or ot Or or or Or } oF +e ulaisds 8 _6 ot 6 6 Oot 6 6 or 6 or | OF 6 or or 6 or | of Tz wiaisks 61 wiaishs | | odA aquog | uone] qi addy, | j adAL es Wh = i d - saiqiadoig surmoyjoy 10; Suey panunuop “¢ 21qeL OT OT OT OL OT OT suIyoe1D ‘BUIIIYO ‘Burloresiy[Vy | Ot OT Or OL OT OL BuryyeyD uone | -10[09sIq u0n92101g [e1auay (shep) | sinsodxq 18 (penunuos) " do} ul ajoy puke aqiios wIOJJ SUIeIS ISNY " do} ut ajoy pur oqrios WIOJJ SUTEIS ISNY do} ut ajoy pur oqiios Woy UleIS IsNy (s]fur) SSOUNSIYL wytiq Aq 3u13n5 -Japun, aqliog Brecon sulioisi|q surJoisi[g ot OL os OT S¢€ wa3sks d aquas uoney] med4y, - saiiadoig SuIMO][O4 10; BuNeY J odAy, | B3urjaag ‘Buyyeld ‘BUI[eIS penunuoy “¢ 21qeL SulyoedIpD ‘BuDpaYO ‘SULIOIESI|V Suryyeyo uone -10]09sIq u0nda101g [eauay (skep) ainsodxq 19 do} ur 2joy pue aqiios WIOJj sUTEIS ISNY do} ut ajoy pue oqiios UWIOJj SUITES ISNY SYIBUIOY (s]iu) ssouxoIy.L wytga Aig eqs sutisisi[g su3no -Japuy) OT OT OT oT oT OT Oot OT OT OT or OT fe Tp wiaishs OT OT or Or or Oot oT Op Wo3shs d dA 3 - saniadoig suIMOT[OY JO; Sune Y panunuoD ¢ xqeL SUIyxDBID ‘Burpoayo ‘gui0yesiy |v OT OT OT oT OT oT Buryyeyo uone -10][09sSIq u01999101g [e1oua5 (skep) ainsodxq 20 (panurjuo5) (Ajuo apis 1Uu01 7 ,) (Ajuo apis 1Uu01,7 ,,) (Ajuo apis 1u01,7,,) 8S wiaisks (Ajuo apts 2u0,) OT (Ajuo apts 2U0,) OL Ot j Ot LS waisks 21 sajoyurd wor pinbiy Moya A 3209d0) ur sajoyulg (s[!uz) Suljoag BulyoRriD eqias eqis sulssisi|g unsny uone u0199}01g -10]09SIq Jeroua5 (sdep) ainsodxq ‘Buryeyy | ‘BuppoayD | Buryyeyo ‘Buryeog | ‘sur0qest[y ssouyxoIy,L SYIBUWIDY wy Aid = Saijiadoig BuIMO][O, 10; BuNeYy ainsodxg Avids yes %¢ Joagy sulaisAs BUIvOD jo Saliag puodas jo ssuNneY Joued “py IIGL (panuuo5) (AjuO apts 2u0,) (Ajuo apts 2uQ x) (ATWO apIs 2q19S,) (AjUO apts 2qi49S x) (A]UO apts aqi49S .) (AJUO aqi9S«) (AjuO apis aqias ,) (A]UO aps 2419S x) (AjuO apts eqs) (AjUO apts eqs ,) SYIVUIOY SsoUyoIy, ul Ta Aid 2qi9S suri2IsI[q su13n5 -lapuy) aquas sunsny L9 wiaisks 6S wiaisks A war yy eddy | yadAy | Burjeog ‘Bunye lay - saqisdoig BuImoy[oy 10; Suney panunuop “ 21q%L BUIyIeID ‘BuryoeyD ‘Bul0ywesI[[V Buryeyo uone -10[ODSIq uonoa101g [e1ouay (skep) ainsodxq 22 apis auo Jawttid 1205 -doi so] — paylty “ Jaunid wio1g 4209 -do} uoneuIMe[ag Sla1SI[q as18] Moy (AjuO apts 2UO x) (A[Uo apis 2uO,) (S[!u) ssouxoIy,L SYIBWIOY wyty Aiq aquog | gunins Bulaisi}g | -opuq suls0IsI1q SqH3S sunsny “Aavay = YH ‘UINIpaul = W ‘Maj = J :sUONBIADIQge JO suOMIUyaq =a LON 39 ulaishs - I addy | eddy | Burjoag pe ‘Bulye | - saiyiadoig BuIMOT[OY 10; BuNeY panunuoy “4 21421 sulyseID ‘BulyoeyD ‘Suro0qwesty[Vv Buryeyo, uone -10[OIsIq u01199}01g [elauay (skep) ainsodxq 23 Bur1aisi[q pezi[es0T uaaity ‘Y9B/G =PlOW. BUIYIID %O' LZ BUTIOISI[G Paz1]e007T uaaIxy ‘anig “Y9e®]q@ :PIOW syeWsy SsouUyxoIy.L ¢S8 Spid ‘Il euuauy purlu ‘Pog Spid ‘1 euusuy (Burza1sita ynoyiM) ] adAL (suti21S1|q 4M) I edAyL BUul[9°qg ‘Bune ld ‘BUIT2IS (s[ru) surisIsl|q [210.1 sulyoe1D ‘BUID2YO ‘Sul07esI] TV Buryeyd, uONFIO[OISIG >.LWd 18 ainsodxy jo syyuOW CT Jaigy seuUaIUY UO ssuNvOD jo ssUeY *¢ FIqUL Ot poplea Ot 8 _O1 pared co}! payed wia3SsAS BuIyz0D 0991014 [e1eua5 24 Table 6. Surface Preparation Standards for Abrasively Blasted Steel SSPC/SIS Visual Standard (Ref 7) NACE SSPC Surface Finish Standard Standard (Ref 10) (Ref 7) White Metal Blast CSa3 Near-White Blast CSa2-1/2 Commercial Blast CSa2 Brush-Off Blast CSal Table 7. Coatings Commonly Used on Steel Tower Structures Minimum Surface Generic Type Preparation Recommended Ease of Repair Important and Topcoating Properties Commercial, but Wets surface well; tool or brush- weathers well; off may be OK protection good in most environments. Vinyl Commercial Protection good in near white all environments. Chlorinated Commercial Fast curing; pro- Rubber near white tection good in all environments. Epoxy-Polyamide | Commercial difficult* Excellent protec- tion; chalks freely in sunlight. Urethane Commercial difficult* Excellent protec- near white tion; aliphatic urethanes have excellent exterior weathering. Inorganic Zinc Near white difficult* Excellent abrasion white resistance; used as preconstruction primers. Organic Zinc Commercial varies More easily top- near white coated than inor- ganic zincs. *Special precautions must be taken in topcoating chemically curing coatings. 25 Table 8. Typical 1978 West Coast Surface Preparation and Primer Costs Cost ($/sq ft) SSPC Surface Preparation Commercial Blast (SSPC-SP 6) Near White (SSPC-SP 10) White Metal (SSPC-SP 5) Primer (Generic Tspal Alkyd, Vinyl, or Chlorinated Rubber Epoxy Zine Rich *From Reference 14. Nees not include cost of coating material. 26 Table 9. Typical 1978 West Coast Costs for Coating New Antenna Towers Cost of Coating System ($/sq ft) Chlorinated Zinc), Shop blasting Shop priming Primer material Field application o intermediate coat Intermediate coating material Field application of finish coat Finish coating material “From Reference 14. geltoeuee inorganic zinc primer, high-build epoxy intermediate ccat, and aliphatic urethane topcoat. “Commercial blast for alkyd, chlorinated rubber, and epoxy; near white blast for vinyl and zinc rich. Taciindes $0.10 for field touchup of damaged areas (10%). Table 10. Relative Costs and Expected Service Lives of Coating Systems in Different Industrial Environments Expected Years of Life in Relative Industrial Environment Coating System Alkyd Vinyl Chlorinated Rubber Epoxy Zinc Rich “From Reference 14. 27 (a) Paint spraying equipment attached. (b) Chiseling. Figure 1. Portable backpack unit. 28 (c) Needling (d) Sanding. Continued Figure 1 29 (e) Spraying. Figure 1. Continued Figure 2. Antenna field. 30 Communication facility. Figure 3. Rusty steel tower. Figure 4 31 Figure 5. Paint peeling from galvanized steel. Figure 6. Circularly disposed (Wullenweber) antenna array. (Neg #12411-70) 32 Tower stairs and railing. Figure 8. Trailer with support equipment. 33 Figure 9. Crossed guy lines. Figure 10. Crossed guy lines with sleeves. 34 compressed air cylinder Figure 11. Equipment for remote coating of guy lines. Figure 12. Cleaning equipment with nylon brush shown. Figure 13. Equipment ascending guy line. Figure 14. Glass-reinforced plastic guy line with dampener. 36 Appendix A TYPE AND SOURCES OF COATING SYSTEMS USED ON SECOND SERIES SALT-SPRAY EXPOSURE 37 (penutquo5) 0°7 BE 9) ~t i=) iY) (T Tu) SsoUyOTYL TeI40L 4e00d04 Zoutsd qe00d0 4 zowutid 4e00d034 zoutid asp oueyqoinAtod Zeqqnzi paqeurzoTyo Yots-outzZ optweAjod-Axoda Zeqqni peyeurszopyo YOEA-IUTZ aueyqoin-Axoda aptueATod-Axode sjusuodwo) weqshs €ZL18-9-TIW €9 did 9 TST-1797¢-d-TIW O7T did 9 OST aiGadis li sueN sper], IO ‘ON uotqedtFtIeds €€L1T6 VO ‘9IUOW TA yanos "aay JaTAL YIAON E1772 sTeotTwey) pue ssutje0) pooueApy €LL26 VO “O8eTg ues "IS ULTeW 9797 "0D “SJ WUTeg ouT[osg €€L16 VO ‘9IUOW TA Yanos “2Ay FeTAL YIFON E177 s[eotway) pue s3utje0) paoueApy €€Z16 VO ‘297U0W] Ty YINos "aay T9TAL YIFON E177 S[POTWOy)D pue s3utje0) paoueApy W “AS UreW 9797¢ "0D “83M JUTeg sUTToIg zeoodoj, 10 TITIg Fo 2xdIN0S weaqsks 8uTq{e09 €L1¢C6 VO ‘O8eTg ues Zeqqnsa payeurzo0 Tyo YOTI-IUTZ Zeqqnz peq.eurszo Tyo YoOtsl-IUTZ aprweAzod Axoda adAj, JoWTIg “ON waeqsAs 38 *2qTYM SeA 489} STYyq TOF sqeoodoq aya [se00d03 aueyqein-Axoda T-91-€ €€L16 VO ‘9qUOW Ty Yyanos "aay T2TA]L YIION E177 Jeqqni pazeurszoTpyo sTeotTwey) Ea YOTA-IuUTzZ €9 did 9 pue ssutje0) pooueapy pore £1880 CN ‘UOSTpy 79 qeoodoq | taqqna pejzeutsoTYyD | wey) [eA TtqoW 0SZ xOg "O'd "09 [eotweYyD [IqGoW on ELL16 VO ‘9IUOW Ty YInos reuse Jaqqni pa,eurszoTzyo €9 ag 9 aay TaTAL YAION €17Z YOTA-IUTZ sTeoTWey) pue ssurtjze0) pooueapy DUeN Ipery cr ene ce SSOUYITY es squsuoduo) weqyshs | uotqedtztoeds : [eq0L weqshs 8urtje0) Tle ut quoustd PUL, Zeqqnsz payeurzoTyo YOTA-IUTZ Zeqqna pe.eurtzo Tyo YOTI-IUTZ ON adAj, A9WITIg ere 39 Appendix B FORMULAS OF EXPERIMENTAL PAINTS USED ON VORTEX TOWERS Field-Applied Antenna Touchup copetne Primer: 3-1G-1 2 Nitropropane Toluol Epoxy Resin Grinding Aid (Prod. 963) Basic Lead Silico Chromate Black Oxide Tale Mica Grinding Aid (MPA-60) Ethyl Acetate Butyl Titanate Vegetable Oil Toluol Epoxy Resin Grinding Aid (Prod. 963) Vegetable Oil Moly White Barium Metaborate Tale Mica Grinding Aid (MPA-60) Titanium Dioxide 2 Nitropropane Ethyl Acetate Butyl Titanate (continued) 40 Chlorinated Rubber Based Zinc-Rich Primer: 6 DLP 63 Varnish and Paintmaker Naphtha Xylol Bentone 38 Zine Oxide Methyl Ethyl Ketone Toluol Cellulose Acetate Chlorinated Rubber Dibasic Lead Phosphate Chlorinated Olefin Zinc Dust Butyl Titanate Chlorinated Rubber Zinc-Rich Primer: 6 DLP 140 Varnish and Paintmaker Naphtha Xylol Chlorinated Rubber Bentone 38 Zine Oxide Zinc Dust #22 Chlorinated Olefin Dibasic Lead Phosphate Butyl Titanate Epoxy Resin Vegetable Oil Grinding Aid (Prod. 963) Moly White Barium Metaborate Talc Mica Grinding Aid (MPA-60) Toluidine Red 2 Nitropropane Toluol Ethyl Acetate Butyl Titanate 4l Appendix C COATING SYSTEMS USED ON VORTEX TOWERS 42 (penutzuo)) €€L16 VO ‘eIUOW TY yInog “aay A2TAL YIAON E177 sTeotuey) pue ssutje0) peooueapy ystuty aptuekTod-Axoda eS1-14474¢-d-TIW T-91-€ €LL18-0-TIW aueyjein—-Axods =) — €€L16 VO “9IUOW TY yanos “aay TaTAL YIION E177 sTeotwey) pue s8urje0) paoueapy YSTUTys aueyqeinAtod ee) N zoutid sueyqoin-Axoda ystuty aueyqoankjod ELLT8-9-TIN | €€LT6 VO ‘9IUOH Ty yanos “aay TaTAL YON €17Z sTeotwey) Ov did 9 pue s3utje0o) pooueapy Zaqqnz peyeurzoTys | weyd [eA TEqGOW | €EZT6 VO ‘eqUOW Ty yanos "aay TaTA] UIAON ET7Z YOTAT dUTZ sTeoTwey) Jeqqni pe eurzo Tyo OvT did 9 pue s3surtje0o) poosueapy sueyqain-Axoda €1L-UI-€ €€L16 VO “2IUOW TY YyInog “aay JeTAL YIAON E177 sTeoTwey) pue ssurje0o) psosueapy Yotr outTZ zowtid : Zeqqnzi pajeurszoTzyo il ystuty zoutsid ao LT USEULy, YOTA DUTZ Zeqqnz peyeurzoTpyo OVI did 9 = 4 ) & A qy ay Vy sseqT9 T ueupucuy d687-4-LL aqeworys sutTz pAyTe 797O# ALluy souleN oper (7 tw) IO °ON SSOUYITUL asy sjzuauodwo) waqshs uotjeoTFTIedS Ystuty Teueus pAyTe 6cOLL XL ‘uoqsnoH “4g ueulpeqgs 0€78 09 Teotwsy) Aeluy N I Zoutsd o TIWWTIg FO saainos T2401 weqshs 3ut e07 oueyqesn -Axoda 6S oueyqein ’ -Axoda 85 ZJeqqni qq 1S peq.eutzroTyo Zaqqnsz fe a a Ps “ON a5 e Zeqqnsz peqeurszoTyo 43 | aeoodoa aprueATod-Axoda 9S1-14¥777-d-TIW 7719 OW ‘StnoyT “IS Spree od 1) [etz4snpuy AsTuey OGE Seconds | sowed | aptueATod-Axodoa 881 euUTTOqIe) vuTTOqIe9) | aeoodoa | eptwekTod-Axoda 9ST-1477¢-d-TIW E1176 VO ‘o8eTg ues : optueAtod ae) PUN iG -Axodo } zourad aptuefk{Tod-Axoda OST-14777-d-TIW "09 °33W JUTeg euTToIg as [ad = €€L16 VO “‘22U0N Ty yanos |g | ae0odoa | sueyqeinhtod €ZL18-9-TIW “aay IJaTAL, UIION €17ZZ sTeoTwsey9 €€L16 VO “eqUOW Ty Yyanos Sa | arm | ice ee ae ie “2AY TOTAL YIAON E172 is Soa es ae sTeoTwWey) een 7-01-47 pue s3utje0) paoueapy €€L16 VO ‘27U0ON Ty YyqNos tueATod-Axoda ue La : pue ssutjeo) peosueapy STUT sueujqein-Axoda €€LT6 WO “9IU0H Ta YaNos SEU q "aay JeTAL YAION €17Z aueyqean pe ce a a ee sueyqein-Axoda STBOTWSYD -Axoda pm pue s38utj}e09) peaoueapy 19 souleN oper, ({ Tw) ZO °ON JIWTIg FO saoino0s aor SSOUYITYL asp sjusu0dwo) waqshs uoTIeITFTIedS adAj, OW TIg TEAS TeI0L woqshsg 8uTje09 44 DISTRIBUTION LIST AAP NAVORDSTA IND HD DET PW ENGRNG DIV, McAlester, OK AFB (AFIT/LD), Wright-Patterson OH; AF Tech Office (Mgt & Ops), Tyndall, FL; AFCEC/XR,Tyndall FL; CESCH, Wright-Patterson; HQ Tactical Air Cmd (R. E. Fisher), Langley AFB VA; HQAFESC/DEMM, Tyndall AFB, FL; MACIDET (Col. P. Thompson) Scott, IL; SAMSO/MNND, Norton AFB CA; Stinfo Library, Offutt NE ARMY ARRADCOM, Dover, NJ; BMDSC-RE (H. McClellan) Huntsville AL; DAEN-CWE-M (LT C D Binning), Washington DC; DAEN-FEU-E (J. Ronan), Washington DC; DAEN-MPE-D Washington DC; DAEN-MPU, Washington DC; ERADCOM Tech Supp Dir. (DELSD-L) Ft. Monmouth, NJ; HQ-DAEN-MPO-B (Mr. Price); Tech. Ref. Div., Fort Huachuca, AZ ARMY - CERL Library, Champaign IL ARMY COASTAL ENGR RSCH CEN Fort Belvoir VA; R. Jachowski, Fort Belvoir VA ARMY COE Philadelphia Dist. (LIBRARY) Philadelphia, PA ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS MRD-Eng. Div., Omaha NE; Seattle Dist. Library, Seattle WA ARMY CRREL Constr. Engr Res Branch, (Aamot) ARMY CRREL R.A. Eaton ARMY ENG DIV HNDED-CS, Huntsville AL; HNDED-SR, Huntsville, AL ARMY ENG WATERWAYS EXP STA Library, Vicksburg MS ARMY ENGR DIST. Library, Portland OR ARMY ENVIRON. HYGIENE AGCY Water Qual Div (Doner), Aberdeen Prov Ground, MD ARMY MATERIALS & MECHANICS RESEARCH CENTER Dr. Lenoe, Watertown MA ASST SECRETARY OF THE NAVY Spec. Assist Energy (Leonard), Washington, DC BUREAU OF COMMERCIAL FISHERIES Woods Hole MA (Biological Lab. Lib.) BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Code 1512 (C. Selander) Denver CO CINCLANT Civil Engr. Supp. Plans. Ofr Norfolk, VA CINCPAC Fac Engrng Div (J44) Makalapa, HI CNAVRES Code 13 (Dir. Facilities) New Orleans, LA CNM Code MAT-08T3, Washington, DC; NMAT 081246 (Dieterle) Wash, DC CNO Code NOP-964, Washington DC; OP987J (J. Boosman), Pentagon COMCBPAC Operations Off, Makalapa HI COMFLEACT, OKINAWA PWO, Kadena, Okinawa COMOCEANSYSPAC SCE, Pearl Harbor HI DEFENSE DOCUMENTATION CTR Alexandria, VA DOE Dr. Cohen; Liffick, Richmond, WA DINSRDC Code 172 (M. Krenzke), Bethesda MD DINSRDC Code 284 (A. Rufolo), Annapolis MD DINSRDC Code 4111 (R. Gierich), Bethesda MD DTNSRDC Code 4121 (R. Rivers), Annapolis, MD DINSRDC Code 42, Bethesda MD FLTCOMBATTRACENLANT PWO, Virginia Bch VA FMFLANT CEC Offr, Norfolk VA GSA Fed. Sup. Serv. (FMBP), Washington DC KWAJALEIN MISRAN BMDSC-RKL-C MARINE CORPS BASE Camp Pendleton CA 92055; Code 43-260, Camp Lejeune NC; M & R Division, Camp Lejeune NC; PWO Camp Lejeune NC; PWO, Camp S. D. Butler, Kawasaki Japan MARINE CORPS HQS Code LFF-2, Washington DC MCAS Facil. Engr. Div. Cherry Point NC; CO, Kaneohe Bay HI; Code PWE, Kaneohe Bay HI; Code S4, Quantico VA; PWD, Dir. Maint. Control Div., Iwakuni Japan; PWO Kaneohe Bay HI; PWO, Yuma AZ; UTC Dupalo, Iwakuni, Japan MCDEC P&S Div Quantico VA MCRD PWO, San Diego Ca NAD Engr. Dir. Hawthorne, NV NAF PWD - Engr Div, Atsugi, Japan; PWO Sigonella Sicily; PWO, Atsugi Japan NAS CO, Guantanamo Bay Cuba; Code 114, Alameda CA; Code 183 (Fac. Plan BR MGR); Code 18700, Brunswick ME; Code 6234 (G. Trask), Point Mugu CA; Code 70, Atlanta, Marietta GA; Dir. Maint. Control Div., Key West FL; Dir. Util. Div., Bermuda; ENS Buchholz, Pensacola, FL; Lakehurst, NJ; Lead. Chief. Petty Offr. PW/Self Help Div, Beeville TX; OIC, CBU 417, Oak Harbor WA; PW (J. Maguire), Corpus Christi TX; PWD Maint. Cont. 45 Dir., Fallon NV; PWD Maint. Div., New Orleans, Belle Chasse LA; PWD, Maintenance Control Dir., Bermuda; PWD, Willow Grove PA; PWO Belle Chasse, LA; PWO Chase Field Beeville, TX; PWO Key West FL; PWO, Dallas TX; PWO, Glenview IL; PWO, Kingsville TX; PWO, Millington TN; PWO, Miramar, San Diego CA; PWO., Moffett Field CA; ROICC Key West FL; SCE Lant Fleet Norfolk, VA; SCE Norfolk, VA; SCE, Barbers Point HI NATL BUREAU OF STANDARDS B-348 BR (Dr. Campbell), Washington DC NATL RESEARCH COUNCIL Naval Studies Board, Washington DC NATNAVMEDCEN PWO Bethesda, MD NATPARACHUTETESTRAN PW Engr, El Centro CA NAVACT PWO, London UK NAVACTDET PWO, Holy Lock UK NAVAEROSPREGMEDCEN SCE, Pensacola FL NAVAVIONICFAC PWD Deputy Dir. D/701, Indianapolis, IN NAVCOASTSYSTCTR Code 423 (D. Good), Panama City FL; Code 713 (J. Quirk) Panama City, FL; Code 715 (J. Mittleman) Panama City, FL; Library Panama City, FL NAVCOMMAREAMSTRSTA Code W-602, Honolulu, Wahiawa HI; Maint Control Div., Wahiawa, HI; PWO, Norfolk VA; PWO, Wahiawa HI; SCE Unit | Naples Italy NAVCOMMSTA CO, San Miguel, R.P.; Code 401 Nea Makri, Greece; PWO, Exmouth, Australia; PWO, Fort Amador Canal Zone NAVEDTRAPRODEVCEN Tech. Library NAVEDUTRACEN Engr Dept (Code 42) Newport, RI NAVENVIRHLTHCEN CO, Cincinnati, OH NAVEODFAC Code 605, Indian Head MD NAVEAC PWO, Cape Hatteras, Buxton NC; PWO, Centerville Bch, Ferndale CA; PWO, Guam NAVEAC PWO, Lewes DE NAVFACENGCOM Code 043 Alexandria, VA; Code 044 Alexandria, VA; Code 0451 Alexandria, VA; Code 0453 (D. Potter) Alexandria, VA; Code 0454B Alexandria, Va; Code 046; Code 0461D (V M Spaulding) Alexandria, VA; Code 04B3 Alexandria, VA; Code 04B5 Alexandria, VA; Code 100 Alexandria, VA; Code 1002B (J. Leimanis) Alexandria, VA; Code 1113 (M. Carr) Alexandria, VA; Code 1113 (T. Stevens) Alexandria, VA; Code 1113 Alexandria, VA; Morrison Yap, Caroline Is. NAVFACENGCOM - CHES DIV. Code 101 Wash, DC; Code 403 (H. DeVoe) Wash, DC; Code 405 Wash, DC; Contracts, ROICC, Annapolis MD; FPO-1 (Spencer) Wash, DC; Scheessele, Code 402, Wash, DC NAVFACENGCOM - LANT DIV. Code 10A, Norfolk VA; Eur. BR Deputy Dir, Naples Italy; European Branch, New York; RDT&ELO 102, Norfolk VA NAVFACENGCOM - NORTH DIV. AROICC, Brooklyn NY; CO; Code 09P (LCDR A.J. Stewart); Code 1028, RDT&ELO, Philadelphia PA; Code 111 (Castranovo) Philadelphia, PA; Code 114 (A. Rhoads); Design Div. (R. Masino), Philadelphia PA; ROICC, Contracts, Crane IN NAVFACENGCOM - PAC DIV. (Kyi) Code 101, Pearl Harbor, HI; Code 2011 Pearl Harbor, HI; Code 402, RDT&E, Pearl Harbor HI; Commander, Pearl Harbor, HI NAVFACENGCOM - SOUTH DIV. Code 90, RDT&ELO, Charleston SC; ROICC (LCDR R. Moeller), Contracts, Corpus Christi TX NAVFACENGCOM - WEST DIV. 102; 112; AROICC, Contracts, Twentynine Palms CA; Code 04B San Bruno, CA; O9P/20 San Bruno, CA; RDT&ELO Code 2011 San Bruno, CA NAVFACENGCOM CONTRACT AROICC, Point Mugu CA; AROICC, Quantico, VA; Code 05, TRIDENT, Bremerton WA; Dir, Eng. Div., Exmouth, Australia; Eng Div dir, Southwest Pac, Manila, PI; OICC, Southwest Pac, Manila, PI; OICC/ROICC, Balboa Canal Zone; ROICC AF Guam; ROICC LANT DIV., Norfolk VA; ROICC Off Point Mugu, CA; ROICC, Diego Garcia Island; ROICC, Keflavik, Iceland; ROICC, Pacific, San Bruno CA NAVHOSP LT R. Elsbernd, Puerto Rico NAVMAG SCE, Guam NAVMIRO OIC, Philadelphia PA NAVNUPWRU MUSE DET Code NPU-30 Port Hueneme, CA NAVOCEANO Code 1600 Bay St. Louis, MS; Code 3432 (J. DePalma), Bay St. Louis MS NAVOCEANSYSCEN Code 41, San Diego, CA; Code 5221 (R.Jones) San Diego Ca; Code 6700, San Diego, CA; Research Lib., San Diego CA NAVORDSTA PWO, Louisville KY NAVPETOFF Code 30, Alexandria VA NAVPHIBASE CO, ACB 2 Norfolk, VA; Code S3T, Norfolk VA; Harbor Clearance Unit Two, Little Creek, VA NAVRADRECFAC PWO, Kami Seya Japan 46 NAVREGMEDCEN Code 3041, Memphis, Millington TN; PWO Newport RI; PWO Portsmouth, VA; SCE (D. Kaye); SCE San Diego, CA; SCE, Camp Pendleton CA; SCE, Guam NAVSCOLCECOF = C35 Port Hueneme, CA; CO, Code C44A Port Hueneme, CA NAVSEASYSCOM Code OOC (LT R. MacDougal), Washington DC; Code SEA OOC Washington, DC NAVSEC Code 6034 (Library), Washington DC NAVSECGRUACT Facil. Off., Galeta Is. Canal Zone; PWO, Adak AK; PWO, Edzell Scotland; PWO, Puerto Rico; PWO, Torri Sta, Okinawa; Security Offr, Winter Harbor ME NAVSHIPREPFAC Library, Guam; SCE Subic Bay NAVSHIPYD; Code 202.4, Long Beach CA; Code 202.5 (Library) Puget Sound, Bremerton WA; Code 380, (Woodroff) Norfolk, Portsmouth, VA; Code 400, Puget Sound; Code 404 (LT J. Riccio), Norfolk, Portsmouth VA; Code 410, Mare Is., Vallejo CA; Code 440 Portsmouth NH; Code 440, Norfolk; Code 440, Puget Sound, Bremerton WA; Code 450, Charleston SC; L.D. Vivian; Library, Portsmouth NH; PWD (Code 400), Philadelphia PA; PWO, Mare Is.; PWO, Puget Sound; SCE, Pearl Harbor HI; Tech Library, Vallejo, CA NAVSTA CO Naval Station, Mayport FL; CO Roosevelt Roads P.R. Puerto Rico; Engr. Dir., Rota Spain; Maint. Cont. Div., Guantanamo Bay Cuba; Maint. Div. Dir/Code 531, Rodman Canal Zone; PWD (LTJG.P.M. Motolenich), Puerto Rico; PWO Midway Island; PWO, Guantanamo Bay Cuba; PWO, Keflavik Iceland; PWO, Mayport FL; ROICC Rota Spain; ROICC, Rota Spain; SCE, Guam; SCE, San Diego CA; SCE, Subic Bay, R.P.; Utilities Engr Off. (A.S. Ritchie), Rota Spain NAVSUBASE Bangor, Bremerton, WA NAVSUPPACT CO, Brooklyn NY; CO, Seattle WA; Code 4, 12 Marine Corps Dist, Treasure Is., San Francisco CA; Code 413, Seattle WA; LTJG McGarrah, SEC, Vallejo, CA; Plan/Engr Div., Naples Italy NAVSURFWPNCEN PWO, White Oak, Silver Spring, MD NAVTECHTRACEN SCE, Pensacola FL NAVWPNCEN Code 2636 (W. Bonner), China Lake CA; PWO (Code 26), China Lake CA; ROICC (Code 702), China Lake CA NAVWPNEVALFAC Sec Offr, Kirtland AFB, NM; Technical Library, Albuquerque NM NAVWPNSTA (Clebak) Colts Neck, NJ; Code 092, Colts Neck NJ; Maint. Control Dir., Yorktown VA NAVWPNSTA PW Office (Code 09C1) Yorktown, VA NAVWPNSUPPCEN Code 09 Crane IN NCBU 405 OIC, San Diego, CA NCBC CEL AOIC Port Hueneme CA; Code 10 Davisville, RI; Code 155, Port Hueneme CA; Code 156, Port Hueneme, CA; Code 400, Gulfport MS; PW Engrg, Gulfport MS; PWO (Code 80) Port Hueneme, CA NCBU 411 OIC, Norfolk VA NCR 20, Commander NCSO BAHRAIN Security Offr, Bahrain NMCB 5, Operations Dept.; 74, CO; Forty, CO; THREE, Operations Off. NOAA Library Rockville, MD NORDA Code 440 (Ocean Rsch Off) Bay St. Louis MS NRL Code 8400 Washington, DC; Code 8441 (R.A. Skop), Washington DC NSC Code 54.1 (Wynne), Norfolk VA NSD SCE, Subic Bay, R.P. NTC Commander Orlando, FL; OICC, CBU-401, Great Lakes IL NUSC Code 131 New London, CT; Code EA123(R.S. Munn), New London CT; Code TA131 (G. De la Cruz), New London CT OCEANSYSLANT LT A.R. Giancola, Norfolk VA ONR (Dr. E.A. Silva) Arlington, VA; BROFF, CO Boston MA; Code 700F Arlington VA; Dr. A. Laufer, Pasadena CA PHIBCB | P&E, Coronado, CA PMTC Code 4253-3, Point Mugu, CA; Pat. Counsel, Point Mugu CA PWC ACE Office (LTJG St. Germain) Norfolk VA; CO Norfolk, VA; CO, Great Lakes IL; CO, Oakland CA; Code 120, Oakland CA; Code 120C, (Library) San Diego, CA; Code 128, Guam; Code 200, Great Lakes IL; Code 200, Guam; Code 220 Oakland, CA; Code 220.1, Norfolk VA; Code 30C, San Diego, CA; Code 40 (C. Kolton) Pensacola, FL; Code 400, Pearl Harbor, HI; Code 400, San Diego, CA; Code 505A (H. Wheeler); Code 610, San Diego Ca; Code 700, San Diego, CA; Library, Subic Bay, R.P.; Utilities Officer, Guam; XO Oakland, CA SPCC PWO (Code 120) Mechanicsburg PA UCT TWO OIC, Norfolk, VA; OIC, Port Hueneme CA MARCORPS Ist Marine Div (LT Galvez), Camp Pendleton, CA U.S. MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY Kings Point, NY (Reprint Custodian) USAF SCHOOL OF AEROSPACE MEDICINE Hyperbaric Medicine Div, Brooks AFB, TX 47 USCG (G-ECV) Washington De; (G-ECV/61) (Burkhart) Washington, DC; G-EOE-4/61 (T. Dowd), Washington DC USCG R&D CENTER Tech. Dir. Groton, CT USDA Forest Products Lab, Madison WI; Forest Service, Bowers, Atlanta, GA USNA Ocean Sys. Eng Dept (Dr. Monney) Annapolis, MD; Oceanography Dept (Hoffman) Annapolis MD; PWD Engr. Div. (C. Bradford) Annapolis MD; PWO Annapolis MD AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE Detroit MI (Library) CALIF. DEPT OF NAVIGATION & OCEAN DEV. Sacramento, CA (G. Armstrong) CALIF. MARITIME ACADEMY Vallejo, CA (Library) CORNELL UNIVERSITY Ithaca NY (Serials Dept, Engr Lib.) DAMES & MOORE LIBRARY LOS ANGELES, CA DUKE UNIV MEDICAL CENTER B. Muga, Durham NC FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY BOCA RATON, FL (MC ALLISTER); Boca Raton FL (Ocean Engr Dept., C. Lin); W. Hartt, Boca Raton FL FLORIDA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY ORLANDO, FL (HARTMAN) INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCES Morehead City NC (Director) IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY Ames IA (CE Dept, Handy) WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INST. Woods Hole MA (Winget) LEHIGH UNIVERSITY BETHLEHEM, PA (MARINE GEOTECHNICAL LAB., RICHARDS); Bethlehem PA (Linderman Lib. No.30, Flecksteiner) LIBRARY OF CONGRESS WASHINGTON, DC (SCIENCES & TECH DIV) MAINE MARITIME ACADEMY CASTINE, ME (LIBRARY) MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY Houghton, MI (Haas) MIT Cambridge MA; Cambridge MA (Rm 10-500, Tech. Reports, Engr. Lib.) NY CITY COMMUNITY COLLEGE BROOKLYN, NY (LIBRARY) UNIV. NOTRE DAME Katona, Notre Dame, IN OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY (CE Dept Grace) Corvallis, OR; CORVALLIS, OR (CE DEPT, HICKS); Corvalis OR (School of Oceanography) PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY STATE COLLEGE, PA (SNYDER) PURDUE UNIVERSITY Lafayette, IN (CE Engr. Lib) SAN DIEGO STATE UNIV. 1. Noorany San Diego, CA SCRIPPS INSTITUTE OF OCEANOGRAPHY LA JOLLA, CA (ADAMS); San Diego, CA (Marina Phy. Lab. Spiess) SEATTLE U Prof Schwaegler Seattle WA STANFORD UNIVERSITY Engr Lib, Stanford CA STATE UNIV. OF NEW YORK Buffalo, NY TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY College Station TX (CE Dept. Herbich); W.B. Ledbetter College Station, TX UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY, CA (CE DEPT, GERWICK); Berkeley CA (B. Bresler); Berkeley CA (E. Pearson); DAVIS, CA (CE DEPT, TAYLOR); M. Duncan, Berkeley CA UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE Newark, DE (Dept of Civil Engineering, Chesson) UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII HONOLULU, HI (SCIENCE AND TECH. DIV.) UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Metz Ref Rm, Urbana IL; URBANA, IL (DAVISSON); URBANA, IL (LIBRARY); URBANA, IL (NEWMARK); Urbana IL (CE Dept, W. Gamble) UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS (Heronemus), Amherst MA CE Dept UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN Lincoln, NE (Ross Ice Shelf Proj.) UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PHILADELPHIA, PA (SCHOOL OF ENGR & APPLIED SCIENCE, ROLL) UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS Inst. Marine Sci (Library), Port Arkansas TX UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN AUSTIN, TX (THOMPSON); Austin, TX (Breen) UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON Dept of Civil Engr (Dr. Mattock), Seattle WA; SEATTLE, WA (OCEAN ENG RSCH LAB, GRAY); Seattle WA (E. Linger) VIRGINIA INST. OF MARINE SCI. Gloucester Point VA (Library) ALFRED A. YEE & ASSOC. Honolulu HI AMETEK Offshore Res. & Engr Div ARVID GRANT OLYMPIA, WA ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO. DALLAS, TX (SMITH) AUSTRALIA Dept. PW (A. Hicks), Melbourne BECHTEL CORP. SAN FRANCISCO, CA (PHELPS) BELGIUM HAECON, N.V., Gent BOUW KAMP INC Berkeley BROWN & CALDWELL E M Saunders Walnut Creek, CA 48 CANADA Can-Dive Services (English) North Vancouver; Mem Univ Newfoundland (Chari), St Johns; Nova Scotia Rsch Found, Corp. Dartmouth, Nova Scotia; Surveyor, Nenninger & Chenevert Inc., Montreal; Trans-Mnt Oil Pipe Lone Corp. Vancouver, BC Canada CF BRAUN CO Du Bouchet, Murray Hill, NJ CHEMED CORP Lake Zurich IL (Dearborn Chem. Div.Lib.) COLUMBIA GULF TRANSMISSION CO. HOUSTON, TX (ENG. LIB.) CONCRETE TECHNOLOGY CORP. TACOMA, WA (ANDERSON) CONTINENTAL OIL CO O. Maxson, Ponca City, OK DILLINGHAM PRECAST F. McHale, Honolulu HI DRAVO CORP Pittsburgh PA (Wright) EVALUATION ASSOC. INC KING OF PRUSSIA, PA (FEDELE) FORD, BACON & DAVIS, INC. New York (Library) FRANCE Dr. Dutertre, Boulogne; P. Jensen, Boulogne; Roger LaCroix, Paris GENERAL DYNAMICS Elec. Boat Div., Environ. Engr (H. Wallman), Groton CT GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS INC. Winchester, MA (Paulding) GLIDDEN CO. STRONGSVILLE, OH (RSCH LIB) GOULD INC. Shady Side MD (Ches. Inst. Div., W. Paul) GRUMMAN AEROSPACE CORP. Bethpage NY (Tech. Info. Ctr) HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. Cambridge MA (Aldrich, Jr.) HUGHES AIRCRAFT Culver City CA (Tech. Doc. Ctr) ITALY M. Caironi, Milan; Sergio Tattoni Milano; Torino (F. Levi) MAKAI OCEAN ENGRNG INC. Kailua, HI KENNETH TATOR ASSOC CORAOPOLIS, PA (LIBRARY) LOCKHEED MISSILES & SPACE CO. INC. Sunnyvale CA (Rynewicz); Sunnyvale, CA (K.L. Krug) LOCKHEED OCEAN LABORATORY San Diego, CA (Springer) MARATHON OIL CO Houston TX MARINE CONCRETE STRUCTURES INC. MEFAIRIE, LA (INGRAHAM) MCDONNEL AIRCRAFT CO. Dept 501 (R.H. Fayman), St Louis MO MEXICO R. Cardenas MOBIL PIPE LINE CO. DALLAS, TX MGR OF ENGR (NOACK) MOFFATT & NICHOL ENGINEERS (R. Palmer) Long Beach, CA MUESER, RUTLEDGE, WENTWORTH AND JOHNSTON NEW YORK (RICHARDS) NEW ZEALAND New Zealand Concrete Research Assoc. (Librarian), Porirua NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBLDG & DRYDOCK CO. Newport News VA (Tech. Lib.) NORWAY DET NORSKE VERITAS (Library), Oslo; DET NORSKE VERITAS (Roren) Oslo; J. Creed, Ski; Norwegian Tech Univ (Brandtzaeg), Trondheim PORTLAND CEMENT ASSOC. SKOKIE, IL (CORLEY; SKOKIE, IL (KLIEGER); Skokie IL (Rsch & Dev Lab, Lib.) PRESCON CORP TOWSON, MD (KELLER) RAND CORP. Santa Monica CA (A. Laupa) RAYMOND INTERNATIONAL INC. E Colle Soil Tech Dept, Pennsauken, NJ RIVERSIDE CEMENT CO Riverside CA (W. Smith) SANDIA LABORATORIES Library Div., Livermore CA SCHUPACK ASSOC SO. NORWALK, CT (SCHUPACK) SEAFOOD LABORATORY MOREHEAD CITY, NC (LIBRARY) SEATECH CORP. MIAMI, FL (PERONI) SHELL OIL CO. HOUSTON, TX (MARSHALL) SOUTH AMERICA N. Nouel, Valencia, Venezuela SWEDEN Cement & Concrete Research Inst., Stockholm; GeoTech Inst; VBB (Library), Stockholm TECHNICAL COATINGS CO Oakmont PA (Library) TIDEWATER CONSTR. CO Norfolk VA (Fowler) TRW SYSTEMS REDONDO BEACH, CA (DAI) UNION CARBIDE CORP. R.J. Martell Boton, MA UNITED KINGDOM Cement & Concrete Assoc Wexham Springs, Slough Bucks; Cement & Concrete Assoc. (Library), Wexham Springs, Slough; D. New, G. Maunsell & Partners, London; Library, Bristol; Taylor, Woodrow Constr (014P), Southall, Middlesex; Univ. of Bristol (R. Morgan), Bristol WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. Annapolis MD (Oceanic Div Lib, Bryan); Library, Pittsburgh PA WISS, JANNEY, ELSTNER, & ASSOC Northbrook, IL (D.W. Pfeifer) 49 WM CLAPP LABS - BATTELLE DUXBURY, MA (LIBRARY); Duxbury, MA (Richards) WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS PLYMOUTH MEETING PA (CROSS, III) BRAHTZ La Jolla, CA BRYANT ROSE Johnson Div. UOP, Glendora CA BULLOCK La Canada LAYTON Redmond, WA R.F. BESIER Old Saybrook CT SMITH Gulfport, MS T.W. MERMEL Washington DC 50 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY CIVIL ENGINEERING LABORATORY NAVAL CONSTRUCTION BATTALION CENTER PORT HUENEME, CALIFORNIA 93043 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 80 = 47.004 Biological Uere bureau woods Laboratory Wildlife Commercial POSTAGE AND FEES PAID DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY DoD-316 ulorary service Fisnerles