Evaluative Study of Autophoretic Coating Performance

Sean Derrick, Graduate Research Assistant, Western Michigan University

Abstract: Autophoretics (A-coat) is a coating process used to adhere a polymer
protective coating to steel components. Environmentally speaking, A-coat is very clean
compared to alternatives. It does not emit VOCs or contain hazardous chemicals. It
can also be easily reconditioned and recycled. However, due to consumer demands,
manufacturing companies are now looking beyond their four walls, far up the supply
chain, to evaluate the total environmental impact of a products materials. Currently
A-coat uses a Polyvinylchloride (PVC) coating base, which gives off chlorine gas, during
the materials manufacturing process. Due to this, a West Michigan manufacturing
company is evaluating conventional autophoretic paint cost and performance against a
greener epoxy based A-coat, as well as a powder paint alternative. This company
sponsored an in depth laboratory study of A-coat to evaluate the protective qualities
of this material with regard to corrosion, long-term adhesion, and longevity/durability.
The purpose of this study is to ascertain if powder paint or epoxy A-coat would be
equivalent or superior to conventional A-coat while decreasing environmental impact.
Microscopy: Two forms of microscopy were employed to study the surface of AP coated
specimens. First the surface of AP coated specimens were studied under 10x and 100x
magnification to find coating defects, observable corrosion, or coating erosion. After
this study was complete any defects would be further studied under a Field Emission-
Scanning Electron Microscope (FE-SEM).
Standard Microscopy Results: The standard surface microscopy evaluation detected
multiple defects in the coating surface (seen below). These defects appeared to be
voids in the coating. These void locations were too big to be detected using the BET
experiment but too small to be observed by the naked eye. When corroded specimens
were examined these void locations were the localized points of failure.

Problem: Autophorectic Coating is used to coat a wide range of manufactured goods.

However, it has been found that this coating will fail and corrosion will become evident
over a relatively short period of time. It is possible that this coating will not meet most
manufacturers quality standards at the recommended coating thickness. Theoretically
A-coating should out perform powder paint while requiring a fraction of the coating
thickness. However, observations indicate that powder paint out performs A-coat in Non-Corroded AP Sample ( 10x mag) AP Sample Showing Voids ( 10x mag)
terms of protection from rust. It is unknown if the coating is failing at its recommended
thickness due to the coating material or from the coating process.

Basics of Autophoretics: Also known as autodeposition, A-coat or AP. It is a waterborne

process which depends on chemical reactions between a ferrous component to be
coated and the coating solution. Iron reacts with a mildly acidic latex emulsion polymer,
as well as other undisclosed ingredients. These ingredients vary depending on
manufacture, usage, and desired properties. The mild acidity liberates a small amount
of ions from the ferrous material. These ions interact with the latex causing a thin
deposition layer to form. The chemical activators diffuse rapidly into a film and etch the AP Sample Showing Voids ( 100x mag) AP Sample w/ 10 Cycles( 10x mag)
surface simultaneously. Unlike an electrostatic coating, there is no external electric
charge and the pigment is in solution. Additionally, this process is only possible with
ferrous materials. Once the coating is applied it is baked, to cure and solidify the
coating, onto the base substrate. FE-SEM Results: Once the voids were detected the coatings surface and void areas were
examined under high magnification. This study revealed that the BET was correct; micro-
defects and pores were too small or did not penetrate the surface. Additionally, the
Autophoretic Coating Process initiation of corrosion could be detected around the void boundaries.

Coating Surface

Step 1:
The base substrate is first cleaned in a multi-
step process. Once cleaned the material is
dipped into the emulsion and left to sit.
Base Metal Surface Iron-Oxide Locations

Micro-Pore (FE-SEM) Void Boundary (FE-SEM)

Corrosion Rate: Corrosion occurs at a rate determined by an equilibrium between

opposing chemical reactions that take place on two dissimilar electrically connected
Step 2: metals, i.e. anode and cathode. The total current, the sum of anodic and cathodic
As the material sits in the solution the iron currents, can be measured by sweeping the potential of the sample. Extrapolating the
begins to react with the acidity. During the anodic and cathodic currents to an intersection, represents the corrosion current and
ionic exchange pigments in the emulsion corrosion potential. This is commonly known as a Tafel plot. The corrosion current is
begin to attach to the substrates surface. directly proportional to the corrosion rate, so a corrosion comparison can be made
The longer the part stays in the emulsion between samples by observing the corrosion current.
the thicker the coating will be.
Results: The test showed a significant difference in corrosion between AP and Powder
Paint.

Step 3:
Once the desired thickness is obtained the Tafel Plot
part is removed from the emulsion and cured
in an oven.

Theories: Several theories exist as to why Autophoretic Coat could be failing prematurely
1.Microporosity of the coating
2.The coating is being eroded causing failure to occur
3.Excess acidity, trapped beneath the coating is causing failure
AP & Powder Paint Comparison

Testing Objectives:
To determine if there are microscopic pores or defects in the coating
To measure the corrosion rate of A-coat and powder paint
Use microscopy to study the surface of the coating, before and after corrosion
Conclusions:
Voids in the AP coating are causing the coating to fail sooner than powder coated
Autophoreticly coated material corrodes faster than Powder coated specimens
Surface Porosity: The Bruanuer, Emmet and Teller (BET) gas absorption method was
Micro-pores and micro-defects are not present or too small to cause failure
employed to determine the porosity of AP and powder paint specimens by determining
the amount of gas which the specimens surface absorbs. The gas condenses in the fine
pore structure of the coating creating a layer on the specimens surface. The gas pressure Recommendations: It has been observed that large oil spots on product prior to cleaning
is increased till the surface pores of the specimen are saturated. Comparing the and painting have inhibited the AP process in coating the metal properly, resulting in large
macroscopic surface area to the microscopic area, reveals pore size, pore volume and (visible) voids. The micro-voids are most likely a much smaller form of the same
pore area in a specimen. phenomena. In applications where AP is in consideration, it is recommended that the
Results: This study found that number and size of pores present in both AP and Powder cleaning process (pre-treatment) be further evaluated and improved to prevent micro-oil
Paint coated samples were too small to compromise the coating. spots.