corrdefense spring 2013 issue - nace...

________________________________ © 2005-2013 CorrDefense Online Magazine

Volume 9, Number 1 Spring 2013 Top Stories

CorrDefense Editorial

By Wimpy Pybus, Army Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive

The Army stands ready to deploy anywhere in the world at a moment's notice. This means that Army equipment and infrastructure must be designed, constructed, and maintained to perform safely and reliably in diverse and extreme environments. Such environments are particularly conducive to the damaging effects of corrosion, risking the safety and reliability of Army equipment and infrastructure. Therefore, it requires a workforce that is knowledgeable in identifying and managing the many forms of corrosion.

Across the U.S. Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard, the responsibility for corrosion prevention and control is a shared one. Every service member, federal civilian, and government contractor shares in that responsibility through their contribution to the design, construction, operation, maintenance, and disposal of our equipment and infrastructure. This vision of shared responsibility underlies our approach to corrosion prevention and control.

When the Army identifies a gap(s) in our warfighting capabilities, we look to find a solution by making changes in one or more materiel and non-materiel entities, namely: doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy.

Our central mission within the Office of the Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive is to ensure that we incorporate corrosion prevention and control in the appropriate Army policies and procedures consulted throughout the equipment and infrastructure life cycles. What we have managed to show Army leaders is that policy and procedures indeed exist to properly preserve our equipment. However, these policies and procedures are not always followed in practice. The mechanisms to ensure that the policies and procedures are followed are many, but include: leadership emphasis, increased awareness, robust training, consistency between various functional policies and procedures, and many others.

Key Corrosion-Related Challenges

In order to provide greater capabilities to Army equipment, more and more acquisition strategies are incorporating both commercial items and existing Government products into a system. One important challenge we are addressing involves the coordination that must take place between two or more program managers when the product or products of one is to be integrated with the products of another. Historically, these interfaces have been highly susceptible to galvanic corrosion, in part, because the use of dissimilar metals was not given the proper consideration.

There are other challenges, of course. The Army is completing a formal study of aviation spare and repair parts that have been lost to corrosion while in storage. Specifically, we are examining our frequency of inspection, the materials selected

Wimpy Pybus


for packaging, repairable container designs, targeted training, sensor-based monitoring, and dehumidified storage facilities.

My office is currently exploring how to compute a "designed cost of corrosion" for comparison against the "actual cost of corrosion" as calculated by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Logistics Management Institute. Such measurement would then allow us to assess the gap between designed and actual cost.

Adopting a Holistic Approach

The critical processes within the Army's corrosion prevention and control program are to define, predict, prevent, detect, and mitigate corrosion within each element of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, facilities, and policy. Such alignment and integration is essential to our holistic approach.

Every acquisition program and construction project is carried out within the framework and boundaries established by statutory and regulatory requirements of the full range of functional areas, to include those desired capabilities of the specific program/project. This is one reason why the corrosion prevention advisory team needs to include multi-functional subject matter experts to ensure consideration of all the contributing factors to corrosion prevention and control.

In this way, leadership can make fully informed decisions based on trade off analyses.

Recent Accomplishments: The Way Forward

The Army published a revised corrosion prevention and control strategic plan, which identifies the goals and objectives for the forthcoming year and beyond.

The formal study being completed on the aviation spare/repair part storage has identified a number of issues where cost savings/cost avoidance can be realized, changes can be made to policy and procedures, and we can increase availability and readiness.

My office, supported by subject matter experts from various Army commands, conducted a pilot corrosion assessment at Fort Stewart and Hunter Army Airfield in August 2012. The conduct of this assessment identified issues that can also produce cost savings/cost avoidance in the area of the application of coatings and paint.

We have identified other OSD-level and Army programs whose efforts result in improvements in mitigating corrosion. The Army Environmental Quality Technology program includes several efforts to replace production and maintenance processes with more environmentally friendly alternatives that meet or exceed corrosion resistance requirements. These efforts and similar efforts through the joint Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program and the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program have served as Army matching funds for OSD demonstration projects in the absence of a dedicated Army budget for corrosion technology.

Similarly, my office has been collaborating with the Army Oil Analysis Program and Condition-Based Maintenance Plus Program since they too are looking at technologies to extend the life of weapon systems and infrastructure and predict the degradation of materials.


While much was accomplished in the past year, new corrosion challenges will present themselves every year. To better defend ourselves, we in the Office of the Army Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive are developing a cost-benefit and business case analysis to support the establishment of an Army Corrosion Prevention and Control Program budget through the Project Objective Memorandum process. If this analysis is successful, the Army will be better positioned to tackle the challenges in the war against corrosion.

As I mentioned at the outset, shared responsibility guides the way in which we address our most important challenges in preserving Army assets. Together we enable victory.

________________________________ Page 1 © 2005-2013 CorrDefense Online Magazine



By Steven J. Spadafora, Navy Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive

As the nation's primary maritime force, the United States Navy and Marine Corps routinely operate in the world's harshest environments. Each day, in addition to defending our freedom against enemies far and near, our Sailors and Marines face a challenge from an often unfamiliar enemy—corrosion. In 2012, the Department of Defense estimated that corrosion, defined as the degradation of a material due to interaction with its chemical environment, costs the Department of the Navy (DON) more than $7 billion annually. Additionally, it presents a significant challenge to maintaining the materiel readiness of our equipment, facilities, and infrastructure.

During my first two years as Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive, the Department has made significant progress in the battle to reduce the fiscal and readiness impacts of corrosion. These accomplishments are due in large part to a commitment by leadership to establish corrosion prevention and control (CPC) as a life cycle best practice. This support, and the tireless efforts of our civilian and military workforce, will continue to deliver a ready, capable Fleet to meet the warfighter needs of today and tomorrow.

Strategic Planning—Groundwork for Success

Last fall, the DON issued a major revision to its Strategic Plan for Corrosion Prevention and Control. This document outlines the Department's goals, objectives, and strategies for combating corrosion across the acquisition and maintenance life cycles. The cornerstone of this plan is echoed in its motto, "corrosion prevention and control as a way of life." Corrosion is a day-to-day reality for maintenance personnel and deployed forces, and the goal is to elevate awareness of corrosion throughout the Department in an effort to reduce its impact.

A critical component in the development and execution of this strategy, and my biggest asset as Corrosion Executive, is the DON Corrosion Cross-Functional Team. This Department-level working group provides the knowledge, skill, and technical solutions that enable the DON to make timely and cost-effective programmatic and policy decisions in support of the Navy and Marine Corps mission. In addition to Department-level activities, team members also serve as corrosion points of contact for programs and personnel within their respective commands.

The underlying theme of our strategic plan is the incorporation of CPC planning as early as possible in the acquisition process. According to some estimates, as much as 80 percent of life cycle cost for a program is "locked in" by Milestone B. Yet corrosion, which is responsible for nearly 25 percent of annual DoD maintenance expenditures, is not formally addressed in program documentation until Milestone B.

Steven J. Spadafora


Therefore, the DON strategic plan focuses on increasing the visibility, awareness, and consideration of corrosion earlier during the acquisition life cycle. Our communication and outreach activities are already providing return on investment through greater program awareness, and we continue to advocate for policy and guidance that encourages corrosion considerations during analyses and trade-off decisions made prior to Milestone A.

Key Activities and Accomplishments

In the last two years, we have executed several initiatives focused on earlier consideration of corrosion. The impetus for our largest initiative was the result of discussions with several acquisition programs and personnel. During these discussions, a desire to understand corrosion planning requirements was conveyed, but a lack of policy and guidance documentation to disseminate that information was noted.

Therefore, we established a working group within the Corrosion Cross-Functional Team to develop the "Weapons System Baseline Assessment Process." This is a Department-level process to assess corrosion prevention and control planning

during each phase of the acquisition life cycle, complete with guidance documentation. Not only will this process provide program management with the expectations for planning at each phase, it allows decision-makers to budget for specific corrosion planning activities. This process is expected to be beta-tested during the CCPE's annual review of major acquisition programs in September 2013, with a targeted release date of late 2013 or early 2014. A similar process is planned for facilities and infrastructure, but has been delayed due to funding shortfalls.

The Department also has several initiatives focused on preventative and corrective maintenance of in-service Fleet equipment and infrastructure. Three of the largest systems commands have established corrosion teams that focus on training and educating Sailors and Marines on maintenance best practices. In some instances, these teams also perform maintenance tasks. In late 2011, these teams were brought together for a Joint Corrosion Team Summit to exchange ideas and share best practices. The result was the identification of many areas for collaboration and a desire to hold future summits to continue cooperation and sharing of best practices and lessons learned.

We also continue to capitalize on the cooperative relationships that exist with our counterparts in the Army, Air Force, and Office of the Secretary of Defense. As the Corrosion Board of Directors, the Corrosion Executives from each military department meet with the Director of Corrosion Policy and Oversight quarterly to establish policy priorities, share best practices and success stories, and collaborate on CPC challenges facing DoD in the future.

The Department also maintains an active corrosion science and technology portfolio. In addition to numerous projects funded by systems commands and the Office of Naval Research, the Corrosion Cross-Functional Team oversees DON's participation in competitive project funding by OSD. In the last three years alone, the Department has received $10 million in complementary funds from OSD to develop, demonstrate, and deliver new technologies to Fleet customers.

In the face of rising operational tempo and looming budget cuts, the Department will continue to leverage its collaborative relationships with DoD, industry, academia, and international navies to deliver corrosion prevention and control solutions that meet the warfighter's needs.


Moving Forward—Guided by Our Strategic Plan

With the delivery of its most recent strategic plan, the Department has set a clear navigational course for its efforts to prevent and mitigate the impacts of corrosion.

As we move forward, the Corrosion Executive and Corrosion Cross-Functional Team will be responsible for executing this plan, under the guidance and support of senior Department leadership like the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation. However, it will take a commitment by the entire civilian, military, and contractor workforce to institutionalize corrosion prevention and control as a way of life.




By David Robertson, Air Force Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive

In his recent vision statement, our Chief of Staff of the Air Force General Mark Welsh III challenged us to be innovative and constantly find better and smarter ways to do the Air Force mission—fly, fight, and win. For corrosion prevention and control, this means accomplishing the work efficiently and implementing solutions to reduce the tremendous long-term costs of corrosion. In other words, we must keep in sight the benefits to be gained by better materials and processes while recognizing the immediate fiscal constraints.

The last major Department of Defense (DoD)-sponsored study put the cost of corrosion for Air Force aviation and missile systems at about $4.5 billion per year, or 24 percent of total maintenance cost. The study used data from fiscal years 2008-2009 and captured cost information from across our entire inventory of aircraft and ballistic missile types. In addition to dollar cost, the study revealed corrosion accounted for roughly 12 percent of all non-availability hours, or nearly 16 days of corrosion-related non-availability per year on average for every aircraft. This is a mission impact we simply cannot afford.

A Defense Science Board task force from 2004 suggested that up to 30 percent of corrosion-related expenditures could be eliminated through optimal corrosion prevention and control measures. I consider it my job to ensure the Air Force Corrosion Prevention and Control Program is dedicated to realizing such savings, while simultaneously improving the mission readiness of Air Force assets.

An Increasing Focus

The Air Force has been engaged in fighting corrosion for a long time, but in 2012 the formal service-wide Corrosion Prevention and Control Program gained new focus and importance. I began serving as the first full-time Air Force Corrosion Control and Prevention Executive within the office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition. Now that the position is a full-time posting, we have a dedicated single point of contact at Air Force Headquarters for coordinating corrosion activities across the department and helping the community implement common solutions to corrosion problems.

One of my first priorities was publishing a new Strategic Plan for corrosion with goals and objectives. We began executing the plan and it is a great start—now we must build on it. We are moving ahead with an update to the plan this year. As part of this plan, we established a Corrosion Prevention and Control Working Group to coordinate the many activities in the Air Force corrosion community. The Working Group enjoys participation from across all corrosion-relevant disciplines, including engineers, facility managers, maintainers, and several others.

David Robertson


Strengthening our partnerships with other DoD corrosion prevention organizations and activities and revamping our processes for identifying new corrosion-fighting technology investments have been important priorities for my first year in this position. Everyone in the corrosion prevention and control enterprise faces resource challenges. Leveraging resources by working closely with other DoD entities is the most immediate way to stretch scarce dollars.

It is imperative—now more than ever—that we improve the way the Air Force addresses the corrosion challenge across weapons systems and installations. Key principles that guide our efforts include developing uniform policies and standards to propagate best practices at low cost, enhancing communication and

collaboration within the enterprise, and improving our ability to share successful technologies and procedures to get maximum "bang for the buck" in our corrosion-fighting efforts. We made good strides in 2012, but we have more room for improvement.

Corrosion-Related Achievements

The Air Force's commitment to its corrosion prevention mission can be seen in many accomplishments over the past year. While there isn't room to note every recent accomplishment, I would like to highlight a few that illustrate the progress we have made.

The mandate for DoD to reduce or eliminate the use of hexavalent chromium, our most significant corrosion-fighting element, is a major issue for our system program offices, the aviation community, and the nation's entire industrial complex. Finding acceptable alternatives that provide adequate corrosion protection remain elusive, but I am confident that, at least for aircraft outer mold line protection, we are only a few years away. Our current priority is to qualify a set of new coating systems that can be leveraged across a range of weapon systems. To that end, testing is underway that includes evaluations of non-chromate coating systems through outdoor exposure tests in some of the most corrosive environments in the country. Additionally, some aircraft programs such as F-15, C-130, and HH-60 are demonstrating non-chromate coatings on aircraft in operational service, generating important operational test data. As a result of these Enterprise-wide efforts, we are getting close to identifying uniform outer mold line non-chromate coating solutions suitable for the aircraft inventory.

Corrosion prevention in the Air Force is about more than aircraft and missiles—it's also about facilities. The Air Force Civil Engineering Center recently assisted the Director of Corrosion Policy and Oversight in an evaluation of corrosion control for DoD facilities and infrastructure. The results of this evaluation, and a related review by the Government Accountability Office, will help guide our corrosion control efforts for facilities over the next several years. On a related topic, we are currently looking at the readiness of Air Force facilities used to perform corrosion control maintenance on our aircraft.

Another noteworthy accomplishment in 2012 was the re-establishment of a research team dedicated to corrosion science at the Air Force Research Laboratory. The Laboratory began new projects in 2012 which included studies of the evolution of hydrofluoric acid from fluoropolymer materials (which can damage adjacent metallic structures and electronics) and new methods for performing nondestructive evaluation to detect environmental degradation of advanced materials such as those found on the F-35.

Moving Forward—Using Resources Efficiently

Budget austerity will likely be part of the military operating environment for the coming years. Focusing effort on corrosion prevention and control is a smart way we can meet our corrosion challenges. Historically, DoD investments in improved


anti-corrosion technologies and procedures have shown an average 14 to 1 return on investment. Even with this good track record, it will take commitment and tenacity to substantially reduce the multi-billion dollar magnitude of Air Force corrosion costs. By leveraging investments broadly and focusing on areas such as standards development, multi-use anti-corrosion technologies, and information sharing, we aim to continue to get the most "bang for our buck" and ensure corrosion does not inhibit the Air Force's ability to fly, fight, and win.



Defense Department Launches E-Portal Dedicated to Corrosion Training

Corrosion Office's Resource Positioned to Benefit Industry and Universities

By Cynthia Greenwood Since 2005 the U.S. Defense Department's Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office has partnered with corrosion experts from industry and academia to educate tomorrow's workforce in controlling and preventing corrosion. To advance its training mission in 2013, the DoD Corrosion Office has launched a powerful Web portal that will make myriad corrosion courses, tutorials, and games accessible to the wider corrosion control and prevention industry. These courses were originally developed for the defense acquisition workforce.

DoD's new online resource is CorrConnect, a corrosion Web site now open to the general public in version 5.0.CorrConnect, found at www.corrconnect.org, offers a variety of training modules on the science of corrosion, its causes, and the technological methods required to prevent and mitigate it. Developed by Game Services Group, Inc. (GSGI) for the DoD Corrosion Office and a broad community of corrosion experts from all military services, CorrConnect received the imprimatur of NACE International members in 2012 when it won the MP Readers' Choice Corrosion Innovation of the Year Award.

"We have a mandate to reach out to industry and academic institutions, and the CorrConnect portal gives us a way to do this," said Daniel J. Dunmire, director of the DoD Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office. "The corrosion courses housed on CorrConnect incorporate video, animation, closed captioning, mini-games, lectures, quizzes, and exams in order to teach, engage, and entertain users while they are learning about the science of corrosion and the practice of mitigating it."

"CorrConnect's training modules and interactive simulation games employ digital media, top-quality graphics, and social networking access to ensure that students are highly engaged throughout their learning experience," Dunmire added. Most important, version 5.0 of CorrConnect allows users to access course content on all mobile devices, as well as the Windows 8 (PC-based), OS X (Mac-based), and Linux desktop operating systems. CorrConnect also supports the operating systems for the iPad and Android tablet computers.

Course Content and Corr-Simulator

For aspiring corrosion control practitioners and experts alike, CorrConnect offers easy and engaging student access to textbook-quality courses and tutorials in basic and advanced corrosion, polymers, cathodic protection, coatings and coating inspection, corrosion management, materials characteristics, and other sub-specialties of corrosion science. Established courses available for immediate download include the Defense Acquisition University-accredited Corrosion

A lesson inside DoD's Cathodic Protection (Level One) course titled "CP 01: Inspect and Protect" addresses the safety procedures required for the practice of taking measurements on rectifiers. Students can either download the course through the CorrConnect.org Web site or access the lessons via Facebook. Photo courtesy of GSGI Systems.

http://www.corrconnect.org/


Learning Module (CLM) 038 Corrosion Prevention and Control Overview, as well as Cathodic Protection (CP) 01 Inspect and Protect; and Cathodic Protection (CP) 02Maintain and Protect. In February 2013, DoD launched its four-part Corrosion 201 Series titled Introduction to Corrosion Engineering. Developed by military researchers and academic experts from The University of Akron's National Center for Education and Research in Corrosion and Materials Performance, the new series is comparable to college-level engineering courses in material science and corrosion prevention. Course titles within the 201 series include Corrosion Basics (201A), Characteristics and Impact of Materials (201B), Corrosion Prevention and Mitigation (201C), and Corrosion Management Methodology (201D). "Each course on CorrConnect offers a mix of text, videos, and games in order to maximize the potential for interaction," Dunmire said. "Certain courses will offer a final exam to help students gauge their comprehension of material." CorrConnect will eventually house the Analysis of Alternatives for Hexavalent Chromium VI and other Analysis of Alternatives tools designed for acquisition program managers, engineers, and weapons systems manufacturers. "The Corrosion Office has been working to secure accreditation from the Defense Acquisition University for each of these courses, in order to meet the professional needs of defense acquisition employees and anyone from industry that supports that workforce," said Dunmire. CorrConnect's library also features a variety of tutorials about corrosion, offering industry users a fast, seamless, and error-free experience during the viewing process. The titles in this four-part Corrosion Comprehension (CC) series feature host LeVar Burton, and they include: CC1 Combating the Pervasive Menace; CC2 Portraying Polymers, CC3 Specifically Ceramics; andCC4 Corrosion Environments. "The videos are organized into chapter modules, each of which includes quizzes for comprehension evaluation," noted Dunmire. One additional tutorial—CC5 Policy, Prevention, and Procedures in Combatting the Pervasive Menace—is expected to be released during the spring of 2013. CorrConnect's educational offerings also include a single-player, turn-based simulation game called Corr-Simulator, or CorrSim. Designed for college students and researchers, CorrSim outlines the environmental factors that cause corrosion on man-made structures and reviews information about how to protect the structures and the consequences of corrosion on the economy. Aimed at varying professional levels, CorrSim players are challenged to build an industrial complex and protect it from corrosion using a menu of combating technologies. During the game, players can optimize their earnings and use their money to build more structures. CorrSim, a winner of the 2012 MP Readers' Choice Corrosion Innovation of the Year award, is also configured as an app for Facebook and the iPad. The DoD Corrosion Office and GSGI are seeking feedback from industry users who access CorrConnect's training courses and tutorials. "We expect that the corrosion community of experts within industry and academia will want to offer us their ideas and preferences related to the functionality of our course content," said Luis Manalac, president of GSGI Systems. "We welcome any insights from our users and will try our best to accommodate as many of these requests as possible." Using Cloud-Based Technology "CorrConnect runs on the latest cloud-based technology to enhance the process of learning in cyberspace, and ensures that all students seeking corrosion training have an equal advantage, noted Dunmire. "CorrConnect has the ability to provide quick access and ease of navigation our online users within DoD and industry, and it allows us to make instant changes to course content, if necessary. Moreover, our server provides multiple layers of security and authentication protocols." "CorrConnect is one of the first cloud-based projects executed for the Department of Defense that uses commercially available, off-the-shelf technology," noted Isabel Manalac, vice president of GSGI. "CorrConnect also follows the standards and specifications of SCORM (Shareable Content Object Reference Model), the Web-based learning system that optimizes e-learning platforms used by industrial, academic, and government institutions."

The DoD's advanced Cathodic Protection (CP) (Level Two) course, titled "CP 02: Maintain and Protect", includes a lesson on CP systems in hazardous environments. Photo courtesy of GSGI Systems.


News and Information-Sharing CorrConnect is organized according to various general tabs or button links that refer to services created for industry and military users. The organizational tabs most useful for industry and NACE members would include News, Podcasts & Magazines, Courses, Simulations, and Community. In addition to fulfilling its role as DoD's leading source of virtual corrosion training, CorrConnect has been configured as an up-to-the-minute news source and medium for information sharing. The News tab provides users with daily corrosion news updates, while the home page features the latest issues of CorrDefense e-magazine. The Simulations & Tools section currently features the CorrSim game, which can be played via the Web site or through the Facebook platform. "GSGI will be adding new simulations and tools in the future," said Dunmire. "By the middle of 2013, we expect that the Community section of CorrConnect will allow NACE members to post comments and suggestions about specific courses, while also allowing for general member interaction and discussion," Dunmire said. "Currently

the Community section functions as a bulletin board supplementing the needs of our course administrators. Administrators are free to modify content according to student feedback." DAU Accreditation is Paramount Since 2005 the DoD Corrosion Office has partnered with DAU to provide numerous online training courses on the CorrDefense and CorrConnect Web sites for scientists and technicians who acquire and maintain military aircraft, ships, and ground vehicles. Most of these courses have migrated to the CorrConnect e-portal. While CorrConnect is a powerful outreach tool, the DoD Corrosion Office's principal aim is to support the DAU platform so that corrosion practitioners who take courses through any online platform can receive DAU accreditation. DAU is reviewing all courses currently available on the CorrConnect Web site to ensure that they comply with their own system requirements, as well as SCORM standards and specifications for Web-based learning. To access the Corrosion Office library of corrosion-related courses and tutorials, visit www.corrconnect.org.

One of the four DoD-sponsored tutorials inside CorrConnect's"Courses" section, titled "Corrosion Comprehension 1: Combating the Pervasive Menace, is moderated by LeVar Burton. Each chapter can be unlocked as the student takes the concluding quiz of the preceding chapter. Photo courtesy of GSGI Systems.




DoD Corrosion Courses and CorrSim Game Available on Mobile Devices

Access Corrosion Apps on the iPad, iPhone, and Via Facebook

By Cynthia Greenwood

If you're looking for an easy way to access Web-based courses on the science of polymers and ceramics, the Defense Department's Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office may have just the right app for you.

Or, if you need to understand the corrosion control technologies on a cargo seaport or an oil rig, you can download CorrSimulator—also known as CorrSim—on your iPad or iPhone. Or you can access it via Facebook if you prefer.

Four mobile apps for the Corrosion Comprehension series feature actor LeVar Burton, and they are available offerings in a four-part tutorial series. Jointly developed by GSGI Systems, The University of Akron, and Bruno White Entertainment for DoD's Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office, the courses can be downloaded from the Apple Store for free. From the store, users can also download the CorrSim training game free of charge.

Developers at GSGI Systems created the corrosion mobile apps after the military corrosion community expressed an interest in makings its existing training courses more portable. The Corrosion Comprehension tutorial series and the CorrSim training game are also housed at CorrConnect.org, the DoD Corrosion Office's e-learning portal.

The titles in the Corrosion Comprehension series include CC1 Combating the Pervasive Menace; CC2 Portraying Polymers, CC3 Specifically Ceramics; and CC4 Corrosion Environments. A fifth tutorial—CC5 Policy, Prevention, and Procedures in Combatting the Pervasive Menace—is expected to be released during the spring of 2013. "Beginning in 2013, all DoD certification and training courses are being made available on the iOS (iPad), Android, and social networking platforms, as well as Windows 8 (PC-based), OS X (Mac-based), and Linux desktop operating systems," said Isabel Manalac, vice president of GSGI Systems. "All coursework sponsored by the Corrosion Office has been developed for each type of mobile application and will eventually be available on Facebook and Google+."

Using Social Networking to Build A Community of Users

The DoD corrosion community began working with GSGI Systems four years ago to foster a community of corrosion practitioners. Only now has technology caught up to allow collaboration by way of social networking.

Scenes from,CorrSim, tutorial can be played

onCorrConnect.org and are also available for download on your

iPad or accessible via Facebook. Photo courtesy of GSGI

Systems.



"The Corrosion Office courses are significantly more powerful on these social networks than if they were to just hang passively on traditional stand-alone Web sites," Manalac said. "Social networking allows you to communicate with corrosion practitioners instantly. On Facebook, for example, you can post a question on a wall, it will go out to the world, and it can be answered quickly by an expert or someone with an interest similar to your own." The dominant players in the social networking landscape are Facebook and Google+, Manalac said. "Between the two of them, they have 98 to 99 percent of the market. If a new one comes into play that is significant, we'll look into adapting DoD courseware for it as well, with the goal of casting as wide a net as possible. Manalac's team began marketing CorrSim on Facebook during the last week of December 2011. In just 10 days, they attracted 1,300 users who downloaded the game. "Such is the power of social networking—the uptake is so much faster than it is on a stand-alone Web site," said Manalac.

The first tutorial in DoD's four-part series, titled Corrosion

Comprehension: Combating the Pervasive Menace, is now

available as a mobile app at the Apple Store online. Photo

courtesy of GSGI Systems.


Volume 9, Number 1 Spring 2013 Featured Projects

Updating an Institution

The Navy's Legendary "Navy Gray" Topside Coating Is Getting A Makeover

By Chris Grethlein

Everyone recognizes the "Great Gray Fleet." It's one of the most recognizable features of the armed services. Even lay people who couldn't tell an airman from a Sailor from a Marine know a Navy ship when they see one. There is no mistaking the one common characteristic of nearly every surface vessel in the U.S. Navy—the universally recognized 'Navy-Gray' color of their topside surfaces that has been the fleet standard for more than three generations of Americans.

A Constant in a Wave of Technical Changes

The Navy of today bears little resemblance to its World War II forebear. Diesel engines gave way to nuclear power; piston engine planes are now jets; the machine gunners' nests that once protected ships from Japanese Zeroes have been supplanted by

radar/infrared-guided Phalanxclose-in weapon systems. Battleships, once the Navy's predominant platform for force projection, have been succeeded by aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, Aegis Cruisers, standoff weapons, and electronic warfare, to name several. But amazingly, during these past seven decades of rapid, evolving weapons technologies, the gray topcoat that is readily identifiable with our surface fleet is fundamentally the same material that was adopted as the Navy standard around the onset of the war. The old expression, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" could have easily been the motto for this topcoat. But not any longer, for even this venerable coating's chemistry must be updated to meet changing safety regulations and the DoD's new commitments to environmental stewardship.

Facing the New Challenge

The technology behind the Navy's current topside system—a 70 percent solids, single-component silicone-modified alkyd coating—represents perhaps the last in a series of coating systems dating from the Second World War. For decades, the

system performed to expectations. But recent changes in environmental legislation, restricting the use of volatile organic

compounds in paints solvents, has driven four reformulations of the original product in the past decade.

As is frequently the result of any design tradeoff, the modified formulations, each environmentally compliant, resulted in versions of the coating system that no longer provided the same level of protection as the original product once did. Nor did they meet the Navy's long-term performance expectations. Developing an updated coating that meets the original performance standards for the topcoat, as well as the new environmental strictures, means abandoning the familiar alkyd chemistry of the original coating for a whole new chemical makeup. While the new coating will still sport the same familiar shade of gray, it will be an entirely new compound underneath.

Photo by Diana Quinlan, Mass Communication Specialist 3

rdClass, U.S. Navy.


Finding A New Way Forward

Researchers at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) Center for Corrosion Science and Engineering have been actively investigating and testing a number of other compounds formulated with a higher solids content (sprayable versions of coatings are a mix of the coating material and a carrier solvent). Environmental regulations now restrict how much solvent content is permissible in paint mixtures, as all the solvent, deemed hazardous, flashes into the atmosphere after application.

Work is ongoing to develop and evaluate solvent-free, rapid cure, and single component coatings for shipboard topside/exterior applications. Under this project, a series of single component, high-solids, and solvent-free silane-based topside coatings were developed and evaluated. These coatings have superior weathering resistance as compared to the Navy's current standard, known as MIL-PRF-24635 silicone alkyd system. As a result, these coatings are now being positioned for transition to industry under licensing for manufacturing and supply to the fleet.

Other Practical Considerations

After briefly considering migrating to a binary, or two-component system (in which two separate parts are mixed just prior to application, and start curing immediately after), it was concluded that remaining with a single component system was more highly favored by the painters. It was also realized that switching away from a legacy style (single-component) product would be difficult to sell to ship's force. The crews would more readily adopt a new system applied similarly to the old. Moreover, any binary coatings would most likely contain isocyanates, the active ingredient in binary curing agents, which pose serious health and safety concerns. Thus, an alternative path was chosen, and its primary focus would concentrate on the more benign chemistry of polysiloxane. A number of other chemistries were also investigated—modified silicone alkyds, several fatty acid derivatives of the original alkyd product, several members of the silane family of molecules, and others. But given the success of previous polysiloxane derivatives developed at NRL, the emphasis was changed from isocyanate-cured compounds to functional siloxane-based products.

Outlook

Currently, the U.S. Navy does not have an approved long-term performance, high solids/solvent free, single-component coating system for topside camouflage application. Thus, more frequent service intervals are required. Incorporating high solids/solvent free coatings will significantly reduce shipboard flammability and health and safety risks associated with ship's force painting. Several of the chemistries tested so far have shown promise of meeting both performance and environmental expectations. In fact, two compounds—a modified silicone alkyd and polysiloxane—have both been adopted in the Navy's topcoat performance specification, MIL-PRF-24635 (Types III and V, respectively).

As a reflection of the more environmentally conscious military, the Secretary of the Navy has declared that in the coming decade, the Navy will deploy the "Great Green Fleet." The eventual successor to the Navy's legendary topcoat may very well have a "green" heart, but the fleet's face will still inspire future sailors to proudly declare the surface fleet "Haze Gray and Underway."

Did you know...?

The official name for the Navy's topcoat shade is "Haze Gray" (RGB 176, 186, 195).

Sailors of the surface fleet have a saying, "Haze Gray and Underway," which refers to surface ships in arduous duty at sea.

The first Navy surface ship was painted Haze Gray in 1918, after the shade had been determined to be optimal for camouflage in day or night.

Haze Gray was adopted as the official topcoat shade in 1941, and has remained so ever since.

The gray topcoat, apart from one minor change in the formulation 50 years ago, has essentially remained unchanged!

Photo by Jessica Smith, Engineman Fireman, U.S. Navy.



Army Introduces Laser Deposition Repairs to Army Aviation

By Chris Grethlein

Recently, the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM) instituted a program to look at the feasibility of restoring worn parts to active service by repairing them, rather than replacing them, which can be very costly. AMCOM chose to evaluate a novel repair method known as Laser Powder Deposition.

This project was performed at the Aerospace Engineering and Maintenance Facility (RDMR-AEM) located at the Corpus Christi Naval Air Station. The effort was collaboration between Benét Laboratories, located at the Army's Watervliet Arsenal in Upstate New York; the Corpus Christi Army Depot, which provided manufacturing support; and an outside contractor, RPM and Associates, who performed the actual laser deposition work. The goal of this project was to demonstrate that laser powder deposition is a feasible alternative for the repair of aircraft components in the Army.

The basic principle of the laser deposition process is quite simple—a laser beam creates a metallurgical bond between the damaged surface area of a part (known as a substrate) and the added repair material, which in this case is a metal powder.

Laser powder deposition has already been used with great success to repair critical components on Navy ships and Army ground vehicles. Industry has also used this process for years to refurbish worn or corroded equipment. Anniston Army Depot uses this process to repair worn turbine engine components on the M1 tank, for example. The Navy also has had success repairing parts that are large and impractical to replace, like propeller shafts. This project represents the Army's first foray into repairing aviation assets.

Choosing the Right Part For Proof-Of-Principle

The Army chose a part deemed a "non critical safety item" for a first demonstration, for which there was already an established repair method for comparison purposes. AMCOM chose a compressor discharge piston seal, classified as a non-critical safety item part, for a T700-GE-700 gas turbine engine, which is used on a number of different helicopters in the inventory, such as the UH-60 Black Hawk and the AH-64 Apache helicopters.

The "knife edge" seals wear during operational service, decreasing their diameters, rendering them out of tolerance. They are currently repaired using an approved standard welding procedure, which was time intensive and required considerable rework.

Laser powder deposition has been used successfully to repair turbine engine components used in this M1 Abrams tank. Photo by Sgt. Francis Horton, U.S. Army.

This illustration depicts the laser powder deposition process used by AMCOM to repair turbine engine parts on Army aircraft. Photo courtesy of U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM).


The Repair Process and Advantages of Laser Deposition

Candidate parts were shipped to the contractor for laser deposition repair. Upon their return to Corpus Christi Army Depot, the parts were heat treated by the same heat treatment process as the standard weld repair. After heat treatment, final machining returned the part to blueprint dimensions. Subsequent analysis indicated that the repaired area had been restored to its original metallurgical properties and dimensions.

Conventional welds create "heat-affected zones" in substrates adjacent to the weld. This may cause the part to distort, making repair more difficult. Just as important, the metallurgical properties in the heat-affected zone can be very different from base material further from the weld. This can actually induce galvanic corrosion-- corrosion caused by contact between dissimilar metals -- because it is as if the two areas of the part are made of different metals. If you have ever seen rust on a welded structure, it is very likely that you will see the highest concentrations of it around the weld lines. Conversely, the laser heats only a small area for a short amount of time, and therefore heat-affected zones are reduced in size. Parts with reduced heat affected zones are less likely to deform or corrode.

The Need to Refurbish Parts

When vital parts to systems are complex and expensive, or are few in number, it may be more economical to refurbish the old part. Procuring new parts, especially if large or prohibitively expensive, can be an untenable choice, since lead times can be long, and the original vendor might be out of business. In these cases, refurbishment may be the only viable option to ensure that a system returns to operational status in the shortest time and at minimal cost.

The laser cladding process successfully restored compressor discharge piston seals to original metallurgical properties and dimensions. The next logical step would be to test this part to verify its airworthiness. AMCOM recommended that it be included in the next round of T700-GE-700 engine tests, for validation.

AMCOM chose to test its laser powder deposition method on a compressor discharge piston seal that forms part of the gas turbine engine used on the UH-60 Black Hawk and AH-64 Apache helicopters. Photo courtesy of AMCOM.



The Case of the Cracked Crawler Treads

Youth Exhibit Welcomes Theories About Corrosion on NASA's Space Shuttle Crawler Transporter


The Department of Defense (DoD) and several partners are launching a new exhibit designed to lure younger minds into solving the puzzles underlying the science of corrosion. "Corrosion: The Silent Menace" opens on March 16, 2013, at 10 a.m. at the Orlando Science Center in Orlando, Florida.

Featuring computer simulation games built around a 200-square-foot trestle bridge made of rusty steel, the exhibit spotlights the natural phenomena that lead to corrosion and material degradation using 3-D mapping technology familiar to the next generation of infrastructure preservationists.

To test younger brains about a particular challenge NASA experienced with the Space Shuttle Crawler Transporter, one exhibit section invites students to speculate about why the treads or "shoes" on the crawler may have cracked. This lesson, titled "The Case of the Cracked Crawler Treads," allows visitors to review NASA's original "fault tree" hypothesis about causes of the cracking, a problem affecting two Crawler Transporters in operation since the 1960s.

"Students can also read the actual NASA report and compare its conclusions to their own views about whether the crawler shoe corrosion stemmed from inadequate maintenance, improper design and fabrication, or excessive loads," said Daniel J. Dunmire, director of the Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office, the exhibit sponsor.

Besides NASA's whodunit-style activity, students can choose from an array of virtual experiences throughout the exhibit that graphically depict the science of corrosion and the industrial processes used to prevent it. The CorrSim Jr. game and the Corrosion Rack display, for example, expose students to corrosion's chemical and electrochemical origins, Dunmire said. In the CorrSim Jr. game students stand in front of a TV that tracks their movements much like a Kinect home video game. "By moving their hands in front of the screen, visitors can replicate the process of sanding, blasting, priming, and painting," noted Anne Hanson, manager of Continuing Education and Outreach at The University of Akron's National Center for Education and Research on Corrosion and Materials Performance (NCERCAMP).

Pictured is the entrance to "Corrosion: The Silent Menace," a DoD-sponsored exhibit located on the second level of the Orlando Science Center. Photo by Andrea Hart, Orlando Science Center.

Young corrosion experts weigh in on a few technical principles of corrosion science, in a preview of the exhibit, "Corrosion: The Silent Menace."

http://corrdefense.nace.org/corrdefense_fall_2012/top_story4.asp


At the Corrosion Rack display, students take a hand-held microscope and hold it up to different coupons or samples, in order to appreciate how scientists collect data to discern how environmental and weather conditions can degrade materials in different ways. At the exhibit's Career Kiosk, students can learn from videos of subject matter experts who maintain the myriad aircraft, ground vehicles, and facilities comprising the nation's infrastructure. The videos feature interviews with inspectors, painters, technicians, corrosion engineers, and scientific researchers that represent industry, DoD, and universities. "The next generation needs to know more about the science of corrosion," said Dunmire. "So the DoD Corrosion Office has organized this novel exhibit to inform and entertain them." Tickets to the Orlando Science Center's exhibits are $20 for children aged three to 11; $27 for adults; $26 for students and senior citizens. Discounts are available for groups of 15 or more.


Volume 9, Number 1 Spring 2013 Featured Project

Corrosion Office's Technical Corrosion Collaboration Announces Research Success

Experts Discuss Discrepancy Between Exposure Results in the Lab and Field

By Bill Abbott

There is increasing evidence that many lab corrosion exposures produce results in significant disagreement with field experience.

1 This is proving to be true in the case of

the evaluation of new and, in particular, non-chrome paint systems. In some cases lab testing may produce results in contradiction with field exposures. In spite of this, salt fog testing often remains a requirement for the qualification of paint systems. Data from such tests may have a large impact on decisions regarding the use of new paint systems on military assets.

The Problem

A good example of one consequence of these effects involved a particular non-chrome primer being considered as a prime candidate for part of a non-chrome paint system. This is a commercially produced magnesium-rich primer.

Early lab testing according to the test standard ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials) B117 for early generation products produced severe blistering on coatings using the magnesium-rich primer. At the same time, field exposures, even in severe environments, failed to show such effects, and actually showed a high corrosion resistance. In spite of the latter results, the lab data could cause a potentially good system to be disqualified from use.

Technical Corrosion Collaboration's Approach to Resolving The Discrepancy

This existence of a significant field versus lab discrepancy provided a good opportunity for the Technical Corrosion Collaboration (TCC) pilot program to study a subject of immediate interest to the services. The TCC program is sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office. Three universities participating in the TCC program, including The University of Virginia, the University of Southern Mississippi, and The

Two samples of a magnesium-rich primer system on 2024 Aluminum, which were subjected to lab and outdoor environmental testing, display disparate effects. The sample above displays the effects of exposure to standard laboratory salt fog testing (ASTM B117). Pictured below is a coupon affected by one to three years of outdoor beach exposure. Photos courtesy of the OSD Technical Corrosion Collaboration.


Ohio State University, undertook tasks as part of this study.

The questions to be resolved included the following: What is the source of this discrepancy? Should any ASTM B117 test method and results be applied to coatings evaluations such as those involving the magnesium-rich primer? The products of the university work that were key to answering these questions included 1) a fundamental understanding of the actual protection mechanisms afforded by the magnesium-rich primer and (2) a working explanation of the cause of the blisters observed on early-generation coating formulations.

3,4,5 This information should allow the DoD and coating manufacturers

to make improvements to the coating formulation and to produce a more realistic accelerated test environment for the qualification of the magnesium-rich primer technology.

The Results

In short order, similar observations of field versus lab discrepancies were made by the universities involved.2,3,4,5

The major sources of magnesium-rich primer blistering were shown to involve a high time of wetness, and high chloride concentration.

4 The ASTM B-117 exposure environment makes no effort to realistically reproduce field exposure

environments with respect to many factors commonly accepted to be relevant to environmental severity, such as those mentioned above. It was also found that the blistering could be prevented by including high concentrations of acidifying atmospheric gases into the B117 environment such as carbon dioxide (CO2).

3,4,5 While multiple mechanisms by which

these factors may inhibit blister formation may exist,1,3,4,5

there is strong experimental evidence that making simple modifications to the B117 exposure environment may totally eliminate blistering on at least the magnesium-rich primer. Even if such changes were made, this would not necessarily mean that B117 could be used for realistic corrosion testing.

The "problem" or the perception of a problem using magnesium-rich primer has been resolved. Adverse conclusions regarding the merits of the magnesium-rich primer based on earlier blister formation in lab testing should be disregarded as not applicable to field use. More specifically, ASTM B117 should not be used for corrosion testing of this, and probably other, new coating systems.

Conclusions

At the moment, empirical evidence shows that the best available data related to non-chrome coatings are those based on actual field use/exposures. These results represent one small but relevant example of the field versus lab discrepancies surrounding corrosion exposures. Unfortunately, at the present time there is no laboratory test that can reproduce results from the field with certainty. This is one area in which TCC research is currently involved.

Disclaimer

These findings do not necessarily represent an endorsement by OSD of this particular non-chrome technology. This information is presented to aid potential users in the decision-making process and to bring attention to critical new data.

Editor's Note: TCC researchers from The University of Virginia, The University of Southern Mississippi, and The Ohio State University collaborated with OSD in the production of this report.

References

1. Abbott, W.H., "Performance of Chrome-Free Paint Systems In Field and Lab Environments – Summary of 4+ Years of Flight and Ground Exposures," 2011 NACE DoD Corrosion Conference Proceedings, (Palm Springs, CA., DoD & NACE, 2011).

2. Pathak, S., et al., "Investigation on Dual Corrosion Performance of Magnesium-Rich Primer for Aluminum Alloys Under Salt Spray Test (ASTM B117) and Natural Exposure," Corrosion Science, 27 (November 2009).

3. A. D. King and J. R. Scully, "Sacrificial Anode-Based Galvanic and Barrier Corrosion Protection of 2024-T351 by a Mg-Rich Primer and Development of Test Methods for Remaining Life Assessment,"CORROSION, 67(5) (2011), 055004.

4. A. D. King and J. R. Scully, "Blistering Phenomena in Early Generation Mg-Rich Primer Coatings on AA2024-T351 and the Effects of CO2." NACE DoD 2011 Conference Proceedings, (Palm Springs, CA, DoD & NACE, 2011).


5. B. Maier and G. S. Frankel, "Behavior of Magnesium-Rich Primers on AA2024-T3," CORROSION, 67(5) (2011), 055001.


Volume 9, Number 1 Spring 2013 Inside DoD

United States and Canada Sign Agreement to Exchange Information

Collaboration Supports Sharing of Technical Data to Mitigate Corrosion

The long-awaited signing of the Corrosion Prevention, Control and Mitigation Technologies Data Exchange Agreement between the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and Canada's Department of National Defence (DND) took place on October 26, 2012, at the National Printing Building in Gatineau, Québec.

Brig. Gen. Alexander Patch (Canada Department of National

Defense) (left) and Daniel J. Dunmire (U.S. Defense

Department) sign a Data Exchange Agreement that allows

Canada and the United States to share information to prevent

corrosion on their military equipment. Photo courtesy of Lyn

Kearns, Canada Department of National Defense.

The agreement was signed by Daniel J. Dunmire, director of the DoD Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office, and Brigadier General Alexander Patch, Canada's DND director of General Land Equipment Program Management. The seeds for this collaborative agreement were planted on Aug. 18, 2011, when members of NACE International, The Corrosion Society, coordinated a meeting between DoD and DND after the NACE Northern Area Eastern Conference, Aug.15-18, 2011.

The new agreement between the United States and Canada allows the sharing of unclassified information that will help in advancing corrosion related science and technology in order to prevent and mitigate the corrosion of military equipment and infrastructure. The shared information will include technical data associated with specific corrosion prevention and control technologies, control approaches to common systems and facilities, test methods and results, policies and strategies associated with research and development, control processes and procedures, corrosion prevention and control training information, and implementation strategies and methods. Following Australia's signing of a similar technical agreement in 2010, Canada is the second country that has signed a data exchange agreement with the DoD Corrosion Office. The United Kingdom, Germany, France, the Philippines and India are in various stages of completing corrosion data exchange agreements with the DoD Corrosion Office. Editor's Note: A version of this article appeared in the March 2013 issue of Materials Performance magazine.

http://corrdefense.nace.org/corrdefense_spring_2010/top_story3.asp



DoD Estimates the Effect of Corrosion on the Cost and Availability of Army Ground Vehicles

By Eric Herzberg

LMI Government Consulting was asked by the DoD Corrosion Prevention and Control Integrated Product Team (CPC IPT) in August 2011 to measure the effect of corrosion on the availability and cost of Army ground vehicle systems. We present these estimates in this report.

Using data from fiscal year (FY) 2010, we estimated the annual corrosion-related cost for Army ground vehicles to be $1.6 billion, or 12.6 percent of the total maintenance costs for all Army ground vehicles. We also estimated the effect of corrosion on non-available days for all Army ground vehicle assets. Corrosion is a contributing factor in approximately 662,649 non-available days of ground vehicles per year, or 6.6 percent of the total non-available days. These days equate to an average of 1.7 days of corrosion-related non-availability per year for every reportable ground vehicle or system.

The total corrosion-related non-available days (662,649) includes 639,352 not mission capable days that are included in the Department of the Army's current method for reporting non-availability, and 23,297 non-available days that are unreported not available days. Unreported non-available days include unreported non-availability due to depot maintenance, transit time, temporary storage, etc.

This review is part of a multi-year plan to measure the effect of corrosion on DoD weapon systems. It is also the first study to analyze the effect of corrosion on Army ground vehicle availability. Table 1 lists previous and future Army studies on the cost of corrosion, while Table 2 lists the studies on the effect of corrosion on availability. (In the tables, NADs refer to non-available days.)

Table 1. Army Cost-of-Corrosion Studies


Table 2. Army Studies on the Effect of Corrosion Availability

As noted earlier, the overall Army ground vehicle corrosion-related costs equate to an average of 12.6 percent of total annual Army ground vehicle maintenance costs. This percentage is the lowest of the DoD weapon systems corrosion-related cost studies completed thus far. The overall corrosion-related cost for Army ground vehicles as a percentage of maintenance cost has decreased steadily since the initial study in FY2005.

We calculated these most recent cost estimates by aggregating the corrosion-related costs of 986 types of Army ground vehicles, major systems, and support equipment. The scope of our study included an inventory of more than 501,000 vehicles and systems for the cost study, and more than 391,000 vehicles and major systems for the availability study. To our knowledge, these data include all types of Army ground vehicles. (Not all ground vehicle systems that incur maintenance costs are reportable from an availability standpoint. This accounts for the difference in ground vehicle totals between the cost and availability studies.)

We then segregated corrosion-related costs for Army ground vehicles within three separate schemas: 1) depot or field-level maintenance (DM or FLM) costs, as well as costs outside normal maintenance reporting (ONR); 2) corrective versus preventive maintenance costs; and 3) costs related to structure or parts. We distributed the $1.606 billion corrosion-related costs within each schema to the extent we were able to classify them according to their respective maintenance records.

Table 3 shows both the costs and percentages within each schema for FY2010.

Table 3. Nature of Corrosion-Related Costs for Army Ground Vehicles (FY2010)


Corrosion-related DM costs exceed corrosion-related FLM costs, in terms of both total maintenance cost and percentage. Corrosion-related DM costs ($964 million) are more than twice as large as the corrosion-related FLM costs ($423 million). Additionally, the DM corrosion-related cost as a percentage of total Army ground vehicle DM cost is 25.2 percent, significantly exceeding the FLM corrosion-related cost as a percentage of total Army ground vehicle FLM, which is 5.9 percent (see Table 4). Together, DM and FLM account for 86.3 percent ($1.387 billion) of the total combined corrosion-related cost for Army ground vehicles within schema group 1 ($1.606 billion).

Table 4. Comparison of DM and FLM Corrosion Cost ($ in millions)

The remaining $219 million for corrosion-related ONR cost for Army ground vehicles in schema 1 is also significant, primarily because of the large number of vehicles and their operators who perform maintenance that is unrecorded in the maintenance recording systems.

Costs incurred to prevent corrosion (e.g., painting, inspection, coating, and quality assurance) were higher ($748 million, or 55.2 percent within schema 2) than corrosion-related corrective costs ($606 million, or 44.8 percent within schema 2). Structure-related costs ($704 million, or 56.7 percent within schema 3) were higher than parts-related costs ($537 million, or 43.3 percent within schema 3).

We also stratified the corrosion-related costs of Army ground vehicle systems by line item number, total cost, and cost per item. We then ranked the systems by their total and average corrosion-related costs. The order in which Army ground vehicle assets rank in Table 5 suggests a priority for further examination from a corrosion-related cost standpoint. The highlighted line item numbers are among the top 10 for combined total corrosion-related cost ranking and average corrosion-related cost ranking for each of the 6 study years. The two Abrams tank models, M1A1 and M1A2, were the second and third highest contributors to both average and total corrosion-related cost, making them the greatest contributors from a combined ranking standpoint.

Table 5. Army Vehicles with the Highest Average per Vehicle and Total Corrosion-Related Cost (FY2010)


We measured the total corrosion-related non-available days (662,649) in a manner consistent with how the Army reports its not-mission capable results with the exception of depot non-mission capable. We found the Army's policy is to typically transfer the property accountability of ground vehicles when they enter DM. As a result, the Army does not typically capture non-mission capable days for these vehicles. We established a separate non-availability calculation for vehicles that incurred DM based on production schedules and maintenance records provided by the Anniston (Alabama) and Red River (Texas) Army depots. Corrosion-related non-available days account for 6.6 percent of the totals reported. We show the highest 10 contributors to corrosion-related non-available days in Table 6.

Table 6. Top 10 Contributors to Total Corrosion NADs by Line Item Number (FY2010)

Two high-mobility multipurpose wheeled-vehicle (HMMWV) variants show the highest total of corrosion-related non-available days (81,156 and 66,464) among all Army ground vehicles. Line item number X59326, a 5-ton truck tractor, shows the highest percentage of corrosion-related non-available days at 10.7 percent. The average corrosion-related non-available days per year are low compared to the aviation weapon systems availability studies we have performed. The average corrosion-related non-available days for Army ground vehicles range from 1 day to 4 days. This shows the Army does not typically place a vehicle into non-mission capable status for corrosion-related reasons.

Preventive maintenance accounts for nearly two-thirds of the total corrosion-related non-available days, with inspection being by far the major contributor to corrosion-related total non-available days. However, this is most likely an anomaly caused by lack of detail within organic field maintenance records. The lack of detail causes corrosion to be flagged more frequently for preventive reasons than corrective work. Table 7 shows a breakdown of the preventive maintenance non-available days.


Table 7. Corrosion-Related Non-Available Days Related to Preventive Maintenance by Activity (FY2010)

There is not a strong relationship between corrosion-related costs and corrosion-related non-available days for those Army ground vehicle types with the highest corrosion-related cost. Only two of the top 10 ground vehicle types with the highest corrosion-related cost are also within the top 10 highest contributors to corrosion-related non-available days. These ground vehicles are the M998 HMMWV (Line Item Num-ber T61494) and the Heavy Variant HMMWV (Line Item Number T07679).

Although there is a slightly stronger relationship between corrosion-related cost and corrosion-related non-available days by a percentage standpoint, it is not significant. This is most likely due to the overall low level of corrosion-related non-available days for all ground vehicles.

Table 8. Total Corrosion-Related Cost and NADs by Line Item Number (FY2010)



DoD Seeks Papers for its 2013 Web-Enabled Conference


The DoD Corrosion Policy and Oversight Office is accepting abstracts from corrosion experts for its 2013 Web-enabled conference. The event is slated to go live from 1 to 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, respectively, on September 16th and 17th, 2013. Please view the Call for Papers here.

Corrosion of military equipment and infrastructure costs an estimated $22 billion annually, and the DoD corrosion community seeks new solutions for personnel who procure, use, and maintain military materiel, equipment, facilities, and infrastructure.

"The 2013 conference will be conducted entirely online so we can provide access to as many attendees as possible worldwide, and to reduce the costs of travel for all participating Service and industry experts," said Daniel J. Dunmire, director of the DoD Corrosion Office. "NACE International will facilitate the Web-enabled format of the online teleconference. By inaugurating this format in 2013, we expect to attract military program managers of weapons systems and facilities, as well as a wide range of corrosion experts across the DoD acquisition community."

"The 2013 DoD Corrosion Conference program will feature multiple symposia tracks, each of which will comprise multiple papers," noted Rich Hays, deputy director of the DoD Corrosion Office. "We are scheduling presentations on two consecutive afternoons in order to make the sessions available to participants headquartered across several time zones. Logistics related to logging into the teleconference will be forthcoming. While it is possible that not all submitted papers will be presented during the Web-enabled conference, all submitted and peer-reviewed papers will appear in the conference proceedings." Abstract submissions will be evaluated by a technical organizing committee led by the Department of the Air Force. Abstracts are

welcome on the following topics: Corrosion Science, Sustainment, Policy, Acquisition/Life Cycle, Corrosion-Resistant Materials, Corrosion Technology Transitions and Evaluations, and Facilities and Infrastructure. Click here to submit your abstract and to view more detailed instructions.

Photo by Val Gempis, U.S. Air Force.

Photo by Tech. Sgt. Michael R.

Holzworth, U.S. Air Force.

Photo by Cpl. Ju-ho Ma, U.S. Army.

http://events.nace.org/conferences/DoD2013/index.asp



Course Funding Available for Military Corrosion Specialists

By Cynthia Greenwood and Earl Wingrove

Besides the immense array of new educational podcasts and videos that are online or in production, DoD personnel and civilian contractors are encouraged to take advantage of training courses in the field of corrosion prevention and mitigation. A host of opportunities exist through technical societies such as NACE International—The Corrosion Society, and SSPC—The Society for Protective Coatings.

Technicians, inspectors, engineers, consultants, architects, and project managers may take advantage of a diverse array of courses related to Basic Corrosion, Cathodic Protection, Corrosion Assessment, Coatings, Coatings Inspection, and Water/Wastewater Facilities.

Descriptions of the most popular course offerings are listed below, according to the subject area of expertise. To learn more about course schedules, content, and individual training providers, please click on a course title and you will be linked to the appropriate Web site and course description.

To view all 34 DoD-funded courses sponsored by SSPC, please view the following list of courses on the SSPC Web site.

General Corrosion Education

Basic Corrosion

Basic Corrosion This course focuses on corrosion and the potential problems caused by corrosion. It provides a basic but thorough review of the causes of corrosion and the methods by which it can be identified, monitored, and controlled. Active participation is encouraged through hands-on experiments and case studies, as well as an open discussion format.

Cathodic Protection

CP-1 Cathodic Protection Tester Course This is an intensive six-day course that presents CP technology to prepare students for the NACE Cathodic Protection Tester Certification Examination. Course topics include basic electricity, electrochemistry and corrosion concepts, CP theory, CP systems, and CP field measurement techniques. This course provides theoretical knowledge and practical fundamentals for testing on both galvanic and impressed-current CP systems. It also involves lectures and intensive hands-on training with equipment and instruments used in CP testing. Hands-on training at outdoor facilities (weather permitting) is also provided. The course concludes with both a two-hour written and a two-hour practical (hands-on) examination.

http://www.sspc.org/Free-Funding

http://www.nace.org/cstm/education/Program.aspx?id=403af18b-d51c-db11-953d-001438c08dca

http://www.nace.org/cstm/education/Program.aspx?id=403af18b-d51c-db11-953d-001438c08dca

http://www.nace.org/cstm/education/Program.aspx?id=2ce9ffdb-8816-db11-953d-001438c08dca



CP-2 Cathodic Protection Technician This is an intensive six-day course that presents CP technology to prepare students for the NACE Cathodic Protection Technician Certification Examination. Course topics include intermediate-level discussions of corrosion theory and CP concepts, types of CP systems, stray alternating-current and direct-current interference, and advanced field-measurement techniques. This course provides both theoretical knowledge and practical techniques for testing and evaluating data to determine the effectiveness of both galvanic and impressed current CP systems and to gather design data. The course involves lectures and hands-on training with equipment and instruments used in CP testing. Hands-on training at outdoor facilities is also included, weather permitting.

CP-2 Cathodic Protection Technician-Marine Developed for NAVSEA (Naval Sea Systems Command), this six-day course provides theoretical knowledge and practical techniques for testing and evaluating data to determine the effectiveness of both galvanic and impressed current CP systems, as they apply to the marine industry. This is an intermediate CP course.

CP-3 Cathodic Protection Technologist This is an intensive six-day course that presents CP technology to prepare students for the NACE Cathodic Protection Technologist Certification Examination. The CP 3—Cathodic Protection Technologist Course builds on the technology presented in the CP 2—Cathodic Protection Technician Course covering both theoretical concepts and practical application of CP, with a strong focus on interpretation of CP data, CP troubleshooting, and mitigation of problems that might arise in both galvanic and impressed current systems. The course is presented in a format of lecture, discussion, and hands-on, in-class experiments, and group exercises. There is a written examination at the conclusion of the course.

CP-4 Cathodic Protection Specialist This is an intensive six-day course that focuses on the principles and procedures for CP design on a variety of structures for both galvanic and impressed current systems. The course discusses the theoretical concepts behind the design and considerations that influence the design (environment, structure type/materials of construction, coatings), design factors, and calculations (including attenuation). The course involves lecture and in-class discussion and practice with design examples on various structures (i.e., pipelines, tanks and well casings, offshore applications, and steel reinforcing in concrete structures). The course concludes with the written NACE CP Specialist examination.

CP Interference The Cathodic Protection Interference course is a six-day course focusing on AC and DC interference. The course includes in-depth coverage of both the theoretical concepts and the practical application of identifying interference and interference mitigation techniques. Students will learn to identify the causes and effects of interference as well as conduct tests to determine if an interference condition exists and perform calculations required to predict AC interference. The course is presented in a format of lecture, discussion, hands-on, in-class experiments, case studies, and group exercises. There is a written examination at the conclusion of the course.

Offshore Corrosion Assessment Training (O-CAT) The Offshore Corrosion Assessment Training course is a five-day intensive program addressing the elements of in-service inspection and maintenance planning for fixed offshore structures. The course also addresses the Minerals Management Services (MMS) A-B-C facility evaluation grading-system requirements for Level I inspection reporting.

Coatings and Coatings Inspection

C-1 Fundamentals of Protective Coatings for Industrial Structures This course provides a practical and comprehensive overview for those who are new to the protective coatings industry. It is also an ideal refresher for reviewing the fundamentals of corrosion and the use of coatings as a protective mechanism against corrosion and deterioration of industrial structures.

C-1 eCourse Fundamentals of Protective Coatings for Industrial Structures This online course provides a practical and comprehensive overview for individuals who are new to the protective coatings industry, as well as those needing a review of the fundamentals of corrosion and the use of coatings as a protective mechanism. It begins on the 15th of every month.











http://www.nace.org/cstm/education/Program.aspx?id=f017dc9e-4853-dd11-889d-0017a446694e


http://www.sspc.org/Fundamentals-of-Protective-Coatings-C1/

http://www.sspc.org/Fundamentals-of-Protective-Coatings-C1/

http://www.sspc.org/Fundamentals-of-Protective-Coatings-C1-eCourse/

http://www.sspc.org/Fundamentals-of-Protective-Coatings-C1-eCourse/


C-2 Specifying and Managing Protective Coatings Projects This course is designed to sharpen your skills in managing the specific requirements of protective coatings projects.

C-2 eCourse Specifying and Managing Protective Coatings Projects This online management course is designed to sharpen your understanding of overall industry practices, beyond your area of specialization, and put your experience in unison with the most current theories and practices that govern coatings project management. It begins on the 15th of every month in 2009.

C-7 Abrasive Blasting Program C-7 is designed to certify operators of dry abrasive or portable centrifugal blast cleaning equipment. It covers principles of surface preparation, surface cleanliness, surface profile, dust and debris control, and abrasives. The program’s primary focus is the certification of the blasters who demonstrate proper blasting techniques during the hands-on session.

CCI Concrete Coating Inspector Program Students who take this course will be able to determine incompleteness and/or technical errors in a specification and bring these issues to the attention of the specification writer or a supervisor. The course also reviews how to use concrete coating inspection equipment according to the manufacturer’s guidelines. The certification portion of this program will certify concrete coating inspectors in the process of correctly observing, assessing, documenting, and reporting all relevant job data as determined by the specification and referenced documents. Students completing the technician-level training (first four days only) would be qualified to work under the guidance of a certified concrete coating inspector.

C-12 Airless Spray Basics This course is designed to train marine/industrial applicators to operate airless spray equipment, incorporating the use of a paint simulator for hands-on training. You'll learn the proper technique for airless spray painting by using a program that simulates real life situations and equipment used in the field. There are two course options that allow participants to complete training and certification that meet NAVSEA 009-32 requirements. Click on the link above for details about each course offering.

C-14 MPCAC - Marine Plural Component Program This course is designed to certify craft workers operating plural component spray equipment. It also certifies those applying protective coatings on steel in immersion service by airless spray using plural component spray equipment.

Lead Paint Removal (C3) C3 includes background information on the hazards of lead and other toxic metals as well as the current legal and regulatory environment. The course contains specific discussions on protecting workers; compliance with environmental regulations; proper management of waste streams and operations that result in potential exposures to lead; and associated control technology. The course also addresses reading specifications and developing programs to effectively control risks to workers, the public, and the environment. It concludes with a discussion of insurance and bonding issues, and an introduction to other safety and health issues that are encountered on painting projects.

Navigating Standard Item 009-32 This one-day course describes the naval ship cleaning and painting requirements found in Standard Item 009-32. It covers the cleanliness, surface preparation, coating application requirements, and system application instructions for various Navy vessels. Requirements of referenced standards are also reviewed.

Quality Control Supervisor (QCS) This course is designed to provide training in quality management for SSPC - Certified contractor personnel, Technical Quality Managers (TQM), and inspectors employed by SSPC-QP 5 inspection firms. It provides an overview of the quality management aspects of surface preparation, paint, coatings, and inspection operations that a Quality Control Supervisor (QCS) needs to know to ensure delivery of a quality product to customers. It is highly recommended that persons attending the QCS course have recent inspection training (SSPC PCI, NBPI or BCI ) or equivalent formal training, and also some quality-control experience.

Quality Control Supervisor (QCS) eCourse This course is designed to provide training in quality management for SSPC - Certified contractor personnel, Technical Quality Managers (TQM), and inspectors employed by SSPC-QP 5 inspection firms. It provides an overview of the quality

http://www.sspc.org/Planning-and-Specifying-Industrial-Coatings-Projects-C2/

http://www.sspc.org/Planning-and-Specifying-Industrial-Coatings-Projects-C2/

http://www.sspc.org/Planning-and-Specifying-Industrial-Coatings-Projects-C2-eCourse/

http://www.sspc.org/Planning-and-Specifying-Industrial-Coatings-Projects-C2-eCourse/

http://www.sspc.org/Abrasive-Blasting-Program-C7/

http://www.sspc.org/Abrasive-Blasting-Program-C7/

http://www.sspc.org/concrete-coating-inspector-cci-program-levels-and-options/

http://www.sspc.org/concrete-coating-inspector-cci-program-levels-and-options/

http://www.sspc.org/Airless-Spray-Basics-C12/

http://www.sspc.org/Airless-Spray-Basics-C12/

http://www.sspc.org/Marine-Plural-Component-Program-MPCAC-C14/

http://www.sspc.org/Marine-Plural-Component-Program-MPCAC-C14/

http://www.sspc.org/Lead-Paint-Removal-C3/

http://www.sspc.org/Lead-Paint-Removal-C3/

http://www.sspc.org/Navigating-Standard-Item-009-32/

http://www.sspc.org/Navigating-Standard-Item-009-32/

http://www.sspc.org/Quality-Control-Supervisor-QCS/

http://www.sspc.org/Quality-Control-Supervisor-QCS/

http://www.sspc.org/Quality-Control-Supervisor-QCS-eCourse/

http://www.sspc.org/Quality-Control-Supervisor-QCS-eCourse/


management aspects of surface preparation, paint, coatings, and inspection operations that a Quality Control Supervisor (QCS) needs to know to ensure delivery of a quality product to customers.

Basics of Steel Surface Preparation eCourse This course defines surface preparation for steel through a brief review of the steps involved. It then provides an overview of abrasive blast cleaning, hand-and-power-tool cleaning, and water jetting and the associated standards referenced when these methods are used to prepare steel for the application of protective coatings.

Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level 1 This course is an intensive presentation of the basic technology of coating application and inspection over a full 60 hours of personal instruction and practice. This course provides both the technical and practical fundamentals for coating inspection work on structural steel projects.

Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level 2 This course focuses on advanced inspection techniques and specialized application for both steel and non-steel substrates. The course includes in-depth coverage of surface preparation, coating types, inspection criteria, and failure modes for various coatings, including specialized coatings and linings.

Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level 2 Marine CIP Level 2, maritime emphasis, includes topics from CIP Level 1 and CIP Level 2, with a focus on coating inspection in the maritime industry. The course provides in-depth coverage of surface preparation, coating types, inspection criteria, failure modes, and case studies from the maritime industry. CIP Level 2, maritime emphasis, highlights the skills and knowledge required to correctly address the inspection requirements of the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO’s) Performance Standard for Protective Coatings (PSPC). The course concludes with both written and practical exams.

Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level 3 Peer Review This course is a detailed oral examination in front of a three-member review board that lasts approximately two hours and is graded on a pass/fail basis. The Peer Review includes a series of questions to test the candidate’s practical and theoretical knowledge of coatings and coating inspection. Candidates are questioned from a random drawing of topics ranging from standards, procedures, ethics, coatings use, inspection instruments, role-playing, and specific case questions. Successful completion of the CIP Peer Review is required to achieve recognition as a NACE Certified Coating Inspector Level 3 individual.

C-14 MPCAC - Marine Plural Component Program This course is designed to certify craft workers operating plural component spray equipment. It also certifies those applying protective coatings on steel in immersion service by airless spray using plural component spray equipment.

NBPI—NAVSEA Basic Paint Inspector Course The NBPI course is similar to NACE Level I or SSPC C-1, but it was developed by the Navy. This four-day quality assessment course was developed by NAVSEA (Naval Sea Systems Command) to train coating inspectors to inspect critical coated areas as defined by Navy policy documents. These areas include but are not limited to cofferdams, decks for aviation and underway replenishment, chain lockers, underwater hulls, bilges, tanks, voids, well deck overheads, and others. The content of the course is similar in nature to the NACE CIP Level I, but with a particular focus on ship-painting issues. What makes this course valuable is that it also provides both the technical and practical fundamentals for coating inspection work for any steel structure projects other than ships.

Protective Coatings Inspector Program (PCI) PCI Level 2 meets ASTM International Standard D3276, “Standard Guide for Painting Inspectors,“ and has been approved by Lloyd’s Register, RINA, and the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). The objective of this course is to thoroughly train individuals in the proper methods of inspecting surface preparation and installation of industrial and marine protective coatings and lining systems on an array of industrial structures and facilities. There are no prerequisites to attend the PCI Course. However, this course is not an entry-level course.

Shipboard Corrosion Assessment Training (S-CAT) In this five-day course developed for naval personnel, students learn how to survey and evaluate protective coating systems as part of a maintenance program for marine vessels. This course is intended to provide a foundation in coatings, corrosion, and corrosion control knowledge for assessing the condition of tanks and other structures, and determining the

http://www.sspc.org/Basics-of-Steel-Surface-Preparation-eCourse/

http://www.sspc.org/Basics-of-Steel-Surface-Preparation-eCourse/

http://www.nace.org/cstm/education/Program.aspx?id=dcf75ff6-8816-db11-953d-001438c08dca








http://www.sspc.org/training/mpcac.html

http://www.sspc.org/training/mpcac.html

http://www.sspc.org/navsea-basic-paint-inspector-nbpi/

http://www.sspc.org/navsea-basic-paint-inspector-nbpi/

http://www.sspc.org/Protective-Coatings-Inspector-Program-PCI/

http://www.sspc.org/Protective-Coatings-Inspector-Program-PCI/




required actions necessary to effectively maintain fully operational status. The course will equip the assessor with practical guidelines for surveying and evaluating the condition of the protective coating system on specific areas of a marine vessel. The desired end result is that assessors use a consistent, orderly, and repeatable process of evaluation that has the confidence of all those involved in the maintenance cycle.

Internal Corrosion Courses

Internal Corrosion (IC) for Pipelines: Basic This course was designed to provide students with the fundamentals of implementing, monitoring, and maintaining an internal corrosion control program as part of an overall Pipeline Integrity Management program. It is an introductory-level course focusing on the internal corrosion of liquid and natural gas pipelines used for transmissions, storage, and gathering systems. The course combines lecture, hands-on field-testing, and case studies. The course concludes with both a written and practical examination. The practical examination includes Operator Qualification Covered Task Assessments for the following tasks: (1) Insert and remove internal corrosion coupons, (2) Measurement of corroded area and pit depth measurement (with pit gauge), (3) Measure wall thickness using handheld ultrasonic meter.

Internal Corrosion (IC) for Pipelines: Advanced The Advanced Internal Corrosion for Pipelines course focuses on the monitoring techniques and mitigation strategies required to assess internal corrosion and develop and manage internal corrosion control programs. Data interpretation, analysis and integration, as well as criteria for determining corrective action for high-level internal corrosion problems within a pipeline system, will be covered in detail. The course will be five days in length. Students successfully completing the course examination and who also meet the requirements can apply for certification as a Senior Internal Corrosion Technologist.

For more information about the organizations that provide training for DoD employees, please consult the following Web sites:

• NACE International—The Corrosion Society • SSPC—The Society for Protective Coatings

http://www.nace.org/cstm/education/Program.aspx?id=073c976d-b51d-db11-953d-001438c08dca




http://www.nace.org/

http://www.sspc.org/


Volume 9, No. 1 Spring and Summer 2013

MARCH

GOMACTech 2013 Government Microcircuit Applications & Critical Technology Conference March 11-14, 2013 Las Vegas, Nevada http://www.gomactech.net

NACE CORROSION 2013 Conference & Expo March 17-21, 2013 Orlando, Florida http://www.nacecorrosion.org

European Coatings Show 2013 March 19-21, 2013 Nurnberg, Germany http://www.european-coatings-show.com/en

APRIL

Navy League Sea-Air-Space Expo SAS 2013 April 8-10, 2013 National Harbor, Maryland http://www.seaairspace.org/

Marine South Marine Military Expo April 10-11, 2013 Camp Lejeune, North Carolina http://www.marinemilitaryexpos.com/marine-south.shtml

MAY

Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineering (SAMPE 2013) May 6-9, 2013 Long Beach, California http://www.sampe.org/events/2013LongBeachCA.aspx

http://www.gomactech.net/

http://www.gomactech.net/

http://www.nacecorrosion.org/

http://www.nacecorrosion.org/

http://www.european-coatings-show.com/en

http://www.european-coatings-show.com/en

http://www.seaairspace.org/

http://www.seaairspace.org/

http://www.marinemilitaryexpos.com/marine-south.shtml

http://www.marinemilitaryexpos.com/marine-south.shtml

http://www.sampe.org/events/2013LongBeachCA.aspx

http://www.sampe.org/events/2013LongBeachCA.aspx


NSTI NanoTech Conference & Expo 2013 May 12-16, 2013 Washington, D.C. http://www.techconnectworld.com/Nanotech2013/

Joint Engineer Training Conference (JETC) & Expo 2013â€”Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) May 21-24, 2013 San Diego, California http://s3.goeshow.com/same/JETC/2013/

JUNE

NASF SUR/FIN 2013 (National Association for Surface Finishing) June 10-12, 2013 Rosemont, Illinois http://nasfsurfin.com/

Mega Rust 2013â€”Naval Corrosion Conference June 24-26, 2012 Newport News, Virginia https://www.navalengineers.org/events/individualeventwebsites/Pages/MegaRust2013.aspx

2013 National Space & Missile Materials Symposium (NSMMS) June 24-27, 2013 Bellevue, Washington http://www.usasymposium.com/nsmms/default.htm

JULY

Military Vehicles Exhibition & Conference July 31-August 2, 2013 Detroit, Michigan http://www.humaneticsatd.com/about-us/events/military-vehicles-exhibition-conference-2013

http://www.techconnectworld.com/Nanotech2013/

http://www.techconnectworld.com/Nanotech2013/

http://s3.goeshow.com/same/JETC/2013/

http://s3.goeshow.com/same/JETC/2013/

http://nasfsurfin.com/

http://nasfsurfin.com/

https://www.navalengineers.org/events/individualeventwebsites/Pages/MegaRust2013.aspx

https://www.navalengineers.org/events/individualeventwebsites/Pages/MegaRust2013.aspx

http://www.usasymposium.com/nsmms/default.htm

http://www.usasymposium.com/nsmms/default.htm

http://www.humaneticsatd.com/about-us/events/military-vehicles-exhibition-conference-2013

corrdefense spring 2013 issue - nace...

Documents