Technical Note

Proactive Approaches to ProtectingMaintenance Equipment against Chloride

Roadway Deicers

Scott Jungwirth1; Xianming Shi, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE2;Nicholas Seeley3; and Yida Fang4

Abstract: Roadway maintenance equipment in cold climates is exposed to highamounts of chloride-based deicers that are inherently corrosive. As such, variousstructural, hydraulic, and electrical components on maintenance equipment are vul-nerable to the deleterious effects of chloride roadway deicers, and their prematuredeterioration can negatively affect the performance, reliability, and service life ofthe equipment fleet. This work aims to shed more light on this important assetmanagement issue by providing an overview of corrosion-prone parts and currentapproaches available to proactively manage the risk of deicer corrosion to equip-ment assets, including design considerations, materials selection, and maintenancestrategies. The information aims to enable equipment engineers and managersto gain a better understanding of this technical issue and make more informeddecisions in corrosion risk management. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)CR.1943-5495.0000085. © 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.

Author keywords: Snow and ice control; Maintenance equipment; Assetpreservation; Corrosion.

Introduction

In the last two decades, the northern regions of North America have experienced agradual increase in the use of roadway deicers. Meanwhile, concerns over thepotentially negative effects of roadway deicers on transportation infrastructure

1Graduate Research Assistant, Western Transportation Institute, Montana State Univ.,P.O. Box 174250, Bozeman, MT 59717. E-mail: jungwirthsp@gmail.com

2Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Washington StateUniv., Sloan 101, P.O. Box 642910, Pullman, WA 99164-2910 (corresponding author).E-mail: xianming.shi@wsu.edu

3Undergraduate Research Assistant, Western Transportation Institute, Montana StateUniv., P.O. Box 174250, Bozeman, MT 59717. E-mail: Nicholas.Seeley@coe.montana.edu

4Undergraduate Research Assistant, Western Transportation Institute, Montana StateUniv., P.O. Box 174250, Bozeman, MT 59717. E-mail: mailfangyida@yahoo.com

Note. This manuscript was submitted on November 26, 2013; approved on September 3,2014; published online on November 24, 2014. Discussion period open until April 24, 2015;separate discussions must be submitted for individual papers. This technical note is part of theJournal of Cold Regions Engineering, © ASCE, ISSN 0887-381X/06014005(14)/$25.00.

© ASCE 06014005-1 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

(Shi et al. 2009a, 2010a, b, 2011, 2012; Pan et al. 2008) and the natural environmenthave significantly increased (Fay and Shi 2012; Levelton Consultants 2008; Fayet al. 2013). The corrosive effects of roadway deicers on motor vehicles, particu-larly on roadway maintenance equipment, have been a less documented yet equallyimportant issue (Shi et al. 2009b; Li et al. 2013). Roadway maintenance equipmentin cold climates is exposed to high amounts of chloride-based deicers that areinherently corrosive (Shi et al. 2013a, b; Shi and Akin 2012; Fay and Shi 2011).As such, various structural, hydraulic, and electrical components on the mainte-nance equipment are vulnerable to the deleterious effects of chloride roadwaydeicers, as shown in Fig. 1, and their premature deterioration can negatively affectthe value, performance, reliability, and service life of the equipment fleet andincrease its lifecycle cost and safety risk (Li et al. 2013; Menzies 1992).

The implementation of best engineering practices and anticorrosion technologiescould reduce the cost of metallic corrosion by approximately 25 to 30% (Menzies1992). Yet the knowledge underlying the corrosion and corrosion mitigation for met-als at the risk of chloride-based deicers remains scattered. In this context, this workprovides an overview of corrosion-prone parts and proactive approaches available tomanage the risk of deicer corrosion to equipment assets, including design consider-ations, materials selection, and maintenance strategies. The information aims toenable equipment engineers and managers to gain a better understanding of this tech-nical issue and make more informed decisions in corrosion risk management.

Corrosion-Prone Parts

Corrosion is an electrochemical process initiated by an electrolyte present on thesurface of a metal. There are many possible types of corrosion, depending on thespecific combination of metal and the service environment. General or uniformcorrosion occurs over a substantial amount of the metallic surface and is the mostpredictable type. Yet, in reality, most corrosion occurs in a localized manner, i.e., at-tacking a specific area of the metal, and is more difficult to predict. Corrosion mayoccur in the form of pitting corrosion (Tsutsumi et al. 2007; Sanchez et al. 2008;Hastuty et al. 2010), intergranular corrosion (Cruz et al. 1996; Stephens et al. 2006),crevice corrosion (Tan et al. 2001), and galvanic corrosion, to name a few. Accord-ing to a recent report (Levelton Consultants 2008), “crevice corrosion and poulticecorrosion typically occur where dirt and moisture are trapped—between adjacentpieces of metal, under gaskets and at fasteners, or on the surface of motor vehiclecomponents. This is compounded by ingress of snow and ice control chemicals thatincrease the conductivity of the trapped moisture.” The presence of residual stressesfrom the metal’s manufacturing processes and cyclic loadings during service arecommon causes of stress corrosion cracking (SCC) and corrosion fatigue, respec-tively, which are forms of corrosion exacerbated by the mechanical stress.

According to a survey of transportation professionals in 2012 (Li et al. 2013),chloride deicer exposure “poses the most significant risk of metallic corrosion todump trucks, liquid deicer applicators, hoppers, front end loaders, and supervisortrucks or crew pickups.” At the component level, the most severe deicer corrosionrisk was found in electrical wiring, frames, brackets and supports, brake air cans,fittings, and the spreader chute. Fig. 2 shows the distribution of corrosion-related

© ASCE 06014005-2 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

Fig. 1. Deleterious effects of chloride roadway deicers: (a) hole in engine block (laterplugged); (b) corrosion in engine from no washing; (c) corrosion of trap door under chainthat had not been cleaned (images courtesy of New York Department of Transportation)

© ASCE 06014005-3 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

repair costs among the equipment owned by the Washington State Departmentof Transportation (WSDOT). This indicates that metallic corrosion mostly led torepair costs in four groups: chassis, axles, brakes, frame, steering, suspension, tires,and wheels; equipment-dependent attachments; engine; and electrical components.

The extent of metallic corrosion is directly related to exposure time to chloridedeicers and chloride concentration. As such, components most significantly af-fected by corrosion are often located on the underbody of equipment or in closeproximity to the road surface and application devices. Common components mostlikely to be affected by roadway deicers are brake shoes, trailer underbodies, trailerlanding gear, junction boxes, door headers, sills, bulk heads, mud flap brackets,threshold plates, logistics posts, and roof bows (Li et al. 2013). The structural com-ponents of the underbody are normally composed of low-carbon steel and high-strength steel. These underbody components commonly experience pitting, crevice,galvanic, and cosmetic corrosion. Cosmetic corrosion often originates where thecoating or paint is damaged or penetrated (Hartley 2010). Sites likely to exhibitcorrosion also include areas where dirt and other materials can deposit and remainwet, such as metal folds and joints, breaks in painted surfaces, threaded screws, andbeneath coatings that do not adhere well to the surface beneath (Berg et al. 1999).

Awealth of research has been conducted on the appropriate methods by which tosimulate corrosion on vehicle components (e.g., Tan 1998; Weng 2004; Kane et al.2005; Ayello et al. 2011) and/or evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation strategies

Fig. 2. Allocation of corrosion-related repair costs among WSDOT equipment

© ASCE 06014005-4 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

(e.g., Leidheiser 1991; Davis et al. 2000; Dante et al. 2007). Accurate corrosionprojections are difficult to obtain because of the stochastic and typically localizednature of corrosion and time required for the corrosion process to manifest its con-sequence. Accelerated laboratory testing is at the risk of not realistically simulatingfield conditions, whereas outdoor exposure testing can be very time consuming(Baldi et al. 1989; Ault 1999). The U.S. Army has developed an accelerated cor-rosion and durability test to collect corrosion and material performance data thatcan be related to the service life of military vehicles in highly corrosive environ-ments. This test has been found to accurately simulate 10 years of cosmeticcorrosion and 3 years of crevice corrosion (Ault 1999). Bierwagen et al. (2000)discovered that the use of thermal cycling paired with electrochemical impedancespectroscopy provides a fast quantitative method to evaluate coating performance.Online corrosion monitoring tools (e.g., Sun 2005; Yang et al. 2005; Jakab et al.2008) provide valuable real-time corrosion information and enable early detection,which can effectively reduce corrosion maintenance costs (Ayello et al. 2011), offeralternative corrosion maintenance approaches, and improve safety standards.

Proactive Approaches to Deicer Corrosion Management

Proactive approaches available to manage the risk of deicer corrosion to equipmentassets primarily include design considerations, materials selection, and mainte-nance strategies. These approaches, employed individually or synergistically,can greatly improve the performance, reliability, and service life of winter main-tenance equipment and reduce the overall cost related to deicer-aggravated corro-sion. Fig. 3 provides a detailed flow chart of corrosion prevention and control tasks,which maintenance agencies can adopt to ensure the effective implementation of acorrosion management program [U.S. Department of Defense (USD) 2007].

In this section, a discussion of the knowledge of corrosion management strat-egies observed from recent and past experiences is presented. For instance, specificmetals are more susceptible to chloride-induced corrosion than others, which makeschoosing materials for desired applications an essential component of corrosionprotection. Subsequently, information gained from survey responses and a main-tenance operation site visit focused on specific proactive design and maintenancepractices is presented.

A survey was performed to gain insight on the current practices related to bestpractices or products used by various industries and agencies to protect their equip-ment or vehicles from the corrosive effects of chloride deicers. The survey consistedof 15 multipart questions and was published online at https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/ZL77RPB. The survey was distributed to various professional forums,including the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) CorrosionNetwork, Corrosion Prevention Association (CPA), equipment engineers, northernstate Departments of Transportation (DOTs), and relevant Linkedin groups. A totalof 105 responses were received, 30 from government agencies and 75 from privateentities, among which 40 responses were complete and used for further analysis.The agency survey identified the current risks of deicer corrosion to the equipmentfleet of responding agencies that report it as being a significant issue, which wasestimated under the current level of corrosion management. The deicer exposure

© ASCE 06014005-5 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

leads to risks in six areas: an average of 17.3% depreciation in equipment value, anaverage of 8.5% increased equipment downtime, an average of 11.9% in reducedequipment reliability, an average of 17.3% in reduced equipment service life, anaverage of 19.6% in increased premature repair and replacement, and an average of1.5% safety risk attributable to faulty parts on the equipment (Li et al. 2013).

Materials Selection

Materials selection for corrosion resistance is one critical aspect of the overall de-sign process. Materials of construction should be economical yet provide adequateresistance to the specified service conditions and consider the likely corrosionmechanisms in the equipment/component’s expected operational conditions. Ad-vancements in science and technology have allowed for various improvementsin materials selection to minimize corrosion. Anticorrosion performance greatlyvaries among dissimilar types of metal, which needs to be taken into considerationwhen selecting materials for specific applications. For instance, in natural environ-ments, unalloyed aluminum has superior corrosion resistance properties relative tocarbon steel but poor mechanical strength. The Cambridge Material Selector (http://www.grantadesign.com) and Defense Corrosion website (http://www.corrdefense.org) provide useful information sources for materials selection. For example,in SCC of austenitic stainless steel by chlorides, substitution of ferritic or duplex

Fig. 3. Flow of tasks for managing corrosion of defense equipment assets (reprintedfrom USD 2007)

© ASCE 06014005-6 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

stainless steels often alleviates the problem. The ferritic stainless steels may be sub-ject to pitting, but the duplex grades are more resistant. Metallurgists and corrosionengineers have been working to improve the mechanical properties of aluminumalloys without sacrificing their corrosion resistance. If a high-strength alloy isneeded, it is recommended to use exfoliation-resistant tempers like T76 or 7xxxalloys with copper. Copper-free alloys and alloys with low noble impurities oralloying elements feature high resistance to pitting corrosion. Alloys in the1xxx, 2xxx, 3xxx, 5xxx, and 6xxx series feature the highest anticorrosion proper-ties (Reboul and Baroux 2011). Uchida and Mochizuki (2000) found that the use ofzinc coating on an aluminum and steel sheet led to outstanding anticorrosion per-formance. They also observed a direct relationship between corrosion and theamount of zinc coating on aluminum sheets. Agarwala (2004) reported that theAir Force Research Laboratory tested a heat treatment process known as retrogres-sion reaging (RRA) and found that it effectively improved corrosion resistance of a7075-T6 alloy. The RRA treatment consists of a retrogression phase of heating at195°C for up to 40 min, quenching, and then heating at 120°C for 24 h (reaging).

Payer (1992) suggested that a combination of environmental stresses can lead tothe failure of automotive electronics, which is frequently initiated at the contactsurfaces of connectors. Therefore, resistance to chemical, thermal, and mechanicalstresses is essential for connector reliability. Corrosion protection of the connectorand more resistant contact surfaces can be achieved through proper design, materi-als selection, and the use of seals/grommets and lubricants.

The survey respondents reported the corrosion-prone material seen in theiragency’s equipment fleet, and Table 1 summarizes the results (Li et al. 2013).The collective agency user experience indicates that cast irons tend to experiencethe most serious general or uniform corrosion (81.3%) followed by carbon steels(73.5%), composites (68.8%), and magnesium alloys (68.2%). Conversely, alumi-num alloys and stainless steels have the most serious localized corrosion (50%)followed by metallic glass (43.8%), metallic coatings (40.0%), and magnesiumalloys (36.4%). A general consensus of survey respondents was observed with

Table 1. Common Types of Corrosion-Prone Material and Their Respective Forms ofCorrosion Seen in Respondents’ Agency’s Vehicles/Equipment Caused by Exposure toChloride Deicers

Materials

General oruniformcorrosion

Localizedcorrosion

Responsecounta

Cast irons 81.3% (26) 21.9% (7) 32Aluminum alloys 55.9% (19) 50.0% (17) 34Magnesium alloys 68.2% (15) 36.4% (8) 22Copper and copper alloys 67.9% (19) 35.7% (10) 28Carbon steels 73.5% (25) 32.4% (11) 34Stainless steels 50.0% (12) 50.0% (12) 24Metallic coatings 64.0% (16) 40.0% (10) 25Metallic glass 56.3% (9) 43.8% (7) 16Composites 68.8% (11) 31.3% (5) 16

Note: The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of respondents to that specific option.aSome respondents selected both forms of corrosion.

© ASCE 06014005-7 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

respect to replacing certain corrosion-prone components with corrosion-resistantmaterials, such as stainless steel or nonmetallic, wherever possible or to be in-spected and replaced on a regular basis. A survey respondent has reported thatstainless steel components last 25–100% longer than carbon steel.

Design Improvements

Agencies should consider corrosion-resistance requirements at the stages of mate-rials selection and design. Existing knowledge about the anticorrosion performanceof various materials and design configurations in various deicer-laden service envi-ronments should be utilized to refine the equipment-purchasing specificationsdeveloped by the transportation agencies. For instance, the survey respondents havesuggested specifying rust-proof brake shoes when rebuilding.

Corrosion prevention and control begins with materials selection; however, theuse of corrosion engineering principles in design can also have a significant effect.If an operating environment is considered to be corrosive, corrosion-preventiondesigns of components need to be taken into consideration. For example, a designshould be used to avoid areas that would trap and/or accumulate water and/or othersolid or liquid contaminants. Structures designed for resistance to atmospheric cor-rosion should always provide easy drainage from all exposed surfaces. Substitutinga more resistant alloy, removing the tensile stress, or making the environment lessaggressive can prevent SCC. Crevice corrosion can be minimized by proper designof welded joints and gaskets that minimize crevices. Welded joints are thus pref-erable to bolted and riveted joints; however, the welds must be properly designedand constructed to eliminate crevices. Gaskets must be properly sized to minimizecrevices exposed to the corrosive solution and should not use an absorbent or per-meable material. Sealing compounds and inhibitive coatings on flange faces alsoprovide a barrier from chloride deicing chemicals and reduce the risk of erosioncorrosion. Galvanic corrosion can be avoided by using the same type of metallicmaterial for the same structure. If dissimilar alloys have to be used in electricalcontact with one another, galvanic corrosion can be controlled by the selectionof alloys that are adjacent to one another in the galvanic series. In other unavoidablecouples, the anode alloy should be larger in area compared with the cathode andboth members of a galvanic couple should be coated to avoid any small anode areaat coating defects. If feasible, dissimilar alloys should be electrically insulated fromone another at their junction. Crevices between dissimilar alloys should be avoided,under which the corrosion is more serious than galvanic corrosion or crevice cor-rosion alone. Furthermore, configuration of the structure should be as simple aspossible. Design should allow maximum access for maintenance and repair paint-ing. Box sections have poor access to coatings, collect water and debris, and maxi-mize possibilities of corrosion. Edges and corners are difficult to coat uniformly,and thinly coated protrusions are susceptible to corrosion. The use of simple cylin-drical structural members is preferred because they allow for ease, uniformity ofpaint application, and convenient inspection (Aluminum Association 2001).

Maintenance Practices

Winter maintenance agencies typically integrate a wide range of methods and pro-cedures that may involve routine washing, reapplication of coatings, grit blasting,

© ASCE 06014005-8 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

mechanical removal of rust, or the use of rust removers to improve the service life ofequipment. Surface protection is a common successful corrosion preventative strat-egy, which is achieved in various methods. Surface treatments, such as applying acoat of paint, reduce the contact between the metal and deicing agents, therebypreventing corrosion. Palmer (1992) suggested that regular wash operations,coupled with the addition of environmentally acceptable corrosion inhibitors,and aftermarket rust proofing, i.e., coating formulations able to displace moistureand penetrate corrosion product layers, can both be effective solutions in mitigatingdeicer corrosion to motor vehicles. Li et al. (2013) conducted some laboratory teststo assess the effectiveness of four anticorrosion coating products, four spray-oncorrosion inhibitors, and six salt removers. Under the investigated conditions,at least one coating (Rust Bullet), one inhibitor (Krown), and two salt removers(HoldTight and ChlorRid) exhibited outstanding performance in reducing the cor-rosion effect of the magnesium chloride solution to carbon steel.

Winter maintenance agencies have reported various modifications of specificcomponents to mitigate the effects of chloride deicers to equipment. In particular,the WSDOT has been actively involved in extensive corrosion research and devel-opment projects because it has recognized the need to protect its equipment assetfrom deicer corrosion. The WSDOT has been very proactive with various corrosionmitigation approaches, such as appropriate deicer and corrosion inhibitor selection,equipment modification techniques, and regular maintenance schedules. Recent in-formation collected from the WSDOT has identified various best practices focusedon reducing effects to equipment from roadway deicers. These specific techniqueshave been an integral part of effective reduction of corrosion costs on winter main-tenance equipment and have allowedWSDOT to achieve the recommended 12-yearservice life for their equipment fleet• Use high-quality weather-proof terminations, high-quality primers, and

topcoats;• Avoid any damage of wiring insulation; position wiring to reduce damage to the

outside casing of wires; do not probe the wires for continuity testing;• Use dielectric silicone for sealing damaged areas or connections;• Open up closed areas and allow them to flush out easily;• Use welds to close and seal off certain areas that are difficult to drain;• Caulk welds before painting;• Do not apply paint to the rubber seals around lights;• Seal hydraulic components and brake canisters;• Install a modified protective cover for the battery;• Eliminate junction boxes wherever possible;• Install modified electrical junction boxes, which are mounted inside the cab

and off the floor;• Replace original oil pans with more resistant zinc oil pans;• Replace radiators every 2 years; and• Specify fender liners and self-healing undercoats for chassis.

Additionally, the WSDOT has implemented the following best practices: con-sistent washing after application, regular rinsing and localized cleaning followed byquick drying, using composite materials less susceptible to corrosion, and protect-ing new and replacement components before installation with wraps, covers, orshields. A laboratory investigation performed by the authors confirmed that power

© ASCE 06014005-9 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

washing with a salt remover significantly enhanced the performance of carbon steeland stainless steel against deicer corrosion. It is recommended to frequently washequipment exposed to deicers to minimize the possibility of chloride penetrationinto crevices, coatings, or the metal surface. The use of the salt remover HoldTightcan significantly improve the corrosion performance of carbon steel and stainlesssteel when subjected to 30% MgCl2 solution (unpublished data). The appropriateapplication of salt removers implemented with high pressure washing would greatlyimprove proactive maintenance of equipment and help preserve the value of theequipment asset. Additional laboratory testing following cyclic exposure confirmedthat once active corrosion of metals has started, power washing should be coupledwith periodically applying a corrosion inhibitor, such as Krown T40 or Rust Oleum,immediately after the equipment is washed clean and dried. This practice wouldeffectively protect aluminum, stainless steel, and carbon steel components againstcorrosion related to sodium chloride (NaCl) or magnesium chloride (MgCl2) deic-ers. Other methods of aftermarket rust proofing may include the application ofpostassembly coatings, e.g., Rust Bullet. During the accelerated laboratory testing,applying a corrosion inhibitor reduced corrosion rates of aluminum alloy, stainlesssteel, and carbon steel by at least 99%, and similarly, a one-time application of aprotective coating, such as Rust Bullet, reduced corrosion rates by at least 99.5%(Shi et al. 2013a).

Sharman (2009) investigated the efficiency of a newly developed biodegradablerust remover in place of a mechanical rust remover and found that this approachcreates an inexpensive method of removing rust and improves the quality of thesurface of the steel. Moreover, after the surface was cleaned, coating adhesiongreatly improved, leading to an increase in the coating’s performance and the sub-strate materials’ service life. The rust remover offers a great alternative to grit blast-ing and the mechanical removal of rust, particularly in situations in which gritblasting may be prohibited or unfeasible for safety and environmental reasons.

Concluding Remarks

A general overview of corrosion-prone parts has been reported to gain a betterunderstanding of the deicer corrosion issue, which facilitates effective improve-ments to existing practices. Table 2 presents a summary of the identified bestpractices in managing the deicer-induced corrosion of metals on maintenanceequipment. Improved materials selection, improved designs, and proactive and re-active maintenance practices can work together to significantly reduce the harmfuleffects of corrosion and associated costs. Research focused on understanding andcharacterizing corrosion behavior in the presence of deicers can provide valuableinsights on the corrosion mechanisms, which can be integrated into developingmore accurate testing and mitigation methods. New corrosion prevention tech-niques involving advancements in materials science and engineering may provideenabling solutions as well. The deicer-aggravated corrosion process is complicated,and it is still necessary to explore new theories, methods, and technologies toaddress the existing problems and bridge knowledge gaps.

Highway agencies have made significant progress in identifying and evaluatingbest practices, especially materials selection, design improvements, and proactive

© ASCE 06014005-10 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

Tab

le2.

Corrosion

Managem

entBestPractices

Corrosion

managem

ent

best

practice

Highlights

Com

ments

Materials

selection

Replace

certaincorrosion-pronecomponentswith

corrosion-resistantmaterials,such

asstainless

steelor

nonm

etallic,whereverpossible

orto

beinspectedandreplaced

onaregularbasis;

use

composite

materials

whereverpossible;specify

high-qualityweather-proof

term

inations,

high-qualityprim

ersandtopcoats,andzinc

oilpans;specifyfender

linersandself-healin

gundercoats

forchassis;

andspecifyrust-proof

brakeshoeswhenrebuild

ing

Increasedcorrosionresistance

andincreasedservicelife;

cost

savingsandrisk

reductionbecauseof

minim

ized

corrosion

Designim

provem

ents

The

configurationof

thestructureshould

beas

simpleas

possible.A

design

should

beused

toavoidareasthat

would

trap

and/or

accumulate

water

and/or

othersolid

orliq

uidcontam

inants.

Alwaysprovideeasy

drainage

from

allexposed

surfaces;properly

design

weldedjoints

andgaskets

that

minim

izecrevices;andelim

inatejunctio

nboxes

whereverpossible

The

design

should

allow

maxim

umaccess

formaintenance

andrepairpaintin

g.Avoid

galvanic

corrosionby

avoiding

theelectrical

contactof

dissim

ilarmetals.Crevicesbetween

dissim

ilaralloys

should

beavoided,

underwhich

the

corrosionis

moreseriousthan

galvanic

corrosionor

crevice

corrosionalone.

Use

sealingcompounds

andinhibitiv

ecoatings

togreatly

reduce

effectsof

corrosion

Maintenance

practices

Protectnew

andreplacem

entcomponentsbefore

installatio

nwith

wraps,covers,or

shields;

other

methods

includeconsistent

washing

afterapplication,

gritblastin

g,mechanicalremoval

ofrust,regular

rinsingandlocalized

cleaning,andreapplicationof

coatings;open

upclosed

areasandallow

them

toflushouteasily;usewelds

tocloseandseal

off

certainareasthat

aredifficultto

drain;

caulk

welds

before

paintin

g

Use

dielectric

siliconeforsealingdamaged

areasor

connectio

ns;seal

hydraulic

componentsandbrakecanisters;

avoidanydamageof

wiringinsulatio

n;establishregular

maintenance

schedulesandmaintaindetailedmaintenance

documentatio

n;power

washwith

asaltremover

© ASCE 06014005-11 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

maintenance strategies and tactics. It is recommended for maintenance agencies andequipment asset owners in the snowy regions of North America to integrate suchbest practices into standard corrosion control protocol to protect maintenanceequipment, reduce costs of corrosion caused by roadway deicers, and increaseequipment service life.

Research is needed to optimize the use of best practices or products for corrosionprotection of vehicles and equipment and evaluate their long-term effectiveness.For instance, there is currently a lack of information on the cost effectivenessof automated internal washing mechanisms and other effective washing techniques,relative to a low-volume high-pressure washing system. It is desirable to test thefield performance of regular washing with a salt remover and innovative anti-corrosion products. Research is also needed to identify, develop, and evaluatetechnologies to improve online assessments of the condition of key metallic com-ponents and their applied coatings so that maintenance of the metal or coating canbe performed on the basis of the corrosion condition. Finally, research is needed todevelop best practice guidelines, e.g., a user’s corrosion management guide, oncelaboratory and field studies are conducted to validate the best practices againstdeicer corrosion.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by the Washington StateDepartment of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA). The authors thankGreg Hansen and Monty Mills and Michael H. Lashmet II for providing the infor-mation related to WSDOT and New York DOT (NYDOT), respectively. Mr. YanZhang is acknowledged for his editorial assistance.

References

Agarwala, V. S. (2004). “Control of corrosion and service life.” 04257, National Associationof Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Aluminum Association. (2001). “Aluminum: The corrosion resistant automotive material.”Publication AT7, Arlington, VA.

Ault, P. J. (1999). “Corrosion durability testing of military vehicles.” Met. Finish., 97(10),20–23.

Ayello, F., Hill, D., Marion, S., and Sridhar, N. (2011). “Integrated sensor networks forcorrosion under insulation: Monitoring, cost reduction, and life extension strategies.”Corrosion 2011, NACE International, Houston.

Baldi, A. L., Crombie, E. A., Dillard, D. P., and Handsy, I. C. (1989). “Development of acomputerized data base to monitor wheeled vehicle corrosion.” Technical Rep. No. 13476,U.S. Army Tank-Automotive Command Research, Development and Engineering Center,Warren, MI.

Berg, R., et al. (1999). A guide to corrosion protection, 1st Ed., Auto/Steel Partnership,Southfield, MI.

Bierwagen, G. P., He, L., Li, J., Ellingson, L., and Tallman, D. E. (2000). “Studies of a newaccelerated evaluation method for coating corrosion resistance—Thermal cycling testing.”Prog. Org. Coat., 39(1), 67–78.

© ASCE 06014005-12 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

Cruz, R. P., Nishikata, A., and Tsuru, T. (1996). “AC impedance monitoring of pittingcorrosion of stainless steel under a wet-dry cyclic condition in chloride-containingenvironment.” Corros. Sci., 38(8), 1397–1406.

Dante, J., Price, K., Sabata, A., and Sabata, B. (2007). “Embedded coating degradationsensors for monitoring performance of temporary coatings.” 07387, National Associationof Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Davis, G. D., Dacres, C. M., and Krebs, L. A. (2000). “EIS-based in-situ sensor for the earlydetection of coatings degradation and substrate corrosion.” 00275, National Associationof Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Fay, L., and Shi, X. (2011). “Laboratory investigation of performance and impacts of snowand ice control chemicals for winter road service.” J. Cold Reg. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)CR.1943-5495.0000025, 89–114.

Fay, L., and Shi, X. (2012). “Environmental impacts of chemicals for snow and ice control:State of the knowledge.” Water Air Soil Pollut., 223(5), 2751–2770.

Fay, L., Shi, X., and Huang, J. (2013). Strategies to mitigate the impacts of chloride roadwaydeicers on the natural environment, National Academies, Washington, DC.

Hartley, P. (2010). “Corrosion protection.” Fleet Equip., Babcox Media, Akron, OH, 16–18.Hastuty, S., Nishikata, A., and Tsuru, T. (2010). “Pitting corrosion of type 430 stainless steel

under chloride solution droplet.” Corros. Sci., 52(6), 2035–2043.Jakab, M. A., Tormoen, G. W., and Dante, J. F. (2008). “Measurement of CPC performance

using EIS based sensor methods—Laboratory and field studies.” 08202, NationalAssociation of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Kane, R. D., Eden, D. C., and Eden, D. A. (2005). “Real-time solutions integrate corrosionmonitoring with process control.” Mater. Perform., 36–41.

Leidheiser, H., Jr. (1991). “Electrochemical methods for appraising corrosion protectivecoatings.” J. Coat. Technol., 63(802), 21–31.

Levelton Consultants. (2008). “Guidelines for the selection of snow and ice controlmaterials to mitigate environmental impacts.” NCHRP Rep. 577, National Academies,Washington, DC.

Li, Y., Fang, Y., Seeley, N., Jungwirth, S., Jackson, E., and Shi, X. (2013). “Corrosion bychloride deicers on highway maintenance equipment.” Transportation Research Record2361, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 106–113.

Menzies, T. R. (1992). “National cost of motor vehicle corrosion from deicing salt.”Automotive Corrosion and Protection: Proc., Corrosion/91 Symp., Robert Baboian,ed., National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Palmer, J. D. (1992). “Current public interest aspect of automotive corrosion.” AutomotiveCorrosion and Protection: Proc., Corrosion/91 Symp., Robert Baboian, ed., NationalAssociation of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Pan, T., He, X., and Shi, X. (2008). “Laboratory investigation of acetate-based deicing/anti-icing agents deteriorating airfield asphalt (with discussion).” J. Assoc. Asphalt PavingTechnol., 77, 773–793.

Payer, J. H. (1992). “Effect of environmental stress on reliability of automotive electronics.”Automotive Corrosion and Protection: Proc., Corrosion/91 Symp., Robert Baboian, ed.,National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Reboul, M. C., and Baroux, B. (2011). “Metallurgical aspects of corrosion resistance ofaluminum alloys.” Mater. Corros., 62(3), 215–233.

Sanchez, J., Fullea, J., Andrade, C., Gaitero, J., and Porro, A. (2008). “AFM study of the earlycorrosion of a high strength steel in a diluted sodium chloride solution.” Corros. Sci.,50(7), 1820–1824.

Sharman, S. (2009). “Evaluation and performance of chemical surface treatments for main-tenance.” 09006, National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International,Houston.

© ASCE 06014005-13 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.

Shi, X., and Akin, M. (2012). “Holistic approach to decision making in the formulation andselection of anti-icing products.” J. Cold Reg. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)CR.1943-5495.0000039, 101–117.

Shi, X., Akin, M., Pan, T., Fay, L., Liu, Y., and Yang, Z. (2009a). “Deicer impacts onpavement materials: Introduction and recent developments.” Open Civ. Eng. J., 3, 16–27.

Shi, X., Fay, L., Peterson, M. M., Berry, M., and Mooney, M. (2011). “A FESEM/EDXinvestigation into how continuous deicer exposure affects the chemistry of Portlandcement concrete.” Constr. Build. Mater., 25(2), 957–966.

Shi, X., Fay, L., Peterson, M. M., and Yang, Z. (2010a). “Freeze–thaw damage and chemicalchange of a portland cement concrete in the presence of diluted deicers.” Mater. Struct.,43(7), 933–946.

Shi, X., Fay, L., Yang, Z., Nguyen, T. A., and Liu, Y. (2009b). “Corrosion of deicers to metalsin transportation infrastructure: Introduction and recent developments.” Corros. Rev.,27(1–2), 23–52.

Shi, X., Fortune, K., Smithlin, R., Akin, M., and Fay, L. (2013a). “Exploring the performanceand corrosivity of chloride deicer solutions: Laboratory investigation and quantitativemodeling.” Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 86, 36–44.

Shi, X., Goh, S. W., Akin, M., Stevens, S., and You, Z. (2012). “Exploring the interactions ofchloride deicer solutions with nanomodified and micromodified asphalt mixtures usingartificial neural networks.” J. Mater. Civ. Eng., 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000452,805–815.

Shi, X., Li, Y., Jungwirth, S., Fang, Y., Seeley, N., and Jackson, E. (2013b). “Identificationand laboratory assessment of best practices to protect DOT equipment from the corrosiveeffect of chemical deicers.”WA-RD 796.1, Washington State Department of Transportation,Olympia, WA.

Shi, X., Liu, Y., Mooney, M., Berry, M., Hubbard, B., and Nguyen, T. A. (2010b).“Laboratory investigation and neural networks modeling of deicer ingress into portlandcement concrete and its corrosion implications.” Corros. Rev., 28(3–4), 105–154.

Shi, X., Veneziano, D., Xie, N., and Gong, J. (2013c). “Use of chloride-based ice controlproducts for sustainable winter maintenance: A balanced perspective.” Cold Reg. Sci.Technol., 86, 104–112.

Stephens, E., Pitman, S., Mattlin, K., Chamberlin, C., and Dahl, M. (2006). “Effects of high-way ice-clearing treatments on corrosion of heavy vehicle materials and components.”Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for the Pacific Northwest Snowfighters Conf.,Pacific Northwest Snowfighters, Olympia, WA.

Sun, X. (2005). “Online monitoring of undercoating corrosion using coupled multielectrodesensors.” Mater. Perform., 44(2), 28–32.

Tan, Y.-J. (1998). “Wire beam electrode: A new tool for studying localized corrosion andother heterogeneous electrochemical processes.” Corros. Sci., 41(2), 229–247.

Tan, Y.-J., Bailey, S., and Kinsella, B. (2001). “Mapping non-uniform corrosion usingthe wire beam electrode method. II. Crevice corrosion and crevice corrosion exemption.”Corros. Sci., 43(10), 1919–1929.

Tsutsumi, Y., Nishikata, A., and Tsuru, T. (2007). “Pitting corrosion mechanism of Type 304stainless steel under a droplet of chloride solutions.” Corros. Sci., 49(3), 1394–1407.

Uchida, M., and Mochizuki, K. (2000). “Corrosion behavior of vehicles operated in NorthAmerica for 5 years.” Kawasaki Steel Giho, 32(1), 26–31.

USD (U.S. Department of Defense). (2007). Corrosion prevention and control planningguidebook, Spiral 3, Washington, DC.

Weng, Y. (2004). “New sensors of wire beam electrodes (WBE) to detect pitting sensitivity ofsteels.” 04428, National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) International, Houston.

Yang, L., Sridhar, N., Brossia, C. S., and Dunn, D. S. (2005). “Evaluation of the coupledmultielectrode array sensor as a real-time corrosion monitor.” Corros. Sci., 47(7),1794–1809.

© ASCE 06014005-14 J. Cold Reg. Eng.

J. Cold Reg. Eng.

Dow

nloa

ded

from

asc

elib

rary

.org

by

WA

ST

AT

E U

NIV

LIB

RA

RIE

S on

11/

27/1

4. C

opyr

ight

ASC

E. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly;

all

righ

ts r

eser

ved.