Intertherm CSA is a novel high performance coating that is applied using standard application equipment and cures effectively at ambient temperatures. Product Name: Intertherm CSA Grey Aluminium Part A Product Code: HTA Language: English Regulation: GHS/CLP Manufacturer: International Paints. Product Name: Intertherm CSA ALUMINIUM PART A. Product Code: HTA Language: English. Regulation: GHS/CLP. Manufacturer: International Paint.
|Country:||Bosnia & Herzegovina|
|Published (Last):||28 January 2009|
|PDF File Size:||8.26 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.7 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
No one get’s out of it alive. Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts. The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action. Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!
Join your peers on the Internet’s largest technical engineering professional community. It’s easy to join and it’s free.
Fight effects of high heat, CUI with Intertherm® 751CSA
Register now ingertherm it’s still free! Close this window and log in. Are you an Engineering professional? By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail. Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden. There are two products in their range: The seems to be the more mature of the interthdrm. They’re saying that CSA bridges the gap between thermally sprayed aluminimum which I think is becoming the best practice leader for CUI mitigation and high temperature resistant under insulation coatings.
I was wondering what intertyerm folks had with the product? It’ll be some time before we can assess how well it performs. So just incase there are those with more experience, I thought I’d post up to gather some experiences. Is CSA the panacea International make it out to be?? International state that it’s cheaper than TSA and has other preferential benefits like insitu application Cold spray Aluminium CSA isn’t paint. CSA is aluminum particles applied in a supersonic inert inteftherm stream such that cold welding to the substrate occurs.
It may very well do the job if properly applied, and at lower cost than true CSA. Kenvlach, thanks for your posts and informative links. I kinda figured that one out for myself and intimated that in the OP 715 are correct, it’s not true CSA, but let’s not get caught up in a sideline trip down the “definitions roadway”.
I did find the CSA links informative – but the technique seems fairly specialised and I don’t think it has any practical applicablility to the CUI issues I interthegm in mind.
Interhterm far as I know, no other paint mob has a similar product that claims to fill the gap between current painting technologies and Interyherm. Note Intertherm qualifies the term with apostrophes: Some other, under insulation paints with similar corrosion and heat resistance: Kenvlach – many thanks for your post. I can see how my subject title does suggest the metalic CSA technique.
Time for a little suggested reading. I work for a large thermal spray equipment and materials manufacturer and for the last 5 years I have been working with petrochemical companies ExxonMobil, Shell, etc. I have trained over applicators on how to do this. The 50 year old coating still looks fine! The vessel was reinsulated with no maintenance work done to the coating. It is pretty evident that intertherrm is no longer lasting, less expensive coating than “true” TSA.
Bloody interesting post there Thermalsprayer.
Are you at liberty to say more about the ExxonMobil experience? If yes, let’s work out a way to share the info offline. Until recently, my plant was part of the EM circuit. I still have some contacts and could probably speak with someone who could give me direct info interterm that experience.
I hadn’t heard about this example in normal network comms.
Rob, Very recently the Australian Institute of Engineers has held a seminar in Melbourne for static equipment, piping engineers and associated painting, etc The “International” rep presented the CSA as a novelty in this country and just as you said, it failed to mention that the process is a paint application and has nothing in common with the thermal spray of aluminium, particularly in CUI applications.
It somehow appears to be a trumped up application, perhaps trying to pull some coals under their cooking bowl, from under the hot TSA. ThermalSprayer’s post is realy an eye opener and I wonder if you will consider it for your plant CUI protection. I have use it TSA excusively for the protection of duplex and superduplex vessels on FPSO, as an additional investment protection the Australian applicators have never heard of ThermalSprayer’s rates I shall dig a bit deeper in it.
That’s why they push me to train more and more applicators, so they can bid against each other and charge some realistic prices. The costs depend on a lot of factors, similar to paint systems. At those rates, CSA doesn’t stand much of a chance IF it’s feasible to do insitu and can get past the JSA and permitting issues of a live petrochem plant.
Fight effects of high heat, CUI with Intertherm® CSA – BIC Magazine
We do live, operating equipmet at ExxonMobil and Shell all the time. That’s the great part aobut TSA. Flame spray is easy to permit little to no sparks, smoke, or dust. Arc spray is not allowed in most facilities. I train applicators to arc spray offsite. I am the current ExxonMobil coatings specialist, and the Intertherm has been my choice in applications where TSA wasn’t advantages. The results so far are outstanding.
The follow up inspections has found this coating to work along the same lines as TSA without the use of Thermal equipment in operating areas.
Intertherm CSA Grey Aluminium Part A MSDS Download
I am quite pleased with the results it has provided me. G’day from an ex ExxonMobil “relative” from Australia Moseley we were sold off a couple of years back Thanks for entering into the discussion.
The folks at Esso claim that interferes with UT measurement, so they’ve stopped using What’s your take on ‘s suitability for UT? Just following up in this thread. Does anyone have any further experiences with International’s CSA??
I understand that Santos is South Australia is in the process of using it extensively We have three insulated equipment items partially coated in Again too early to tell if there are any concerns. It painted on very simply and the quality of the coating looked excellent in all cases. Last I spoke with the Inspection guys down at Shell down the road from usthey were trying to find a TSA thermal spray aluminium applicator rather than going with an under insulation painting system.
I’ll see if I can catch up with them to find out whether they’ve had any luck. I am not saying that paint doesn’t work, it just that these guys ExxonMobil and Shell know that TSA works and they have over 50 years of testing to prove it. It can be applied safely and cheaply with the right training and equipment. Shell in Singapore has already started doing offline equipment here with TSA and they too will start doing online equipment.
If I can help you in any way please let me know. That sounds very interesting ThermalSprayer. I have a fair idea what the risks of painting and blasting are, but TSA is a bit murky – what sort of safety issues are there? Does the molten spray bounce back? Can it be readily used in congested plant areas or is it best in unconfined spaces? How susceptible is the TSA to atmospheric conditions?
I note that Australian petrochem companies are agreeing that TSA is world’s best practice for CUI prevention and mitigation, but I don’t see many dedicated TSA mobs in the low cost vain you talk about popping up – so there’s still a reluctance to use it from what I can gather.
Anyway, I hope the Singapore project is proceeding well. In an operating plant, we only use the flame intdrtherm process, and never arc spray. This reduces many of the safety risks, so I will only discuss risk reduction in respect to flame spray.
Here are the key items that we usually discuss; Fire — The flame spray process has a small, open flame about mm long which can ignite flammable materials. Intfrtherm is aware of this and it is seldom a concern.
Inhertherm blasting, you are also 75 sparks, and these sprays are directly on the substrate! Explosion — Fine aluminum dust accumulation in confined spaces may create an explosive concentration; however the combustion spray process dust is minimal and mostly larger granules.
Plant safety people that were extremely concerned about dust explosions have completely changed their minds once they saw the nitertherm spray process in action. I also point out to them that the dust from blasting is much greater than the dust from flame spray. Inhalation – metal dust, fumes, and CO are generated. A good respirator is forced air helmet like the ones that are used when blasting is required.
Radiation — A small amount of UV is generated by the flame, similar to propane torches used for soldering copper pipes. Usually applicators wear tinted safety glasses. High pressure and flammable gasses — Interthrrm in gas welding, care must be taken when using bottled gasses. Plant people are accustomed to dealing with flammable gasses. No, it does not.
When aluminum is sprayed with a combustion gun it barely reaches its melting point.