© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
© 2006 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Blast Cleaning and Other Heavy Surface Pretreatments 71<br />
4.2.3.1 Variations in Composition and Physical Properties<br />
It should be noted that, because these abrasives are <strong>by</strong>-products of other industrial<br />
processes, their chemical composition and physical properties can vary widely. As<br />
a result, technical data reported can also vary widely for this class of abrasives. For<br />
example, Bjorgum has reported that copper slag created more blasting debris than<br />
nickel slag in trials done in conjunction with repainting of the Älvsborg bridge in<br />
Gothenburg, Sweden [4]. This does not agree with the information reported <strong>by</strong> Keane<br />
[1], which is shown in Table 4.1.<br />
This contradiction in results almost certainly depends on differences in the<br />
chemical composition, hardness, and particle size of different sources of the same<br />
generic type of <strong>by</strong>-product abrasive.<br />
Because of the very wide variations possible in chemical composition of these<br />
slags, a cautionary note should perhaps be introduced when labeling these abrasives<br />
as nontoxic. Depending on the source, the abrasive could contain small amounts of<br />
toxic metals. Chemical analyses of copper slag and nickel slag used for the Älvsborg<br />
bridge work have been reported <strong>by</strong> Bjorgum [4]. Eggen and Steinsmo have also<br />
analyzed the composition of various blasting media [5]. The results of both studies<br />
are compared in Table 4.2. Comparison of the lead levels in the nickel slags or of<br />
the zinc levels in the copper slags clearly indicates that the amounts of an element<br />
or compound can vary dramatically between batches and sources.<br />
By-product abrasives are usually considered one-time abrasives, although there are<br />
indications that at least some of them may be recyclable. In the repainting of the Älvsborg<br />
bridge, Bjorgum found that, after one use, 80% of the particles were still larger than 250<br />
µm; and concluded that the abrasive could be used between three and five times [4].<br />
4.2.4 MANUFACTURED ABRASIVES<br />
TABLE 4.1<br />
Physical Data for By-Product Abrasives<br />
Abrasive Degree of dusting Reuse<br />
Boiler slag High Poor<br />
Copper slag Low Good<br />
Nickel slag High Poor<br />
Modified from: Good Painting Practice, Vol. 1, J.D.<br />
Keane, Ed.. Steel Structures Painting Council, Pittsburgh,<br />
PA, 1982.<br />
The iron and steel abrasives discussed in Section 4.2.1 are of course man-made. In<br />
this section, however, we use the term “manufactured abrasives” to mean those<br />
produced for specific physical properties, such as toughness, hardness, and shape.<br />
The two abrasives discussed here are very heavy, extremely tough, and quite expensive.<br />
Their physical properties allow them to cut very hard metals, such as titanium<br />
<strong>©</strong> <strong>2006</strong> <strong>by</strong> <strong>Taylor</strong> & <strong>Francis</strong> <strong>Group</strong>, <strong>LLC</strong>