Cargando…

Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance

There is a rising imperative to increase the operational availability of maritime vessels by extending the time between full docking cycles. To achieve operational efficacy, maritime vessels must remain clear of biological growth. Such growth can cause significant increases in frictional drag, there...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Donnelly, Bradley, Bedwell, Ian, Dimas, Jim, Scardino, Andrew, Tang, Youhong, Sammut, Karl
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6523467/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30978995
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym11040663
_version_ 1783419340746391552
author Donnelly, Bradley
Bedwell, Ian
Dimas, Jim
Scardino, Andrew
Tang, Youhong
Sammut, Karl
author_facet Donnelly, Bradley
Bedwell, Ian
Dimas, Jim
Scardino, Andrew
Tang, Youhong
Sammut, Karl
author_sort Donnelly, Bradley
collection PubMed
description There is a rising imperative to increase the operational availability of maritime vessels by extending the time between full docking cycles. To achieve operational efficacy, maritime vessels must remain clear of biological growth. Such growth can cause significant increases in frictional drag, thereby reducing speed, range and fuel efficiency and decreasing the sensitivity of acoustic sensors. The impact that various stages of fouling have on acoustic equipment is unclear. It is also unclear to what extent antifouling techniques interfere with the transmission of acoustic signals. In this study, to examine this effect, neoprene samples were coated with three antifouling coatings, namely, Intersmooth 7460HS, HempaGuard X7 and Hempasil X3. Other neoprene samples were left uncoated but were imbedded with the biocide, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one (DCOIT) during the mixing and curing process. Uncoated nitrile samples that had varying levels of fouling from immersion in Port Phillip Bay, Australia, for 92, 156 and 239 days were also extracted. The acoustic properties of these samples were measured using an acoustic insertion loss test and compared to uncoated neoprene or nitrile to ascertain the acoustic effects of the applications of antifouling coatings as well as the fouling growth itself. A T-peel test was performed on all coated samples in an attempt to understand the adhesive properties of the coatings when applied to neoprene. It was found that the application of antifouling coatings had little effect on the transmission characteristics of the neoprene with approximately 1 dB loss. The embedment of DCOIT, however, has a chance of causing aeration in the neoprene, which can heavily hamper transmission. An assessment of the effect of the fouling growth found that light and medium fouling levels produced little transmission loss, whereas more extreme fouling lead to a 9 dB transmission loss. The adhesion properties of the coatings were investigated but not fully ascertained as tensile yielding occurred before peeling. However, various failure modes are presented and discussed in this study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6523467
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65234672019-06-03 Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance Donnelly, Bradley Bedwell, Ian Dimas, Jim Scardino, Andrew Tang, Youhong Sammut, Karl Polymers (Basel) Article There is a rising imperative to increase the operational availability of maritime vessels by extending the time between full docking cycles. To achieve operational efficacy, maritime vessels must remain clear of biological growth. Such growth can cause significant increases in frictional drag, thereby reducing speed, range and fuel efficiency and decreasing the sensitivity of acoustic sensors. The impact that various stages of fouling have on acoustic equipment is unclear. It is also unclear to what extent antifouling techniques interfere with the transmission of acoustic signals. In this study, to examine this effect, neoprene samples were coated with three antifouling coatings, namely, Intersmooth 7460HS, HempaGuard X7 and Hempasil X3. Other neoprene samples were left uncoated but were imbedded with the biocide, 4,5-dichloro-2-octyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one (DCOIT) during the mixing and curing process. Uncoated nitrile samples that had varying levels of fouling from immersion in Port Phillip Bay, Australia, for 92, 156 and 239 days were also extracted. The acoustic properties of these samples were measured using an acoustic insertion loss test and compared to uncoated neoprene or nitrile to ascertain the acoustic effects of the applications of antifouling coatings as well as the fouling growth itself. A T-peel test was performed on all coated samples in an attempt to understand the adhesive properties of the coatings when applied to neoprene. It was found that the application of antifouling coatings had little effect on the transmission characteristics of the neoprene with approximately 1 dB loss. The embedment of DCOIT, however, has a chance of causing aeration in the neoprene, which can heavily hamper transmission. An assessment of the effect of the fouling growth found that light and medium fouling levels produced little transmission loss, whereas more extreme fouling lead to a 9 dB transmission loss. The adhesion properties of the coatings were investigated but not fully ascertained as tensile yielding occurred before peeling. However, various failure modes are presented and discussed in this study. MDPI 2019-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6523467/ /pubmed/30978995 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym11040663 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Donnelly, Bradley
Bedwell, Ian
Dimas, Jim
Scardino, Andrew
Tang, Youhong
Sammut, Karl
Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
title Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
title_full Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
title_fullStr Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
title_full_unstemmed Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
title_short Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
title_sort effects of various antifouling coatings and fouling on marine sonar performance
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6523467/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30978995
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym11040663
work_keys_str_mv AT donnellybradley effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT bedwellian effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT dimasjim effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT scardinoandrew effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT tangyouhong effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT sammutkarl effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance