Laboratory and ships test of modern antifouling paint formulation

1990 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.M.H. Ayoub ◽  
M.M. Abdel Malek ◽  
N.N. Messiha
Keyword(s):  
Antifouling Paint ◽  
Paint Formulation

Painting for the Protection of Outdoor Metal Structures

1954 ◽  
Vol 1 (7) ◽  
pp. 239-242
Author(s):  
J.F. Stanners
Keyword(s):  
Paint System ◽  
Metal Structures ◽  
Paint Formulation

In this second and concluding part of his article, Mr. Stanners discusses the choice of paints, paint formulation, the paint system, and, finally, when and how to paint. The first part of the article ‘Preparing to Paint’ appeared in our August issue.

scholarly journals Release and detection of nanosized copper from a commercial antifouling paint

2016 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
pp. 374-382 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adeyemi S. Adeleye ◽  
Ekene A. Oranu ◽  
Mengya Tao ◽  
Arturo A. Keller
Keyword(s):  
Antifouling Paint

Biocides in antifouling paint formulations currently registered for use

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
César Augusto Paz-Villarraga ◽  
Ítalo Braga Castro ◽  
Gilberto Fillmann
Keyword(s):  
Antifouling Paint

scholarly journals ­A practical application of reduced-copper antifouling paint in marine biological research

PeerJ ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. e2213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea S. Jerabek ◽  
Kara R. Wall ◽  
Christopher D. Stallings
Keyword(s):  
Community Composition ◽  
Antifouling Paint ◽  
Biological Research ◽  
Percent Cover ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Local Effects ◽  
Antifouling Paints ◽  
Manual Removal ◽  
Potential Alternative ◽  
Legislative Changes

Biofouling of experimental cages and other field apparatuses can be problematic for scientists and has traditionally been addressed using frequent manual removal (e.g., scraping, scrubbing). Recent environmental restrictions and legislative changes have driven the development of less hazardous antifouling products, making antifouling paint a potential alternative option to manual removal. Consequently, the viability of using these newly developed products as a replacement for the manual cleaning of exclusion cages was experimentally investigated. There were six treatments tested, comprising three with settlement tiles in experimental cages coated with antifouling paint, two with settlement tiles in unpainted experimental cages, and one cage-free suspended tile. The three antifouling treatments comprised two reduced-copper paints (21% Cu2O and 40% Cu2O) and one copper-free, Econea™-based paint (labeled “ecofriendly”). Antifouling paints were assessed for performance of preventing fouling of the cages and whether they elicited local effects on settlement tiles contained within them. All three paints performed well to reduce fouling of the cages during the initial six weeks of the experiment, but the efficacy of “ecofriendly” paint began to decrease during an extended deployment that lasted 14 weeks. The macro-community composition, biomass, and percent cover of settled organism on tiles within cages treated with copper-based paints (21% and 40% concentrations) were indistinguishable from tiles within the manually scrubbed cages. In contrast, settlement to tiles from the “ecofriendly” treatment was different in composition of macro-community and lower in biomass, suggesting the presence of local effects and therefore rendering it unsuitable for use in settlement experiments. The results of this study suggest that reduced-copper paints have the potential to serve as an alternative to manual maintenance, which may be useful for deployments in locations that are difficult to access on a frequent schedule.

A study on the treatment of antifouling paint waste from shipyard

2005 ◽  
Vol 51 (8-12) ◽  
pp. 1048-1053 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y.C. Song ◽  
J.H. Woo ◽  
S.H. Park ◽  
I.S. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Antifouling Paint

Developing New Antifouling Paint to Enhance Propulsion

2021 ◽  
Vol 56 (6) ◽  
pp. 922-926
Author(s):  
Wataru Kitamura
Keyword(s):  
Antifouling Paint
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document