L&I Maritime Ltd UK company formed 1999 UAE company formed in - - PDF document

3/10/2010 1

L&I Maritime Ltd L&I Maritime Ltd L&I Maritime Ltd L&I Maritime Ltd

Unit 4, First Floor Unit 4, First Floor Old Brewery Yard Old Brewery Yard Worksop Worksop Nottinghamshire Nottinghamshire S80 2DE S80 2DE UNITED KINGDOM UNITED KINGDOM Tel: +44 (0) 1909 532 003 Tel: +44 (0) 1909 532 003 Fax: +44 (0) 1909 500 945 Fax: +44 (0) 1909 500 945 Email: operations@limaritime.com Email: operations@limaritime.com

L&I Maritime Ltd

• UK company formed 1999
• UAE company formed in 2006
• Providing chemical expertise to the industry
• Tank Cleaning / Cargo Tank Inspection
• Cargo Handling
• Training
• Projects – laboratory to field (MarinSpec

Associates, formed 2007)

3/10/2010 2

L&I Maritime Ltd

• Principals are ship owners, charterers, oil

majors chemical suppliers industry majors, chemical suppliers, industry

• rganisations and coating manufacturers
• APC have employed the services of LIM to

i ti t th iti i t f M i Li investigate the positive impact of MarineLine

• n cargo handling and tank cleaning

between different cargo grades

Absorption / Transmission

• We identified two immediate areas for

investigation: investigation: i.) The absorption of penetrating chemical cargoes and transmission into subsequent cargoes This project is well underway (via MarinSpec Associates) and APC have been encouraged to publish the interim results in the near future

3/10/2010 3

Cleanability

ii ) Th “ l bilit ” f M i Li d ii.) The “cleanability” of MarineLine compared to other cargo tank linings This project is still in its early stages, but the initial results are interesting and I am l d t di th ith t d pleased to discuss them with you today

Cleanability

• Our first intention was to explore how

MarineLine responded to basic tank cleaning MarineLine responded to basic tank cleaning methods, compared to other commonly used cargo tank linings

• Different linings possess different

characteristics / advantages and we needed t h M i Li fitt d i to see where MarineLine fitted in

• These characteristics always need to be

considered when planning any tank cleaning

• peration)

3/10/2010 4

Cleanability

• Organic coatings tend not to absorb viscous

(oil based) cargoes, but do absorb (and (oil based) cargoes, but do absorb (and retain) solvent type cargoes

• Inorganic coatings (zinc silicate based) are

porous and whilst they do absorb solvent type cargoes, do not retain them. Viscous d d “ ti k” t th fil cargoes can and do “stick” to the profile

• Stainless steel extremely versatile but with

some limitations

Cleanability

• With this in mind, the following project was

developed developed

• Five cargo tank linings would be directly

compared against each other: i.) Stainless steel i.) Stainless steel ii.) Industry standard zinc silicate (aged) iii.) Industry standard phenolic epoxy iv.) Industry standard high solids ph. epoxy v.) MarineLine 784

3/10/2010 5

Cleanability

• Test panels * of each lining would be

immersed in the following cargoes for 48 immersed in the following cargoes for 48 hours: i.) Palm Stearin at 65oC ii.) Hydro-cracker Bottoms (HCB) at 50oC iii.) FAME (SBO based) at 30oC iii.) FAME (SBO based) at 30 C iv.) Ethylene Dichloride (EDC) at 30oC v.) Styrene Monomer at 30oC

* Where appropriate the panels were post cured according to the manufacturers specifications

Cleanability

• After immersion, the panels were cleaned

according to the Dr Verwey tank cleaning according to the Dr. Verwey tank cleaning guide. PS and HCB: Hot (70oC) S/W for 6 cycles Hot F/W 0.05% Teepol for 4 cycles Cold F/W for 1 cycle Steaming

3/10/2010 6

Cleanability

FAME: Warm (50oC) S/W for 6 cycles H t (70oC) F/W f 3 l Hot (70oC) F/W for 3 cycles Steaming EDC: Cold S/W for 3 cycles Warm (50oC) S/W for 3 cycles ( ) y Steaming Styrene: Cold S/W for 9 cycles F/W flush, then steaming

Cleanability

• After cleaning, all test panels were “wall

washed” with 20ml of methanol washed with 20ml of methanol

• Any contamination on the surface of the test

panels or absorbed into the coating, would be washed into the methanol. (Contact time is minimal so accurate analysis was required ) minimal, so accurate analysis was required.)

• This methanol was scanned in the UV region of

the light spectrum using the L&I WAVE II Spectrometer

3/10/2010 7

Cleanability

• Theoretically, the test panels with the cleanest

wall wash samples could be considered as the wall wash samples could be considered as the easiest to clean …

Results

palm stearin

1 5 0.5 1.0 1.5 a b so rb a n ce

phenolic epoxy high solids epoxy marineline 784 stainless steel zinc silicate

0.0 200.0 220.0 240.0 260.0 280.0 300.0 320.0 340.0 wavelength (nm)

3/10/2010 8

Results

hydro-cracker bottoms

1 5 0.5 1.0 1.5 absorbance

phenolic epoxy high solids epoxy marineline 784 stainless steel zinc silicate

0.0 200.0 220.0 240.0 260.0 280.0 300.0 320.0 340.0 wavelength (nm)

Results

fatty acid methyl ester (soya)

1 5 0.5 1.0 1.5 absorbance

phenolic epoxy high solids epoxy marineline 784 stainless steel zinc silicate

0.0 200.0 220.0 240.0 260.0 280.0 300.0 320.0 340.0 wavelength (nm)

3/10/2010 9

Results

ethylene dichloride (edc)

0 5 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 absorbance

phenolic epoxy high solids epoxy marineline 784 stainless steel zinc silicate

0.0 200.0 220.0 240.0 260.0 280.0 300.0 320.0 340.0 wavelength (nm)

Results

styrene monomer

1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 absorbance

phenolic epoxy high solids epoxy marineline 784 stainless steel zinc silicate

0.0 200.0 220.0 240.0 260.0 280.0 300.0 320.0 340.0 wavelength (nm)

3/10/2010 10

Discussion

• Clearly, the choice of cargo tank lining does

impact on tank cleaning impact on tank cleaning

• Viscous cargoes are retained in the zinc silicate

coating

• Solvent cargoes are retained in the organic

Solvent cargoes are retained in the organic coatings

• Stainless steel and MarineLine behave almost

the same

Discussion

• Over-cleaning is perhaps apparent?
• More efficient tank cleaning procedures can be

investigated using this model

• Removing absorbed solvent residues from
• rganic coatings and viscous cargoes from zinc

silicate

3/10/2010 11

Economic Advantages

• Extremely difficult to quantify the economic advantage of M/L because it depends on

too many factors: i.) how the vessel is equipped ii.) how many tanks can be cleaned simultaneously iii.) ability of the officers / crew iv.) the duration of the ballast leg / permitted time

• What is apparent is that M/L does not seem to absorb penetrative chemical

cargoes, nor does it allow viscous oil based cargoes to stick to its surface. In other words it possesses the advantages of both inorganic and organic coatings words, it possesses the advantages of both inorganic and organic coatings. i.) significantly quicker cleaning from oil based cargoes compared to zinc silicate ii.) no challenge of removing absorbed cargoes from organic coatings iii.) reduced need for tank cleaning chemicals. lower tank cleaning costs and less environmental impact iv.) significantly less risk of contaminating subsequent cargoes from retained residues, because there are no retained residues

Thank You

L&I Maritime Ltd L&I Maritime Ltd

Unit 4, First Floor Old Brewery Yard Worksop Nottinghamshire S80 2DE S80 2DE UNITED KINGDOM Tel: +44 1909 532 003 Fax: +44 1909 500 945 Email: operations@limaritime.com