|
3. Removal of Iron Concretions Using Cathodic Polarization.
The tank was filled
with a total of 4,428 litres of 0.04M sodium metasilicate pentahydrate
solution (MW 122.06). A total weight of 21.62kg was first made up as
a concentrated solution in small tanks and diluted to the correct concentration
in the larger treatment tank prior to the commencement of the treatment.
During the process, a fine white precipitate formed in the tanks. It
was speculated that this was due to the high carbonate content of the
available tap water forming a precipitate with the high initial concentration
of metasilicate, although this theory was never tested.
After the extensive
mechanical cleaning described above, the iron components of the engine
were prepared for polarization by connecting all major iron components
using electrical wires and clamps. It must be remembered that this treatment
stage is designed to treat the iron components only while inhibiting
corrosion of the aluminium alloys (fig. 20.).
|
Figure
20. Wiring of the iron components ready for cathodic polarization.
|
Although the aluminium components are not directly
polarized at this stage they are obviously in some sort of electrical
contact to a greater or lesser extent with the iron components and
are thus indirectly subjected to some degree of cathodic polarization. To minimise the risk of cathodic corrosion then,
circulation of solution around the object was facilitated by the
strategic placement of a hose with outlet holes, attached to a circulation
pump. This countered any possible formation of hydrogen bubbles on
the surface of the aluminium components (fig. 21). The PVC flooring material was placed into position
as was the stainless steel anode attached to its frame. The engine
was carefully lowered into position and potentials measured on
various representative parts prior to polarization: |
|
| Figure 21. Positioning of the circulation hose. |
| Table 2:- Recorded potentials prior to polarization. |
| With initial polarization,
potentials were then set at: |
Table 3:- Potentials after initial polarization.
|
|
|
Power supply settings
were 4.5V and 40 Amps.
The tank and engine
were polarized using a single power supply for both. After a short period
of instability with fluctuating potentials, power could be decreased
to 3V and 20 Amps obtaining stable average potentials of E= -1.33V/SSE
for the iron components and a reading of E= -1.60V/SSE for the tank
surface. The system was left for four days undisturbed, after which
the potentials were checked and the following values obtained:
Table
4: Potentials obtained after four days.
After a further
24 hours of polarization, the power was disconnected and the engine
lifted for inspection. Although covered with the white precipitate formed
during the solution preparation, all metal surfaces appeared to be in
good condition with the precipitate being nonadherent and easily washed
off. On reimmersion at the same power settings the potentials obtained
were as obtained previously.
The polarization
was continued for another 6 days, after which time the engine was removed
from the tank and thoroughly cleaned with a high pressure water spray.
The surfaces were then kept wet with a water spray. The general appearance
indicated that most of the iron concretions were now removed with a
small amount of what appeared to be carbonate species still present.
Because of its
high pH, the sodium metasilicate solution had to be first neutralized
before disposal. This was accomplished using citric acid monohydrate
in the proportion of 5g per litre of metasilicate solution. This gave
a final solution pH averaging 6.1 which was suitable for drainage disposal.
Tanks, hoses, pumps, leads and anode had to be thoroughly cleaned of
the tenacious film of metasilicate which formed on all surfaces.
4.
Dechlorination in Buffered Citrate.
Again a sodium
citrate solution, buffered to a pH of 5.4, was prepared in the same
manner as for the pretreatment although this time deionized water was
used. The total volume of solution was prepared in small open tanks
ready for immediate transfer to the treatment tank once the engine was
placed into position. This avoided any practical problems which could
arise due to delays in the collection of such a large volume of deionized
water from a conventional, laboratory water treatment unit.
Since this stage
of the treatment is a global one, all major metal components, both aluminium
and iron, were wired (fig. 22.), making sure that good electrical contact
was achieved. The pump and hose were positioned, as in the previous
stage, to facilitate good circulation of the solution.
|
Figure
22. Wiring of all metal components ready for dechlorination in
buffered citrate solution.
|
After
transfer of the solution, the engine was positioned in the tank,
power connection strategically placed and polarization of both
tank and engine immediately commenced.
At
the commencement of this treatment stage, as with that previously,
one power supply was used for both tank and engine. The initial
values were:
|
|
|
|
These
values required a power setting of 5.5V and 48 Amps, but these values
tended to fluctuate somewhat and the current required seemed rather high.
Thus after two days, the circuit configuration was altered to a configuration
where two power supplies were used. In this way, the tank was cathodically
polarized separately from the engine. The ACORE power supply was continued
to be used for the tank and a SODILEC 12V, 30A unit was used for the
engine. Potentials were then set at the following values:
|
| Table 6: Stabilized potential settings for
dechlorination treatment. |
The potentials
remained stable and were maintained throughout the treatment.
During the entire
treatment, iron components must be kept at a potential of at least I.lV/SSE
or below to avoid corrosion. At the same time the aluminium components
should not have a potential of less than -1.6V/SSE, thus avoiding cathodic
corrosion. Aluminiumcopper alloys are very sensitive to this type of
corrosion below this value, and other alloys to a lesser extent.
Throughout the
treatment, samples of the solution were taken at regular intervals to
closely monitor pH and chloride ion concentrations, which were determined
using a selective ion electrode:
|
These results can be represented
graphically (fig.23).
Figure 23. Increase in chloride ion
concentration with time in buffered citrate solution.
Unfortunately due to the limitations of immediate
access to adequate analytical facilities, these analyses were only
conducted some considerable time after the samples were taken. It
was speculated therefore that the erratic variation of Cl- concentrations
was due to the presence of chloride-consuming bacterial species.
After approximately 7 days the treatment was discontinued. |
Table
7. PH and chloride concentrations for dechlorination treatment. |
5.
Removal of Citrate Ions.
The engine was
removed from the treatment solution and immediately washed with high
pressure water spray. The tank and associated equipment were washed
and prepared for a final immersion of the engine in tap water under
cathodic protection to remove contaminating citrate species.
This was conducted
for a period of 24 hours, after which time the engine was removed, washed
with water and dried in preparation for the finishing treatments.
6.
Finishing Treatments.
The exterior of
the object was dried as quickly as possible using a hot air gun and
the interior was pumped out and dried by the same method. A certain
amount of superficial mechanical cleaning was conducted prior to the
application of a protective surface coating. This was Dinol 4010 which
was applied by spray application (fig. 24.).
|
Figure
24. After the final treatment and the application of Dinol 4010.
|
 |
 |
 |
Finally replacement
on its display stand indicated the last phase in the treatment process
(fig. 25.)
|
Figure 25. Comparisons. Engine mounted on display stand.
|
 |
 |
| Before treatment.
|
After treatment.
|
TREATMENT
OF ASSOCIATED OBJECTS
Some 57 items associated
with the engine and plane were also put into the care of the Valectra
laboratories for treatment and storage/display preparation.
A detailed discussion
of the treatment of these objects is the subject of an EDF publication
by Ms C. McLennan which is at present in production. However, figures
26 to 31 present an indication of the diversity of the objects treated.
Although most of these followed the general plan as described, each treatment
was “tailored” to suit the specific needs of the object, taking into account
such parameters as construction materials, size, fragility and condition.
|