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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bradley Donnelly, Ian Bedwell, Jim Dimas, Andrew Scardino, Youhong Tang, Karl Sammut
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2019-04-01
Series:Polymers
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/11/4/663
id doaj-288cd92c243b4a8db137ec379c7ada66
record_format Article
spelling doaj-288cd92c243b4a8db137ec379c7ada662020-11-25T00:56:22ZengMDPI AGPolymers2073-43602019-04-0111466310.3390/polym11040663polym11040663Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar PerformanceBradley Donnelly0Ian Bedwell1Jim Dimas2Andrew Scardino3Youhong Tang4Karl Sammut5Centre for Maritime Engineering, Control and Imaging, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, South Australia 5042, AustraliaDefence Mission Systems, Thales Australia, New South Wales 2116, AustraliaMaritime Division, Defence Science & Technology, Victoria 3207, AustraliaMaritime Division, Defence Science & Technology, Victoria 3207, AustraliaCentre for Maritime Engineering, Control and Imaging, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, South Australia 5042, AustraliaCentre for Maritime Engineering, Control and Imaging, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, South Australia 5042, AustraliaThere 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.https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/11/4/663foulingacoustic sensorsantifouling coatingstransmission loss
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Bradley Donnelly
Ian Bedwell
Jim Dimas
Andrew Scardino
Youhong Tang
Karl Sammut
spellingShingle Bradley Donnelly
Ian Bedwell
Jim Dimas
Andrew Scardino
Youhong Tang
Karl Sammut
Effects of Various Antifouling Coatings and Fouling on Marine Sonar Performance
Polymers
fouling
acoustic sensors
antifouling coatings
transmission loss
author_facet Bradley Donnelly
Ian Bedwell
Jim Dimas
Andrew Scardino
Youhong Tang
Karl Sammut
author_sort Bradley Donnelly
title 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_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_sort effects of various antifouling coatings and fouling on marine sonar performance
publisher MDPI AG
series Polymers
issn 2073-4360
publishDate 2019-04-01
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.
topic fouling
acoustic sensors
antifouling coatings
transmission loss
url https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4360/11/4/663
work_keys_str_mv AT bradleydonnelly effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT ianbedwell effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT jimdimas effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT andrewscardino effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT youhongtang effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
AT karlsammut effectsofvariousantifoulingcoatingsandfoulingonmarinesonarperformance
_version_ 1725227634315493376