Crimson Publishers | Thermal Analysis of Oil Pipeline Coatings

1/9
Introduction
Figure 1: Bath tub model; life cycle of SSC growth in
pipelines [1].
The oil pipe lines in Oman are unprotected to high ambient
temperature that disturbs the coating properties. Losses original
properties and oxidation would take place on the outer surface
of the pipe lines. Results in corrosion that develops on pipe
line surface. Moreover, insufficient coating performance also
contributes to stress corrosion cracking (SSC) that develops due to
stress generation and form cracks on the surface [1]. Life cycle of
SSC is shown in Figure 1 in three stages. First stage is development
of favorable conditions to SCC followed by the crack “initiation”
stage. These cracks then continue to grow and merge, while
additional crack initiation also occurs in stage 3. Finally, in stage
4, large cracks amalgamate and failure occurs. Same is explained
in Figure 2 like tensile stress higher then threshold stress; material
vulnerable to SSC and cracking environment [2].
Figure 2: Conditions for SSC [2].
At present, the steel pipes used in Oman oil industry are made of
low alloy steel ASTM A106B [3] varies from 305mm to 1219mm. Oil
Mumtaz Mirza M1
*, Elansezhian Rasu1
and Anjali Desilva2
1
Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, Oman
2
School of Engineering & Built Environment, UK
*Corresponding author: Mumtaz Mirza M, Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, Seeb, CPO 111, Oman
Submission: September 10, 2017; Published: October 17, 2017
Thermal Analysis of Oil Pipeline Coatings
Copyright © All rights are reserved by Mumtaz Mirza M
Abstract
The research paper focuses on oil pipe lines used in desert region of Oman that is exposed to very high ambient temperature affects the coating
properties resulted in brittleness in coatings. The impact of high ambient temperature is analyzed through heat transfer rate and thermal stress. Two
coatings are considered, commercially available fusion bonded epoxy (FBE) coating and experimentally developed electroless nickel phosphorous
(EN-P) composite alloy coating. Simulation is done under three ambient conditions, morning at 308K, mid-day at 328K and evening when temperature
was around 313K along with crude oil temperature of 343K. Thermal analysis demonstrates that at high ambient temperature EN-P composite alloy
coating has low heat transfer rate as compared to FBE coating and its thermal efficiency was around 96% against uncoated pipe and around 69.4% less
as compared to FBE coating. The lower the heat flow, the more effective the insulation and it improves the stability of the coating. On the other hand, as
the heat flow increases, the insulation is more pronounce to thermal expansion due to high thermal stress behavior. In this scenario, EN-P composite
alloy coating is more sensitive as compare to FBE coatings and thus it becomes more pronounce towards stress corrosion cracking (SSC). The impact of
thermal stress has significant effect on structural strength and stability, potentially causing cracks or breaks within certain components. Such failures
compromise the overall design of the structure, which can lead to possible weakening and deformation at high ambient temperature.
Keywords: High ambient temperature; Thermal analysis; FBE coating; EN-P composite alloy coating; Thermal stress; Heat transfer rate; Stress
corrosion cracking
Research Article
Research & Development in
Material ScienceC CRIMSON PUBLISHERS
Wings to the Research
ISSN: 2576-8840

How to cite this article: Mumtaz M M, Elansezhian R, Anjali D. Thermal Analysis of Oil Pipeline Coatings. Res Dev Material Sci. 1(4). RDMS.000517. 2017.
DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
Research & Development in Material Science
2/9
Res Dev Material Sci
pipelines used in Oman are coated with two types of FBE coatings
applied on the external and the internal surface of pipelines
[4,5]. The external surface is coated with two layers FBE system
as shown in Figure 3 in which the FBE coating material is coated
above the base during manufacturing process. The exposed coat of
FBE is applied during the melt stage of the first coating [6]. Three-
layer external pipe-coating system utilizes FBE as the primary
corrosion coating. The sandwich coating is made of polyolefin. An
intermediate adhesive layer of modified polyolefin bonds the epoxy
to the polyolefin. The top coat is unmodified polyolefin which is
compatible with the intermediate polyolefin as shown in Figure 3. A
three-layer coating is a good selection, if the operating temperature
is above 110 0C. 3 LPE coating as shown in Figure 4 comprises of:
Figure 3: Two layers of FBE coating [6].
Figure 4: Three layers of FBE coating [6].
a. Anti-corrosion coating: 350mm (14mil) nominal FBE
b. Insulation: 50mm minimum polyurethane foam
c. Outer jacket: 2.5mm (100mil) minimum PE tape and
extruded PE
The internal surface of pipelines is also coated with FBE coating
with the thickness of above four hundred microns. The main
advantage of FBE coating on the inside surface not only provides
protection against corrosion, but it will also help in smooth flow
of oil.
Electro less Nickel Phosphorous (EN-P) coating is a technique of
depositing a noble metal (from its salt solution) on a catalytic active
surface of a less noble metal by employing a suitable reducing agent
(RA) without using electrical energy. The added RA causes the
reduction of the metallic ions to metal, which eventually gets plated
over the catalytically activated surface giving a highly uniform, but
thin coating. Thus [7]:
Metal Ions + RA → Metal + Oxidized products
The mechanism of the EN-P deposition reactions takes place in
the hypophosphite bath. In EN plating, the metal source is a soluble
Nickel salt which is in terms of NiCl2
. During redox reaction, the
Ni ion becomes Ni metal and the Cl2
is wasted as salt solution. In
the reaction, RA is Sodium Hypophosphite NaPO2
H2
is the sodium
salt that contributes Phosphorous better against corrosion in the
medium range [8]. Nano additives from the oxide group added in
the bath at its best concentration value, it improves the mechanical
and physical properties of the EN-P coating. The Nano additives
sits in the molecular gap of the coating thus attempts to stop the
infiltration of the corrosion.
Methodology
The simulation paper focuses on the performance of EN-P
composite alloy coating based on thermal transit analysis in
comparison with FBE coating by keeping the thermal input
configuration same. The simulation uses ANSYS APDL 18.1 as
computational software for analysis. Keeping in view the software
limitations, an appropriate coating thickness of 10mm is considered
on ASTM A106B substrate. The comparative results focus on two
analyses (Figure 5):
Figure 5: Cross sectional view of oil pipeline simulated.
a. Heat transfer rate at three different temperatures
b. Thermal stress at three different temperatures.
Basedontheinputs,afaircomparisonbetweentheEN-Pcoating
and the FBE coating at three different ambient temperatures with
average relative humidity of 60 to 65% and wind speed of 3 to 5m/s
is analyzed [9]. Moreover, the crude oil temperature is considered
as 20 °C at the inlet and 70 °C in the full section of the pipeline. The
conditions are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Temperature inputs and total heat generation calculated.
Temperature Zone
Temperature in the
surface of coating
Inside Pipeline
Temperature
Morning Time 35 °C 70 °C (343K)
Mid-day 55 °C 70 °C (343K)
Evening 40 °C 70 °C (343K)

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
3/9
Res Dev Material SciResearch & Development in Material Science
Crude oil properties
Table 2: Measured density data (10-3
x Kg m-3
) for crude oil samples at different locations [11].
tT( °C) Erad Oman Export Receive Line Mabruk Zal-41
20 933,302 855,019 851,414 824,753 817,802
25 929,939 851,503 847,930 821,182 814,311
30 926,586 848,018 844,441 817,776 810,890
35 923,262 844,488 840,904 814,370 807,468
40 920,123 840,983 837,395 810,967 804,047
45 916,973 837,493 833,877 807,561 800,618
50 913,806 834,008 830,375 804,153 797,188
55 910,644 830,525 826,880 800,746 793,758
60 907,479 827,034 823,376 797,336 790,324
65 904,361 823,540 819,876 793,924 786,884
70 901,255 820,043 816,370 790,505 783,433
API 19.19 33.41 34.13 39.47 40.89
Refer Table 2 [10] physical properties of five samples from five
different locations in Oman are considered [11] to undermine the
simulation process. The sample properties are from Erad, Oman
Export, Receive line, Mabruk and Zal-41. It is observed that the
lightest crude oil is from Zal 41 (lightest crude) and heaviest crude
oil is from Erad (heaviest crude). Full flow of crude oil is assumed
inside the oil pipe through forced pumping with transient behavior
of oil flow.
Oil pipeline material
ASTM A106 B low alloy steel is selected for simulation that
has been used in Oman oil industry. Pipe line size of 609.6 mm is
considered with different properties as shown in Figure 6 [12].
Figure 6: Pipeline information received through courtesy of
CC energy development
EN-P composite alloy coating properties
Density of EN-P (EN-P +NanoAl2
O3
+SDS) composite alloy
coating
Weight of coating against 20x20x0.126mm3
=50.4mm3
(volume).
Weight of coating=2.98gms
Density of composite coated material=2.98/50.40=0.0592gms/
mm3
Thermal conductivity of the coated sample
To identify the thermal conductivity of the coated sample, refer
Figure 7 through X-ray diffraction,
Figure 7: XRD of EN-P composite alloy coating.
The percentage of various elements of the coating stands as
follows:
a. Nickel-99.91 %
b. Phosphorous-0.09 %
Nano Al2
O3
sits in the gap of Nickel structure; its presence does
not have much impact as indicated in the XRD results. From the
above analysis and for simulation purpose, summarizing physical
properties shown in Table 3 [13-17]:

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
4/9
Table 3: Physical properties of the coated samples/crude oil.
Parameters
FBE
(existing
coating)
EN-P
composite
alloy coating
A106B
Crude
oil
Thermal
conductivity(λ)
Wm-1
K-1
0.2921 76 60.40 0.120
Density(r)Kg m-3
1440 5920 7860 913.806
Poisson coefficient
(n)
0.35 0.28 0.29 0.5
specific heat (Cp) J
Kg-1K-1 1000 1046.6 850 2.2e-3
Thermal expansion
coefficient (a) k-1 - 18e-6
16e-6
Young modulus (E)
G Pa
3.8
210
(approximate)
208
Tensile Strength (s)
M Pa
413
Yield Strength (s)
M Pa
241
Pipe line support
Pipe line supports are meant to hold pipelines to avoid piping
stresses and leakage at the joints. Supports for piping must be
considered not only to avoid sag in the pipeline within the desired
limits, but also to avoid excessive bending stresses. To calculate the
maximum span of length for the pipeline considered for simulation
Figure 8 [17] bending stress formula with deflection is used.
Figure 8: Straight pipe resting on two supports [18].
Calculations
Maximum bending stress (N/m2
)
Sb=(0.0624 w L2 + 0.1248 wc
L) D/I
Maximum deflection (m)
y = 5wL4 + 8wcL3/384 EI
Where
w = Uniform distributed weight in N/m
wc = Concentrated weight on pipeline in N
L = Span length in m
D = Outside diameter of oil pipe
E = Modulus of elasticity of pipe material in N/m2
.
I = Moment of inertia of pipe in m4
.
Maximum bending stress of pipe can be taken as 30% of
allowable stress [18].
The calculated deflection value should be less than L/600 to
confirm the calculated span of length against safe deflection [19].
Calculations
Total weight=Dead weight+Load weight
Now Dead weight
Dead weight=Weight of pipe+weight of crude oil+weight of
insulation (inside and outside surface of pipe)
Weight of pipe ASTM A106B [20] = 89Kg/m = 872.79N/m
Weight of crude oil [20] (Erad at 20 °C)=5901N/m
Weight of FBE insulation- internal and external against 600µm
[19] = 7.7 x 10-3
N/m
Dead Weight = 872.79+5901+7.7x 10-3
=6773.79N/m
Load weight
As per ASME B31.4 2012 for liquid pipelines against pipeline
diameter of 914.4mm with thickness of 8mm for ASTM A106 B and
6mm for FBE, Pi=4M Pa.
Convert into F = Pi x Area of cross section=4x106x(0.894)2
xπ/4
F = 2.5M N/m
Allowable shear stress for ASTM A106B=137.89MPa [18]
Maximum bending stress can be taken as 30% of allowable
shear stress [16]
Therefore Sb=0.3x137.89=41.36M Pa
Moment of inertia for oil pipe [21]
I=1.174x10-4
m4
Since the pipe is not considered to carry flanges it will not
considered to carry wc
.
Put all the values in maximum bending stress equation Sb
Considered outside diameter of oil pipe=920.4mm
Therefore L=3.54m≈4m
Now maximum deflection will be
y = 5 w L4/384 EI
Put all the values we get
y = 9.45x10-4
m ≈ 0.945mm
With L/600=4/600=6.66mm
With deflection value of 0.945mm is less than 6.66mm;
therefore deflection of pipeline is safe against 4m length of pipe line
in between supports.
Computational analysis assumptions
ANSYS 18.1 APDL is used to simulate the oil pipeline using
transit state thermal analysis. The ANSYS framework and
methodologies for thermal analysis in transient flow is done with

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
5/9
following task:
For pipeline
Outer Radius = 0.305m (Figure 6)
Inner Radius = 0.298m
For EN-P / FBE coating
Outer Radius = 0.315m (Figure 6)
Inner Radius = 0.305m
Based on the ANSYS APDL 18.1 requirement for thermal
analysis, the pipeline considered is dependent on the dimensional
inputs reflected and the properties for the ASTM A106 grade B pipe
line values are taken from Table 3. Keeping in view the software
limitations, a coating thickness of 10 mm with physical properties
as discussed in section 2-3 are considered. The input values like
thermal conductivity, specific heat, thermal expansion coefficient,
Young modulus and poisons ratio values are considered from Table
3.
Based on the assumptions a pipe length of 4m is considered as
shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9: Hollow pipe line with EN-P coating.
Meshing
Using meshing attributes and mesh tool of the software fine
mesh is developed on the hollow pipe as shown in Figure 10.
Figure 10: Meshing of the hollow pipe.
Heat Transfer Rate Evaluation
Inputs for heat transfer evaluation
Preferences: Thermal Analysis with transient condition
Preprocess: Element type - Solid (brick 8 node 278)
Units: SI, meters
Material properties: Material model based on thermal
conductivity Wm-1
K-1
, Specific heat J Kg-1
K-1
and density kgm-3
(Table 3).
Meshing: Fine mesh based on 100mm extruded length of the
hollow pipe (due to software limitations).
Thermal load: Inside pipe surface temperature starts at 20 0C
(293K), in the middle 70 0C (343K) (Table 1).
Pipe dimensions considered: 0.293m internal diameter,
0.305m outer diameter, EN-P insulation thickness internal diameter
0.305m, external diameter 0.325m (Figure 6).
Temperature input considerations: Three different ambient
temperature zones along with crude oil temperature as indicated
in Table 3.
Output for heat transfer evaluation
Output considerations: Heat transfer rate against EN-P
coating and for FBE coating for three different temperature zones
are calculated and compared. Based on heat transfer rate thermal
performance efficiency of the two coatings is calculated.
Preprocessor: Modeling a hollow pipe of ASTM A106 B was
developed over it EN-P coating was generated with fine mesh of
size 4 and 3.
Solution:
Analysis type > transient;
Define load > Apply > temperature (inside pipe 293K at the
start and 343K overall length);
Define load > Apply > convection > outside temperature
ambient 328 K. (Figure 11)
Figure 11: Convection properties of the hollow pipe.
Solution for EN-P Coating (Figure 13-19)
Morning temperature zone: Based on the simulation at
morning temperature zone (Figure 11 & 12) can easily present
how the heat will flow from inside the crude oil temperature to
outside temperature of 40 °C. Figure 12 shows that how the surface
temperature reaches 343K and balances the inside temperature of
the crude oil. Heat generated at morning zone=117.09Wm-2
.

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
6/9
Figure 12: Thermal variation at morning time.
Figure 13: Total heat generation at morning time.
Heat generated at morning zone=117.09Wm-2
.
Figure 14: Total heat generated in Wm-2
during mid-day.
Heat generated at morning zone=16.509Wm-2
.
at evening time.
Heat generated at morning zone=62.361 Wm-2
Figure 16: Total Heat generated for FBE coating at morning
time.
Total heat generation=128.89Wm-2.
Figure 17: Total Heat generated for FBE coating at mid-day
time.
Heat generated at mid-day zone=58.407Wm-2
.
Mid-day temperature zone: Heat generated at mid-day
zone=16.509Wm-2
.
Evening temperature zone: Heat generated at morning
zone=62.361Wm-2
.
Thermal performance efficiency of the coating
Thermal performance efficiency of the coating can be calculated
using following formula [22].
ηth
≡ Thermal performance efficiency of the coating;

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
7/9
at evening time.
Heat generated at evening zone=67.09 Wm-2
.
Figure 19: Total Heat generated without insulation.
Total heat generated without insulation=408.17Wm-2
.
Table 4: Thermal performance of the coatings.
Temperature
zone
Inside Pipeline
Temperature
Total Heat
Generated in
W/m2
for EN-P
coating
ƞth for EN-P
coating against
uncoated pipe
Total Heat
generated in
W/m2
for FBE
coating
ƞth for FBE
Coating against
uncoated pipe
ƞth for EN-P
Coating against
FBE Coating
Morning time 35 °C
(308k)
70 °C (343K) 117.09 71.31% 128.89 68.42% 9.1%
Mid-day 55 °C
(328K)
70 °C (343K) 16.509 96% 54.07 86.75% 69.4%
Evening 40 °C
(343K)
70 °C (343K) 62.361 84.72% 67.09 83.56% 7.04%
ηth
= (Uncoated pipe heat flow- coating heat flow)÷Uncoated
pipe heat flow.
Table 4 and consider uncoated pipe heat flow as 408.17W as
shown in Figure 20.
Figure 20: Comparative performance of EN-P/FBE
coatings.
Thermal performance efficiency coating for EN-P coating can
be estimated against uncoated pipe and FBE coated pipe for three
temperature zones (Table 4, Figure 20).
Thermal Stress Evaluation
Inputs for thermal stress evaluation
Preferences: Thermal Analysis with transient condition
Preprocess: Element type - Solid brick (8 node 77)
Element behavior-Axisymmetric -based on Von Misses criteria.
Units: SI, meters.
Material properties: Material model based on thermal
conductivity Wm-1
K-1
, Specific heat J Kg-1
K-1
, density kg m-3
, young’s
modulus in Pa and Poisson’s ratio (Table 3).]
Meshing: Fine mesh based on 100mm extruded length of the
hollow pipe (due to software limitations).
Thermal load: Inside pipe surface temperature- at the start 20
°C (293K), in the middle 70 °C (343K) refer Table 4.
Pipe dimensions considered: 0.293m internal diameter,
0.305m outer diameter, EN-P insulation thickness internal diameter
0.305m, external diameter 0.325m (Figure 6).
Temperature input considerations: Three different ambient
temperature zones on the insulated surface are considered in
simulation with reference to the Figure 9. Similarly, for oil pipe
inside temperature are considered refer Figure 6, Erad Oman
pumping station crude oil values.
Solution
Based on heat transfer rate input and linking the *.rth file with
the structural analysis, thermal stress on the EN-P/FBE coated
surface can be analyzed. Out of the three temperature zones the
most vulnerable coated surface is at mid-day temperature zone of
55 °C results are presented as under (Figure 21-23).
EN-P/FBE coated samples: Thermal stress at mid-day for
EN-P coating (328K ambient temperature).
Max thermal stress generated for EN-P coating at node number
379 is 0.2222 E009.

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
8/9
Figure 21: Thermal stress at mid-day temperature zone for
EN-P coating.
Max thermal stress generated for EN-P coating at node
number 379 is 0.2222 E009.
FBE coating.
Max thermal stress generated for FBE coating at node
number 3297 is 0.2324 E08.
uncoated coating.
Max thermal stress generated for uncoated pipe at node
number 262 is 0.2927 E08.
Max thermal stress generated for FBE coating at node number
3297 is 0.2324 E08.
Max thermal stress generated for uncoated pipe at node
number 262 is 0.2927 E08.
Comparative performance of Thermal stress: To have
comparative performance of EN-P/FBE coating at 328K mid- day
temperature.
Conclusion
(Table 4 & 5), following results can be drawn:
a. Simulation was done in three steps, first under EN-P coating
with substrate ASTM A106 B low alloy steel. Second with FBE
coating with same substrate and lastly substrate only. All the three
conditions simulated against with three types of ambient conditions
i.e. morning when temperature was around 308K, mid-day when
temperature was around 328K and evening when temperature was
around 313K. Besides this, the crude oil temperature considered at
the inlet was around 293K and later it reached around 343K.
Table 5: Comparative performance of thermal stress on coatings.
Type of coating
Ambient
Temperature (K)
Node Number(Max)
Max Thermal Stress
Developed (Pa)
Node Number(Min)
Min Thermal stress
Developed (Pa)
EN-P 328K 379 0.2222 E09 2614 0.3303 E08
FBE 328K 3297 0.2324 E08 4458 0.2989 E06
Uncoated 328K 262 0.2927 E08 607 0.1122 E07
b. Two types of thermal behaviors were studied mainly heat
transfer rate from the substrate to the coating and later thermal
stress for each case. EN-P coating has low heat transfer rate as
compared to other coatings and its coated thermal efficiency
was around 96% against uncoated pipe and around 69.4% less
as compared to FBE coating. The lower the heat flow, the more
effective the insulation and therefore improves the stability of the
coating. However, on the other hand, as the heat flow increases the
insulation is more pronounce to thermal expansion.
c. Coating works as solid material experiences an increase in
temperature, the volume of the structure is ultimately impacted
by increasing a phenomenon known as thermal expansion. This
process, results from heat’s ability to increase a material’s kinetic
energy. Within solids, molecules are typically located near one
another, contributing to the defined shape of the structure. As the
temperature rises, molecules begin to vibrate at a more rapid speed
andpushawayfromoneanother.Thisincreasedseparationbetween
the individual atoms causes the solid to expand, thus increasing

DOI: 10.31031/RDMS.2017.01.000517
9/9
the volume of the structure. With this volumetric enlargement, the
elements of a solid undergo greater levels of stress.
d. Thermal stresses can have a significant effect on a structure’s
strength and stability, potentially causing cracks or breaks within
certain components. Such failures compromise the overall design
of the structure, which can lead to possible weakening and
deformation.
e. Thermal stress in case of EN-P coating is more pronounced
than FBE or uncoated surface. Based on Von Misses criteria, thermal
stress at a node has more value than other nodes. The variation in
stress condition from maximum to minimum at a node for EN-P
coating is around 189M Pa which is appreciably quite high as
compared to FBE coating that is around 22.9M Pa and for uncoated
that is around 28.15M Pa. Through simulation, it proves that stress
corrosion cracking (SSC) is more pronounce towards EN-P coating
as compare to FBE coating.
f. Due to limited capabilities of the software some limitations
on the dimensions are taken care off. However, while considering
the EN-P coating physical properties, Ni alloy physical properties
are assumed to be considered because of the reason 99.14% of
Nickel is available in the EN-P+ NanoAl2
O3
+surfactant confirmed
under XRD test (Figure 7).
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to oblige Glasgow Caledonian University
U.K., Caledonian College of Engineering Oman, Sultan Qaboos
University Oman and Indian Institute of technology Madras India
for providing laboratory facilities, technical advice and suggestions
and financial assistance under staff development program of
Caledonian College of Engineering Oman.
References
1. Parkins RN (1987) Current Topics in Corrosion: Factors Influencing
Stress Corrosion Crack Growth Kinetics. Corrosion 43(3): 130-139.
2. Michael Baker (2004) Understanding Stress Corrosion Cracking in pipe
lines.
3. Popoola L, Grema A, Latinwo G, Gutti B, Balogun A (2013) Corrosion
problems during oil and gas production and its mitigation. Int J Ind
Chem 4(1): 35.
4. Crude oil properties are collected from CC energy development, Farah
Station. Muscat, Oman.
5. Kehr JA, Enos DG FBE, a Foundation for Pipeline Corrosion Coatings.
6. Muscat May Weather (2016) Accu Weather Forecast for Masqat Oman.
7. Jain & Jain (2009) Engineering Chemistry. (15th
edn), Dhanpat Rai
Publishing Company, Delhi, India.
8. Weil R, Parker K The Properties of Electroless Nickel.
9. Rahman SMM (2014) Velocity Profiles for Flow of Omani Crude Oils and
Other Liquids. SQU J Sci 19(1): 87-94.
10. Scotchkote TM (2013) Fusion Bonded Epoxy Coating.
11. Kundua S, Kalyan S (2014) The engineering properties of Electroless
Nickel coatings. Procedia Engineering 97: 1698-1706.
12. Nickel-Properties, Fabrication and Applications of Commercially Pure
Nickel.
13. Zhou G, Ding H, Zhang Y (2008) Structure and Mechanical Properties
of Ni-P-Nano Al2O3 Composite Coatings Synthesized by Electroless
Plating, J Iron Steel Res Int 15(1): 65-69.
14. Vakharia DP, Farooq M (2009) Determination of maximum span between
pipe supports using maximum bending stress theory. Int J Recent Trends
Eng 1(2).
15. Dhinakaran R, Elansezhian R, Lalitha AA (2013) Effect of nano additives
with surfactant on the surface characteristics of electroless nickel
coating on magnesium-based composites reinforced with MWCNT.
Advances in Tribology 2013 (2013): Article ID 315965.
16. Shalaby HM, Lowther M, Al-Hashem, Al-Besharah J (1996) Industrial
Corrosion and Corrosion Control Technology. 2nd
Arab Corrosion Conf,
pp. 16-17.
17. The Engineering Science of Oil Pipelines. Sci media Cent Canada.
18. Sorensen PA, Kiil S (2009) Anticorrosive coatings: a review. J Coatings
Technol Res 6(2): 135-176.
19. Yuan K (2013) Thermal and Mechanical Behaviors of High Temperature
Coatings.
20. ASTM A106 Pipe Specifications American Piping Products (2017)
American Piping Products Inc., USA.
21. PDO (2014) Petroleum Development Oman, magazine Almanhal.
22. Kundu S, Das SK, Sahoo P (2014) Properties of electroless nickel at
elevated temperature-a review. Procedia Eng 97: 1698-1706.

Crimson Publishers | Thermal Analysis of Oil Pipeline Coatings

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Crimson Publishers | Thermal Analysis of Oil Pipeline Coatings (20)

More from CrimsonPublishersRDMS (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Crimson Publishers | Thermal Analysis of Oil Pipeline Coatings