Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Surface & Coatings Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/surfcoat

Metallurgical assessment of critical defects in continuous hot dip galvanized

steel sheets
A. Azimi a,⁎, F. Ashrafizadeh b, M.R. Toroghinejad b, F. Shahriari c
a
Steel Institute, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 8415683111, Iran
b
Department of Materials Engineering, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan 8415683111, Iran
c
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Shiraz University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Development of hot dip zinc coated sheets in new applications increased demand for production of high
Received 17 January 2012 quality galvanized coatings, but the presence of surface defects reduces the quality of these products. In
Accepted in revised form 20 April 2012 order to alleviate the problem, one needs to know the extent to which the properties of a galvanized sheet
Available online 26 April 2012
are influenced by the presence of a given defect. In this paper, specimens including any of the four major
defects of continuously galvanized steel sheets produced in an industrial continuous process have been
Keywords:
Galvanized sheet defects
studied. The defects, including scratches, bare spots, pimples and wrinkle bands, were microstructurally
Scratches characterized and their influence on corrosion behavior of the coated sheet was evaluated. The defects,
Bare spots originating from insufficient cleaning procedure, improper quality of steel substrate or adhered metallic par-
Wrinkle bands ticles to the substrate surface, exert their main effects on corrosion resistance and surface quality. Corrosion
Pimples behavior was examined via standard salt spray test and polarization test. Based on the experimental results, it
was concluded that the corrosion resistance was influenced by severity of defects; bare spots reduced the
overall corrosion resistance of galvanized sheet by 39% ± 1% and pimples by 10% ± 1% as compared to defect
free specimens.
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction In fact, many coating defects are caused by poor surface quality of
the incoming strip [7]. Bare spots are areas on the product where
The most common commercial processing technique used to protect the zinc coating is missing and the steel substrate is exposed [8]. In
steel components in corrosive environments is hot-dip galvanizing some cases, they result from mechanical damage to the coating after
with various applications in iron and steel components [1,2]. Similar galvanizing and could be related to poor adhesion. More often, bare
to many other industrial products, continuously galvanized steel spots are areas where the substrate is not completely wetted by the
sheet is encountering challenges and threats from competing materials molten zinc in the galvanizing bath [8,9]. Insufficient cleaning of steel
and processes, as quality and performance and, at the same time, mini- substrate before immersing in the zinc pot is introduced as the main
mizing the cost are involved [3,4]. Hot-dip galvanized steel is now cause of bare spots [10].
being used in more demanding applications such as automotive body One of the common defects appearing as swelled spots on coated
panels, where any tiny blemish on the coating is objectionable for the steel sheets is known as furnace roll pimple; these defects cause
exposed surface [5]. Such defects damage the surface quality, leading rough regions on the surface of galvanized coatings [9–11]. A main
to downgrading the product where high surface quality is required. factor often leading to formation of pimples is the presence of parti-
A number of defects have been identified in hot dip galvanized cles in the coating; such particles are generally composed of dross
sheets and, some of them, are critical in terms of their influence on on the top of galvanizing bath. These are intermetallic compounds
sheet properties. Scratches are areas on the surface of galvanized [12] or snout dust containing vaporized zinc particles [13]. Outbursts
sheet grown from the thickness of coating that increase the roughness in inhibition layer can be another source of pimples due to the growth
of product. A rough substrate surface containing iron fines is prone of intermetallic compounds through the coating [14]. Wrinkle bands
to the development of outbursts in the coating [6]. A strip with a good are similar to wavy shape islands on the surface of coating that or-
surface quality is the pre-requisite for producing a good quality coating. dered in rolling direction. These regions can affect the surface quality
and corrosion performance of the coating. Such wavy patterns can be
confused with luders bands, but they are completely different in that
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: + 98 3113912778; fax: + 98 3113912588. luders bands on the material usually make a well-defined angle, typi-
E-mail address: arash.az.ms@gmail.com (A. Azimi). cally 50–55° from the specimen axis, as it moves down the sample

0257-8972/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.surfcoat.2012.04.062
 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383 4377

[15], however, there is no wavy pattern on the substrate in the case Table 2
of wrinkle bands. Typical production parameters for specimens.

Despite the fact that some defects have been identified during Specimen Coating Sheet Bath Galvanizing
recent years, studies on defects have mainly been limited to industrial thickness thickness temperature line speed
investigations including their origins as related to the galvanizing (μm) (mm) (°C) (m/min)

bath and the parameters that intensify the formation of defects. A Scratch 12 ± 1 0.5 460 ± 1 90
review of literature indicates that published work on the influence Bare spot 14 ± 1 0.7 460 ± 1 90
Pimple 12 ± 1 2 460 ± 1 48
of defects on corrosion behavior of the coated sheet is very scarce. It
Wrinkle band 14 ± 1 0.6 460 ± 1 90
is important to note that, in order to investigate the effect of defects
on corrosion resistance, identification of nature and origin of defects
is necessary. Therefore, in this research, the effects of such defects
on the metallurgical characteristics of continuous galvanized steel sheet; they grow from the thickness of the coating and increase the sur-
sheets have been assessed; the microstructural features of these face roughness. The defect usually takes place in the rolling direction
defects are presented, their influence on corrosion performance of and can form all around the sheet.
galvanized sheet is studied and the statistical data concerning the In Fig. 2(a), metallographic cross section of a typical scratch is
role of defects on severity of corrosion is discussed. shown. It can be observed that, the coating in scratch region is
swelled leading to an apparent increase in the coating thickness. Fur-
2. Experimental procedure thermore, there is a crater in the steel substrate beneath the swelled
region. In spite of the fact that the presence of crater on substrate
Samples from JIS G3302 hot-dip galvanized steel sheets produced by and a swelled area in the coating, simultaneously, can be the sign of
a local company were used for this investigation. The manufacturing embedded particle in the coating [11], there is no such a particle in
conditions including rolling finishing temperature, coiling temperature, this region. This means that embedded particle is not the essential
cold work percentage and annealing conditions were the same for all cause of this defect. According to Fig. 2(b), the coating is divided into
the specimens used in this study. The chemical composition of steel two layers of different colors after etching, probably due to different
substrate and zinc coating parameters are shown in Tables 1 and 2, re- compositions in these areas.
spectively. The chemical composition of the zinc bath was in the same Fig. 3 shows the SEM micrograph from the region observed in
range for all specimens. Fig. 2(b); the micrograph proved outburst phenomenon at the coating
Cross sections of the coatings were prepared by conventional substrate interface [18]. Table 3 shows the microanalysis of the
metallography method and examined by optical microscopy. The outburst and interface regions. Aluminum is an important alloying
specimens were etched in a solution containing 1% nitric acid in element added to zinc bath as an inhibitor that greatly slows down
amyl alcohol. For the observation of surface morphology, scanning the zinc–iron reaction rate by creating an inhibition layer at the
electron microscopy (SEM) was employed and the compositions of zinc–substrate interface and promoting coating adhesion; this is
defects were determined using energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) considered a key factor during forming of the galvanized sheet [1].
analysis. In order to remove the coating from the substrate and examine The high amounts of Fe and Al at the interface confirm the existence
the origin of defects, hydrochloric acid (HCl) with added inhibitor of inhibition layer. Such a layer inhibits the diffusion of Fe toward
(hexamethylenetetramine) was used. coating and the formation of Fe–Zn intermetallic layers [1,19]. When
Salt spray tests were carried out using a salt spray cabinet according the inhibition layer is destroyed or ruptured for some reasons, the
to ASTM B117 standard (5% NaCl solution at 35 °C) [16]. The number inter-diffusion of Fe and Zn is inevitable. The formation of outbursts
of hours to 5% red rust is one of the criteria for ranking the corrosion is the sign of instability or damage of the inhibition layer [20,21].
performance of metallic-coated steels in salt spray testing; this criterion Therefore, the amount of iron detected inside the outburst (about
has been used by several researchers [17] and was considered in this 4%) is related to diffusion of Fe into the coating and the condition
research. All tests were carried out at least 3 times for each specimen for the intermetallic formation. Fig. 4 reveals the appearance of the
to ensure the accuracy of the experimental findings. defect after removing the coating by acid solution; the scratches are
Polarization tests were performed to further investigate the corro- observed on the substrate surface. Accordingly, it can be stated that
sion behavior. The test was conducted in a 3% NaCl solution at room the scratches on the substrate appear as similar defects on the coating
temperature using a Parstat model 2273 electrochemical system. surface and, as mentioned before, these regions are potential sites to
The exposed area was 0.5 cm 2 in all specimens selected for polariza- produce intermetallic compounds. It has been reported that there is
tion tests. A standard corrosion cell kit with a working electrode, a higher reactivity inside the scratch surface on the steel substrate
two graphite counter electrodes, and an Ag/AgCl reference electrode that promotes iron diffusion [22]. The formation of intermetallic layers
were used. Potentiodynamic scanning was performed by stepping is, in effect, due to high reaction kinetics between molten zinc and
the potential at a scan rate of 1 mV/s from −250 to 350 mV. steel substrate, growing from the coating thickness and eventually
cause scratch defect [23].
3. Results and discussion Bare spots, i.e. areas on the surface without coating, may occur
anywhere on the surface of galvanized sheet with varying sizes.
3.1. Identification and analysis of defects Such areas usually appear on the coating as black crater (Fig. 5a).
Fig. 5b shows the SEM micrograph of a specimen with a bare spot
Fig. 1(a–d) shows the major defects of galvanized sheets including defect. The EDS results depicted considerable amount of iron and
a typical scratch, bare spot, pimple and wrinkle band, respectively. carbon within the defect area (Table 4). Similarly, in other specimens
Scratches appeared as both lines and spots on the surface of galvanized with bare spots, carbon was detected; carbon is considered a typical
surface contamination in this process. High percentage of iron and
lack of zinc are related to the fact that there is no coating material in-
Table 1 side the defect. Noting that all specimens were ultrasonically cleaned
Chemical composition of steel sheet substrate (wt.%). before SEM examination, the carbon percentage detected in defect
Grade %C %Si %Mn %P %S %Al N (ppm) Fe
area must be related to the steel substrate contamination. It is well
established that insufficient cleaning of the strip could result in poor
JIS G3302 0.033 0.009 0.207 0.012 0.008 0.051 0.059 Bal.
wettability of the molten zinc, leading to bare spots [8]. When the
4378 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383

Fig. 1. Major defects observed in galvanized steel sheet, (a) scratch, (b) bare spot, (c) pimple, and (d) wrinkle band.

strip is appropriately prepared to remove all kinds of contaminants, the crater between two dents that coating has an irregular shape
a metallically clean and chemically activated substrate surface is pro- on it. The existence of cavities on the surface of the substrate can
duced for defect free coating; failing to do so will result in the forma- be a sign of embedded particle in the coating similar to pimples.
tion of bare spots. However, as in Fig. 9(a), no external particle was detected in the
Pimples appeared as swelled areas on the surface of galvanized coating, instead, the micrograph confirmed an irregular shape of
sheet. Such defects have often been observed near the edge of galva- the coating that appeared as a delaminated or fractured layer in the
nized sheet, but they may extend to the center of the sheet. Optical defect region. According to EDS analysis, Zn was the main constituent
micrograph from the cross section of a pimpled specimen (Fig. 6) of the coating (99.8%) in this area. Therefore, it was concluded that
showed an embedded particle in the coating and results of EDS con- neither intermetallic layers nor metallic particles were the origin of
firmed that iron was the main constituent of the particle. Fig. 7(a) wrinkle bands.
depicts the appearance of a trapped particle in the zinc coating after Removing the coating by acid solution (Fig. 9b) confirmed the
removal of the layer by acid solution, and Fig. 7(b) shows the SEM presence of craters on the substrate surface ordered in the rolling
micrograph of the same particle after detachment. Two regions can direction. Although both wrinkle bands and scratch defects produce
be identified on the particle after detachment from the matrix; the craters on the substrate, they are not the same as scratches grow
white region is composed of almost pure zinc, while the dark region from the thickness of the coating and cause inflation in this region
is made of iron. According to Table 5, it was confirmed that the parti- whereas coating in the wrinkled area, does not show any growth on
cle was debris that has been embedded in the zinc coating. As can be its surface. The origin of the craters on the steel sheet is the printing
seen, coating removal leads to both depression marks on the surface sign of rolling scales or metallic particles that adhered to the surface
and particle adheres to the steel substrate. It can be inferred that of cold rolls. Such scales or particles produce depression marks on
the particle has been adhered to the surface of steel substrate because the surface of the sheet during application of rolling force. If sheets
of the pressing action of rolls in the zinc bath or the subsequent rolls. with printed signs enter to galvanizing line, wrinkle bands are gener-
The depressions, thus, were generated by pressing of particles onto ated in the final products. Formation of intermetallic layers mainly
the steel substrate. depends on the time that steel sheet is in the bath, in other words
Wrinkle bands were observed as bands in the rolling direction in the galvanizing line speed; the more the line speed, the less the
which coating formed wavy pattern and the uniformity of the coating formation of intermetallic layers. In the case of wrinkle bands, since
was spoiled. Such defects can occur mainly in the sheets with low they occur on the low thickness sheets, the line speed is considerably
thickness of base metal, generally between 0.4 mm and 0.6 mm. high, of the order of 90 m/min for sheets of 0.6 mm thickness. Under
Fig. 8(a) depicts a cross section of a specimen where the wrinkle such conditions, a crater acts as a small pool that is deeper than other
band is present. As can be seen, there is a crater on the defect area regions of substrate, thus it contains higher amounts of molten zinc
separated from other adjacent crater with a dent. Fig. 8(b) shows and, as a result, it will solidify later than other areas. When the sheet
 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383 4379

Table 3
EDS analysis of the outburst and the interface in scratch area (wt.%).

Element %Zn %Fe %Al %Cl

Outburst 0.033 0.009 0.207 0.012

Interface 27.76 65.60 5.81 0.83

like an anodic inhibitor, forming a passive layer, lowering the rate of

zinc dissolution and it is also an efficient cathodic inhibitor, lowering
the rate of the oxygen reduction reaction on the metal surface, avoiding
the formation of blisters [26]. Such properties could be significantly
improved by the addition of transition metal ions to the chromate
solution. These additives are the main factor improving homogeneity
and wettability of the chromate layer and, as a result, improve the cor-
rosion performance of the final coating [27]. Accordingly, depending
on chromate layer thickness and the type of additives, the corrosion
resistance can be controlled. As the concentration of chromate solution
can have significant influence on corrosion results, throughout this
work, the sheet samples were selected from coils of similar conditions
in terms of chromate process. It is important to note that, for each type
of defect, a batch was considered that contained 4 specimens from
4 coils of the same composition, coating thickness, and chemistry of
the galvanizing bath. Accordingly, the results obtained for sound and
defective specimens, must be compared for each batch, separately.
The results of salt spray tests indicated that the time to red rust
for sound specimens, in all batches, is in the range 170 to 240 h.
This rather wide range, caused by non-uniformities of the zinc coating
and chromate solution, etc., is considered acceptable for steel sheets.
Non-uniformities generally occur due to unbalanced air blowing
pattern in air knives as well as other variables in the hot dip galva-
nizing process [28].
Examination of many defective sheets showed that, on average,
they contained 15–30 bare spots, etc. per sample (15 cm × 25 cm). Ac-
cordingly, the specimens for salt spray tests were selected from such
areas to contain a similar number of defects on their surface; this
Fig. 2. (a) Optical micrograph from cross section of the scratch defect, (b) different
layers of the coating in defect area.
means 15–30 defects per specimen. This range was useful to deter-
mine the maximum reduction in corrosion resistance. Fig. 10 shows
the results of salt spray tests for specimens containing scratches com-
reaches to air knives, the zinc layer will solidify as a wavy pattern due pared to sound specimens in the same batch. From these results, it
to high pressure air blowing and wrinkle bands are generated. can be seen that the time to red rust is significantly reduced for
scratched specimens; the extent of reduction in corrosion resistance
varied from specimen to specimen. According to experimental data
3.2. Corrosion behavior
obtained in the present research, the maximum reduction in corro-
sion resistance, based on salt spray tests, was 108 h reduction in the
Although zinc coatings offer a good level of corrosion resistance
time to red rust. Fig. 11 shows specimen number 3 which includes
to steel sheets, in general practice, a chromate layer is added for
increased corrosion protection and further improvement in coating
performance [24,25]. The chromate layer has several functions: it acts

Fig. 3. Formation of outbursts in defect area. Fig. 4. Scratches on the surface of steel substrate after coating removal.
4380 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383

Fig. 6. Optical micrograph of a pimple on the cross section of a galvanized specimen

(etched).

Fig. 12 illustrates the typical results of polarization tests. The

scratches caused the curve to shift toward higher currents compared
with the sound specimen; the results show that at Ecorr = −9.8 mV,
the value of icorr is 3.7 μA for the scratched specimen as compared
to 1.9 μA for the sound specimen. The data are generally in good
agreement with the results of salt spray tests indicating that defects
caused a significant reduction in corrosion resistance of galvanized
steel sheet. As it is evident, the anodic branches are laid on each

Fig. 5. (a) Bare spots on the surface of galvanized sheet as black holes, (b) SEM micro-
graph of a bare spot.

several scratches after 50 h exposed in salt spray chamber. It is evi-

dent that the rust started from the scratch defects and propagated
to nearby regions that mean defect areas effectively weakened the
corrosion resistance of coating. Examination of the specimens after
coating removal indicated that number 3 had more scratches. The
concentration of defects is a key factor to reach the red rust faster;
the more the number of scratches, the shorter is the time to red
rust. As discussed before, excessive growth of coating in scratched
area is due to growth of intermetallic layers and, as a result, the pres-
ence of these layers decreased the corrosion resistance of galvanized
coating [29].
In order to measure the potentiodynamic behavior of a defect,
experimental areas were chosen from regions covered with 50% to
60% of the surface defect. Depending on their sizes, the number of
defects in the exposed area was between 1 and 3. Considering the
fact that the selected area was small and the major part of it was
covered by the defect, it can be stated that differences observed
in corrosion current densities between defective and sound polariza-
tion curves must be related to the potentiodynamic behavior of the
defects.

Table 4
EDS results of different regions of specimens with bare spot (wt.%).

Region %Zn %Fe %C %Cu %Ni %Si %Ca

Defect 17.29 68.91 4.57 6.55 0.96 0.16 1.55

Fig. 7. Pimple defect; (a) a particle appeared after coating removal, (b) SEM micro-
Sound coating 99.56 0.44 – – – – –
graph of the particle after detachment.
 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383 4381

Table 5
EDS analysis of different regions of the particle in Fig. 2b (wt.%).

Element %Zn %Fe

Region 1 100 –
Region 2 – 100

other and look very similar, whereas the cathodic branches show a
difference. This indicates that texture and surface morphology play
no significant role in the anodic dissolution of zinc coating, while
difference between the cathodic branches is due to the various ex-
change current densities of water reduction on the zinc coatings
[30]. Water reduction can be related to the existence of the defect
that provides a vulnerable surface for this phenomenon on its surface
and, as a result, leading to differences in cathodic branch.
As can be seen in Fig. 13, the time to red rust for specimens with
bare spot is much lower than that for sound specimens. The maxi-
mum reduction in corrosion resistance, based on the salt spray testing
of specimens with bare spots, was about 120 h reduction in the time
to red rust. For each coil, 3 sound specimens and 3 defective speci-
mens were examined, thus, from 4 coils in the batch, a total of 24
specimens were tested. For defective specimens, the criterion was
that 20% to 30% of the surface (about 15 to 30 defects by number)
was being covered by the defect. The severity of damage to corrosion
resistance depends on several factors including concentration of de-
fects, shape and size of bare spots. As the protection of steel by zinc

Fig. 9. (a) SEM micrograph from cross section of a wrinkle band, and (b) substrate
surface after coating removal.

coating is of galvanic type, Zn is consumed during exposure and,

thus, the more the amount of bare spots, the faster is the time to
red rust. The other factor was found to be related to the shape and
size of the bare spots; large bare spots are less susceptible to fast
red rust (Fig. 14) since a rather heavy chromate layer is deposited
on these defects. High concentration of chromium detected by micro-
analysis confirmed that chromate solution was gathered in large bare
spots and inhibited the red rust.
Results of the salt spray tests on pimples in Fig. 15 demonstrate
that in specimens 1 and 2 the presence of pimples had a significant

Fig. 8. Optical micrographs from cross section of wrinkle band, (a) irregular shape of
coating in defect area, and (b) presence of cavities on the surface of the substrate in
defect area. Fig. 10. The effect of scratches on hours to red rust in salt spray tests.
4382 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383

Fig. 14. A typical big size bare spot in specimen number 3.

Fig. 11. Surface appearance of specimen number 3 after 50 h exposure to salt spray test.

Fig. 15. The effect of pimples on hours to red rust in salt spray tests.

Fig. 12. The comparative polarization curves for the sound and defective specimens.
shift toward higher currents compared with the sound specimen.
The data show that at Ecorr = − 9.7 mV, the value of icorr for pimpled
effect on corrosion resistance of the galvanized sheet, whereas, in specimen is 2.5 μA compared to 1.8 μA for the sound specimen.
specimens 3 and 4 the time to red rust for pimpled specimens was These results are in good agreement with the results of salt spray
almost equal to that of the sound specimens. According to the experi- tests.
mental data obtained in this research, the maximum reduction in The results of salt spray tests in Fig. 17 show that the presence
corrosion resistance based on the salt spray tests, was 50 h reduction of wrinkle bands decreases the corrosion resistance of galvanized
in the time to red rust. The severity of damage to corrosion resistance sheet. The specimens were selected from areas of uniform chromate
is concerned with the fact that the concentration of chromate solution solution to eliminate this effect as a variable. Wavy pattern or uneven
is usually high near the edges of the sheet where the specimens were areas of wrinkle bands provide a vulnerable surface to corrosion. The
selected as pimple defects usually appeared in these areas. Since maximum reduction in corrosion resistance due to the presence of
chromium passivation has a strong effect on the corrosion behavior wrinkle bands was 72 h reduction in the time to red rust.
of galvanized sheets, the factor is likely to affect the corrosion resis-
tance more severely [24,31].
Fig. 16 illustrates the typical results of the polarization test for
a pimpled and a sound specimen. The pimples caused the curve to

Fig. 13. The effect of the bare spots on hours to red rust in salt spray tests. Fig. 16. The comparative polarization curves for the sound and defective specimens.
 A. Azimi et al. / Surface & Coatings Technology 206 (2012) 4376–4383 4383

3. The main source of pimple defect in continuous galvanized products

is iron particles or debris embedded in the coating. This could be
due to the presence of adhered particles to the surface of furnace
rolls or suspension particles in the zinc bath. The pressing action of
the zinc bath rollers on the adhered particles, then, produced depres-
sions of various sizes and shapes on the coated sheet surface.
4. Wrinkle bands originated from trapped molten zinc in the surface
gouges which formed as wavy pattern because they solidify slower
than other regions and air blowing can make the surface uneven.
5. Based on the results of salt spray tests, all four types of defects
decrease the corrosion resistance of galvanized steel sheets; the
highest average value of reduction belongs to bare spots with
39% ± 1% and the lowest average reduction is for pimple defect
with 10% ± 1%.
Fig. 17. The effect of wrinkle bands on hours to red rust in salt spray tests.
6. Increase in corrosion current density (icorr) in polarization tests was
observed for both pimpled and scratched specimens as an indication
Fig. 18 shows a comparison between the four types of defects of reduced corrosion resistance. These defects increased the corro-
studied in this research, based on the salt spray tests, in terms of sion current densities by 39% ± 0.6% and 94% ± 0.6%, respectively.
percentage of reduction in corrosion resistance. As can be seen, the 7. Bare spots decreased corrosion resistance as measured by the time
highest reduction in corrosion resistance is related to bare spots, to red rust from 240 to about 120 h and wrinkle bands reduced
and after that, scratches, wrinkle bands and pimples are observed. that by 72 h reduction in time to red rust.
In order to calculate the percentage of reduction in corrosion resis-
tance of each type of defect, it was necessary to calculate the average Acknowledgments
values for sound and defective specimens in that batch, separately.
Eq. (1) was employed to calculate the average values and percent The authors would like to acknowledge Mobarakeh Steel Compa-
reductions in corrosion resistance where TD is the average values for ny for providing samples of galvanized steel sheets and laboratory
a set of defective specimens and TS is the average values of a set of facilities.
sound specimens.
References
ððTD −TS Þ=TS Þ  100 ð1Þ
[1] A.R. Marder, Prog. Mater. Sci. 45 (2000) 191.
[2] M. Safaeirad, M.R. Toroghinejad, F. Ashrafizadeh, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 196
According to this calculation, it can be concluded that bare spots
(2008) 205.
exert the highest adverse effect on corrosion resistance of galvanized [3] D. Horstmann, Faults in Hot-dip Galvanizing, secound ed. G.m.b.H, Dusseldorf,
steel sheets whereas pimples had the lowest effect. 1983.
[4] G. Vourlias, N. Pistofidis, D. Chaliampalias, P. Patsalas, G. Stergioudis, D. Tsipas,
E.K. Polychroniadis, Surf. Coat. Technol. 200 (2006) 6594.
4. Conclusions [5] A. Ravi Shankar, U. Kamachi Mudali, B. Raj, Eng. Fail. Anal. 16 (2009) 2485.
[6] N.Y. Tang, ILZRO Project Report, Program ZCO-34, Report No. 1, 2000.
In order to evaluate the influence of major defects on the proper- [7] Y.W. Kim, S.C. Kung, W.C. Sievert, R. Patil, Proceedings of the Galvatech '89, Tokyo,
Japan, 1989, p. 120.
ties of hot dip galvanized steel sheets, selected specimens from a large [8] N.Y. Tang, F.E. Goodwin, Proceedings of the Galvatech '01, Dusseldorf, Germany,
number of continuous hot dip galvanized sheets were studied by 2001, p. 49.
SEM, microanalysis and corrosion testing. The conclusions from the [9] S. Srikanth, C.B. Sharma, A. Bhattacharyya, A. Ray, JFAP 5 (2005) 73.
[10] A. Azimi, F. Shahriari, F. Ashrafizadeh, M.R. Toroghinezhad, J. Jamshidi, AMR 445
present work are summarized below. (2012) 661.
[11] G. Vourlias, N. Pistofidis, G. Stergioudis, E.K. Polychroniadis, Solid State Sci. 7 (2005)
1. Scratches or gouges on the steel substrate are the main cause of 465.
scratches on the surface of galvanized sheets. In such areas, surface [12] N.Y. Tang, in: M.S. Jackson (Ed.), Proceedings of 91st Galvanizers Association
roughness of steel substrate causes instability in inhibition layer Meeting, 1999, p. 92.
[13] S. Shawki, Z. Abdel Hamid, Surf. Interface Anal. 35 (2003) 943.
and, as a result, with the growth of intermetallic layers, coating
[14] J.E. Arnold, Proceedings of Galvatech '89, Tokyo, Japan, 1989, p. 130.
thickness grows in defect region. [15] G. Ananthakrishna, Phys. Rep. 440 (2007) 113.
2. The main reason for bare spots is carbon contamination remained [16] Wear and erosion, metal corrosion, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 03.02,
1997.
on the surface of steel substrate due to insufficient cleaning. Con-
[17] H. Asgari, M.R. Toroghinejad, M.A. Golozar, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 198 (2008)
taminations reduce coating to substrate adhesion and result in 54.
bare spots. [18] C.E. Jordan, A.R. Marder, in: F.E. Goodwin (Ed.), Proceedings of the TMS Annual
Meeting, Zinc-based Steel Coating Systems: Production and Performance, TMS,
Warrendale, PA, 1998, p. 115.
[19] C.E. Jordan, A.R. Marder, J. Mater. Sci. 32 (1997) 5593.
[20] M. Urednicek, J.S. Kirkaldy, Z. MetaIlkd. 64 (1987) 649.
[21] C.E. Jordan, A.R. Marder, Met. Mater. Trans. 28A (1997) 2695.
[22] J.D. Culcasi, P.R. Seré, C.I. Elsner, A.R.D. Sarli, Surf. Coat. Technol. 122 (1999) 21.
[23] N.Y. Tang, in: F.E. Goodwin (Ed.), Proceedings of the TMS Annual Meeting, Zinc-
based Steel Coating Systems: Production and Performance, Warrendale, PA, USA,
1998, p. 3.
[24] Z. Mekhalif, L. Forget, J. Delhalle, Corros. Sci. 47 (2005) 547.
[25] B. Ramezanzadeh, M.M. Attar, M. Farzam, Surf. Coat. Technol. 205 (2010) 874.
[26] C. Gabrielli, M. Keddam, F. Minouflet-Laurent, K. Ogle, H. Perrot, Electrochim. Acta
48 (2003) 965.
[27] K.W. Cho, V.S. Rao, H. Kwon, Electrochim. Acta 52 (2007) 4449.
[28] H.G. Yoon, G.J. Ahn, S.J. Kim, M.K. Chung, ISIJ Int. 49 (11) (2009) 1755.
[29] H. Asgari, M.R. Toroghinejad, M.A. Golozar, ISIJ Int. 48 (5) (2008) 628.
[30] S. Khorsand, K. Raeissi, M.A. Golozar, Corros. Sci. 53 (2011) 2676.
[31] S.L. Manchet, J. Landoulsi, C. Richard, D. Verchère, Surf. Coat. Technol. 205 (2010)
Fig. 18. Comparative results of reduction in corrosion resistance for various defects. 475.