Why are civil engineers responsible for cathodic protection?

It would seem that electrical engineers would design cathodic protection systems. However, it has been my experience that civil engineers do this
work on the trans-Alaska pipeline and at the Valdez marine terminal. The Canadian electrical Code contains an article on Cathodic Protection that covers mainly identifying these systems so they are not confused with grounding systems. There was a proposal to add a cathodic protection article to the National Electrical Code a few cycles ago, but it was rejected.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I do not know just what the codes, union rules, or any of the formal legal stuff is. Cathodic protection should be practiced by someone who understands it. My guess is that, all other things being equal, an electrochemist will understand it best.
It is not difficult to understand the fundamentals. Having experience and judgement is not always easy to achieve.
Bill
--
Private Profit; Public Poop! Avoid collateral windfall!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Electricians perform work on impressed current systems where rectifiers are used, but labors do the work on the passive galvanic systems. The importance of these systems to prevent leaks is of utmost when trying to protect crude tanks and pipelines that contain and transport millions of gallons. While working at the Red Dog mine Port Site near Kotzebue, Alaska an impressed current system used to protect the steel at a loading dock was connected in reverse. Strangely, a bouy chain about 2 miles away in the Chuckchi Sea was eaten in two in a matter of weeks. It would seem that the NEC should contain rules to insure that these systems are tested after completion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In article

Is there any evidence, other that two things happened concurrently (no pun intended), that the bad protection job had anything to do with the chain? It boggles the mind.
Bill
--
Private Profit; Public Poop! Avoid collateral windfall!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Salmon Egg wrote:

Wandering off into an aside, once more:
I was in a marina office when a yacht owner came in complaining furiously about the slipshod work of the marina staff who had done his anti-fouling. They had missed bits of the hull, entirely. He wanted them sacked and for the whole job to be done again.
The marina managed went with the customer to check and came back laughing a few minutes later - the "bits of hull that were missed" were, of course, the sacrificial anodes..
-- Sue
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
blue_collar_worker wrote:

In general, a civil engineer would be responsible for building structures and the like, and how to maintain them. And that's the purpose of cathodic protection, to protect the structure from galvanic corrosion created by dissimilar metals in a moist environment like dirt or seawater.
It's my understanding that NEC deals with the safe use of electricity, not so much the protection of structural metal components.
FWIW,
daestrom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
daestrom wrote:

It would not be out of place for the NEC to address wiring methods used and any possible safety issues with systems that impose currents and potentials on grounded conductors and grounding systems.
But the design of cathodic protection to ensure that it functions as intended should be the responsibility of the structural folks.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto: snipped-for-privacy@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

The purpose of the NEC is the practical safeguarding of persons and property from the hazards arising from the use of electricity. The property protection is generally presumed to be from fires cause by electricity. In my opinion, this scope should be expanded to include environmental protection since an improperly connected cathodic protection system can cause very serious environmental damage when oil pipelines and crude oil storage tanks are included. While working at the Valdez Marine Terminal on the Trans- Alaska pipeline we were often trying to determines if conductors were catholic protection conductors or grounding conductors. This facility has over 14 miles of cable tray and a very elaborate cathodic protection system.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.