Server maintenance is scheduled for Saturday, December 21st between 6am-10am CST.
During that time, parts of our website will be affected until maintenance is completed. Thank you for your patience.
Use GIVING24 at checkout to save 20% on eCourses and books (some exclusions apply)!
Metallic corrosion is a natural inevitable phenomenon defined commonly as the deterioration of metals due to reactions with their environments. The global cost of corrosion estimated by NACE in 2013 was found to be $2.5 trillion (USD), which is approximately 3.4% of the global gross domestic product (GDP). The two-year global study released at the CORROSION 2016 conference in Vancouver, B.C., Canada, assessed the economics of corrosion and the role of corrosion management in establishing best practices for the different industrial sectors. It found that implementing corrosion prevention best practices could result in global annual savings of 15-35 % of the cost of damage, which is equivalent to $375-875 billion (USD). These estimations excluded the cost of individual safety and environmental consequences from corrosion. Corrosion mitigation has been extensively researched. The methods of corrosion prevention include, but are not limited to, selection of the right material of construction, coatings, corrosion inhibitors, and cathodic protection.1,2
Current standard test methodologies used in determining the presence of vapor inhibition ability of the different volatile corrosion inhibitors are qualitative and limited in their ability to differentiate between the anticorrosive effect of inhibitor in liquid and powder. They also have intrinsic limitation in their applicability to determine the ability of the different volatile corrosion inhibitors in reducing active corrosion rate providing protection to pre-corroded ferrous metals. The aforementioned limitations raise the need to look for other methods for rapid and quantitative evaluation for this class of corrosion inhibitors. In this study, coupled multi array sensor technology was evaluated for its ability to overcome these limitations. The results obtained showed the ability of this technology to provide consistent and repeatable results, differentiate quantitatively between the anti-corrosive effects of the different VCI materials Indicate performance differences between VCI in powder versus liquid forms in VIA testing environment, and determine VCI materials that can reduce active corrosion rate and provide protection to pre-corroded surfaces
Various austenitic stainless steels such as UNS S30409, S31609, S32109 and 34709 are widely used in complex refinery or chemical plants at temperature ranges between 550°C and 950°C. However, Stress Relaxation Cracking (SRC) in welded joints or cold deformed parts has been a serious problem during fabrication or operation. Several researches were conducted to construct SRC test methods. This included the evaluation of SRC susceptibilities among various austenitic stainless steels and to determine SRC mechanism within TNO Science and Industry or JIP1-4. It was concluded that SRC was caused by the accommodation of strain due to both carbide/nitride precipitation hardening inhibiting dislocation movement and the formation of precipitation free zone along the M23C6 carbide at grain boundary during stress relaxation process of welding residual stresses at temperatures between 550°C and 750°C.
We are unable to complete this action. Please try again at a later time.
If this error continues to occur, please contact AMPP Customer Support for assistance.
Error Message:
Please login to use Standards Credits*
* AMPP Members receive Standards Credits in order to redeem eligible Standards and Reports in the Store
You are not a Member.
AMPP Members enjoy many benefits, including Standards Credits which can be used to redeem eligible Standards and Reports in the Store.
You can visit the Membership Page to learn about the benefits of membership.
You have previously purchased this item.
Go to Downloadable Products in your AMPP Store profile to find this item.
You do not have sufficient Standards Credits to claim this item.
Click on 'ADD TO CART' to purchase this item.
Your Standards Credit(s)
1
Remaining Credits
0
Please review your transaction.
Click on 'REDEEM' to use your Standards Credits to claim this item.
You have successfully redeemed:
Go to Downloadable Products in your AMPP Store Profile to find and download this item.
Industrial usage of Plasma Electrolytic Oxidation (PEO) has grown consistently in recent years, thanks to the improved characteristics imparted to the oxide film in terms of surface adhesion, hardness, crystallinity, uniformity, and corrosion resistance. The metallic substrate is not subjected to elevated temperature and the overall equipment complexity is relatively simple, making the technique a good candidate for surface functionalization. In PEO treatments, high voltages are employed (~ 150-750 V 1) allowing for the formation of an insulating, or at least semiconductive, oxide layer that’s limits ion transport responsible for the initial coating growth. Beyond the spark voltage (prerequisite the enter the PEO regime) oxidation does not occur only as the result of a continuous flow of ions but rather it takes place after the cooling of a plasma discharge.
Traditional solutions for the chemical passivation of stainless steel are nitric acid based, with the addition of sodium dichromate as an inhibitor for precipitation hardened and free machining stainless steels. These passivation chemistries are difficult to handle from an environmental health and safety point of view, particularly the dichromate inhibited versions. Citric acid passivation has been pursued as a replacement for both nitric acid and inhibited nitric acid based chemistries for many years, and has been incorporated into consensus specifications such as ASTM A967 and SAE AMS2700.