Corrosion Science and Technology

The Corrosion Science Society of Korea (한국부식방식학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of hydrogen embrittlement resistance between 2205 duplex stainless steels and type 316L austenitic stainless steels under the cathodic applied potential

음극 인가전위 하에서 type 2205과 type 316L의 수소취성 저항성

  • Seo, Dong-Il (School of Advanced Materials Engineering, Kookmin University) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Bong (School of Advanced Materials Engineering, Kookmin University)
  • 서동일 (국민대학교 공과대학 신소재 공학부) ;
  • 이재봉 (국민대학교 공과대학 신소재 공학부)
  • Received : 2016.09.28
  • Accepted : 2016.10.25
  • Published : 2016.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

2205 duplex stainless steels have been used for the construction of the marine environment, because of their excellent corrosion resistance and high strength. However, the resistance to hydrogen embrittlement (HE) may be less than that of 316L austenitic stainless steel. The reason why 316L stainless steels have better resistance to HE is associated with crystal structure (FCC, face centered cubic) and the higher stacking faults energy than 2205 duplex stainless steels. Furthermore 2205 stainless steels with or without tungsten were also examined in terms of HE. 2205 stainless steels containing tungsten is less resistible to HE. It is because dislocation tangle was formed in 2205 duplex stainless steels. Slow strain-rate tensile test (SSRT) was conducted to measure the resistance to HE under the cathodic applied potential. Hydrogen embrittlement index (HEI) was used to evaluate HE resistance through the quantitative calculation.

Keywords

References

  1. M. C. Young, S. L. I. Chan, Mater. Chem. Phys., 91, 21 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2004.10.042
  2. D. M. Bromley, Ph. D. Thesis, p. 5, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver (2008).
  3. J. Michalska, J. Labanowski, J. Cwiek, Mater, Sci. Eng., 35, 1 (2012).
  4. Z. Jingwei, J. Zhengyi, Corros. Sci., 82, 380 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2014.01.042
  5. K. Alfons H. M, Metall. Mater. Trans. B, 31, 1475 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11663-000-0032-0
  6. ASTM Standard E8/E8M, Standard Test Methods for Tensile Testing of Metallic Materials (2009).
  7. ASTM Standard G129, Slow Strain Rate Testing to Evaluate the Susceptibility of Metallic Materials to Environmentally Assisted Cracking (2013).
  8. L. Erik, springer sci. & business media, 1, 133 (2012).
  9. W. Songqing, Ph. D. Thesis, Metallurgical Evaluation of Cast Duplex Stainless Steels and Their Weldments, p. 12, University of Tennessee - Knoxville (2001).
  10. G. Almaida, Mater & Tech., 46, 519 (2012).
  11. S. M. Teus, V. N. Shyvanyuk, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 497, 290 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2008.07.003