HIC and SSC Behavior of High-Strength Pipeline Steels

doi:10.1007/s40195-015-0257-1

Abstract

Abstract:

In this study, hydrogen-induced cracking (HIC) and sulfide stress corrosion cracking (SSC) behaviors of high-strength pipeline steels in four different strength grades (X70, X80, X90 and X100) with the microstructure of acicular ferrite were estimated. The results showed that both of X70 and X80 steels exhibited better HIC resistance, and their susceptibility to HIC increased with the strength grade. HIC parameters, including cracking length ratio, cracking thickness ratio (CTR) and cracking sensitivity ratio, were all increased, and among these, the CTR increased most, with the increase in the strength grade. HIC was found to initiate and grow along the hard boundaries such as large size martensite/austenite (M/A) islands and bainitic ferrite. In addition, the density of hydrogen-induced blister on the steel surface was increased with the decrease in pH value for the same-grade pipeline steels. SSC susceptibilities of X80, X90 and X90-C were revealed to subsequently decrease, which was related to the large size M/A islands.

Key words: Hydrogen-induced, cracking, Sulfide, stress, corrosion, cracking, High-strength, pipeline, steel, Martensite/austenite, island, (M/A)

Xian-Bo Shi, Wei Yan, Wei Wang, Lian-Yu Zhao, Yi-Yin Shan, Ke Yang. HIC and SSC Behavior of High-Strength Pipeline Steels[J]. Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), 2015, 28(7): 799-808.

Figures/Tables 15

References 32

[1]	M.A. Al-Anezi, G.S. Frankel, A.K. Agrawal, Corrosion 55, 1101 (1999)
[2]	K.T. Corbett, R.R. Bowen, C.W. Petersen,Int. J. Offshore Polar Eng. 14, 75(2004)
[3]	C. Mendibide, T. Sourmail,Corros. Sci. 51, 2795(2009)
[4]	M.C. Zhao, Y.Y. Shan, Y.H. Li, K. Yang,Acta Metall. Sin. 37, 1087(2001). (in Chinese)
[5]	M.C. Zhao, Y.Y. Shan, F.R. Xiao, K. Yang, Y.H. Li,Mater. Lett. 57, 141(2002)
[6]	S.U. Koh, H.G. Jung, K.B. Kang, G.T. Park, K.Y. Kim, Corrosion 64, 574 (2008)
[7]	G.T. Park, S.U. Koh, H.G. Jung, K.Y. Kim,Corros. Sci. 50, 1856(2008)
[8]	B. Beidokhti, A. Dolati, A.H. Koukabi, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 507, 167 (2009)
[9]	S.S. Nayaka, R.D.K. Misra, J. Hartmann, F. Siciliano, J.M. Gray, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 494, 456 (2008)
[10]	Z. Shen, Y.H. Li, Y.Y. Shan, K. Liu, K. Yang,Acta Metall. Sin. 44, 215(2008). (in Chinese)
[11]	D. Hardie, E.A. Charles, A.H. Lopez,Corros. Sci. 48, 4378(2006)
[12]	M.A. Arafina, J.A. Szpunar, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 528, 4927 (2011)
[13]	F. Huang, J. Liu, Z.J. Deng, J.H. Cheng, Z.H. Lu, X.G. Li, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527, 6997 (2010)
[14]	S.W. Thompson, D.J. Colvin, G. Krauss, Metall. Trans. A 21, 1493 (1990)
[15]	F.R. Xiao, B. Liao, D.L. Ren, Y.Y. Shan, K. Yang,Mater. Charact. 54, 305(2005)
[16]	W. Wang, Y.Y. Shan, K. Yang,Acta Metall. Sin. 43, 578(2007). (in Chinese)
[17]	W. Wang, Y.Y. Shan, K. Yang, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 502, 38 (2009)
[18]	M.C. Zhao, K. Yang, Y.Y. Shan, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 34, 1089 (2003)
[19]	I. Chattoraj, Sadhana 20, 199 (1995)
[20]	A. Traidia, M. Alfano, G. Lubineau, S. Duval, A. Sherik, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 37, 16214 (2012)
[21]	M. Al-Mansour, A.M. Alfantazi, M. El-boujdaini, Mater. Des. 30, 4088(2009)
[22]	D. Hejazi, A.J. Hap, N. Yazdipour, D.P. Dunne, A. Calka, F. Barbaro, E.V. Pereloma, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 551, 40 (2012)
[23]	C.A. Zapffe, C.E. Sims,Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Metall. Pet. Eng. 145, 225(1941)
[24]	M.C. Zhao, K. Yang,Scr. Mater. 52, 881(2005)
[25]	J.H. Chen, Y. Kikuta, T. Araki, M. Yoneda, Y. Matsuda,Acta Metall. 32, 1779(1984)
[26]	R.M. Ale, J.M.A. Rebello, J. Charlier, Mater. Charact. 37, 89(1996)
[27]	W.K. Kim, S.U. Koh, B.Y. Yang, K.Y. Kim,Corros. Sci. 50, 3336(2008)
[28]	R.W. Revie, V.S. Sastri, G.R. Hoey, R.R. Ramsingh, D.K. Mak, M.T. Shehata, Corrosion 49, 17 (1993)
[29]	T. Hara, H. Asahi, H. Ogawa, Corrosion 60, 1113 (2004)
[30]	Z.Y. Liu, C.W. Du, X. Zhang, F.M. Wang, X.G. Li, Acta Metall. Sin. 26, 489 (2013). (Engl. Lett.)
[31]	J. Kittel, V. Smanio, M. Fregonese,Corros. Sci. 52, 1386(2010)
[32]	G.T. Park, S.U. Koh, H.G. Jung, K.Y. Kim,Corros. Sci. 50, 1856(2008)

Steel	C	Si	Mn	S	P	Mo	Cu	Cr	Ni	Al	Nb + V+Ti	Fe
X70	0.032	0.14	0.81	0.0017	0.0050	0.11	0.18	0.30	0.11	0.055	0.092	Bal.
X80	0.046	0.14	1.53	0.0014	0.0050	0.20	0.31	0.30	0.10	0.061	0.132	Bal.
X90	0.046	0.10	1.68	0.0013	0.0050	0.19	0.30	0.29	0.20	0.031	0.117	Bal.
X90-C	0.050	0.19	1.77	0.0016	0.0076	0.24	0.0086	0.30	0.016	0.038	0.089	Bal.
X100	0.046	0.10	1.91	0.0013	0.0050	0.29	0.29	0.30	0.50	0.038	0.138	Bal.

Steel	C	Si	Mn	S	P	Mo	Cu	Cr	Ni	Al	Nb + V+Ti	Fe
X70	0.032	0.14	0.81	0.0017	0.0050	0.11	0.18	0.30	0.11	0.055	0.092	Bal.
X80	0.046	0.14	1.53	0.0014	0.0050	0.20	0.31	0.30	0.10	0.061	0.132	Bal.
X90	0.046	0.10	1.68	0.0013	0.0050	0.19	0.30	0.29	0.20	0.031	0.117	Bal.
X90-C	0.050	0.19	1.77	0.0016	0.0076	0.24	0.0086	0.30	0.016	0.038	0.089	Bal.
X100	0.046	0.10	1.91	0.0013	0.0050	0.29	0.29	0.30	0.50	0.038	0.138	Bal.

Steel	Temperature of different rolling steps denoted by interpass reduction							Cooling rate (°C/s)	Final cooling temperature (°C)
Steel	80-60 mm (°C)	60-45 mm (°C)	45-30 mm (°C)	30-24 mm (°C)	24-16 mm (°C)	16-11 mm (°C)	11-8 mm (°C)	Cooling rate (°C/s)	Final cooling temperature (°C)
X70	1090	1045	986	909	850	841	815	16	430
X80	1100	1056	1000	892	854	800	772	15	300
X90	1079	1046	987	890	835	800	750	20	-
X100	1092	1005	960	907	837	780	725	28	-

Steel	Temperature of different rolling steps denoted by interpass reduction							Cooling rate (°C/s)	Final cooling temperature (°C)
Steel	80-60 mm (°C)	60-45 mm (°C)	45-30 mm (°C)	30-24 mm (°C)	24-16 mm (°C)	16-11 mm (°C)	11-8 mm (°C)	Cooling rate (°C/s)	Final cooling temperature (°C)
X70	1090	1045	986	909	850	841	815	16	430
X80	1100	1056	1000	892	854	800	772	15	300
X90	1079	1046	987	890	835	800	750	20	-
X100	1092	1005	960	907	837	780	725	28	-

Steel	YS (MPa)	UTS (MPa)	Ratio of YS/UTS	Elongation (%)	Impact toughness (J)
X70	491	563	0.87	25.0	106^a
X80	620	720	0.86	23.5	116^a
X90	657	729	0.90	23.5	116^a
X90-C	690	726	0.95	20	57^b
X100	698	922	0.76	21.5	104^a