A multiphysics model for studying transient crevice corrosion of stainless steel

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2020.06.008

Abstract

Abstract:

The transient crevice corrosion behavior of 304 stainless steel in NaCl solution has been investigated by a multiphysics coupling model. The model considers local electrochemical reactions, transport of different species, and homogeneous reactions. The moving mesh method is used to obtain the geometrical change of the crevice wall with time due to corrosion. The level set method is employed to quantitatively describe the influence of the precipitation process on electrochemical reactions. The transient crevice corrosion morphology, potential and current distributions, and pH and chloride ion concentration distributions are obtained by simulation. The effect of crevice geometry factors on the corrosion process is also discussed. The simulation results are in good agreement with the experiments, showing that the model has high reliability.

Key words: Stainless steel, Crevice corrosion, Simulation, Multiphysics, Transient behavior

Jiawei Ding, Haitao Wang, En-Hou Han. A multiphysics model for studying transient crevice corrosion of stainless steel[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 60: 186-196.

Figures/Tables 14

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the crevice geometry. The coordinate of crevice opening, middle, and tip is (0,8), (0,4), (0,0), respectively.

Fig. 2. Flowchart showing the order of operations for the current model.

Table 1 Electrochemical parameters used in the model. The data comes from Ref. [16].

Definition	Value
Equilibrium potential (vs. SCE) of Fe oxidation	-0.684 V
Equilibrium potential (vs. SCE) of Cr oxidation	-0.988 V
Equilibrium potential (vs. SCE) of Ni oxidation	-0.494 V
Equilibrium potential (vs. SCE) of oxygen reduction	0.456 V
Exchange current density of Fe oxidation	2.7 × 10^-11 A/m²
Exchange current density of Cr oxidation	1.4 × 10^-8 A/m²
Exchange current density of Ni oxidation	1.67 × 10^-9 A/m²
Exchange current density of oxygen reduction	4.0 × 10^-9 A/m²
Tafel slope of Fe oxidation	0.040 V/decade
Tafel slope of Cr oxidation	0.102 V/decade
Tafel slope of Ni oxidation	0.126 V/decade
Tafel slope of oxygen reduction	0.145 V/decade

Table 2 Equilibrium constants of hydrolysis reactions used in the model. The data comes from Refs. [21,23,26].

No.	Chemical reaction	log10?K
1	Cr³⁺+H₂O↔Cr(OH)²⁺+H⁺	-3.8
2	Cr(OH)²⁺+H₂O↔Cr(OH)₂⁺+H⁺	-6.2
3	Cr(OH)₂⁺+H₂O↔Cr(OH)₃+H⁺	-6.2
4	Cr³⁺+Cl^-↔CrCl²⁺	-0.149
5	Cr³⁺+2Cl^-↔CrCl₂⁺	0.158
6	Fe²⁺+H₂O↔Fe(OH)⁺+H⁺	-8.3
7	Fe(OH)⁺+H₂O↔Fe(OH)₂+H⁺	-11.1
8	Fe²⁺+Cl^-↔FeCl⁺	-0.161
9	Fe²⁺+2Cl^-↔FeCl₂	-2.45
10	Ni²⁺+H₂O↔Ni(OH)⁺+H⁺	-9.5
11	Ni(OH)⁺+H₂O↔Ni(OH)₂+H⁺	-9.1
12	Ni²⁺+Cl^-↔NiCl⁺	-0.996
13	H₂O↔H⁺+OH^-	-14

Table 3 Diffusion coefficients for different species in the model. The data comes from Refs. [23,26].

No.	Species	Diffusion coefficient (10^-9 m²s^-1)
1	Cl^-	2.030
2	Na⁺	1.330
3	Cr³⁺	0.590
4	Cr(OH)²⁺	0.730
5	Cr(OH)₂⁺	0.770
6	Cr(OH)₃	0.820
7	CrCl²⁺	0.730
8	CrCl₂⁺	0.770
9	Fe²⁺	0.710
10	Fe(OH)⁺	0.750
11	Fe(OH)₂	0.780
12	FeCl⁺	0.750
13	FeCl₂	0.780
14	Ni²⁺	0.661
15	Ni(OH)⁺	0.730
16	Ni(OH)₂	0.780
17	NiCl⁺	0.730
18	OH^-	5.273
19	H⁺	9.311
20	O₂	1.980

Fig. 3. Deformation of the geometry of crevice predicted by the current model for 304 stainless steel. (a) Initial mesh distribution; (b) Mesh distribution at 90 h. The scale on the right is the state of mesh deformation.

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of crevice corrosion morphology and its polarization curve [41].

Fig. 5. Comparison of predicted potential (a) and current (b) distributions along the crevice at t = 90 h in the current model and in Wang et al.’s steady state model [16] for 304 stainless steel; (c) Potential distribution along the crevice at 1 h in DeForce’s experiment [40]; (d) Potential distribution along the crevice in Onishi et al.’s model [27].

Fig. 6. Precipitation porosity distribution along the crevice predicted by the current model for 304 stainless steel at t = 90 h.

Fig. 7. Comparison of predicted pH profile change with time in the current model and in Alavi et al.’s experiment [45] for 304 stainless steel at different locations (a) (0, 7), (b) (0, 4), (c) (0, 0.5) referring to the coordinate system in Fig. 1, and (d) pH distribution along the crevice at t = 90 h.

Fig. 8. Schematic showing the development of an active region over time for a passive system prior to crevice corrosion [46].

Fig. 9. Comparison of predicted Cl- concentration profile change with time in the current model and in Heppner et al.’s model [26] and Sharland’s model [21] for 304 stainless steel at different locations (a) (0, 7), (b) (0, 4), (c) (0, 0.5), and (d) Cl- concentration distribution along the crevice at t = 90 h.

Fig. 10. Potential (a) and current (b) distributions along the crevice predicted by the current model under different log10( r2/w) at 90 h.

Fig. 11. pH (a) and Cl- concentration (b) distributions along the crevice predicted by the current model under different log10( r2/w) at t = 90 h.

References 48

[1]	J.M. Zhan, M.C. Li, J.X. Huang, H.Y. Bi, Q. Li, H. Gu, Metals 9 (2019) 129-137.
[2]	F. Khodabakhshi, M.H. Farshidianfar, A.P. Gerlich, M. Nosko, V. Trembosová, A. Khajepour, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 756 (2019) 545-556.
[3]	B. Hashemi, M.R. Yazdi, V. Azar, Mater. Design 32 (2011) 3287-3292.
[4]	D.X. Chen, E.H. Han, X.Q. Wu, Corros. Sci. 111(2016) 518-530. DOI URL
[5]	H.W. Pickering, Corros. Sci. 29(1989) 325-341. DOI URL
[6]	J.N. Al-Khamis, H.W. Pickering, J. Electrochem. Soc. 148(2001) B314-B321.
[7]	A.M. Al-Zahrani, H.W. Pickering, Electrochim. Acta 50 (2005) 3420-3435.
[8]	B.A. Shaw, P.J. Moran, P.O. Gartland, Corros. Sci. 32(1991) 707-719.
[9]	T. Suzuki, M. Yamabe, Y. Kitamura, Corrosion 29 (1973) 70-74. DOI URL
[10]	Y.H. Lee, Z. Takehara, S. Yoshizawa, Corros. Sci. 21(1981) 391-397.
[11]	M.H. Peterson, T.J. Lennox, Corrosion 29 (1973) 406-412. DOI URL
[12]	B.F. Brown, C.T. Fujii, E.P. Dahlberg, J. Electrochem. Soc. 116(1969) 218-219.
[13]	R.D. Klassen, P.R. Roberge, C.V. Hyatt, Electrochim. Acta 46 (2001) 3705-3713.
[14]	E.Y. Na, J. Mater. Sci. 41(2006) 3465-3471.
[15]	E.Y. Na, J.Y. Ko, S.Y. Baik, Desalination 186 (2005) 65-74.
[16]	W. Wang, H.Y. Sun, L.J. Sun, Z.W. Song, B.N. Zang, Chem. Res. Chin. Univ. 26(2010) 822-828.
[17]	S.M. Sharland, P.W. Tasker, Corros. Sci. 28(1988) 603-620.
[18]	J.C. Walton, Corros. Sci. 30(1990) 915-928. DOI URL
[19]	D.T. Chin, G.M. Sabde, Corrosion 56 (2000) 783-793.
[20]	B. Vuillemin, R. Oltra, R. Cottis, D. Crusset, Electrochim. Acta 52 (2007) 7570-7576.
[21]	S.M. Sharland, Corros. Sci. 33(1992) 183-201.
[22]	M. Watson, J. Postlethwaite, Corrosion 46 (1990) 522-530. DOI URL
[23]	K. Yaya, Y. Khelfaoui, B. Malki, M. Kerkar, Corros. Sci. 53(2011) 3309-3314.
[24]	H.Y. Chang, Y.S. Park, W.S. Hwang, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 103(2000) 206-217.
[25]	G.F. Kennell, R.W. Evitts, K.L. Heppner, Corros. Sci. 50(2008) 1716-1725. DOI URL
[26]	K.L. Heppner, R.W. Evitts, J. Postlethwaite, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 80(2002) 857-864.
[27]	Y. Onishi, J. Takiyasu, K. Amaya, H. Yakuwa, K. Hayabusa, Corros. Sci. 63(2012) 210-224.
[28]	W. Sun, L.D. Wang, T.T. Wu, G.C. Liu, Corros. Sci. 78(2014) 233-243.
[29]	D. Höche, J. Electrochem. Soc. 162(2014) C1-C11.
[30]	J.W. Oldﬁeld, W.H. Sutton, Calcif. Tiss. Res. 13(2013) 13-22.
[31]	K.L. Heppner, R.W. Evitts, J. Postlethwaite, Can. J. Chem. Eng. 80(2002) 849-856.
[32]	J. Wu, H. Wang, X. Chen, P. Cheng, G.F. Ding, X.L. Zhao, Y. Huang, Electrochim. Acta 75 (2012) 94-100.
[33]	K.B. Deshpande, Corros. Sci. 52(2010) 3514-3522.
[34]	K.B. Deshpande, Electrochim. Acta 56 (2011) 1737-1745.
[35]	R. Duddu, J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 54(2014) 613-627.
[36]	B.P. Cai, Y.H. Liu, X.J. Tian, F. Wang, H. Li, R. Ji, Corros. Sci. 52(2010) 3235-3242.
[37]	M.I. Abdulsalam, Corros. Sci. 47(2005) 1336-1351. DOI URL
[38]	H.W. Pickering, K. Cho, E. Nystrom, Corros. Sci. 35(1993) 775-783.
[39]	J.S. Lee, M.L. Reed, R.G. Kelly, J. Electrochem. Soc. 151(2004) B423-B433.
[40]	M.I. Abdulsalam, H.W. Pickering, J. Electrochem. Soc. 145(1998) 2276-2284.
[41]	B.S. DeForce, Revisiting the Crevice Corrosion of Stainless Steel and Aluminum in Chloride Solutions-the Role of Electrode Potential, Ph.D. Thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, 2010.
[42]	M. Rossmann, A. Braeuer, S. Dowy, T. Gallinger, Gottfried , A. Leipertz, E. Schluecker, J. Supercrit. Fluid 66 (2012) 350-358.
[43]	B.J. Wang, D.K. Xu, S.D. Wang, L.Y. Sheng, R.C. Zeng, E.H. Han, Int. J. Fatigue 120 (2019) 46-55.
[44]	J.L. Meyer, E.D. Eanes, Calcif. Tiss. Res. 25(1978) 59-68.
[45]	A. Alavi, R.A. Cottis, Corros. Sci. 27(1987) 443-451.
[46]	A.M. Abdullah, The Pennsylvania State University, 2002.
[47]	J.C. Walton, G. Cragnolino, S.K. Kalandros, Corros. Sci. 38(1996) 1-18.
[48]	J.Y. Zuo, Z.Q. Jin, Chin. J. Chem. Eng. (1984) 126-136.