Interaction between sulfate-reducing bacteria and aluminum alloys—Corrosion mechanisms of 5052 and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloys

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2019.07.009

Abstract

Abstract:

Microbiologically influenced corrosion caused by sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) poses a serious threat to marine engineering facilities. This study focused on the interaction between the corrosion behavior of two aluminum alloys and SRB metabolic activity. SRB growth curve and sulfate variation with and with aluminum were performed to find the effect of two aluminum alloys on SRB metabolic activity. Corrosion of 5052 aluminum alloy and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy with and without SRB were performed. The results showed that both the presence of 5052 and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy promoted SRB metabolic activity, with the Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy having a smaller promotion effect compared with 5052 aluminum alloy. The electrochemical results suggested that the corrosion of the Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy was accelerated substantially by SRB. Moreover, SRB led to the transformation of Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy corrosion product from Al(OH)₃ to Al₂S₃ and NaAlO₂.

Key words: Aluminum alloy, Sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB), Electrochemical behavior, Corrosion

Fang Guan, Jizhou Duan, Xiaofan Zhai, Nan Wang, Jie Zhang, Dongzhu Lu, Baorong Hou. Interaction between sulfate-reducing bacteria and aluminum alloys—Corrosion mechanisms of 5052 and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloys[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2020, 36: 55-64.

Figures/Tables 20

Table 1 Chemical compositions of 5052 aluminum alloy (wt%).

Si	Fe	Cu	Mn	Mg	Zn	Cr	Al
0.25	0.4	0.1	0.1	0.4	0.1	0.15	Balance

Table 2 Chemical compositions of Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy (wt%).

Zn	In	Cd	Si	Fe	Cu	Al
2.5-4.5	0.018-0.05	0.005-0.02	﹤0.1	﹤0.15	﹤0.01	Balance

Fig. 1. Sulfate variation in SRB medium over time (t) in different conditions.

Fig. 2. Eocp values obtained from 5052 aluminum alloy and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy as a function of time in the culture media with and without SRB.

Fig. 3. Nyquist plots of the measured (symbols) and fitted data (lines) for 5052 aluminum alloy in SRB culture solution (a), and Al-Zn-In-Cd in sterile (b) and SRB media (c) for 15 days.

Fig. 4. Bold plots of the measured (symbols) and fitted data (lines) for 5052 aluminum alloy in SRB medium (a) and Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys specimens in sterile (b) and SRB (c) media.

Fig. 5. Equivalent circuits proposed for 5052 aluminum alloy and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy in SRB culture media.

Fig. 6. Equivalent circuits proposed for Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy in sterile medium for the first day (a) and the other days (b).

Table 3 Electrochemical parameters of the 5052 aluminum alloy sample in SRB medium.

Time (day)	R_s (Ω cm²)	Q_f (F cm^-2)	n_f	R_f (Ω cm²)	Q_dl (F cm^-2)	n	R_ct (Ω cm²)
1	6.39	9.94 × 10^-6	0.92	2007	1.85 × 10^-5	0.64	8.19 × 10⁴
3	6.09	8.49 × 10^-6	0.90	2095	2.33 × 10^-5	0.64	2.00 × 10⁵
5	6.20	7.89 × 10^-6	0.89	3035	2.86 × 10^-5	0.65	4.89 × 10⁵
7	5.81	7.75 × 10^-6	0.89	2988	3.07 × 10^-5	0.65	6.47 × 10⁵
9	6.44	7.90 × 10^-6	0.87	3596	2.93 × 10^-5	0.65	1.30 × 10⁶
10	6.28	8.64 × 10^-6	0.85	4824	2.79 × 10^-5	0.67	1.30 × 10⁶
13	6.94	9.23 × 10^-6	0.84	4949	2.80 × 10^-5	0.67	1.28 × 10⁶
15	7.79	9.17 × 10^-6	0.83	5145	2.83 × 10^-5	0.68	4.40 × 10⁵

Table 4 Electrochemical parameters of the Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy sample in sterile medium.

Time (day)	R_s (Ω cm²)	Q_f (F cm^-2)	n_f	R_f (Ω cm²)	L_pit (H cm²)	R_pit (Ω cm²)	Q_dl (F cm^-2)	n	R_ct (Ω cm²)
1	3.93	8.03 × 10^-6	0.90	300.0	9355	826.6	8.06 × 10^-5	0.72	1503
3	6.221	1.18 × 10^-5	0.89	537.4			8.77 × 10^-5	0.62	2843
5	5.54	1.18 × 10^-5	0.89	659.1			6.96 × 10^-5	0.59	4487
7	5.46	1.15 × 10^-5	0.90	604.3			6.04 × 10^-5	0.55	5589
9	5.29	1.11 × 10^-5	0.91	516.5			5.25 × 10^-5	0.55	6029
10	5.32	1.24 × 10^-5	0.90	862.3			5.14 × 10^-5	0.56	6673
13	5.23	1.10 × 10^-5	0.91	509.7			4.38 × 10^-5	0.56	6938
15	5.43	1.18 × 10^-5	0.90	783.3			4.51 × 10^-5	0.55	8096

Table 5 Electrochemical parameters of the Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy sample in SRB medium.

Time (day)	R_s (Ω cm²)	Q_f (F cm^-2)	n_f	R_f (Ω cm²)	Q_dl (F cm^-2)	n	R_ct (Ω cm²)
1	3.484	7.25 × 10^-6	0.9386	639.5	7.08 × 10^-5	0.5968	4866
3	2.649	5.94 × 10^-6	0.9269	342.8	4.37 × 10^-5	0.6849	4455
5	2.415	4.83 × 10^-6	0.9413	193.9	6.64 × 10^-5	0.6370	4891
7	2.272	4.74 × 10^-6	0.9386	184.6	1.07 × 10^-4	0.5768	3273
9	2.185	4.42 × 10^-6	0.9427	170.5	1.06 × 10^-4	0.5712	2054
10	2.491	5.03 × 10^-6	0.9292	193.0	1.14 × 10^-4	0.5784	1897
13	2.603	5.91 × 10^-6	0.9097	203.9	1.67 × 10^-4	0.5270	2482
15	2.682	6.46 × 10^-6	0.8991	230.1	1.81 × 10^-4	0.5136	3894

Fig. 7. Polarization curves with a scan rate of 0.1 mV s-1 of 5052 aluminum alloy and Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys exposed to media with and without SRB (i: current density).

Table 6 Tafel parameters of the 5052 and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy specimens exposed to media with and without SRB (ba: Tafel slope of the anodic curve; bc: Tafel slope of the cathodic curve).

Condition	5052Al with SRB	Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys with SRB	Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys without SRB
I_corr (nA cm^-2)	63.1	9157	3952
E_corr(mV vs SCE)	-820.9	-965.5	-994.9
b_a (mV dec^-1)	191.5	50.24	49.1
b_c (mV dec^-1)	142.6	221.3	150.0

Fig. 8. SEM images of 5052 aluminum alloy in SRB medium (a) and Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys specimens (b) in sterile (c, d) and SRB (e, f) media.

Fig. 9. Surface morphologies of 5052 aluminum alloy in SRB medium (a) and Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys specimens in sterile (b) and SRB (c) media after removing corrosion products.

Fig. 10. Wide XPS spectra for surface of 5052 and Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloys exposed to sterile and SRB media for 15 days.

Fig. 11. Al 2p spectra of 5052 aluminum alloy in SRB medium (a) and Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys specimens in sterile (b) and SRB (c) media for 15 days.

Table 7 Results of XPS for different Al-positions on the 5052 Al alloy and Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys specimen surface in sterile and SRB medium (%).

Energy (eV)	Element	5052Al with SRB	Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys without SRB	Al-Zn-In-Cd alloys with SRB
75.4	AlOOH	0.39	0.22	0.15
74.9	Al₂O₃	0.15	0.31	0.05
74.4	Al₂S₃	0.23		0.13
73.6	Al(OH)₃	0.24	0.22	0.06
72	Al		0.13
76.0	Al₂O₃		0.12	0.37
73.05	NaAlO₂			0.24

Fig. 12. Schematic of the corrosion mechanism for the Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum alloy in sterile culture medium.

Fig. 13. Schematic of the corrosion mechanism for the Al-Zn-In-Cd aluminum in SRB medium.

References

[1]	Y. Li, D. Xu, C. Chen, X. Li, R. Jia, D. Zhang, W. Sand, F. Wang, T. Gu, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 34 (2018) 1713-1718.
[2]	R. Jia, T. Unsal, D. Xu, Y. Lekbach, T. Gu, Int. Biodeterioration Biodeg. 137 (2019) 42-58.
[3]	L.L. Barton, Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1995.
[4]	S. Chen, P. Wang, D. Zhang, Corros. Sci. 87 (2014) 407-415.
[5]	S. Chen, P. Wang, D. Zhang, Corros. Sci. 87 (2014) 407-415.
[6]	D. Enning, J. Garrelfs, Appl. Environ. Microb. 80 (2014) 1226-1236.
[7]	M. Lv, M. Du, Rev. Environ. Sci. Bio/Technol. 17 (2018) 431-446.
[8]	H.T. Dinh, J. Kuever, M. Muszmann, A.W. Hassel, M. Stratmann, F. Widdel, Nature 427 (2004) 829-832.
[9]	V.I.G. Kueher, Water 18 (1934) 147-165.
[10]	J.A. Hardy, Brit. Corros. J. 18 (1983) 190-193.
[11]	R. Cord-Ruwisch, F. Widdel, Appl. Microb. Biotechnol. 25 (1986) 169-174.
[12]	T. Gu, R. Jia, T. Unsal, D. Xu, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 35 (2019) 631-636.
[13]	B.W.A. Sherar, I.M. Power, P.G. Keech, S. Mitlin, G. Southam, D.W. Shoesmith, Corros. Sci. 53 (2011) 955-960.
[14]	R. Jia, J.L. Tan, P. Jin, D.J. Blackwood, D. Xu, T. Gu, Corros. Sci. 130 (2018) 1-11.
[15]	H. Li, X. Dake, Y. Li, H. Feng, Z. Liu, X. Li, T. Gu, K. Yang, PloS One 10 (2015),e0136183.
[16]	R. Jia, D. Yang, D. Xu, T. Gu, Bioelectrochemistry 118 (2017) 38-46.
[17]	D. Xu, T. Gu, Int. Biodeterior. Biodeg. 91 (2014) 74-81.
[18]	T. Wu, J. Xu, C. Sun, M. Yan, C. Yu, W. Ke, Corros. Sci. 88 (2014) 291-305.
[19]	M.A. Javed, P.R. Stoddart, S.A. Wade, Corros. Sci. 93 (2015) 48-57.
[20]	Y. Lin, The Electro-Active Characteristics of Sulfate-Reducing Bacteria and its Influencd on the Anaerobic Cossosion of Carbon Steels, Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2011 (in Chinese).
[21]	F. Guan, X. Zhai, J. Duan, M. Zhang, B. Hou, PLoS One 11 (2016), e0162315.
[22]	F. Guan, X. Zhai, J. Duan, J. Zhang, K. Li, B. Hou, Surf. Coat. Technol. 316 (2017) 171-179.
[23]	L. Yu, J. Duan, W. Zhao, Y. Huang, B. Hou, Electrochim. Acta 56 (2011) 9041-9047.
[24]	L. Yu, J. Duan, X. Du, Y. Huang, B. Hou, Electrochem. Commun. 26 (2013) 101-104.
[25]	C.R. Qian, Microbiology Experiment Course, Peking University Press, Beijing, 2008 (in Chinese).
[26]	A.M. Awad, E.A. Ghazy, S.A. Abo El-Enin, M.G. Mahmoud, Surf. Coat. Technol. 206 (2012) 3165-3172.
[27]	I.B. Beech, J. Sunner, Curr. Opinion Biotechnol. 15 (2004) 181-186.
[28]	Z.H. Dong, T. Liu, H.F. Liu, Biofouling 27 (2011) 487-495.
[29]	C.B. Breslin, L.P. Friery, W.M. Carroll, Corrosion 49 (1993) 895-902.
[30]	J.B. Wen, J.G. He, X.W. Lu, Adv. Mater. Res. 146-147 (2011) 691-695.
[31]	G. Gunasekaran, S. Chongdar, S.N. Gaonkar, P. Kumar, Corros. Sci. 46 (2004) 1953-1967.
[32]	C.N. Cao, J.Q. Zhang, Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy Introduction, Science Press, Beijing, 2002 (in Chinese).
[33]	M. Metikoš-Huković, R. Babić, Z. Grubač, S. Brinć, J. Appl. Electrochem. 24 (1994) 772-778.
[34]	F. Liu, J. Zhang, C. Sun, Z. Yu, B. Hou, Corros. Sci. 83 (2014) 375-381.
[35]	F. Liu, J. Zhang, S. Zhang, W. Li, J. Duan, B. Hou, Mater. Corros. 63 (2012) 431-437.
[36]	Y.J. Tan, S. Bailey, B. Kinsella, Corros. Sci. 38 (1996) 1545-1561.
[37]	H. Liu, Y.F. Cheng, D. Xu, H. Liu, J. Electrochem. Soc. 165 (2018) C354-C361.
[38]	H. Wang, Y. Song, J. Yu, D. Shan, H. Han, J. Electrochem. Soc. 164 (2017) C574-C580.
[39]	G. Ji, L.F. Macía, B. Allaert, A. Hubin, H. Terryn, J. Electrochem. Soc. 165 (2018) C246-C257.
[40]	R.C. Newman, B.J. Webster, R.G. Kell, ISIJ Int. 31 (1991) 201-209.
[41]	J. Liu, X. Liang, S. Li, J. Rare Earths 25 (2007) 609-614.
[42]	H. Liu, C. Fu, T. Gu, G. Zhang, Y. Lv, H. Wang, H. Liu, Corros. Sci. 100 (2015) 484-495.
[43]	S. Chongdar, G. Gunasekaran, P. Kumar, Electrochim. Acta 50 (2005) 4655-4665.
[44]	T. Wu, M. Yan, D. Zeng, J. Xu, C. Yu, C. Sun, W. Ke, Acta Metall. Sin.(Engl. Lett.) 28 (2014) 93-102.
[45]	P. Thabo, Molecules (Basel) 9 (2015) 16004-16029.
[46]	S. Paul, Kar Bi, ISRN Corros. (2012), .
[47]	B.J. Little, J.S. Lee, R.I. Ray, Electrochim. Acta 54 (2008) 2-7.
[48]	E. Håkansson, J. Hoffman, P. Predecki, M. Kumosa, Corros. Sci. 114 (2017) 10-16.
[49]	S. Kakooei, M. Ismail, B. Ariwahjoedi, World Appl. Sci. J. 17 (2012) 524-531.
[50]	S.C. Dexter, J.P. LaFontaine, Corrosion 54 (1998) 851-861.
[51]	A.F.F. Giacobone, S.A. Rodriguez, A.L. Burkart, R.A. Pizarro, Int. Biodeterioration Biodeg. 65 (2011) 1161-1168.
[52]	M.B. Rockel, D. Schedlitzky, R. Bender, Aluminium alloys, Corrosion Handbook, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co, KGaA, Frankfurt, 2008.
[53]	W.J. James, in: M.G. Fontana, R.W. Staehle (Eds.), Advances in Corrosion Science and Technology, vol. 4, Springer US, Boston, MA, 1974, pp. 85-147.
[54]	V.W. Kühr, V.D. Vlugt, Water Quality Res. J.Can. 18 (1934) 147-165.
[55]	J.N. Butler, Ionic Equilibrium: Solubility and pH Calculations, John Wiley & Sons, Harvard University, Cambridga, 1998.
[56]	N. Perez, in: N. Perez (Ed.), Electrochemistry and Corrosion Science, Springer US, Boston, MA, 2004, pp. 155-166.
[57]	K. Huo, X. Zhang, H. Wang, L. Zhao, X. Liu, P.K. Chu, Biomaterials 34 (2013) 3467-3478.
[58]	G. Jin, H. Qin, H. Cao, S. Qian, Y. Zhao, X. Peng, X. Zhang, X. Liu, P.K. Chu, Biomaterials 35 (2014) 7699-7713.