MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264638045 · doi:10.1149/ma2015-02/47/1902

Effect of Nickel Content on the Corrosion Behaviour of Stainless Steel at 80 °C

2015· article· en· W2264638045 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Guo, Linda Wu, Ahmed Y. Musa, Veena Subramanian, Delin Li, J.C. Wren

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrosionMaterials scienceAlloyMetallurgyStress corrosion crackingCoolantCrevice corrosionOxideMicrostructureEmbrittlementIntergranular corrosionAusteniteLight-water reactorPressurized water reactorNuclear engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A range of Fe-Cr-Ni alloys are used in nuclear power plants due to their high mechanical strength and corrosion resistance. As a major component of these alloys, Ni contributes to the formation of austenite microstructures. In many nuclear reactor applications the alloys are exposed to ionizing radiation (g-rays) that can continuously decompose water to a range of highly redox active species (such as •OH, H 2 O 2 , O 2 ). The change in water chemistry induced by radiation can affect both the general and localized corrosion behaviour of these alloys. In particular, its influence on the susceptibility of an alloy to localized corrosion such as crevice and stress corrosion cracking (SCC) are important for assessment of reactor component aging. As well, corrosion products that dissolve into the reactor coolant can be transported to the reactor core where they can be neutron activated. This can create a radiological hazard for reactor maintenance personnel. Thus, quantifying the rate of general corrosion and the corrosion product transport in a reactor are important safety, operation and maintenance issues. It has been well established that the type of oxide that forms on a surface is a critical factor in determining both general and localized corrosion behaviour. Both alloy composition and water chemistry affect the type of oxide that forms. Systematic studies that examine the effect of alloy composition on corrosion are rare and those available have been conducted mostly from a metallurgical perspective. There are even fewer studies that examine the combined effects of alloy composition and corrosion environment. A fundamental understanding of the mechanism by which the Fe to Ni ratio in a steel alloy influences the corrosion rate in different environments will provide valuable information that can be used for alloy selection and usage. We have investigated the effect of the Fe to Ni ratio of alloy on oxide formation and growth kinetics. For this study, customized steel alloys with different Ni contents and constant Cr content (18 ± 1 %) were prepared. The Ni content ranged from 15 to 25 wt.%, within the range between AISI 316L and Alloy 800 (Fig. 1). The corrosion kinetics was investigated using a combination of coupon corrosion tests and electrochemical measurements. These measurements were augmented by oxide surface and depth analyses using several spectroscopic and imaging techniques, and by post-test solution analyses for dissolved metal loss. We found that the oxide formed at pH 10.6 and 80 °C has a graded layer structure, consisting of a mixed spinel oxide (FeCr 2 O 4 /Fe 3 O 4 /NiFe 2 O 4 ) as an inner layer and Ni(OH) 2 as an outer layer. The increase in Ni content from 15 to 25 wt.% does not affect the inner layer but increases the thickness of the Ni(OH) 2 layer. The increase in Ni content also decreases the total amount of dissolved metal loss. Gamma-irradiation of the corroding system increases the corrosion potential on these alloys. Correspondingly, gamma-radiation accelerates the formation of passive oxide layers and decreases the overall rate of metal dissolution. The observed kinetics of oxide growth and metal dissolution can be explained by the competition kinetics of oxide growth and dissolution for oxidized metals. Figure 1

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207