Stress Corrosion Cracking of 316L Stainless Steel in Concentrated Ammonium Chloride Solution with Very Low Dissolved Oxygen Levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Slow strain rate testing has been used to investigate the susceptibility of 316L stainless steel to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in high chloride and low dissolved oxygen (DO) brines. Tests have been performed for various temperatures and ammonium chloride (NH4Cl) concentrations. The susceptibility to SCC was assessed in terms of ductility loss, detailed fractography, and cross-sectional inspections to identify the damage mechanisms. It is challenging to maintain long-term SCC experiments with very low DO levels. In this work, we showed that 3 h of sparging with high-purity nitrogen at a flow rate of 0.2 L/min was sufficient to reduce the DO in a 0.6 L test solution to approximately 10 ppb. However, over the full test duration of 7 d or 8 d with continuous nitrogen purging of the solution, the mean and maximum DO values were 17.4 ppb and 34.4 ppb in 40 wt% NH4Cl, and 16.5 ppb and 41.8 ppb in 30 wt% NH4Cl solutions at 95°C. For 316L stainless steel at the open circuit in ≥30 wt% (i.e., 6.1 M) ammonium chloride solutions with these very low DO levels, pitting corrosion was not seen at 60°C, became evident at 80°C and was severe at 95°C and above, while SCC was not seen at 60°C or 80°C, was possibly initiating at 80°C without propagating significantly and was severe at 95°C.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".