Sulfuric Acid Corrosion to Simulate Microbial Influenced Corrosion on Stainless
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sulfuric Acid Corrosion to Simulate Microbial Influenced Corrosion on Stainless Steel 316L by Jacob T. Miller Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Engineering in the Chemical Engineering Program YOUNGSTOWN STATE UNIVERSITY December, 2017 Sulfuric Acid Corrosion to Simulate Microbial Influenced Corrosion on Stainless Steel 316L Jacob T. Miller I hereby release thesis to the public. I understand that this thesis will be made available from the OhioLINK ETD Center and the Maag Library Circulation Desk for public access. I also authorize the University or other individuals to make copies of this thesis as needed for scholarly research. Signature: Jacob T. Miller, Student Date Approvals: Dr. Holly J. Martin, Thesis Advisor Date Dr. Pedro Cortes, Committee Member Date Dr. Brett P. Conner, Committee Member Date Dr. Salvatore A. Sanders, Dean of Graduate Studies Date Abstract The continued improvement of additive manufacturing (3D printing) is progressively eliminating the geometric limitations of traditional subtractive processes. Because parts are built up in thin layers, such as in processes like Laser Powder Bed Fusion, complex parts can be manufactured easily. However, this manufacturing method likely causes the parts to have rougher surfaces and decreased density compared to their traditional counterparts. The effect of this difference has not been researched thoroughly, but may have a significant impact on the properties of the parts. For example, the 3D printed parts could more easily collect micro-organisms that produce sulfuric acid as byproducts of their metabolic processes. Uninhibited microbial growth on the sample surface could produce enough sulfuric acid to degrade the parts through hydrogen embrittlement. This research contrasts the tensile stress and corrosion behavior of 316L stainless steel between traditional and additive manufactured parts based on exposure time to a 0.75 molar sulfuric acid solution, which mimics microbial metabolic byproducts. iii Acknowledgements I am dedicating this thesis to my parents, Mike and Phyllis Miller, and my brothers, Michael and Scott Miller. Their unwavering support and love have allowed me to excel in ways I never thought possible. I owe more to them than I will ever be able to repay. I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Holly Martin, for her constant guidance and expertise. The skills she helped to develop in me throughout my time at YSU will undoubtedly follow me in my professional career and beyond. I wish to thank Dr. Pedro Cortes and Dr. Brett Conner for volunteering their time to be on my committee. Their knowledge and insight were valuable in improving my thesis. I am grateful for Dr. Douglas Price’s constant advice and for challenging me to improve my way of thinking over the last six years. I want to thank Dr. Dingqiang Li for helping me to understand the theory and operation of the scanning electron microscopes on campus. My study would not have been possible without the data collected under his supervision. I also wish to thank the numerous faculty members who helped me complete my thesis with their guidance, instruction, and support. Finally, I wish to thank all of my family members and friends who have provided me with an infallible support system. Whenever times were difficult, I turned to you for support and was never left empty handed. You have all helped shape me as a professional and an individual, and I am humbled by your immeasurable love. iv Table of Contents Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents v List of Figures vi List of Tables vii 1.0 Introduction and Literature Review 1 2.0 Materials and Methods 11 2.1 Sample Preparation 11 2.2 Corrosion Testing 13 2.3 Surface Characteristic Examination 13 2.4 Mechanical Testing 14 2.5 Graphical Analysis 14 2.6 Density Testing 17 3.0 Results 18 4.0 Discussion 44 5.0 Conclusions 60 6.0 Future Work 63 7.0 References 68 v List of Figures Figure 1 Sample Dimensions 12 Figure 2 Micrographs of samples after 0 hours exposure time 19 Figure 3 Micrographs of samples after 2184 hours exposure time 20 Figure 4 Mass loss vs. Exposure Time 21 Figure 5 Density vs. Exposure Time 23 Figure 6 Exposure Time vs. Tensile Stress (averages) 24 Figure 7 Exposure Time vs. Strain (averages) 26 Figure 8 Stress-Strain Curve: Control and 2184 Hours Exposure 27 Figure 9 SEM images of samples after 0 hours exposure time 31 Figure 10 SEM images of samples after 24 hours exposure time 32 Figure 11 SEM images of samples after 96 hours exposure time 34 Figure 12 SEM images of samples after 168 hours exposure time 35 Figure 13 SEM images of samples after 336 hours exposure time 37 Figure 14 SEM images of samples after 672 hours exposure time 38 Figure 15 SEM images of samples after 1176 hours exposure time 40 Figure 16 SEM images of samples after 1680 hours exposure time 41 Figure 17 SEM images of samples after 2184 hours exposure time 43 vi List of Tables Table 1 TM Samples Compiled Data 28 Table 2 3D Printed Samples Compiled Data 30 vii 1.0 Introduction and Literature Review Since first being mass produced in blast furnaces in the mid-19th century [1], steel has been invaluable to major industries, such as automotive, aerospace, and construction. The production of steel has become more precise and efficient since the introduction of the Bessemer process. Carbon steel, which consists of only iron and carbon, accounts for a majority of steel produced today [2]. However, alloying elements can be added during production to obtain favorable properties in the steel. Elements such as manganese, nickel, molybdenum, and chromium are very common in modern steel alloys. Different combinations of these alloying elements result in steels with varying properties and uses, such as increased creep resistance for steels exposed to high temperatures or increased tensile strength for steels used in construction. To effectively control the amounts of each alloying element and the overall composition of the steel product, more advanced equipment, such as Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs), have been developed. Unlike traditional furnaces which use ores and other raw materials to produce steel, EAFs can use scrap metal as the feed stock to produce new product. The scrap metal is loaded into the furnace and an electrode with an electric current running through it is then placed in the furnace. The electric arc produced by the current running through the electrode melts the metal into a molten liquid [1]. Alloying elements can then be added into the batch by weight, allowing the manufacturer to produce batches with the desired composition. Different alloying elements used in steel products are added to obtain favorable properties depending on the environment and stresses the steel must withstand. For example, manganese is used in small amounts to increase strength of steel products [3]. 1 The addition of nickel helps to increase ductility, as well as improve corrosion resistance against some acids. Rare elements, such as niobium, help prevent inter-granular corrosion, particularly in the heat affected zone (HAZ) after welding. Molybdenum can be used to increase the corrosion resistance of steel to chloride ions [4]. Chromium is often used as an additive in order to promote corrosion resistance in other acidic environments, especially against oxidation in air [4]. Steels containing specified amounts of different alloying elements can be further categorized into groups. Carbon steels and alloy steels are designated with a four digit number; the first digit indicates the main alloying element(s), the second digit indicates the secondary alloying element(s), and the last two digits indicate the amount of carbon, in hundredths of a percent by weight. Traditional carbon steels begin their four digit number with 1, nickel steels with 2, and so on [5]. More specific designations are used for each unique combination. For example, 1060 steel is a plain-carbon steel containing 0.60% carbon by total weight [6]. One such group of particular interest are stainless steels, which are steel alloys containing a minimum of 11% chromium by weight [7]. The chromium passivates in the presence of oxygen to form a thin layer of chromium oxide, which protects the metal underneath [8]. This film reforms even if the surface of the metal is scratched or damaged. Stainless steels are incredibly versatile because they have the strength of typical steel products while also remaining resistant to many corrosive environments. Stainless steel (SS) can be further categorized into grades, each of which has criteria of alloying elements that must be met. Most stainless steels are given three digit specification numbers which provide information about their composition; however, the 2 identification numbers themselves do not contain specific alloying information as with the carbon steels described previously. For example, stainless steels in the 200 series, as defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), are stainless steels containing chromium, nickel, and manganese [9]. The 500 series contains heat resisting chromium alloys while stainless steels in the 300 series are steels containing at least 16% chromium and 6% nickel by weight [10]. Contained within each series are more specific grades, such as SS 316, which contains 16-18% chromium, 10-14% nickel, 10% nitrogen, 2-3% molybdenum, 2% manganese, and 0.8% carbon by weight [4]. SS 316 is used in environments where both strength and corrosion resistance are required, such as aerospace, pharmaceuticals, cutlery, and marine applications [11]. SS 316L, which has a maximum of 0.3% carbon versus 0.8% in SS 316, is used for improved performance under corrosive environments, especially where potential leaching of carbon from the steel would decrease strength [7].