Experimental Study and Numerical Modeling
of Erosion-corrosion of J55 Steel in Brine
of Huanghe (Yellow) River Valley
Dajun Zhao1,2, Zihang Sun1,2, Yan Zhao1,2,*, Xiaoshu Lü1,2,3 and Xianfeng Tan4
1College of Construction Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130026, P.R. China
Laboratory of Drilling Technology in Complex Conditions of Ministry of Land and Resources of the People’s Republic of China,
No. 938 Ximinzhu Street, Changchun 130026, P.R. China
3Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, School of Engineering, Aalto University, P.O. Box 12100, FIN-02150, Espoo, Finland
4Shandong Provincial Lubei Geo-engineering Exploration Institutes, Dezhou 253000, P.R. China
2Key
ABSTRACT: Fluid field can have significant effects on corrosion rates of steels. The objective of this paper is to investigate erosion-corrosion mechanisms of J55 steel and the
effects of local hydrodynamic factors, in particular, the fluid flow velocity on J55 steel’s
service life. A new experimental setup was developed to specifically simulate the actual
hydrodynamic conditions of Huanghe (Yellow) River valley. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model was adopted to characterize the hydrodynamic factors, such as the flow
rate, the turbulence kinetic energy and the shear stress, and their effects on the corrosion behavior of J55 steel. Corrosion morphology was analyzed. Results show that the
erosion rate increased with the flow rate and the resulting corrosion pit became smaller
and deeper. Through the research results of this paper, it could provide some technical
supports for the scientific and rational exploitation of brine.
1. INTRODUCTION
J
has been widely
used as filter material in brine mining. In the presence of a large amount of Cl– , K+, Ca2+, Na+, Mg2+
in brine, J55 steel is extremely sensitive to corrosion
damage. Erosion-corrosion of steel in brine mining is
the most common cause of filter element failure [1–3].
The erosion-corrosion is known to be affected by
a number of factors including the microstructure of
the materials, the flow field, and the external stress
distribution. In fact, changes in fluid flow rate induce
changes in surface ions and stress in the mass transfer
process, leading to a complex corrosion process.
Studies show that the corrosion rates increase with
flow rates [4–8]. High flow rate not only accelerates
the general corrosion rate, but also causes local corrosion [9–11]. However, when the flow rate increases,
the scour effect intensifies and washes the loose corrosion products, alleviating the alloy corrosion to some
extent. The effects of flow rate and regime on erosioncorrosion morphology can further affect the flow field
55 steel/low carbon steel
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: [email protected]; Tel/fax: +86 431 8850 2678
in the erosion process, especially in the part of sudden
change of flow field (corrosion pitting).When there is
no corrosion product on the top of the material surface,
the high flow rate increases the transmission rate between the materials and the medium, intensifies the
erosion effect on the metal surface, and, hence, accelerates the corrosion rate. By contrast, if there is corrosion product film on the material surface, it can act as
a barrier that reduces the mechanical damages of fluid
on the material surface [6,7,9,12]. Therefore, corrosion
rate is strongly related to material transport rate. If the
product film is dissolved by chemical process and mechanical incision effect, the corrosion rate of the material rapidly increases. It is generally accepted that high
flow rate causes the corrosion product film to become
thinner [13,14]. High flow rate may form a thin but
protective film by affecting Fe2+ dissolution kinetics
and nucleation process of FeCO3 [13]. Schmitt’s study
stated that the damage of fluid on corrosion product
film could cause local corrosion [15].
The above studies demonstrate the profound influence of the hydrodynamic environments on the erosion
corrosion process of the J55 steel. The local hydrodynamic factors, such as flow rate, regime and concentrations of Cl– , K+, Ca2+, Na+, Mg2+ in brine, interact
Journal of Residuals Science & Technology, Vol. 14, No. 1—January 2017
1544-8053/17/01 235-09
© 2017 DEStech Publications, Inc.
doi:10.12783/issn.1544-8053/14/1/28
235
236
D. Zhao, Z. Sun, Y. Zhao, X. Lü and X. Tan
with each other to simultaneously influence the corrosion process [16]. Brines vary from mine to mine, and
for this reason the local hydrodynamic factors in the
Huanghe (Yellow) River valley is investigated in this
study. As there is limited research on the effect of hydrodynamic conditions on erosion-corrosion of the J55
steel in general, the current work covers this gap via
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations and
experimental validation.
The experiments were set up to specifically simulate
the actual hydrodynamic conditions of Huanghe (Yellow) River valley. As fluid velocity is one of the most
important parameters affecting the corrosion rates, this
study focused on the effect of fluid rates on the corrosion of J55 steel. CFD model was adopted to characterize the flow pattern within the reaction kettle in
order to determine the correlation between the flow
and the corrosion rates. The effects of corrosion morphology on the flow field and the distribution conditions of the flow with pits were studied using CFD
simulations.
2. EXPERIMENTAL MATERIALS AND
PROCEDURES
Figure 1. The configuration of the corrosion test sample.
rosion products. Then the weight loss rate of the test
sample (ΔW, g cm–2 s–1) was evaluated using Faraday’s
equation of general chemistry [17]:
∆W =
(1)
Where W: sample lost weight (g), A: exposure area
(cm2), t: corrosion time (s)
The weight change rate related to metal loss, ΔW
(mg cm–2 d–1), can be then converted to an average
penetration rate (P, mmy–1) using the relation below
[18–21]:
P=
2.1. Experimental Materials
J55 steel of Φ300 mm (outside diameter) and wall
thickness of 10mm was chosen as experimental material. Its nominal chemical compositions are shown in
Table 1. The J55 steel was processed into the cuboid
sample with size 140 mm × 30 mm × 5 mm, and then
drilled at equal spacing. The diameter of the hole was
18 mm and the center distance was 40 mm. The circular hole was in the size of the field. The processed
sample is shown in Figure 1. The sample surfaces were
polished up to 1500 grit gradually with grinding paper
in a clean and dry condition. Before and after the test,
the sample was weighted (±1 mg accuracy).
The employed solution was comprised of 110.1 Cl–,
1.52 K+, 1.02 Ca2+, 60.3 Na+ and 7.85 Mg2+ to simulate
brines under local hydrodynamic conditions of Huanghe valley groups (Table 2)
The corrosion test duration was 48 hours. The ultrasonic cleaning machine was used to remove the cor-
W
At
3.65∆W
ρ
(2)
Which could be derived by dividing Equation (1)
with the density of the metal.
XL-30 (ESEM) FEG scanning electron microscope
and Genesis 2000 energy dispersive spectrometer
(EDS) were adopted to characterize and study the corrosion behavior of the sample.
2.2. Erosion-corrosion Test
An erosion-corrosion device was designed to simulate the loop circulating conditions of J55 steel (Figure
2). It consisted of pipes, a centrifugal pump, a reservoir, a pressure gauge, a flow meter, a ball valve, a
sample holder, and a reaction kettle. The solution was
supplied from a 35 L reservoir and circulated through
the centrifugal pump. Its flow velocity was controlled
by the pump rotational speed using a speed controller.
The material of the connecting pipeline (inner diameter
28 mm) was PPR pipe fitting. The material of both re-
Table 1. Nominal Chemical Composition
of J55 Steel (mass %).
Table 2. The Chemical Composition of Brine (g/L).
Element
C
Si
Mn
P
S
Ni
Cu
Content
0.18
0.20
1.25
0.015
0.007
0.162
0.20
Ion
Content
Cl–
K+
Ca2+
Na+
Mg2+
110.1
1.52
1.02
60.3
7.85
Experimental Study and Numerical Modelingof Erosion-corrosion of J55 Steel
237
Figure 2. Erosion Corrosion Device.
action kettle and sample holder was organic glass and
the inner diameter of the reaction kettle was 190 mm.
The volume of the water pump was adjustable with
the experimental pipe inlet flow rates of 0.677 m/s,
0.812 m/s and 0.947 m/s. A temperature control system
was installed in the reservoir to control the temperature
of solution. The testing temperature was set to be 70°C
which was taken as the actual working temperature of
the steel controlled by Pt100 resistance temperature
detector.
2.3. CFD Simulation
CFD simulation was used to investigate the flow
field condition in the reaction kettle and the effect of
the morphology (corrosion pitting) of the corrosion
product film on the flow field. The simulation analysis
was divided into two parts, overall simulation and local
simulation. The overall simulation focused on the distribution of flow field in reaction kettle under the aforesaid condition. The model size to full size ratio was
1:1. The local simulation was performed for corrosion
pitting. Figure 1 shows its location in the front face of
the sample. The corrosion pit, of a cylindrical pit was
measured 0.1 mm in diameter and 0.1 mm in deep.
The fluid was assumed to be incompressible and a
standard two-equation κ – ε turbulent model considering the Reynolds number of the flow, 27644 calculated
according to the geometrical dimension of pipeline and
flow velocity. The Reynolds number was much higher
than 4000, indicating a turbulent flow. The turbulent
kinetic energy κ was 1 m2/s2 and the turbulent dissipation rate ε was 1 m2/s3. The κ – ε turbulence intensity
was set as 3.5%, obtained from Reynolds number. The
turbulence equation was solved by iterative method
with a convergence criterion of 0.000001. The mesh
and boundary were set up according to the following
conditions: Single phase flow model was used to determine distribution of flow field within the reaction
kettle. The flow rate of the inlet was respectively corresponding to 0.677 m/s, 0.812 m/s and 0.947 m/s. The
outlet was set as outflow.
3. RESULTS
3.1. Corrosion Performances
3.1.1. Corrosion Rate and Weight Loss
Figure 3 shows the macro corrosion morphology at
238
D. Zhao, Z. Sun, Y. Zhao, X. Lü and X. Tan
the flow rates of 0.677 m/s, 0.812 m/s and 0.947 m/s
with obvious erosion marks (trace of dark scratch). The
corresponding weight loss and penetration rate derived
using Equation (2) are shown in Table 3. In all three
samples, the position having the most serious corrosion was above the hole in the middle (see red circles
of figure), where the opening for filtering water was the
closest to the pipe inlet and the erosion intensity of the
fluid was the maximum.
Both Figure 3 and Table 3 demonstrate that the increasing flow rate led to a gradually growing weight
loss and a penetration rate and a general higher corrosion. At the inlet flow rates of 0.677 m/s and 0.812
m/s, there was a large difference in weight loss, but
the difference became much less for the flow rates of
0.812 m/s and 0.947 m/s. Although the corrosion rate
was found to increase with the increasing flow rate, the
magnitude of the increase tended to decrease due to the
barrier formed corrosion. The visually notable areas of
corrosion (red circles in Figure 3) were observed further through the electron microscope scanning.
The samples were observed further through the electron microscope scanning (SEM). Figure 4 shows the
SEM pictures (with corrosion products) of these similar positions for three groups of samples: front view in
Figures 4(a)–(c) and back view in Figures 4(d)–(f). For
the inlet flow rate of 0.677 m/s, the sample surfaces
are uneven with corrosive morphology of silt-shape
[see the box in the Figure 4(a) and 4(d)], compared to
the relatively smooth surfaces for the inlet flow rate of
0.812 m/s although clearly raised corrosion products
Table 3. Corrosion Rate Measured from Sample
Weight Loss in Different Flow Rate.
Flow Rate
cm–2
ΔW (mg
P (mmy–1)
d–1)
0.677
0.812
0.947
1.91
0.89
3.08
1.43
3.45
1.60
are also apparent (see the box in the Figure 4(b)] with
even crater-like and crack-like corrosion [see the arrow in Figure 4(e)]. For the inlet flow rate of 0.947
m/s, sample surfaces are more even but with much significant increases of raised corrosion products with the
shapes similar as craters [see the arrows in Figures 4(c)
and 4(f)].
Figure 5 shows the morphology pictures after removing the corrosion product films: Figures 5(a)–(c) for the
front view and Figures 5(d)–(f) for the back view. Uneven surfaces with larger corrosion pit area shallower
depth are clearly shown in Figure 5(a), whilst corrosion pit area in Figure 5(b) was smaller but much deeper with lots of cellular corrosion pitting shown by the
arrow [Figure 5(b)]. The corroded region in Figure 5(c)
has the maximum number of pits that have the minimum pit areas and the deepest pit depth [the corrosion
morphology characterization in Figures 5(d)–(f)].
3.2. CFD Simulation
3.2.1. The Influence of Flow Rate to Distribution
of Flow Field
CFD simulation was performed to further investigate the differences in erosion corrosion at different
flow rates of the samples. Figure 6 shows the flow field
characteristics of the turbulent kinetic energy intensity and the boundary shear stress: Figure 6(a) for the
cross-sectional view and Figure 6(b) for the front view.
The distribution of flow field was not affected significantly by the increasing flow rate, however, the speed
at same place was all boosted. Figure 6(c) shows that
the turbulent kinetic energy of sample surface increases dramatically with the increasing flow rate. Figure
6(d) clearly shows that the increasing flow rate results
in increasing stress intensity and its distribution trend,
indicating the extension area of higher stress density.
3.2.2. The Effect of Corrosion Pitting on
Distribution of Flow Field
Figure 3. Macro corrosion morphology at different flow rates. (a)
0.677 m/s , (b) 0.812 m/s, (c) 0.947 m/s.
Figure 7 displays the simulation results of the effects of corrosion pitting on the distribution of flow
Experimental Study and Numerical Modelingof Erosion-corrosion of J55 Steel
239
Figure 4. Pictures of corrosion feature at different flow rate (front view): (a) 0.677 m/s , (b) 0.812 m/s, (c) 0.947 m/s; back view: (d) 0.677 m/s,
(e) 0.812 m/s, (f) 0.947 m/s.
field. Figures 7(a)–(b) present the flow rate distribution, showing that the fluid flow rate changes when
passing through the pit. The fluid flow rate within the
pit was near zero due to the influence of outer wall
surface of pit. The flow rate was lower in certain areas of the pit upstream. For the inlet velocity of 0.677
m/s, the average flow rate near wall surface of corrosion pitting was about 0.759 m/s. As shown in arrow
of Figure 8(a), the near-wall fluid flow rate of the corrosion pitting was the maximum about 1.33 m/s. The
near-wall velocity far from the corrosion pitting was
only about 0.475 m/s (as shown in the circle of the
Figure 5. Pictures of sample surface without corrosion product layer at different flow rates (front view): (a) 0.677 m/s , (b) 0.812 m/s, (c) 0.947
m/s; back view: (d) 0.677 m/s, (e) 0.812 m/s, (f) 0.947 m/s.
240
D. Zhao, Z. Sun, Y. Zhao, X. Lü and X. Tan
Figure 6. The whole CFD simulation. (a), (b): The distribution of rate, (c): turbulent kinetic energy, (d): wall shear stress).
figure). With the increasing of flow rate, the distribution of flow field changed little and only flow rate in
relevant position increases. Similar phenomenon was
observed in other samples. The simulation findings
show that the existence of corrosion pitting increased
the turbulent kinetic energy and wall surface shear
strength in the near-wall region of the corrosion pitting, as shown in Figures 7(c)–(d). In addition, the
turbulent kinetic energy surrounding corrosion pitting
was two times of that of corrosion pitting. However,
the wall surface shear force surrounding the corrosion
pitting increased dramatically, about 10 times larger
than that of corrosion pitting. Many corrosion pitting
existed in the area shown in Figure 7 and the corrosion product film surrounding the corrosion pitting
showed irregular grooving or silt-shaped corrosion
morphology. These findings are consistent with others from previous reports, for example [8].
Experimental Study and Numerical Modelingof Erosion-corrosion of J55 Steel
4. DISCUSSION
4.1. Corrosion Behavior
It is well known that local fluid hydrodynamics
plays an important role in erosion corrosion reactions
241
regarding the movement, distribution and diffusion
of fluids [20]. The increasing flow rate results in the
growth of local flow intensity of turbulence and the
wall shear stress, which accelerates surface damages
and causes the accelerated film detachment in corrosion products. When fresh sample surfaces, exposed to
Figure 7. The CFD simulation of corrosion pitting (a), (b): The distribution of rate, (c): turbulent kinetic energy, (d): wall shear stress.
242
D. Zhao, Z. Sun, Y. Zhao, X. Lü and X. Tan
the corrosive medium after corrosion products, were
removed, there was a higher chance of the formation of
different galvanic couples between the exposed sample
surface and its contacted corrosion product, leading to
accelerated corrosion in these areas. All these factors
can cause higher weight loss and faster corrosion rate
under higher flow rate.
However, corrosion is an extremely complicated
process that needs time to exert damaging effect. Although higher flowing rate increases corrosion rate,
removes corrosion product layers and leads to an increased corrosion, the corrosion rate can decrease due
to insufficient corrosion time. Because the flowing
suspension contained no solid particles in this study,
the strong erosion-corrosion effect was not observed
clearly. For this reason, the maximal increase in corrosion rate was shown for the flow rate of 0.812 m/s
other than the flow rate of 0.947 m/s. Moreover, the
study suggests that the adsorbed C1– in the steel surface promoted the corrosion pitting [22]. C1– with
strong electronegativity dissolved the part of the corrosion products of the iron and generated more flaws in
the rust layer [Figure 4(e)]. A diffusion path of O2 then
is provided for the corrosion to proceed. It is worth to
note that higher flow rate can provide more sufficient
Cl– and O2 for the reaction. When the corrosion started,
the concentration of OH– ion appeared around the corrosion pitting, resulting in an anodic reaction that iron
loses the electron. Because of the larger flow rate, the
OH– generated outside of the corrosion pit was taken
away by fluid while the OH– inside of the corrosion
pit stayed. This caused corrosion pit extended to the
interior, and the depth of the corrosion pit got deeper.
Sufficient reaction between OH– and its surrounding
iron elements at low flow rate leads to the corrosion
pit extension trend to in adjacent area rather than towards in depth, which results in the different corrosion
pit characteristics at high and low flow rate.
4.2. Simulation Study
In the present study, weight loss and morphology
feature show that there was considerable difference in
the erosion-corrosion behavior at different flow rates
of sample. High flow rate causes a large weight loss
and penetration rate (Table 3). Mass transfer was also
known to remove corrosion products from the metal
surface [23]. Juan Wang et al. observed that more corrosion products were removed at higher wall shear
stress values in the samples [24]. The differences in
corrosion at various flows are due to the turbulent ki-
netic energy and the wall shear stress determined by
the flow rate of the medium.
It is known that the fluid hydrodynamics is the important factor for erosion-corrosion behavior. CFD
simulation indicates that there were large difference
on the hydrodynamics at different locations of sample
surface due to change of surface morphology [Figures
(6)–(7)]. During the erosion corrosion test, the corrosion product film of the sample surface constantly shedding and produce, leading to the uneven surface of the sample. When the medium flows through
the surface, changes in the turbulence intensity and the
wall shear stress distribution differences associated
with the flow field had a huge impact on the weight
loss and corrosion rate of sample.
High local shear stress causes corrosion product detachment and potentially strut fracture [25–28]. When
the flow rate increases, the turbulent kinetic energy
of fluid and surface shear force increase in the nearby
area of corrosion pit. Therefore, the nearby product
film bears higher outer stress and falls off, the new
matrix surface is then exposed and the new corrosion
product film is formed. This continuous process of the
formation-falling off of the product film causes the
nucleation and extension of the stress corrosion. This
phenomenon is more significant when the fluid flow
accelerates, see Figure 7. During erosion-corrosion
process, fluid flow would accelerate the mass transfer
process of cathodic reactants and products, and then
accelerate the corrosion of steel [27]. At the same time,
we observed that the increase of flow rate may accelerate the mass transfer process. In addition, as the fluid
flow accelerates, the erosion intensity on the sample
surface increases, which makes the loosen corrosion
layer falls off more easily, which resulted in thinner
corrosion layer [7,27].
Therefore, this morphology with corrosion pit
makes the scouring environment more complicated.
In addition, the comparison between the erosion-corrosion experiment and the CFD simulation shows that
the existence of corrosion pit can easily cause the corrosion product film to fall off and to further intensify
the corrosion.
5. CONCLUSIONS
The following conclusions can be drawn from on
the study of the erosion-corrosion of J55 steel under
the local hydrodynamic conditions of Huanghe valley:
1. Within the range of flow rate (0.677 m/s, 0.812 m/s
Experimental Study and Numerical Modelingof Erosion-corrosion of J55 Steel
and 0.947 m/s.), the sample mass loss increases
with the fluid flow rates, however, the magnitude
of the increase tends to decrease, indicating that
when the flow rate increases to a certain degree, its
effect on corrosion becomes weaker.
2. For the flow rate of 0.647 m/s, the corrosion pit
is shallower with larger area. For the flow rate of
0.947m/s, the corrosion pit is deeper with smaller
area.
3. The corrosion pit and raised corrosion product
film change the distribution of nearby fluid. CFD
simulation shows that the boundary flow rate near
to the sample with defect is seven times of the
flow rate at smooth boundary. The fluid around
sample surface has large turbulent kinetic energy
and surface shear stress, which intensifies the
corrosion.
4. The corrosion rate increases as the flow rate increases. From oil extraction efficiency and economic considerations, the flow rate of 0.947 m/s
is more cost-effective compared to the flow rate of
0.812 m/s.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the support of Research Fund for
the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China
(20130061120080) and the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Grant No.41602370).
REFERENCES
1. M.M. Stack, G.H. Abdulrahman, Mapping erosion-corrosion of carbon steel in oil-water solutions: Effects of velocity and applied potential, Wear 274–275 (2012) 401–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wear.2011.10.008
2. X.M. Hu, K. Alzawai, A. Neville, A. Gnanavelu, Assessing the effect of
corrosion inhibitor on erosion-corrosion of API-5L-X65 inmulti-phase
jet impingement conditions, Wear 271 (2011) 1432–1437. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.wear.2010.12.069
3. L. Zeng, G.A. Zhang, X.P. Guo, Erosion–corrosion at different locations of X65 carbon steel elbow, Corros. Sci. 85 (2014) 318–330.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2014.04.045
4. S. Srinivasan, R.D. Kane, Experimental simulation of multiphase flow
for assessing system corrosivity, Advanced in Corrosion Control and
Materials in Oil and Gas Production. London: European Federation of
Corrosion Publications, 1999, 171–179.
5. S. Nesic, G.T. Solvi, J. Enerhaug, Comparison of the rotating cylinder
and pipe flow tests for flow-sensitive carbon dioxide corrosion, Corrosion 51(1995) 773 –787. https://doi.org/10.5006/1.3293555
6. J.R. Vera, A. Viloria, M. Castillo, Flow velocity effect on CO2 corrosion of carbon steel using a dynamic field tester. A Working Party
Report on Prediction CO2 Corrosion in Oil and Gas Industry. London:
The Institute of Materials, 1994, 94–119.
243
7. G. X. Zhao, X.H. Lu, Y. Han, Effect of Flow Rate on CO2 Corrosion
Behavior of P110 Steel, Material engineering, 8 (2008) 5–8.
8. K. Sasaki, G.T. Burstein, Erosion–corrosion of stainless steel under impingement by a fluid jet, Corros. Sci. 49 (1) (2007) 92–102. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.corsci.2006.05.012
9. K. Videm, A. Dugstad, Effect of flow rate, pH, Fe2+ concentration and
steel quality on CO2 corrosion of carbon steel, Corrosion87. NACE,
Houston, 1987.
10. F.L. Ling, Effect of flow velocity on corrosion in gas well tubing and
application, Advanced Materials Research 703 (2012) 171–174
11. B. Evgeny, H. Trevor, N. Michaela, Efficiency of film-forming corrosion inhibitors in strong hydrochloric acid under laminar and turbulent flow conditions, Corros. Sci. 92 (2015) 85–94. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.corsci.2014.11.038
12. X. Jiang, Y.G. Zheng, W. Ke, Effect of flow velocity and entrained
sand on inhibition performances of two inhibitors for CO2 corrosion
of N80 steel in 3% NaCl solution, Corros. Sci. 47 (2005) 2636–2658.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2004.11.012
13. S. Kenji, Y. KatsumiK.G. Naohiko, Prevention of CO2 corrosion in gas
gathering systems, Corrosion83. Houston: NACE, 1983.
14. G. A. Schmitt, Modeling microturbulences at surface imperfections
as related to flow-induced localized corrosion, Corrosion (1992), 48,
No.5. 431–440. https://doi.org/10.5006/1.3315957
15. G.A. Schmitt, M. Mueller, Critical wall shear stresses in CO2 corrosion
of carbon steel. Corrosion99. Houston: National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Texas, 1999.
16. Y.G Zheng, Z.M Yao, W. Ke. Review on the effects of hydrodynamic
factors on erosion corrosion, Corrosion science and protection technology (2000), Vol. 12 No. 1.
17. Z. Ahmad, Principles of Corrosion Engineering and Corrosion Control, Butterworth-Heinemann, UK (2006) 656p
18. M.C. Zhao, M. Liu, G. Song, A. Atrens, Influence of pH and chloride
ion concentration on the corrosion of Mg alloy ZE41 Corros. Sci. 50
(2008) 1939–1953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2008.04.010
19. M.C. Zhao, P. Schmutz, S. Brunner, M. Liu, G. Song, A. Atrens, An
exploratory study of the corrosion of Mg alloys during interrupted salt
spray testing, Atrens, Corros. Sci. 50 (2009) 1277–1292. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.corsci.2009.03.014
20. M. Qian, D. Li, S.B. Liua, S.L. Gong. Corrosion performance of laserremelted Al–Si coating on magnesium alloy AZ91D. Corrosion Science
52 (2010) 3554–3560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2010.07.010
21. K. Efird. Ottawa, Ontario, Flow effects on corrosion. Uhlig’s corrosion
handbook, Canada: CANMET Materials Technology Laboratory, 2011.
p. 203. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470872864.ch17
22. Y. Gan, Y. Li, H.C. Lin, Experimental studies on the local corrosion
of low alloy steels in 3.5% NaCl. Corros. Sci. 43(3) (2001) 397–411.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-938X(00)00090-1
23. Schmitt G., Rothmann B, Study of the corrosion mechanism of unalloyed steel in oxygen-free carbon dioxide solutions Werkstoffe und Korrosion, 29 (1978) 98–100. https://doi.org/10.1002/maco.19780290204
24. X.X. Li, Z.Y. Wang, W. Han, Corrosion behavior of weathering resistant steel in dry and wet environments with MgCl2 medium. Journal of
Chinese Society for Corrosion and Protection 3 (2006) 138–140.
25. Y. Yang, Y.F. Cheng, Parametric effects on the erosion-corrosion rate
and mechanism of carbon steel pipes in oil sands slurry. Wear 276–277
(2012) 141–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2011.12.010
26. M.M. Stack, G.H. Abdulrahman. Mapping erosion-corrosion of carbon
steel in oil exploration conditions: Some new approaches to characterizing mechanisms and synergies. Tribol. Int. 43 (2010) 1268–1277.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.triboint.2010.01.005
27. J. Wang, G. Venkataraman, Flow-induced corrosion behavior of absorbable magnesium-based stents. Acta Biomaterialia 10 (2014) 5213–
5223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.08.034
28. H. W. Wang, M. M. Stack, The erosion wear of mild and stainless
steels under controlled corrosion in alkaline slurries containing alumina particles, Journal of Materials Science 35(2000) 5263–5273. https://
doi.org/10.1023/A:1004865107688