J.
£ Heger I
Chromium Conservation in Stainless Steel
REFERENCE: Heger, J. J., "Chromium Conservation in Stainless
Steel," Journal of Testing and Evaluation, JTEVA, Vol. 14, No. 3, May
1986, pp. 160-162.
ABSTRACT: A critical review of published literature, and personal
contacts with industries and individuals, were made to determine the
possibilities for chromium conservation in stainless steels. The informa-
tion obtained indicates that no low- or non-chromium substitute will be
universally satisfactory. However, substitutes are possible in many spe-
cific applications, although the substitute probably will differ for each
application. Examples are given.
KEY WORDS: chromium, stainless steel, low- or non-chromium mate-
rials
As has been stated in many publications, the United States is
completely dependent upon imported chromium, and the known
commercial deposits of that metal are located in only a few coun-
tries, namely South Africa, Zimbabwe, the Soviet Union, and Tur-
key. However, this situation has always existed; the United States
has never been, and probably never will be, self-sufficient with re-
spect to chromium. Surprisingly, with few exceptions, no major
concerns were expressed over the possibility of a chromium short-
age until the early 1970s when the formation of O P E C and the sub-
sequent monopolistic control of petroleum supplies and prices ex-
pc-ed the vulnerability of the United States to imported materials.
In its excellent Report on Contingency Plans for Chromium Utili-
zation (NMAB-335), [1] the National Materials Advisory Board
states that the vulnerability of the United States to a chromium
shortage lies in the areas of (1) metal production, (2) refractories,
and (3) chemicals [1]. Of these, metal production consumes the
most chromium, up to 69%, in the United States. In this area, the
largest single use of chromium is in the production of stainless
steel. If chromium were to become unavailable, the United States
might suffer seriously because, as one conclusion in the NMAB re-
port [1] states:
No substitutes exist or are likely to be developed for chromium in the high-
strength steels, high-temperature metals, and corrosion-resisting alloys
that are essential in the manufacture of jet engines, petrochemical and
power plant equipment and other critical products. It is highly unlikely that
corrosion-resistant or high-strength alloy steels without chromium will be
developed for such critical applications, although chromium-free substi-
tutes might be used for decorative stainless steels, automotive trim, flat-
ware, refractories, and some chemicals.
Notwithstanding this somewhat gloomy conclusion, one of the
recommendations in the report is:
IConsultant, The Metal Properties Council, New York, NY 10017. Mem-
ber of ASTM.
0090-397318610005-0160502.50
160
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Mon Sep 14 05:37:34 EDT 2020
Downloaded/printed by
Cambridge University Engineering Dept. (Cambridge University Engineering Dept.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
A basic research program aimed at developing substitutes for chromium in
stainless steels and high-temperature, oxidation-resistant alloys should be
initiated. Although this is a long-term program with little chance for early
success, it is the only technical possibility for eliminating U.S. vulnerability
to a long-term chromium embargo.
The M P C Program
Activity on the recommendations in the aforementioned NMAB
report has been initiated by The Metal Properties Council (MPC)
through its Task Group on Critical Materials. This task group
formed a Subgroup on Chromium Conservation in Stainless Steel
which recommended a study on the possibilities of chromium con-
servation and suggested the following guidelines:
1. Technical and patent literature pertaining to chromium sub-
stitutes in stainless steel from 1920 to the present should be re-
viewed.
2. Information should be obtained, by way of personal contacts,
from industries and individuals who have been active in this field.
3. An important factor in the usefulness of any of the alloy sys-
tems obtained from the literature review and personal contacts is
that it be capable of being produced in large quantities.
4. Applications should be segmented to some extent, (e.g., food
processing equipment, chemical processing equipment, and deco-
rative trim). Candidate substitutes may be perfectly acceptable for
one application, but not useful in others.
In accordance with these guidelines, a review of the technical
and patent literature as well as personal contacts with various indi-
viduals and industries have been made. The literature reviews were
based upon a computer search made by the Information Services
Group of the American Society for Metals (ASM) and a manual
review of abstracts. Personal contacts were made by correspon-
dence and by telephone.
The computer search covered the time period 1982 to 1966 (the
earliest year in the computer files) and used the sources listed in
Table 1.
TABLE 1--Sources used in computer search.
Source No. of Abstracts Obtained
Metadex 16
NTIS 3
Compendex 6
INEPEC 6
Chemical Abstracts 9
© 1986 by the American Society for Testing and Materials
 HEGER ON CHROMIUM CONSERVATION IN STAINLESS STEEL 161

The manual search focused on Chemical Abstracts and covered In the review of these corrosion data, alternative materials were
the years 1960 to 1958. considered to be possible only if their corrosion resistance were
Personal contacts were made with representatives of Colt Indus- equal to or better than that of 18-8 stainless steel for those temper-
tries, CARTECH, Republic Steel, U.S. Steel, Universal-Cyclops, atures and concentrations of corrodent where data were available
Allegheny Ludlum, Climax Molybdenum, Union Carbide, General for 18-8. On this basis, 18-8 was considered to be best (no alter-
Electric, Westinghouse, Chrysler, General Motors, and the Na- natives exist) in 14 of the 450 environments listed. These 14 envi-
tional Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). ronments are ammonium tungstate, amylphenol, diallyl phthalate,
In addition, following the suggestion in Item 4 of the above dinitrochlorobenzene, ethylene dibromide, hydrogen sulfide,
guidelines, a preliminary (or sample) approach was undertaken to methylamine, oxidizing gases, sodium aluminum sulfate, steam,
examine several specific applications or "end uses" of stainless vinyl chloride, zinc cyanide, and zinc hydrosulfite (pH 4.5).
steel to determine what, if any, alternative materials might be In the event that research programs are undertaken to develop
feasible. low- or non-chromium materials to replace stainless steel for corro-
sion resisting applications, initial attention might logically be given
Results of the MPC Program to materials for the above environments.
Analysis of the literature surveys and personal contacts indicates The second example of considering specific end uses is the stain-
that the current situation is roughly as follows: less steel used in automobiles. The information on chromium us-
age in automobiles was obtained from Table B-1 of the aforemen-
1. Chromium-nickel austenitic steels with chromium contents
of 9 to 14%, instead of the nominal 18% minimum, and with addi- tioned NMAB report [•]. Each stainless steel application was
tions of one or more of the following elements, molybdenum, cop- studied, and alternative materials were judged to be feasible as
shown in Table 2.
per, silicon, and aluminum, appear to have adequate strength and
Based on a car production of 6.7 million units, the total amount
oxidation resistance for service up to 760°C (1400°F). The corro-
of chromium saved would be 20 200 tons. This amount is the sav-
sion resistance of these alloys in a limited number of environments
ing at the end use point. Obviously, the saving at the steel manu-
appears to be good enough to warrant additional investigation
facturing point or of chromium ore would be significantly higher
[2-7].
because yield losses must be considered.
2. Low- (5 to 9%) and non-chromium austenitic and austenitic-
ferritic steels containing 0.5 to 1.0% carbon, up to 20% manga- Quite justifiably, some controversy will arise over several of the
judgements, particularly that concerning the elimination of the
nese, and 4 to 9% aluminum have good elevated temperature
catalytic converter. However, the converter is installed in a car only
oxidation resistance and mechanical properties. Additional infor-
mation is needed on corrosion resistance [8-13]. because of legislation and, in a serious emergency, additional legis-
lation could be enacted to temporarily eliminate it.
3. A modified 9Cr-lMo ferritic steel appears to be a promising
If an analysis similar to that conducted on the automobile is con-
replacement for Type 304 stainless steel in electric power genera-
tion applications at temperatures up to 649°C (1200°F) [14]. ducted on other end uses (but only on specific end uses such as a
4. Modified 6% chromium steels are being considered as re- heat exchanger or steam kettle and not on general end uses such as
placements for the 12% chromium, Type 409 stainless steel in au- the petroleum industry or the food processing industry), a number
tomotive emission control systems [15]. of applications where alternatives are possible may be uncovered.
5. Sheet product of aluminum-coated, 6% aluminum steel has
been successfully used in the duct work of automotive gas turbine TABLE 2--Chromium usage in automobiles and alternative materials. ~
engines. The material that was replaced contained over 18% chro-
mium [16]. Pounds of
Passenger Car Part Chromium Alternative Pounds
6. Low-chromium (less than 5%) iron-chromium-aluminumal- (1975) Used Per Car Material Saved
loys have an elevated temperature oxidation resistance equal to
that of stainless steels containing over 18% chromium. Also, these Catalytic converter 3.335 none, eliminate 3.335
alloys have exhibited good resistance to corrosion in a limited num- the part
ber of environments. However, at the aluminum content needed Windshield wipers 0.365 plastics, 0.365
aluminum,
for these good corrosion and oxidation characteristics, the alloys coated steel
are very difficult to process [17-33]. Wheel covers 1.440 plastics, 1.440
7. Low-carbon, nodular cast iron containing 4% silicon and 2% aluminum,
molybdenum has sufficient oxidation resistance up to 816°C coated steel
Windshield lower 0.276 plastics, 0.276
(t500°F) to be considered as a replacement for stainless steels con- molding aluminum,
taining 18% chromium [13]. coated steel
Roof drip moldings 0.203 plastics, 0.203
The concept of examining specific applications or end uses with aluminum,
the goal of determining the feasibility of using alternative materials coated steel
was employed in two areas. One of these was the use of published Door window moldings 0.155 plastics, 0.155
corrosion data surveys, the other was the breakdown of chromium aluminum,
coated steel
usage in automobiles. Seat belts 0.355 coated steel 0.355
The corrosion data surveys used were the Corrosion Data Survey
of the Shell Development Company, published in 1955, and the Total savings 6.039 lb
Total amount of chromium in car 8.356 lb
more recent publication, Corrosion-Resistance Tables, of R. A. Percent savings 72
Schweitzer. Over 450 chemicals and environments are included in
these surveys. "1 lb = 0.4536 kg.

Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Mon Sep 14 05:37:34 EDT 2020
Downloaded/printed by
Cambridge University Engineering Dept. (Cambridge University Engineering Dept.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
162 JOURNAL OF TESTING AND EVALUATION
Certainly, the results of a series of these analyses would highlight
those applications where the use of stainless steel is critical. Re-
search efforts directed towards developing alternatives for these
specific applications could then be considered. This approach is
consistent with the previously quoted conclusion and recommenda-
tion of the N M A B report [I].
Conclusions
1. For elevated temperature applications requiring oxidation re-
sistance, several low- and non-chromium steels appear to be prom-
ising alternatives for Type 304 stainless steel. These are:
(a) A modified 9Cr-lMo steel developed by Oak Ridge Na-
tional Laboratories ( O R N L ) - - T h i s steel probably is
good up to 649°C (1200°F).
( b) 9 to 14% chromium austenitic steels--These steels ap-
pear to be good up to 760°C (1400°F).
(c) Low-carbon nodular cast &ons containing silicon and
molybdenum--These materials reportedly are good up
to 816°C (1500°F) but probably have low strength.
2. For the automobile catalytic converter, the substitution of
6% chromium steel for 12% chromium steel appears to be possi-
ble.
3. A review of available tables of material for corrosion resisting
application indicates that, for at least 95% of the environments
listed, alternatives to stainless steel are available.
4. One specific application for stainless steel, the automobile,
was studied critically. Without detriment to the operation of the
vehicle, alternative materials might be used with a chromium sav-
ings of 72 %.
5. Although research programs to develop substitutes for chro-
mium in stainless steel may be desirable, the objective of any pro-
gram should be a specific end use; otherwise the acceptance by in-
dustry of the results of the program may be disappointing.
6 With respect to stainless steels, the conclusions and recom-
mendations of N M A B Report NMAB-335 [1] are valid.
References
[1] "Contingency Plans for Chromium Utilization," Report NMAB-335,
National Materials Advisory Board, National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, DC, t978.
[2] F|oreen, S., "An Examination of Chromium Substitution in Stainless
Steel," Metallurgical Transactions, Vol. 13A, Nov. 1982, pp. 2003-
2012.
[3] Stephens, J. R., Barrett, C. A., and Gyorgak, C. A., "Mechanical
Properties and Oxidation and Corrosion Resistance of Reduced-Chro-
mium 304 Stainless Steel Alloys," NASA Report N80-11188/3, Na-
tional Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC. Nov.
1979.
[4] Stephens, J. R., "New Alloys to Conserve Critical Elements," NASA
Report NASA-TM-78840: E-9551, National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, DC, 1978.
[5] Stephens, J. R., "Corrosion/Oxidation Behavior of Stainless Steels of
Reduced Chromium Content," Reviews on Coating and Corrosion,
Vol. 3, No. 4, 1979, pp. 2tl-252.
[6] Spaeder, C. E., Jr., and Brickner, K. G., "Modified Type 316 Stain-
less Steel with Low Tendency to Form Sigma," in Advances in the
Technology of Stainless Steels and Related Alloys, ASTM STP 369,
American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1965.
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Mon Sep 14 05:37:34 EDT 2020
Downloaded/printed by
Cambridge University Engineering Dept. (Cambridge University Engineering Dept.) pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
[ 7] Muca, B. and DuBois, B., "About the Partial Substitution of Chro-
mium in 18Cr-10Ni Stainless Steels," Comptes Rendus des Seances
de l'Academie des Sciences, Series II, Vol. 293, No. 4, 1981, pp. 283-
286.
[8] Banerji, S. K., "An Austenitic Stainless Steel Without Nickel and
Chromium," Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, Vol. 30,
1977, pp. 186-189.
[9] Gareia, J. C., Rosas, N., and Rioja, R. J., "Development of Oxida-
tion-Resistant Fe-Mn-AI Alloys," MetatProgress, Aug. 1982, pp. 47-
S0.
[10] Gibson, R. C., "Development of a Ductile, Oxidation-Resistant,
Low-Density Alloy System for Intermediate Temperature Use," Final
Report to U.S. Navy, Bureau of Aeronautics, Contract 60-6025-c, 15
Oct. 1959 to 15 Oct. 1960, Crucible Steel Company of America and
Syracuse Research Laboratory, now Colt Industries Research Center,
Pittsburgh, PA.
[1l] "Mn-Cr-AI Austenitic Stainless Steel," U.S. Patent No. 3,201,230, 17
Aug. 1965.
[12] "Low-Cost, High-Temperature Oxidation-Resistant Steel," U.S. Pa-
tent No. 4,141,724, 27 Feb. 1979.
[13] Proceedings of Public Workshop, Vanderbilt University, "Trends in
Critical Materials Requirements for Steels of the Future: Conserva-
tion and Substitution Technology for Chromium," 4-7 Oct. 1982, Re-
port NBSIR 83-2679-2, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington,
DC, Vol. IIA, p. 25 and Vol. lIB, p. 29.
[14] Proceedings of Public Workshop, Vanderbilt University, "Trends in
Critical Materials Requirements for Steels of the Future: Conserva-
tion and Substitution Technology for Chromium," 4-7 Oct. 1982, Re-
port NBSIR 83-2679-2, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington,
DC, Vol. IIB, p. 27.
[15] Proceedings of Public Workshop, Vanderbilt University, "Trends in
Critical Materials Requirements for Steels of the Future: Conserva-
tion and Substitution Technology for Chromium," 4-7 Oct. 1982, Re-
port NBSIR 83-2679-2, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington,
DC, Vol. IIA, p. 8.
[16] Dunning J. S., "An Iron-Aluminum-Molybdenum Alloy as a Chro-
mium-Free Stainless Steel Substitute," Report 8654, U.S. Depart-
ment of Interior, Washington, DC, 1982.
[17] Loria, E. A., "Note on the Metallurgy of Fe-Cr-AI Alloys," Metallur-
gical Transactions A, March 1980, pp. 537-539.
[18] Savitsky, E. M. et al, "Influence of Rare Earth Metals on the Me-
chanical Properties of Iron-Aluminum Alloys," Metal Sc&nce and
Heat Treatment of Metals, Vot. 3, 1959, pp. 43-50.
[19] Medovar, B. I. et al, "Electroslag Welding of Cr-Ni-A1 Stainless
Steel," Avtomaticheskaia Svarka, Izdatelstvo, Vol. 12, 1959, pp. 33-
44.
[20] "Iron-Aluminum Alloys," U.S. Patent No. 2,920,955, 12 Jan. 1960.
[21] "Iron-Aluminum Alloy Systems," PB Reports 138,158 and 137,502,
from U.S. Government Research Reports, Vol. 31, 1959.
[22] "Aluminum-Containing Iron-Base Alloys," U.S. Patent No.
2,930,690, 29 March 1960.
[23] Sehmatz, D. J., "Strength and Properties of Austenitic Alloys Con-
taining Aluminum and Silicon," Transactions of American Society
for Metals, Vot. 52, 1960, pp. 898-909.
[24] Dalrymple, W. J., "Precipitation Hardenable Iron-Aluminum Al-
loys," PB Report 140,383, U.S. Government Research Reports, Vol.
32, 1959, p. 238.
[25] "Iron-Aluminum Alloys," U.S.S.R. Patent No. 126,894, I0 March
1960.
[26] "Iron-Manganese-Aluminum Alloys," British Patent No. 841,366.
[27] Schmehl, N. G. et al, "Scaling of Pure Iron Aluminum Alloys in Oxy-
gen," Archivfiir das Eisenhuettenwesen, Vol. 30, 1959, pp. 345-349.
[28] "Iron-Aluminum Alloys," British Patent No. 798,892, 30 July 1958.
[29] "Iron-Aluminum Alloys," U.S. Patent No. 2,845,365, 29 July 1958.
[30] Zackey, V. F. and Goering, W. A., "The Air Melting of Iron-Alumi-
num Alloys," Transactions of the Metallurgical Soc&ty of AIME,
Vol. 212, 1958, pp. 203-204.
[31] "Iron-Aluminum Alloys," U.S. Patent No. 2,804,387, 27 Aug. 1957.
[32] "Coating Steel with Aluminum," U.S. Patent No. 2,809,422, 15 Oct.
1957.
[33] "Stainless Steel," U.S. Patent No. 3,594,156, 20 July 1971.