Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020

ARTICLE INFO
Article ID: 05-14-02-0013
© 2021 SAE International
doi:10.4271/05-14-02-0013

Susceptibility of Aluminum
Alloy 7075 T6 to Stress Corrosion
Cracking
Jafar Taher Al-Haidary,1 Jamil Sami Haddad, 2 Fadi Anton Alfaqs,2 and Fouad Fakhri Zayadin3
1
University of Technology, Iraq
2
Al-Balqa Applied University, Jordan
3
Jubail Industrial College, Saudi Arabia

History
Abstract Received: 25 Feb 2020
One of the most important aluminum (Al) alloys among the 7XXX series is 7075 in the T6 temper Revised: 31 Jul 2020
condition. However, 7075 T6 alloy is proven to be susceptible to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) and Accepted: 27 Aug 2020
has caused many service failures of airplanes. In this research, the susceptibility of 7075 T6 alloys e-Available: 22 Sep 2020
to SCC is approached according to many variables of stress, sodium chloride (NaCl) concentration,
pH variation, and aeration. The testing method selected was the three-point bending under complete Keywords
immersion for a period of 40 days. The results indicate that the threshold for SCC in 7075 T6 alloy Stress corrosion cracking
lies between 220 and 340 MPa in environments containing as low as 0.5wt% NaCl concentrations (SCC), Al alloy 7075 T6,
in both neutral and acid solutions. The cracking direction found was different from the expected Pitting
using other techniques such as tensile or notched specimens, which opens a new gate for testing
and monitoring SCC in the 7XXX series. In addition to SCC, pitting was highly noticed and was found Citation
related to stress intensity, the higher the stress the more intense the pitting. However, in a pH of 2 Al-Haidary, J., Haddad, J.,
and pH of 4 acid solutions, uniform corrosion was more predominant than pitting and contributed Alfaqs, F., and Zayadin, F.,
to more uniform surface damage. “Susceptibility of Aluminum
A very remarkable effect for the conjugation of pitting and SCC can be seen in samples stressed Alloy 7075 T6 to Stress
to Ultimate Tensile Strength (UTS) levels and UTS under aerated solution, SCC cross-connected Corrosion Cracking,”
horizontal pits together creating semi-loose particles of the alloy, a result that was not observed in SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf.
14(2):2021,
previous literature of related researches.
doi:10.4271/05-14-02-0013.

ISSN: 1946-3979
e-ISSN: 1946-3987

1
 Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020
2 Al-Haidary et al. / SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. / Volume 14, Issue 2, 2021
1. Introduction
S
tress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) could be defined as
the combined action of stress and corrosion that leads
to cracking of metals [1, 2, 3]. Aluminum (Al) alloys
that contain appreciable amounts of soluble alloying elements,
primarily Cu, Mg, Si, and Zn, are susceptible to SCC. An
extensive failure analysis shows how many service failures
occurred in the industry and what kind of alloys and stresses
led to the initiation and propagation of stress corrosion (SC)
cracks that caused these service failures.
Researchers [4, 5, 6, 7] limited the stress that causes the
SCC to tensile stress, in their definition of SCC, since no case
of SCC had been experienced with compressive stress. The
7XXX series Al alloys containing Al-Zn-Mg-Cu have been
widely used in aircraft structures due to their high strength and
high stress-to-density ratio. This series of alloys provides higher
strength in the T6 temper, but it was found prone to SCC [8].
In general, alloys in the 7XXX series in T6 condition are
sensitive to SCC failure in sodium chloride (NaCl) solution.
It is generally accepted that the SCC mechanism for these
alloys is due to anodic dissolution, promoted by galvanic
coupling between the intermetallic compound and the matrix,
or is attributed to atomic hydrogen embrittlement, derived
from cathodic reaction [9, 10].
One of the most important alloys among the 7XXX series
is 7075  in the T6 temper condition. Unfortunately, it has
caused many service failures of airplanes and thus was
replaced, in high-stress structures, by another heat treatment
of the same alloy (T73) that actually has lower mechanical
properties [11].
Practically, SCC and intercrystalline corrosion are the
main problems associated with the Al alloys used in the
aircraft industry. Many studies [1, 12, 13] were carried out to
identify the causes of SCC, the main three elements of this
phenomenon are the combined effect of stress, corrosive envi-
ronment, and a susceptible material.
The function of SCC may range from initial slip or forma-
tion of deformation twins to propagate short bursts of cleavage
from the base of the corrosion pit, since a pit may act as stress
raisers for the nucleation of cracks [4, 12, 13], and then under
the combined action of stress and corrosion, these cracks
would be propagated.
The stresses induced in the corroded parts come from
different sources applied, residual, thermal, or welding. Brown
et al. [6] suggested the self-generation of stress. They showed
that both solid and gaseous corrosion products (e.g., hydrogen)
must be considered. Corrosion products can exert a wedging
action, developing lateral tensile stresses [4, 6, 7].
One important factor of SC behavior of heat-treated Al
alloys is the direction of tensile stressing in relation to the
direction of rolling and grain flow. The stress corrosion resis-
tance (SCR) for specimens in the three principal directions,
i.e., longitudinal, long transverse, and short transverse, is, to
a great extent, controlled by the morphology and shape of the
grains, which in turn is related to the composition and fabrica-
tion history [14].
SC tests are divided into laboratory acceleration tests,
simulation tests, and field tests. According to the factors of
SC, the research methods of SC can be divided into three
types: physical method, electrochemical test, and mechan-
ical test [15].
R.E. Ricker et al. [16] concluded that 7075 T6 exhibited
reduced strengths and failure strains (times) in the solutions
compared with laboratory air under slow strain rate loading.
Experiments carried out by Sprowls and Brown, in one of the
older studies [17], have demonstrated that 7075 T6 was suscep-
tible only in some halides, such as NaCl, NaBe, and NaI, in
contrast to the behavior of 2129 T87 that failed in only a
few environments.
Kramer et al. [18] studied the use of 2519 Al alloy, plate,
extrusions, ring roll forgings, and weldments, all exhibited
excellent SCC resistance and hand-forged parts were found
to exhibit SCC susceptibility that could be avoided by a special
heat-treatment process.
According to Parkins [19], this type of cracking presents
an especially critical case for the industry, since not only it is
highly localized but also it can occur in environments that
are merely mildly corrosive to the material.
Hence, this research was conducted in order to study
the susceptibility of 7075 T6 to SCC under different condi-
tions and determine the threshold stress for SCC, as well as
to determine the effect of chloride concentration and
­v isualize the effect of lowering pH and the effect of rolling
direction. This work also presented the corresponding and
related types of corrosion that appeared during the experi-
ments of SCC. At last, the work also aimed to study the effect
of aeration on SCC.
2. Experimental Procedure
2.1. Test Material
The material used is 7075 T6, courtesy of Jordan Aircraft
Maintenance Company (JorAMCo); the samples were taken
from a single sheet. Samples with 1.8 mm thickness were taken
as longitudinal and transverse to the rolling direction. The
chemical composition of the alloy is 5.4Zn 2.6Mg 1.2Cu 0.2Cr
0.2Fe balance Al. A simple tensile test was used to determine
the samples’ mechanical properties; the test was applied on
three strips, 200 mm long, 25 mm wide, and 1.8 mm thick,
parallel to the rolling direction.
2.2. Stressing Method
The selected testing method for SCC is the three-point
bending. This method is preferred for the virtues of locating
the higher stress at a specific point, ease of creating fixtures,
ease of moving and transporting samples while still under
test, and the ability to apply visual inspection using a low-
magnification microscope and to utilize a large number of
samples at the same time and for long periods.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020
Al-Haidary et al. / SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. / Volume 14, Issue 2, 2021 3
 FIGURE 1   Schematic diagram of sample isolation.
© SAE International
All samples were isolated at the points of contact using
layers of rubber and plastic film to prevent any kind of metallic
contact, which can cause cathodic corrosion or crevice corro-
sion. A schematic diagram of the isolation method is shown
in Figure 1, where two to three layers were used according to
the applied stress on the three contact points.
As specified by NACE (National Association of Corrosion
Engineers), three-point loaded specimens are usually flat
strips 25-50 mm wide and 125-250 mm long. The thickness
of the specimen is usually dictated by the mechanical proper-
ties of the material and the product form available. Specimen
dimensions can be modified to suit specific needs, but the
above approximate dimensions should be preserved [20].
In three point-loaded specimens, the sample is subject to
both tensile and compression stresses, where the tensile is on
the upper surface and compression is on the lower, the
maximum bending stress occurs at midlength of the specimen
and decreases linearly to zero at the outer supports [20], and
the expected results should be at the tensile surface at the
maximum stress.
2.2.1. Stress Calculation Strips of Al 7075 T6 were to
be fixed at three-point bending fixtures at different stresses,
and to be subjected to selected environments for a total pe-
riod of 40 days, during which a nondestructive surface inves-
tigation was done. Surface loading at the three-point bend-
ing test was applied by bending the sample to a certain radius
at which the following relation acquires the required theo-
retical stress:
σ = 6 t E y / H2 Eq. (1)
where σ is the resultant applied stress, t is thickness, E is
modulus of elasticity, y is deflection, and H is the distance
between the outside supporting points [4]. Samples were loaded
at the theoretical stresses of yield strength (YS), 75%, 50%, and
25% of the YS. Additional samples at the ultimate tensile
strength (UTS) were used at aerated and 3.5wt% and 2.5wt%
NaCl solutions and with pH of 2. Reference samples were added
unstressed in 3.5wt% NaCl, pH of 2, aerated solution.
The test was considered complete after a period of 40 days
when cracks were visible in some samples.
2.3. Test Solution
According to NASA’s “Preferred Reliability Practice no.
PD-ED-1227,” environments causing SCC in Al alloys are
NaCl-H2O2 solution, NaCl solution, seawater and air, and
water vapor [21]. The most common environment for 7075 T6
alloy is chloride ions in different concentrations [22], the
maximum was considered as 3.5wt% NaCl in distilled water
(marine environment equivalent) [23]. Other concentrations
were 2.5, 1.5, and 0.5wt%.
The 3.5wt% concentration was subjected separately to
further investigation under a pH of 4, pH of 2, and
aerated solutions.
3. Results and Discussion
SCC tests are mainly qualitative, not quantitative, because
once the crack has formed the stress conditions change as
previously noted by Equation 1.
Another cause for conditions change is such that the outer
layer of the specimen is not subject to tensile stress alone but
also to a complex combination of tensile and bending stresses.
The propagating crack will then deviate from the central line
[8]. In general experience, however, multiple tangled cracks
are often observed in SCC. In this case, the multiple cracks
result in a complex change in local stress and then the stress
intensity factor, so that it is difficult to predict the empirical
crack growth behavior [24] which at the beginning of the
experiment caused difficulties in finding the cracks, since the
expected results were expected on the upper surface of
the sample.
When tips of approaching cracks are close to each other,
their growth rate is accelerated due to the enhancement of the
stress field around the crack tip [25]. On the other hand, the
growth rate is suppressed when the crack tip approaches the
face of the neighboring crack due to the stress shielding
effect [26].
Thus, in this work, the cracking of 7075 T6 alloys was
studied according to its occurrence, location, and direction,
not according to length and concentration or intensity. Cracks
found in the present research varied according to length, level
of branching, concentration of cracking at a certain area, and
crack initiation point.
In the same sample, some cracks were found to initiate
at the pit and others at the surface of the sample, and a newly
created crack could be found in the same sample with a crack
that reached a point where its tip got blunted.
Results of SCC were found in all samples subjected to
stresses of 75% YS, YS, and UTS, which include samples of
3.5wt% NaCl, transverse and parallel to the rolling direction;
2.5wt%, 1.5wt%, and 0.5wt% NaCl solutions; and pH of 2, pH
of 4, and aerated 3.5wt% NaCl solutions. This indicates that
the threshold for SCC for 7075 T6 in pure NaCl solutions
exceeds 50% of YS with NaCl concentrations down to 0.5wt%.
In all samples, cracking was found in the region of higher
stress in the three-point loading assembly shown in Figure 2.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020
4 Al-Haidary et al. / SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. / Volume 14, Issue 2, 2021
 FIGURE 2   Cracking location and growth direction with
relation to sample dimensions.
© SAE International
Most of the cracks initiated at the pitting sites are in agreement
with Prevéy et al. [27].
Cracks were initiated at the side of the sample parallel to
the rolling surface. Figure 2 shows the sites of cracking at the
sample. Petroyiannis et al. [28] found a similar type of crack
propagation in 2024 Al alloy and referred this type of cracking
to Corrosion-Induced Hydrogen Embrittlement. This type of
corrosion can be taken into account to cause cracking in test
samples, taking into consideration that hydrogen gas was
evolving during the experiment as a result of uniform corrosion.
This direction and location of cracking would decrease
the total stress applied at the surface of the sample. Referring
to the three-point loading stress formula (1), stress can
be decreased by decreasing the thickness of the sample. Cracks
grew in a semiparallel form, creating layers of low thicknesses.
Figure 3 illustrates parallel crack growth starting at the side
surface and associated with pitting towards the center.
These cracks will reduce the stresses of the sample during
their propagation as explained in Equation 1.
Usually, SCC illustration can be displayed by using tech-
niques that ensure complete fracture such as simple low strain
rate tensile testing [29]; in our results cracks are shown in
cross-section, which adds to the unicity of the results.
 FIGURE 3  SEM micrograph showing parallel cracks growth
from the edge towards the center in 3.5wt% NaCl sample at UTS.
© SAE International
Unlike common SCC results, optical microscope photos
showed discontinuity in cracking and almost without
branching. Following the behavior of SC cracks, we found
that it is a property of the material; thus branching, direction,
and shape of the crack differ from one metal to another and
from different heat treatment of the same metal to another.
Comparing the type of cracking in relation to the rolling
direction, 3.5wt% NaCl YS parallel to the rolling direction
and 3.5wt% NaCl YS transverse to rolling direction, there is
no noticeable difference between the two, which means that
the direction of rolling did not affect the SCC.
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) micrograph of the
crack in Figure 4 shows a more detailed view of the crack’s
topography and growth. It shows the crack extending from
the surface of the specimen with secondary parallel cracks.
SEM micrograph also shows corrosion products inside the
crack, which confirms the process of anodic dissolution.
Some of the crack initiations appear to be the develop-
ment of pits into cracks, and these produce internal cracks
near the path of the original one. This was assured by observing
newly created cracks as in Figure 5. Since it is not usually easy
to access the planar direction of the crack, these parallel cracks
may also be branches of SCC.
A similar pit photographed by SEM, Figure 5, shows a
deep pit with adjacent cracks and cracks initiating at the
surface of the sample, which indicates that cracks do not only
initiate at the pit but may also start as intergranular corrosion
and propagate throughout the alloy. Those results agree with
 FIGURE 4   SEM micrograph showing crack growth
direction, corrosion products, and a region of discontinuity.
© SAE International
 Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020

Al-Haidary et al. / SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. / Volume 14, Issue 2, 2021 5

 FIGURE 5   SEM pits and cracks initiating at the side surface  FIGURE 7   SEM micrograph showing crack tip for an SC
of 7075 T6. crack at 75% of YS in 1.5% NaCl.
© SAE International

© SAE International
Szklarska Smialowska and Gust [30] in their research on
austenitic Cr-Ni steel in MgCl2 solution, which showed that
SCC could initiate on the free surface of the material.
When subjected to etching, the crack appears to be inter-
granular, and discontinuity regions of the crack are at the
grain boundaries, where turning around the grain seems to
reduce the crack width. Figure 6 shows a discontinuity of the
crack on the etched 7075 T6 alloy.
The crack tip is normally blunted on the grain bound-
aries; consequently, a fine tip is divided into two branches,
this results in stress division and lowering crack tip force to
an extent at which the crack cannot propagate further.
Figure 7 shows a crack tip blunted by tip division. On
high magnification the two tips seem to be blurring, perhaps
due to some sort of very low propagation rate still in progress
because of the stress concentration still present at the tip
region; otherwise, they bended deeper inside the sample to
become more than the depth of the field of the SEM.
The division of crack tips also results in lowering the overall
stress in the sample. This process is what makes the SCC study
more qualitative; since the crack movement is unpredictable,
the amount by which the stress changes is also unpredictable.
Another remarkable type of cracking was found in
samples at UTS. This type of cracking connected the pits at
the surface of samples, creating semi-loose fragment particles
of the alloy.
Cracking also took place at the surface of the sample
around the pits; see Figure 8. This result was also found by
Al-Tal and Badran [31] only observed in a shallow layer of the
corrosion products found on the surface.

 FIGURE 8   Surface cracking found in corrosion products in

2.5wt% NaCl subjected to YS bending stress.
 FIGURE 6   SEM micrograph of SCC for Al alloy 7075 T6.
© SAE International
© SAE International
 Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020
6 Al-Haidary et al. / SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. / Volume 14, Issue 2, 2021
4. Conclusions
From the conducted work, the following conclusions
are obtained:
1. Al alloy 7075 T6 is susceptible to SCC under specified
conditions of stress and environment.
2. The threshold for SCC for Al alloy 7075 T6 lies
between 50% and 75% of YS, i.e., 230 and 345 MPa.
3. Chloride concentration down to 0.5% NaCl is a
convenient environment for SCC.
4. Higher chloride concentration can affect the uniform
corrosion phenomenon, but does not directly affect
the SCC.
5. An acidic environment below a pH of 4 can enhance
uniform corrosion in addition to SCC.
6. Rolling direction does not have a dramatic effect
upon the SCC in the 7075 T6 alloy tested.
7. SC cracks may initiate at pitting sites or the free
surface of samples.
References
1. Gere, J., and Goodno, B.J., Mechanics of Materials, Eighth
Edition (Cengage Learning, 2012), 561.
2. Abolikhina, E.V., and Molyar, A.G., “Corrosion of Aircraft
Structure Made of Aluminum Alloys,” Mater. Sci. 39(6):889-
894, 2003.
3. Yue, T.M., Yan, L.J., Dong, C.F., and Chan, C.P., “Stress
Corrosion Cracking Behaviour of Laser Treated Aluminium
Alloy 7075 Using a Slow Strain Rate Test,” Mater. Sci. Tech.
21(8):961-966, 2005.
4. Fontana, M.G. and Green, N.D., Corrosion Engineering,
Third Edition (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986) Chapter
3, 91.
5. Sozańska, M., Mościcki, A., and Chmiela, B.,
“Characterization of Corrosion and Stress Corrosion
Cracking of AE44 Magnesium Alloy,” Arch. Metall. Mater.
65(1):479-484, 2020.
6. Brown, B., Sprawls, D.O., and Shumaker, M.B., Stress
Corrosion of Metals, ASTM STP 518 (West Conshohocken,
PA: ASTM International, 1972), 98.
7. Fridlyander, I.N., “High Strength Aluminum Alloys with
Zinc, Magnesium and Copper,” Metal Science and Heat
Treatment 45(9-10):341-351, 2003.
8. Yang, J.-G., and Ou, B.-L., “Influence of Microstructure on
the Mechanical Properties and Stress Corrosion
Susceptibility 7050 Al-Alloy,” Scandinavian Journal of
Metallurgy 30(3):158-167, 2001.
9. Buhl, B.H., Braun, R., Yuan, C., and Helin, J., “Fracture
Properties Of 7010 and 7050 Aluminum Alloys under Inert
and Aggressive Environment Conditions,” DLR-FB 91-35,
Instituts fur Werkstoff-Forschung, Kohn,1991, 61.
10. Puiggali, M., Zielinski, A., Oive, J.M., Ronauld, E. et al.,
“Effect of Microstructure on SCC of an Al-Zn-Mg-Cu Alloy,”
Corros. Sci. 40(4/5):805-819, 1998.
11. Altenbach, C., Schnatterer, C., Mercado, U.A., Suuronen,
J.-P. et al., “Synchrotron-Based Holotomography and X-Ray
Fluorescence Study on the Stress Corrosion Cracking
Behavior of the Peak-Aged 7075 Aluminum Alloy,” Journal
of Alloys and Compounds 817:152722, Mar. 2020.
12. Benavides, S., Corrosion Control in the Aerospace Industry
(Boca Raton, FL: Woodhead Publishing, 2009).
13. Dova, B., Conde, A., and De Damborwnea, J., “Stress
Corrosion Cracking of B13, A New High Strength
Aluminium Lithium Alloy,” Corros. Sci. 48(12):4113-
4126, 2006.
14. Rubaiey, S., “Stress Corrosion Cracking of High Strength
Aluminium Alloys,” MSc. thesis, Department of Production
Eng. and Metallurgy-Univ. of Technology, Iraq, 1985.
15. Chen, X., Li, Q., Pan, J., Liu, J. et al., “Experimental Study on
Stress Corrosion of X12Cr13 Stainless Steel in Natural Gas
Environment,” Journal of Materials Research and Technology
9(3):3064-3074, May-June 2020.
16. Ricker, R.E., Lee, E.U., Taylor, R., Lei, C. et al., “Chloride Ion
Activity and Susceptibility of Al Alloys 7075-T6 and 5083-
H131 to Stress Corrosion Cracking,” Metallurgical and
Materials Transactions A 44a:1353, Mar. 2013.
17. Sprawls, D. and Brown, R., “Influence Of Stress And
Environment On The Stress-Corrosion Cracking Of High
Strength Aluminum Alloys,” in Fundamental Aspects of
SCC, Conference Proceeding, Ohio State Univ., Columbus,
OH, 1967, 466.
18. Kramer, L., Blair, T., Blough, S., Fisher, J. Jr. et al.,
“Susceptibility of Various Product Forms of Aluminum
Alloy 2519,” JMEPEG 11(6):645-650, 2002.
19. Parkins, R.N., Revie, Ed, “Stress Corrosion Cracking,” in
Uhlig’s Corrosion Handbook, Second Edition (New York:
Wiley, 2000).
20. Sedriks, J. and Syrett, B.C., Stress Corrosion Cracking Test
Methods (Houston, TX: National Association of Corrosion
Engineers, 1990), Chapter 3, 20.
21. NASA Preferred Reliability Practice, “Controlling Stress
Corrosion Cracking in Aerospace Applications,” Practice
No. PD-ED-1227, 1992, 5 pages.
22. Lynch, S.P., “Failures of Engineering Components due to
Environmentally Assisted Cracking,” Practical Failure
Analysis (PFANF8) 3(5):33-42, Oct. 2003.
23. ASTM G47-98, Standard Test Method for Determining
Susceptibility to Stress-Corrosion Cracking of 2XXX and
7XXX Aluminum Alloy Products, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, PA, 1998.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Fadi Alfaqs, Monday, October 12, 2020

Al-Haidary et al. / SAE Int. J. Mater. Manuf. / Volume 14, Issue 2, 2021 7

24. Kamaya, M., and Haruna, T., “Influence of Local Stress on
Initiation Behavior of Stress Corrosion Cracking for
Sensitized 304 Stainless Steel,” Corros. Sci. 49(8):3303-
3324, 2007.
25. Kamaya, M., and Kitamura, T., “Stress Intensity Factors of
Interacting Parallel Surface Cracks,” Transactions of JSME
68:1112-1119, 2002.
26. Kamaya, M., “A Crack Growth Evaluation Method for
Multiple Interacting Cracks,” JSME International Journal
(Series A) 46:15-23, 2003.
27. Prevéy, P.S., Jayaraman, N., and Cammett, J.T., “Mitigation
of Active Corrosion Fatigue and Corrosion Pit Initiated
Fatigue in AA7075-T6 with Low Plasticity Burnishing,” in
ASIP Conference, Georgia, USA, Dec. 2-4, 2003.
28. Petroyiannis, P.V., Kamoutsi, E., Kermanidis, A.T., Pantelakis,
S.G. et al., “Evidence on the Corrosion-Induced Hydrogen
Embrittlement of the 2024 Aluminum Alloy,” Fatigue
Fracture Engineering Mater Structure 28:565-574, 2005.
29. Mathur, D., Gouma, P.I., and Buchhe, R.G., “Intergranular
and Stress Corrosion Cracking Behavior of Al-Li-Cu Alloy
AF/C458 after Artificial Aging,” presented at in Lightweight
Alloys for Aerospace Applications: Deformation, Fatigue and
Environmental Fracture-I, session, New Orleans, Louisiana,
Feb. 14, 2001.
30. Szklarska-Smialowska, Z., and Gust, J., “The Initiation of Stress
Corrosion Cracks and Pits in Austenitic Cr-Ni Steel in MgCl2
Solutions At 40-90oC,” Corrosion Science 19:753-765, 1979.
31. Al-Tal, M. and Badran, O., “The Effect of Shot Peening on the
Stress Corrosion Cracking Resistance of 304 AISI Stainless
Steel Immersed in NaCl Solution,” in The First Jordanian
International Conference of Materials Science and
Engineering, Al-Salt, Jordan, May 3-5, 2005, 138-150.

© 2021 SAE International. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this work are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. Responsibility for the content of the work lies
solely with the author(s).