Corrosion Monitoring Methods

500 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods
Author: J.H. (John) Kmetz
Abstract
This section describes various methods for corrosion monitoring and testing. These
include electronic devices comprised of meter and probe, corrosion specimens
(weight loss coupons) in field equipment, probes to detect the presence of hydrogen,
and nondestructive test methods.
Contents Page
510 Overview of Monitoring Tools 500-3

520 Electronic Corrosion-Monitoring Devices 500-4
521 Corrosometer
522 Polarization Resistance Probes (PAIR and Corrater)
523 Galvanic Probes
530 Corrosion Specimens 500-22
531 Types of Corrosion Specimen Assemblies
532 Preparation of Corrosion Specimens
533 Exposure Conditions—Important Factors
534 Cleaning of Specimens After Test
535 Visual Examination of Specimens
536 Interpretation and Application of Data
537 Summary
538 Vendors
540 Hydrogen Probes 500-35
541 Mechanism of Hydrogen Damage
542 Hydrogen Pressure Probes (Internally Mounted)
543 Electrochemical Hydrogen Patch Probes (Externally Mounted)
544 Pressure-measuring Patch Probes (Externally Mounted)
Chevron Corporation 500-1 August 1999

500 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods Corrosion Prevention and M etallurgy M anual
545 Future Advancements

550 Nondestructive Testing 500-42
551 Visual/Mechanical Testing
552 Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT)
553 Magnetic Particle Testing (MT)
554 Ultrasonic Testing (UT)
555 Radiographic Testing (RT)
556 Eddy Current (EC)
557 Acoustic Emission (AE)
558 Leak Testing
560 References 500-65
August 1999 500-2 Chevron Corporation

Corrosion Prevention and M etallurgy M anual 500 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods
510 Overview of M onitoring Tools

Section 500 covers many ways to monitor and inspect for corrosion. Some methods
are useful for on-stream measurements, either continuous or periodic. Others are
methods used during shutdowns or for new construction. Figure 500-1 summarizes
the corrosion monitoring methods discussed in this Section and indicates whether
they are used on-stream (O/S), during shutdowns (S/D) or both. A brief description
of the monitoring tool and the section of the manual to which to refer for details are
also given. For information on which tools should be used for various forms of
corrosion, see Reference [13].
Fig. 500-1 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods (1 of 2)

On-Stream (O/S) or Section of
M onitoring Tool Description
Shutdow n (S/D) M anual
Electronic O/S Continuously measure 420
M onitoring Devices corrosion rates. Includes
electric resistance and
polarization type devices
Corrosion O/S Coupons exposed to 430
Specimens service. Removed periodi-
cally to measure corrosion
rates
Hydrogen Probes O/S Probes continuously 440
measure evolved hydrogen,
w hich is correlated to
degree of corrosion
Visual/M echanical S/D, O/S (leaks) Various visual techniques 451
and mechanical measure-
ment devices to determine
corrosion rates
Liquid Penetrant S/D Dye penetrant used to look 452
Testing (PT) for surface-breaking
cracks
M agnetic Particle S/D M ore sensitive penetrant 453
Testing (M T) testing to detect surface-
breaking, or close-to-
surface cracks
Ultrasonic Testing S/D, O/S Sound w aves are reflected 454
(UT) back and evaluated. Used
to measure thickness or to
find cracks
Radiographic S/D, O/S X-rays used to view condi- 455
Testing (RT) tion of internal surface,
measure thickness, or look
for cracking

Fig. 500-1 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods (2 of 2)

On-Stream (O/S) or Section of
M onitoring Tool Description
Shutdow n (S/D) M anual
Eddy Current S/D Used to detect pitting, 456
testing cracking, or to measure
thickness, often in heat
exchanger tubes
Acoustic Emission S/D, O/S M easures the release of 457
energy during cracking due
to stress
Leak Testing S/D Usually hydrotesting. Used 458
to determine adequate
strength under pressure or
to find a leak
520 Electronic Corrosion-M onitoring Devices

Weight loss coupons (Section 530) are the oldest and often most reliable method for
determining the corrosion rates of a metal in a given environment. The corrosion
monitoring devices described here attempt to provide similar information, but more
quickly. Whereas weight loss coupons require weeks or even months to provide reli-
able data, some electronic corrosion-monitoring devices give corrosion rate in a few
days, and others, instantly. All of these devices can record data continuously.
Although the corrosion measuring devices described in this section can be quite
effective, one must carefully interpret the data they supply. We rarely rely solely on
them to predict absolute corrosion rates of a system.
However, electronic measuring devices are very useful to determine relative corro-
sion rates and to pinpoint periods of high or low corrosion rates. For these reasons,
they are often used in studying the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitor programs or
the effects of specific process changes on corrosion.
This section will describe the Corrosometer, Corrater, PAIR, and galvanic probes,
and provide ordering information for common systems. It will also outline potential
disadvantages of each of these devices.
521 Corrosometer
The term “Corrosometer” has come loosely to mean both probe and meter, but more
correctly it refers to the meter made by Rohrback Cosasco Corporation that
measures and displays the resistance changes of the metal wire or strips contained in
the probe. In the text below “Corrosometer” will mean meter only. This section
describes both meter and probe, tells where to place the probe and how to interpret
its data, and discusses potential field problems.

Theory
This system is an offspring of the weight loss coupon in the sense that the corrosion
rate it gives is proportional to the metal loss of a measuring element per unit time.
Instead of a coupon, the system uses a thin wire, tube, or strip of metal. Rather than
measuring metal loss directly, the meter measures the resistance of the wire. As the
cross-sectional area of the wire decreases through corrosion, the electrical resis-
tance increases. If there were no corrosion, the resistance would remain unchanged.
If the strip corroded at a constant rate, the resistance would steadily increase, and if
the corrosion rate increased suddenly the resistance would increase at an acceler-
ated rate.
The resistance of any metal is a function of both its cross-sectional area and its
temperature. Thus, temperature fluctuations can superimpose resistance fluctua-
tions on the resistance increases due to corrosion. Therefore, the exposed wire is
connected in series to a second wire of the same metal which is shielded from corro-
sion by a protective sheath. These two metal wires are called the measuring and
reference elements, respectively, and are housed in a stainless steel cylinder called
the “probe” (Figure 500-2). The meter compares the resistance of the exposed
(measuring) element versus the protected (reference) element and because the two
elements are always at essentially the same temperature, only the resistance change
from corrosion is seen.
Fig. 500-2 Retractable CORROSOM ETER® Probe (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems,
Inc.)
The dotted lines outline the 1½-inch full port valve, w hich is not supplied w ith the
probe. Typical dimensions are show n below.
Std. Length (in.) ‘A’ Dimension (in.) ‘B’ Dimension (in.)
18 15.75 23.5
24 21.75 29.5
30 27.75 35.5
Types of Corrosometers
Any of a number of Rohrback probe types can be used with any of several models
of the Corrosometer. The most popular and least expensive Corrosometer is the
Rohrback Model CK-3 (Figure 500-3).
Figure 500-4 lists popular types of Rohrback Corrosometer equipment.

Fig. 500-3 CORROSOM ETER® Instrument (RCS M odel CK-3) (Courtesy of Rohrback
Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
Fig. 500-4 Rohrback Corrosometer— Prices and Use (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco
Systems, Inc.)
Rohrback 1999
M odel Prices Use
CK-3 $1995 Portable unit for instant measurement.
CK-4 $2495 Portable unit for instant measurement w ith data storage
4020 LT $2200 Tw o w ire transmitter instrument.
RDC $2795 Battery Pow ered Remote Data Collector
M ate CDM $2995 Intrinsically Safe Data Transfer Device
Types of Corrosometer Probes

This section explains options and provides ordering information for probes suitable
for most process conditions in the field. (Laboratory probes will not be discussed.)
The manufacturers’ literature gives a complete listing of the available probes.
All Corrosometer probes have the same basic design but because of the wide range
of process conditions they encounter, they are available in different materials and
configurations. Choose a probe with an element that is the same as the material of
interest.

The two basic probe types suitable for field conditions are the nonretractable and the
retractable types. For most applications, retractable probes are preferred because
they can be installed on the run. Nonretractable probes can be installed or replaced
only when the system is shut down. The retractable probe is introduced into the
system through a packing gland mounted externally to a full port gate valve.
In addition to the wire-type measuring elements described earlier, Corrosometer
probes are available in cylindrical tube-type elements. Cylindrical elements are
more sensitive but shorter lived than the wire type. The useful life of any probe
element is one-half of its original thickness. The wire elements are available in
40-mil and 80-mil diameters (designated W40 and W80, respectively), and cylin-
drical elements are available in 4-mil and 8-mil wall thicknesses (T4 and T8). The
W40 element is available in the widest range of alloys and sensitivities and is there-
fore the most used. However, cylindrical elements are mechanically more rugged
and are able to resist high velocity streams.
Figure 500-5 lists common materials used for Corrosometer® probes and Rohr-
back’s alloy designation. After choosing the type, thickness, and material of the
measuring element, then choose the model and length of the probe assembly. The
choices are detailed in the manufacturer’s literature. The Company usually chooses
3000 Series probes, which can withstand pressures up to 1000 psi and maximum
temperatures of 500°F. These probes can fit through 1-inch full port gate valves, but
the Company uses 1½ inch full port gate valves whenever possible. Special probes
are available to fit through ¾-inch full port gate valves, and operate at high tempera-
tures and pressures. Packing glands can be purchased from probe suppliers. The
probes come in several standard lengths (refer to Figure 500-2).
Fig. 500-5 Partial list of Corrosometer Probe M aterials (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco
Systems, Inc.)
UNS No. RCS Alloy Code Alloy
K3005 ----- Pipe Grade Carbon Steel
S30400 8013 304 Stainless Steel
N08020 8043 Alloy 20 Cb3
N0440 8054 Monel 400
C71500 8060 Copper Nickel 70/30 CDA #715
N10276 8088 Hastelloy C-276
Probe Selection and Installation Guide

By combining the information given in Figures 500-5 and 500-6, an appropriate
Corrosometer probe assembly can be chosen for most services. For example, a
typical ordering description might be:
3000-W40-K03005-24-1

where:
3000 = Probe Model Number (in this case, for 500°F, 1000 psi max.).
W40 = Element (wire type, 40 mils diameter).
K03005 = Element Material (Carbon Steel).
24 in. = Length of probe (see data sheets for specific dimensions)
1 = Include safety clamp and cables
Fig. 500-6 Retractable Corrosometer Probes— 1000 psi M aximum (1) (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
M aterials Exposed Complete Replacement Coupon Holding
M ax. Temp., °F to Process Probe No. Insert No. Shield No.
500 304 SS, Teflon, Ceramic (2) 3000 3001 623000
500 316 SS, Glass 3000G 3001G 623000
(1) For pressures over 75 psi, a retractor should be used No. 60300. In all c ases a safety clamp and c able may be used (see “ Potential
Problems” ).
(2) Ceramic should not be used for pH above 9, or if fluoride ions are present.
The 1½ inch full port gate valve and associated fittings (shown in Figure 500-2) are
supplied by the Company.
Specialty Probes (See Also “Possible Problems in Field Use”)

Flush-mounted Probes. Several types of Corrosometer probes have been devel-
oped for specialty purposes. The Model 3700 mounts the measuring elements flush
to the equipment, which allows measurements immediately adjacent to the wall
rather than in the bulk solution. The Model 3700 has a maximum temperature limit
of 500°F, with a pressure limit of 1500 psi and is retractable.
High-sensitivity Probe. The Model 2500 (nonretractable) and the Model 3500
(retractable) probes have a greatly increased measuring element surface area to
obtain high sensitivity. The bodies of the 3500 Series probes are made of the same
material as the measuring element, and the element is actually welded onto the
body. Measuring elements are available in carbon steel or Types 304 or 316 stain-
less steel. In the case of carbon steel, the body is Teflon-coated. The ordering speci-
fications for these probes follow the same format as for conventional probes.
Figure 500-7 gives the information needed to order them.
Thus, a typical ordering description for a 3500 Series probe might be:
3500-T20-K03005-18-1
where:
3500 = Probe Model Number, complete retractable probe with packing
gland
T20 = Element, Specifies a T20 measuring element.

K03005 = Element Material (Carbon Steel).

18 in. = Length of probe (see data sheet for specific dimensions).
1 = Include safety clamp and cables
Fig. 500-7 Retractable Corrosometer Probes— High Sensitivity (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
M aximum
Ordering Replacement M aximum Pressure
Temperature Element Type
No. Element No. (psi)
°F
3500 3501 500 1500 T10 T20
3500 HT 3501 HT 850 1000 T10 T20
Coupon Holding Shield. It is possible to obtain corrosion coupon data along with
the Corrosometer data by use of a “coupon holding shield.” The coupon data serves
as a valuable overall check of the Corrosometer data. One end of the coupon
holding shield is screwed onto the end of the Corrosometer while the other end
contains a Teflon insert. A small hole is drilled into the Teflon to attach the coupons,
which are supplied by the Company.
Probes for Marine and Buried Environments. Grounded carbon steel
Corrosometer probes have been developed to monitor the corrosion rate of steel in
marine or buried environments. Potential applications include docks, offshore plat-
forms, ballast tanks of ships, and underground tanks. The grounded probes are elec-
trically connected to the structure of interest so that the structure and the probe are
at the same potential (very important for cathodically protected structures) and in
the same environment. The assumption is that the probe and the structure will
corrode at the same rate. Rohrback’s model 650 is a rod configuration, while model
620HD (Figure 500-8) is a flat plate.
Fig. 500-8 Corrosometer Probe for M arine or Underground Corrosion M onitoring (Rohr-
back M odel 650/620HD) (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
Interpretation of Data. To obtain corrosion data using the Corrosometer, readings

are taken on a regular basis, usually daily or two to three times per week. The
Corrosometer gives the data in terms of microinches of metal loss. The difference

between two Corrosometer readings represents the metal loss, in microinches, that
has occurred in the time interval between the readings. Therefore, if the metal loss is
plotted as a function of time, the slope of the resulting curve gives the corrosion
rate. See Figure 500-9.
Fig. 500-9 Typical Corrosometer Data Plot
To convert the corrosion rate from microinches per hour to mils per year (mpy), one
uses the formula:
Corrosion rate (mpy) = microinches per hour × probe multiplier × 8760 hours
per year × 10-3 mils per microinch.
The “probe multiplier” is a conversion factor stamped on every probe, along with
the element designation. For example, “T8x4” stamped on the probe means that it is
an 8-mil tube element and that the Corrosometer readings should be multiplied by 4
to give true readings (in microinches).
Location of Probes
The probe must be located to accurately reflect the corrosion conditions of concern.
For example, in studying the effectiveness of inhibitors in combatting crude unit
overhead corrosion, the probe should be located in the inlet or outlet line on the
exchanger where the most active corrosion occurs. The reflux drum may be a more
convenient location, but it will not reflect the performance of the inhibitor on the
hotter parts of the system.
Possible Problems in Field Use

Erroneous Readings. Although the Corrosometer and Corrosometer probes are
rugged devices which usually give accurate corrosion data, a few possible problems
in field use can lead to erroneous data. The reference element is protected from the
process stream, so when there is a large temperature swing, the reference element
may “lag” behind the measuring element in responding, causing misleading or even

“negative” corrosion readings. The solution is to avoid taking readings during (or
just after) unstable conditions and to plot enough data to smooth out fluctuations.
Modern probes are claimed to withstand up to ±100°F changes with little effect. The
elements equilibrate a few minutes after a temperature change.
Except for the flush-mounted probes, Corrosometer probes are supplied with a
perforated or slotted metal guard over the measuring element. The purpose of the
guard is to protect the element from mechanical damage, either accidental or from
high velocity streams. This guard also provides protection against any accelerated
corrosion due to velocity effects. If the corrosion problem under study involves
velocity or turbulence effects—accelerated corrosion at piping bends, for
example—then the element guard should be removed to give realistic readings.
Also, in special situations, the guards may cause pressure-drop-induced corrosion
with unrealistic results.
Occasionally, the seal in the tip of the probe will leak, allowing the process fluid to
enter the body of the probe. This fluid can attack the reference element and cause
erratic data. Because the probe bodies of Series 3500 probes are welded to the
sensing element section, they are not as susceptible to this form of failure.
Metallurgy Failure. Corrosometer probes with stainless steel bodies have suffered
chloride stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in crude unit overheads. For this service,
and wherever hot chlorides may be present, carbon-steel-bodied probes should be
used.
Safety Hazards. It is most important in handling Corrosometer probes to recognize
potential safety hazards. The chloride cracking of stainless steel probes described
above is one such potential hazard. The portable battery-operated Corrosometers use
very low currents and voltages, so there is no personnel or fire hazard. However, the
larger Corrosometer models are powered by 110-volt AC, and they must be placed
in electrically safe sites. Safety barriers are available to minimize the problem.
The greatest danger of Corrosometer probes lies in the possibility of a retractable
probe blowing out of a pressurized system, causing personnel injuries or fires. The
Company has experienced probe blowouts, especially when the probe was
inadvertently pulled past the packing gland before the valve was closed during
removal of the probe. Some probes have a “stop ring” to prevent overretraction of
the probe. Other probes are supplied with safety cables, while still others rely upon
the velocity shields to catch at the packing gland. With this last type, the manufac-
turer recommends safety clamps for pressures above 300 psi.
All retractable probes should have safety cables, including 3500 Series probes (the
stop ring can corrode or crack off) for almost all services. A reasonable exception
might be for low temperature, innocuous fluids at near atmospheric pressure.
Safety cables can be purchased or “homemade” (see Figure 500-10). For pressures
above 75 psi, a “probe retractor” is recommended for inserting and retracting the
probes. Although the probes can be manipulated by hand at pressures up to 100 psi,
the retractor is useful even at lower pressures because it allows the packing glands
to be set up tighter and reduces the possibility of leakage.

Fig. 500-10 Safety Cable for Retractable Probes
W here Not to Use the Corrosometer

The Corrosometer should not be used where pitting is the predominant form of
attack, with the possible exception of the grounded probes noted earlier. Since the
corrosion rate shown by the Corrosometer is based on the change in electrical resis-
tance of the entire probe element, the formation of a pit on the element will not
appreciably affect the total resistance. Therefore, the Corrosometer will indicate low
corrosion rates when actually severe pitting may be occurring. When the depth of
the pits increases to the point that the element is almost severed, the Corrosometer
will show an abrupt increase in corrosion rate before total failure of the probe.
Use of the Corrosometer where corrosion is due primarily to oxygen is also often
undesirable, at least with respect to carbon steel. As heavy corrosion product film
forms on the steel probe, it creates a barrier layer for further corrosion. Therefore
the Corrosometer may not give readings which accurately predict the corrosion of
the system under study. This is particularly true in chemically treated, recirculated
cooling water systems where such behavior is frequently experienced.
All of the probes described here share the limitation that they represent the corro-
sion rates at the process stream temperature. This is exactly what we want in terms
of knowing how fast the system’s piping or vessels are corroding; but exchanger
tubes could be corroding at much higher rates because the metal itself is at higher or
lower temperatures.

While the Corrosometer is capable of gathering corrosion data not obtainable by

other means, it must be regarded as a supplement for other types of corrosion
measurements. It is certainly not a substitute for the long-term exposure of corro-
sion test specimens in a process unit or for careful inspection and gaging of the
equipment.
Suppliers
The Corrosometer equipment described in this section can be ordered through
one of the offices listed below. These offices can also provide more detailed
information.
Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.
11841 East Smith Avenue
Santa Fe Springs, California 90670
Tel: (310) 949-0123
FAX: (310) 949-3065
Wilson Walton Group, LTD.
Adams Street, Bowesfield Lane
Stockton/on/Tees
Cleveland, England TS18-3HQ
Tel: 011-44-1642-614106
FAX: 011-44-1642-614100
For Matcor grounded Corrosometers:
Matcor, Inc.
P.O. Box 687
Doylestown, Pennsylvania 18901
Tel: (215) 348-2974
Similar instrumentation is available through Petrolite Equipment—see address in
Section 522.
522 Polarization Resistance Probes (PAIR and Corrater)

The Rohrback “Corrater” and the Petrolite “PAIR” (Polarization Admittance Instan-
taneous Rate) probes are truly instantaneous corrosion monitoring devices. These
probes give direct readings of corrosion rates in mpy and the data can be continu-
ously recorded. It is possible to feed the corrosion data to an alarm which will sound
at a predetermined corrosion rate or even to a control loop to adjust the process (say,
inhibitor injection rate) in direct response to the corrosion rate.
Basic Theory
The polarization resistance probes are based on the principle that when a metal
corrodes in a solution, a flow of electrical current (corrosion current) is established
between the corroding metal and the solution. The corrosion rate is directly propor-
tional to this corrosion current.

The amount of the corrosion current depends on the rate of the corrosion reactions,
which are limited by a number of factors. For example, one such factor might be the
buildup of corrosion products, which limit the rate at which oxygen reaches the
metal surface. One can think of these “limiting factors” as a resistance to the flow of
electrons from the corroding metal to the solution. The greater the resistance, the
lower the corrosion current, and the lower the corrosion rate.
If the corrosion current could be measured directly, the corrosion rate could be
obtained immediately. This is not possible because the current produced in the
anodic reaction on a freely corroding metal electrode is exactly balanced by the
current used in the coupled cathodic reaction—the external current is zero. The
theory for polarization resistance probes depends on the formula
E
I ( measured ) = -------------------
R p + Rs
(Eq. 500-1)
where:
I = Current
E = Voltage applied
Rp = Polarization resistance
Rs = Solution resistance
When a constant small voltage is applied, and the solution resistance is small
compared to Rp, there is a direct relationship between I and Rp. Therefore, corro-
sion current measured by the probe, I, is proportional to actual field corrosion
current or corrosion rate.
The polarization resistance probes are really not much more than a probe with two
or three identical electrodes, a source of small voltage (E), and an instrument to
measure the resulting current and convert it to an mpy corrosion rate reading (see
Figure 500-11). Although the theory is somewhat more complicated than the
Corrosometer, the instrumentation is not and the polarization resistance probes often
cost less than the electrical resistance (Corrosometer) type.
Solution Resistance Effects

A complicating factor to the theory just described can be important when solution
resistance is high. (Ultrahigh purity water has high resistance.) For a high-resis-
tance solution, consider Ohm's Law:
E = IR
(Eq. 500-2)

Fig. 500-11 Tw o-electrode Polarization Probe Voltmeter and Ammeter Circuits [1] (Copyright
NACE International. All rights reserved.)
where:
E = Voltage applied
I = Current
R = Resistance
Total resistance of the system is from the electrode-solution interface and solution
resistance itself. If the solution resistance is high, it accounts for a greater portion of
the total resistance and the current is not representative of the corrosion rate at only
the metal (electrode) solution interface. With a constant applied voltage and a high
resistance the current is lower than it should be and causes an erroneously low
corrosion rate reading.
Figure 500-12 shows the magnitude of error which can result in acid solutions. One
way to get around this problem is to use correction charts which give “true” corro-
sion rates from the indicated corrosion rate and the solution resistivity (if it is
known). Another method is to use a third electrode.
If a third, or “reference,” electrode is placed near one of the electrodes as shown in
Figure 500-13, it will be relatively unaffected by the corrosion current. Thus, the
voltage measured between the reference and test electrodes is dependent solely on
the electrode-solution interface current and not on the resistance of the solution. In
practice, the voltage between the reference and test electrodes is maintained at a
predetermined value by the current flowing from the auxiliary electrode. How much
current is required to maintain this voltage difference depends only on the electrode-
solution interface “resistance” and, therefore, this current is a true reflection of the
corrosion rate.

Fig. 500-12 Use of Resistivity Correction Charts [1] (Copyright NACE International. All rights
reserved.)
Fig. 500-13 Polarization Resistance Probes— Use of a Third (or Reference) Electrode [1]
(Copyright NACE International. All rights reserved.)
Tw o- Versus Three-prong Probes

There are differences of opinion among the polarization resistance probe manufac-
turers as to the optimal probe design. Although no one probe design has emerged

with a clear superiority, from the preceding theory and discussions with the industry,
we can deduce three basic truths:
1. In solutions of low resistance (highly conductive), a two-prong probe is entirely
adequate and usually has cost and reliability advantages over three-prong
probes. The literature indicates that solution resistance effects should not come
into play until the product of the corrosion rate (in mpy) and the resistivity (in
ohm-cm) (see Figure 500-14) is above 10,000.
Fig. 500-14 Specific Resistance of Several Water Solutions
2. Placement of the third (reference) electrode in three-prong probes is critical.

The triangular arrangement of prongs is the least effective. Three probes in a
line is common, but the most effective arrangement places the reference
electrode close to the test electrode. ASTM D 2776-79 (Test Methods for
Corrosivity of Water in the Absence of Heat Transfer) states that close spaced
three-electrode probes can be used at resistivity-corrosion rate products ten
times higher than two-electrode probes without correction.
3. Under the best of conditions and probe design, one cannot expect better than
100%, quantitative accuracy.
The Company has not yet had enough experience with polarization probes to give
specific guidelines regarding probe designs or manufacturers. The decision to buy a
particular probe must be based on an understanding of the concept discussed above
with regard to the system under study. The ability of a supplier to give good local
service is also an important consideration.
Polarization M eters
As with the Corrosometer, polarization probe systems consist of two units: the
probes, which are introduced into the environment, and meters which give the
corrosion rates directly in mpy. Rohrback's version is the “Corrater” series. Metal

Samples/Cortest (which purchased Petrolite) markets their “LP” (linear polariza-

tion) probes. Figure 500-15 gives a very brief description of the models of the
meters most suitable for field use. For more information, contact Rohrback at 800-
635-6898 or Metal Samples/Cortest at 281-471-2777.
Fig. 500-15 Polarization M eters (X = approximately $1500 in 1999 prices) (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems,
Inc.)
RORBACH
Instrument Relative Price Pow er Source Comments
Aquamate ™ X Batteries Readily portable. No chart recorder.
SCA-1/L X 115 or 230 VAC Available w ith 4-20 mA output or data logger.
Aquacorr ™ 2X 115 or 230 VAC Available w ith 4-20 mA output or data logger,
can read ZRA and Temperature.
8020LT X Loop Pow ered A 2-w ire transmitter.
RDC 2X Batteries An intrinsically safe data logger.
M ETAL SAM PLES/CORTEST
Instrument Relative Price Pow er Source Comments
M odel IN-3011 2.3X 115 VAC or 220 VAC Designed for continuous monitoring. Compat-
ible w ith chart recorder and computer inter-
face. Instantaneous corrosion rate from 0.02
mpy to 1000 mpy.
M odel In-6000 3.5X for chassis 115 VAC Completely computer compatible multistation
plus IN-6010 1.3X for each card monitoring system.
(up to 12 maximum)
w hich allow s one Cards for measuring hydrogen rate (IN-6020)
channel per card and galvanic current (IN-6030) available for
to be monitored same price as other cards.
Polarization Probes
The Corrater probes appear to be virtually identical to the Corrosometer probes,
except that instead of having a wire or tube element at the end, they have two or
three electrodes. The Corrater probes fit through exactly the same valve and packing
assemblies as the Corrosometer probes; they are interchangeable.
Three Corrater probes for field use cost less than $750 each (1999 prices). See
Figure 500-16.
Fig. 500-16 Corrater Probes for Field Use (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
Series M ax. psi Description
7000 500 Fixed, Adjustable M ounting
7200 1000 Fixed, Non-adjustable M ounting
8000 1000 Retractable

To order a “flush” probe in which the probes are mounted in the seal so that they are
flush with the pipe or vessel wall, an “X” is added to the appropriate four-digit
number (for example, Probe Model No. 8012X).
Figure 500-17 gives all of the information needed to order a retractable Corrater
probe. As with the Corrosometer probes, a safety cable may be specified and for
over 75 psi pressure, a retracting device should be used.
The Petrolite “PAIR” probes are similar in nature to the “Corrater” and are summa-
rized in Figure 500-18. All PAIR probes have three replaceable mild steel elec-
trodes as standard (except for the flush versions). Probe bodies are mild steel, with
Type 304SS available.
Field Use of Polarization Resistance Probes

Because these probes are not applicable in many hydrocarbon systems, they have
not been widely used and the Company's experience is limited. We have already
described why polarization resistance probes are effective only in solutions of
moderate to high conductivity, and they do not work in nonconductive liquid hydro-
carbon or vapor phases. The probes must be immersed in conductive, aqueous
phases, such as water legs on drums. Although not essential, the probes should be
placed perpendicular to the process flow. For usual applications, the probes should
be left in the process steam for at least 24 hours before readings are taken. Shorter
periods may be appropriate for special studies, such as inhibitor trials.
Because some time is needed to equilibrate the electrode current, readings should
not be taken immediately after the instrument is turned on, as they will tend to be
too high initially. Normally, 20 to 60 seconds are sufficient to get a good reading,
and for consistency, the same time should be used for all subsequent readings.
The polarization resistance probes can be used in an attempt to measure the pitting
tendencies of a system and, in fact, the Corrater instruments have a “pitting index”
switch to simplify such readings. This could be a most useful aspect of the polariza-
tion resistance-type probes, but the concept has some limitations and should not be
relied on heavily.
Fig. 500-17 Retractable Corrater Probes— Ordering Information (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
Retractable Corrater Probe— 1000 psi, 300°F M aximum(1)
Probe M odel No. No. of Electrodes Probe Body M aterial (2) Electrode Insulation M aterial
8012 2 304 SS Glass-filled Epoxy
8013 3 304 SS Glass-filled Epoxy
8022 2 316 SS Glass
8023 3 316 SS Glass
Probe Dimensions, in. (per Figure 500-2)
Ordering Length “A” (3) “B”
18 17.5 24.7
24 23.5 30.7

Fig. 500-17 Retractable Corrater Probes— Ordering Information (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
Retractable Corrater Probe— 1000 psi, 300°F M aximum(1)
Probe M odel No. No. of Electrodes Probe Body M aterial (2) Electrode Insulation M aterial
30 29.5 36.7
36 35.5 42.7
Standard Electrode Alloys
Rohrback No. Alloy Type
8001 1010 Carbon Steel
8003 1020 Carbon Steel
8013 304 SS
8020 316 SS
8021 316L SS
8061 Copper
(1) Temperature limit may be low er in some servic es due to Viton seals.
(2) Also available in Hastelloy C
(3) W ith probe fully inserted in packing gland.
Fig. 500-18 M etal Samples/Cortest LPR Probes— Ordering Information (Y = approximately $300 in 1999 prices) (Data
Courtesy of M etal Samples Co.)
Probe Relative Temperature Access Electrode
M odel No. Cost Pressure Limits Fittings Configuration Comments
LP1100 Y 500°F, 3000 psig 1-in or 2-in. NPT In-Line or Trian- Nonretractable. 1-7/8 in. fixed insert length.
gular
LP4100 2Y 500°F, 1500 psig 1½-in. NPT Triangular Retractable. Requires 1½-in. diameter opening.
Can go to1200°F w ith Grafoil packing.
LP3100 Y 500°F, 1500 psig 1-in. NPT Triangular Can set insert length but not retrac table.
Requires 1½-in. diameter opening.
LP7220 2Y 500°F, 3600 psig 2-in. NPT Concentric Flush. Requires 2-in. acc ess fittings.
Suppliers
More detailed information can be obtained from the suppliers:
Corrater: Rohrback Corporation. See Section 521.
PAIR: Petrolite Equipment & Instruments Group
5455 Old Spanish Trail
Houston, Texas 77023
(713) 926-7431

523 Galvanic Probes

Introduction and Principles
The simplest and most economical electronic corrosion monitoring device is the
galvanic probe. The galvanic probe consists of two dissimilar metal electrodes
(Figure 500-19 and Figure 500-20). When placed in an aqueous system, a current
will flow between the electrodes, and any change in the system will be reflected by
a change in the current. The system is monitored by a 0 to 100 microampere meter
or recorded continuously on a strip chart. The current can be affected by many
factors, including temperature, flow velocity, oxygen levels, and process flow chem-
istry.
Any two electrode Corrater probes can be configured as a galvanic probe by using
one brass and one mild steel electrode. Electrodes of other materials can be ordered.
Fig. 500-19 AquaCorr probe (Courtesy of Rohrback Fig. 500-20 Corrater Probe (Courtesy of Rohrback
Cosasco Systems, Inc.) Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
Field Use of the Galvanic Probe

The galvanic probe is suitable only for aqueous systems or in the aqueous phase of
other systems. It is often used in water disposal systems, cooling towers, and
production wells. The probe only qualitatively measures the system’s corrosivity,
but it can readily detect such factors as a change in pH or a loss of inhibitor. A
system under good corrosion control should usually have readings in the range of
0 to 10 microamperes, while a corrosive system would tend to read on the order of
40 microamperes or more. The unit is particularly sensitive to oxygen, which depo-
larizes the electrodes and increases the current flow. As a rough guide, aqueous
systems with less than 10 to 30 parts per billion oxygen should give galvanic probe
readings of less than 10 microamperes. It is a very useful tool to monitor oxygen
content of waters where minor contamination can cause serious corrosion.

The galvanic probe is a reliable, rugged instrument. Inaccuracies can be caused by

fouling or coating of the electrodes with oil. When taking readings, any extraneous
system changes, such as fluctuations in temperature, must be taken into account. At
temperatures above 200°F, the polarity of the brass and steel element can reverse,
and therefore, a nickel-steel electrode couple is recommended for these higher
temperatures.
Suppliers
Several companies supply galvanic probes. Two are given below:
Rohrback Cosasco Systems, Inc.
11841 East Smith Avenue
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
Tel: (562) 949-0123
FAX (562) 949-3065
Cortest Instrument Systems
Houston, TX
Tel: (713) 471-2777
530 Corrosion Specimens

To resolve a corrosion problem, actual corrosion rates of materials in the system in
question and the effectiveness of corrosion inhibitors must be known. Such informa-
tion is frequently obtained through the exposure of test specimens (weight loss
coupons). In doing so, however, proper procedures and evaluation are necessary to
avoid misleading conclusions.
Corrosion specimens can be exposed either in the laboratory, in pilot plants, or in
actual field equipment. Since both laboratory and pilot plant corrosion tests usually
are conducted by specialists, the following discussion relates primarily to field tests.
Normally, corrosion specimens are exposed in the field for one of the following
purposes:
• Selection of the optimal construction material for a given application; for
example, exposure of corrosion specimens in a refinery distillation column to
select a suitably resistant alloy for use as a lining.
• Control of corrosion of a given material or piece of equipment; for example,
periodic exposure of corrosion specimens in recirculated cooling water systems
helps determine proper chemical treatment of the cooling water.
• Study of the corrosion mechanism; for example, periodic exposure of corro-
sion specimens in the Salt Lake Products Pipeline has provided information on
the functioning of corrosion inhibitors in pipelines.

531 Types of Corrosion Specimen Assemblies

Conventional Corrosion Specimen Assemblies
A corrosion specimen is a small piece of metal that is measured, exposed to corro-
sion in a fixed location, and then measured again to establish a corrosion rate. Phys-
ical design of a corrosion specimen assembly is dictated by convenience and logic.
For example, a specimen should be small enough to be installed easily and conve-
niently in the desired equipment and yet have a large enough area to detect pitting.
A two-inch-square size balances ease of handling and adequate sensitivity. The
specimen assembly should be removable so that the specimen can be inspected,
cleaned, and weighed.
A conventional corrosion specimen assembly for high temperature or nonaqueous
systems is shown in Figure 500-21. For low temperature and aqueous media, use
electrically insulated specimens.
Fig. 500-21 Conventional Corrosion Specimen Assembly w ith Noninsulated Specimens
Individual specimens are mounted on a rod and are separated by metal spacers. The
rod in turn is supported by a pair of brackets that may be welded (preferred), bolted,
or wired in place.

The individual specimens are not electrically insulated from each other or from any
equipment to which the assembly may be attached. As a result, galvanic attack may
occur between the dissimilar metals. This type of corrosion specimen assembly
therefore should not be used in an aqueous solution or any other electrically conduc-
tive fluid. However, it is satisfactory for high temperatures (above 500°F) since
electrically conductive process fluids are rarely encountered at these temperatures.
To avoid galvanic attack, corrosion specimens should be electrically insulated.
Teflon tubing is slipped over the mounting rod and Teflon spacers are inserted
between the specimens to prevent metal-to-metal contact. This assembly is normally
specified in preference to the noninsulated assembly for all locations, at any temper-
ature up to the decomposition limit of Teflon (500°F).
The corrosion specimen holding assembly (rod, nuts, and mounting bracket) should
be constructed of an alloy having good corrosion resistance in the intended test
location. To prevent the corrosion specimen assembly from breaking loose, double
nuts should be used in attaching the rod to the brackets, and the ends of the rod
should be peaned or the threads mechanically distorted to prevent the nuts from
loosening.
It is often convenient or necessary to wire the corrosion specimen assembly in
place. Actually, thin wire is inadequate to hold the assembly in place where appre-
ciable turbulence exists in the process stream. Instead, it has been the practice to use
a length of 1/8-inch diameter corrosion-resistant weld rod with the flux removed to
provide a strong and permanent attachment for the corrosion specimen assembly.
Specimens are often wired to the strainers in the bottom of distillation columns in
this manner.
Where equipment has been stress-relieved to prevent stress corrosion cracking,
avoid the use of welding when attaching corrosion specimens. In such cases, the
specimens must be either wired or bolted in place.
Corrosion Specimens for Process Piping Systems

Because of higher fluid velocities, piping will frequently corrode at a higher rate
than columns or vessels exposed to the same fluid.
Corrosion specimen assemblies for piping systems necessarily differ in design from
those previously described. In addition to the need for convenient installation, it is
necessary to mount individual specimens with the flat face parallel to the direction
of flow to minimize the effect of liquid impingement.
Where there are flat or raised face flanges in the piping, specimens may be attached
to a flat ring bolted between the flanges and gasketed on both sides. The ID of this
ring should be approximately equivalent to the ID of the pipe, and the OD of the
ring must fit in the bolt circle. A cross-member extending across the diameter of
the ring may be used to hold the specimens.
Various designs have been used for piping corrosion specimen assemblies. Factors
influencing design include line size, type of flange face, desired frequency of
removal, and ability to remove the line from service. Examples of three possible
designs are shown in Figure 500-22.

Fig. 500-22 Typical Corrosion Specimens for Piping Systems
Corrosion Specimens for Pipelines

Pipeline specimens are most often exposed for six-month periods with individual
sets of specimens installed three months apart. As each set of specimens is removed,
a new one is installed, and the first half of each six-month test period is concurrent
with the last half of the previous period.
Pipeline specimens frequently show preferential corrosion around the mounting
bolt. Since the specimen’s openly exposed surface most nearly duplicates the pipe
itself, the most accurate results are obtained by using a larger specimen than is used
in most other field applications. This makes the preferential attack at the mounting
bolt a smaller percentage of the total weight loss.
Typical pipeline corrosion specimens measure 1¾ inches wide and 4½ inches long.
A carbon steel specimen of this size with a six-month test exposure yields a corro-

sion rate in mils per year that is numerically equal to the weight loss in grams. This
is approximately correct since the effect of specimen edge corrosion is small.
Preferably, specimens should be electrically insulated from the pipe to prevent
extraneous galvanic corrosion and should be located where they will not be
damaged by scrapers (but not in dead ends).
Corrosion Specimens for Cooling Water Systems

Test specimens in cooling water systems are not intended to measure the actual
corrosion rate of water piping or associated equipment, but to provide a quantitative
basis for evaluation of water treatment. The distinction between these two objec-
tives is important.
Characteristically, the corrosion rate of carbon steel in aerated fresh water is initially
high and gradually decreases. This gradual decrease in corrosion rate with time
results either from the formation of a rust film or, in properly treated fresh water, of
some other film such as a phosphate compound.
To reproduce accurately the corrosion of piping or other equipment, corrosion speci-
mens should be exposed for as long as possible. To provide a continuing guide
about the adequacy of water treating, however, a short test period and frequent eval-
uation is needed. For controlling water treatment, the test interval is usually three
weeks to a month. Longer intervals do not yield data often enough.
Because the corrosion rate decreases with time, the time interval chosen for the tests
must be constant. In addition, a new specimen should be installed each time. So
long as these precautions are taken, the measured corrosion rates can be used as a
quantitative indication of the adequacy of water treating.
In most cases, corrosion tests are run in the hot water returning to the cooling tower.
A small diameter (usually 1-inch) line with isolating valves is installed to draw
water from the hot water return line and discharge it into the tower basin. Flow can
be stopped as necessary to install and remove specimens in this line. A diagram of a
typical system is shown in Figure 500-23. Water velocity normally is set at some
constant arbitrary value, preferably about 3 feet per second.
Figure 500-24 is a conventional corrosion specimen assembly for a recirculated
cooling water system. The specimens in this assembly measure ½ inch by 2 inches,
and it is particularly important that they be electrically insulated from the specimen
holder. For ease of installation, the rod holding the specimen is attached to a pipe
plug which is inserted into the open leg of a tee in the test piping.
Other Types of Test Specimens

Occasionally, conventional corrosion specimen assemblies are inadequate. For
example, it may be necessary to install or remove specimens without shutting down
equipment. A device such as that shown in Figure 500-25 serves this need.
This assembly is attached to the equipment through a full port gate valve. It consists
of a packing gland through which a rod with specimens attached may be inserted or
removed. By retracting the rod through the packing gland and closing the valve, the

Fig. 500-23 Piping System for Cooling Water Corrosion Specimens
operator may remove the assembly for examination of the specimens. Specimens
may then be replaced, the assembly reattached to the valve, and the specimens
inserted into the equipment by opening the gate valve and pushing the specimen rod
through.
Certain precautions are necessary if the assembly shown in Figure 500-25 is to be
used for pressured service. In addition to designing the stuffing box to withstand the
anticipated pressure, a retaining device is required to prevent the rod from blowing
out and injuring the operator.
Corrosion data may also be gathered by exposing actual hardware as test speci-
mens. It is not unusual to install test bubble caps in a distillation column to evaluate
a variety of construction materials under conditions exactly reproducing their end
use.
It may be desirable to test welded, stressed, or sensitized specimens to determine the
probability of unusual forms of corrosive attack. Where preferential corrosion of
welds is known or suspected, for example, the exposure of welded specimens
should be considered.
In certain services austenitic stainless steels may be susceptible to intergranular
corrosion. Intergranular corrosion can occur only when the stainless steel has been
in the 800°F-to-1500°F temperature range, as during welding or hot forming. A
conventional corrosion specimen cut from annealed sheet is not susceptible to inter-
granular attack but may be made susceptible by heat treating at 1200°F for 12 to
24 hours. (A sensitization period of one or two hours at 1250°F is also used to simu-
late sensitization such as occurs during welding.)
Light intergranular corrosion is evidenced by a granular or “sugary” surface appear-
ance and the ability to remove individual metal grains with a sharp object. In the
event of severe intergranular corrosion, the specimen may deteriorate completely. In

Fig. 500-24 Corrosion Specimens for Cooling Water Systems
Fig. 500-25 Removable Corrosion Specimen Assembly (Courtesy of Rohrback Cosasco

Systems, Inc.)

this case a nonheat-treated specimen should be simultaneously exposed so that any

difference in performance between the two is due to the sensitizing heat treatment.
Stress corrosion cracking is a form of corrosive attack that may occur with almost
any metal or alloy in the presence of certain specific media, providing that the metal
is internally or externally stressed. Carbon steel may crack in sodium hydroxide
(caustic embrittlement), brass will suffer a similar phenomenon in ammonia (season
cracking), and austenitic stainless steels are susceptible to cracking by chlorides.
Since this type of attack occurs only when the metal is subjected to stress, it can be
reproduced on a corrosion specimen under conditions where the specimen has been
stressed and then exposed to the proper corrosive medium. Stressing may be accom-
plished either by cold bending and flattening, or preferably by bending the spec-
imen into a U and using a bolt through the two legs of the specimen to maintain a
load. Stress corrosion cracking is evidenced by one or more cracks in the stressed
area of the specimen.
532 Preparation of Corrosion Specimens

M aterials
In most cases, corrosion specimens are made of thin gage wrought alloys. A thick-
ness of 16 gage is usually considered optimum but may be varied as necessary.
Excessively thin specimens should be avoided, since corrosion rates may be
affected by flexure and because a thin specimen may perforate or corrode
completely away during the test, obscuring the true corrosion rate. On the other
hand, specimens of excessive thickness are more difficult to prepare and weigh, and
the corrosion rate may be greatly influenced by edge effects. However, the use of
thicker specimens may be unavoidable, particularly when dealing with cast alloys or
with materials not easily available in sheet form.
The material chosen for corrosion specimens should duplicate as nearly as possible
that to be used in the intended application; for example, a cast specimen should be
used for a part to be fabricated by casting. In certain applications, the corrosion rate
of a given alloy may be a highly variable function of metal composition, even
within the normally specified composition range for the material. Therefore, a
chemical analysis of the specimen stock is necessary. A metal or alloy of question-
able composition should never be used for corrosion specimens.
Preparation
Specimens may be cut to size by any convenient means. Holes for mounting can be
either drilled or punched. Specimens should then be cleaned to remove dirt, oil,
grease, and paint. Carbon steel also should be sanded or acid-pickled to remove rust
and mill scale. For nonrusting alloys, cleaning with water and a mild abrasive soap
usually is sufficient.
Surface condition may have a pronounced effect on any induction period prior to the
onset of corrosion and may also affect the initial rate of attack. Once a thin surface
layer of metal is removed, subsequent corrosion will progress at a rate more or less
independent of original surface condition.

For short-time tests of about a month or less, a reproducible method of surface prep-
aration should be used, such as by sanding of the specimen on a 150-grit sanding
belt. For longer tests, the regular mill finish is not objectionable so long as no rust or
mill scale is present.
Stamp mark all specimens and maintain a permanent record book of number, weight
before, where exposed, and weight after.
After final preparation, the specimen should be washed with soap and water, rinsed
in either alcohol or acetone, and dried.
Weighing
An analytical balance may be used to weigh specimens before and after exposure.
The accuracy of weighing will have a corresponding effect on the accuracy of the
calculated corrosion rate.
In a field corrosion test involving a 2-inch by 2-inch specimen exposed for one year,
a weight accuracy of ±0.1 gram is sufficient to fix the calculated corrosion rate to
±0.1 mil per year. A 24-hour laboratory test, however, requires that the specimen be
weighed to ±0.0001 gram to yield this same degree of accuracy.
533 Exposure Conditions— Important Factors

Corrosion rates may be influenced by many variables, such as time, temperature,
fluid composition, and fluid velocities. The effect of these variables cannot be
predicted without historical data, and no firm laws exist on which to base such a
prediction. For example, a rule of thumb is that chemical reaction rates will approxi-
mately double for each 10°C rise in temperature. Although this generalization is
often applied to corrosion reactions, it is generally valid only if the metal is
corroding vigorously. In most field situations, the rate of corrosion is controlled by
other variables such as diffusion rate, not by the reaction rate of the metal. The
effect of temperature, therefore, is less than would be predicted by the rule.
Specimens must be located to produce the desired corrosion effect as nearly as
possible. For example, in a distillation column corrosion may occur either in the
liquid phase only or in the vapor phase only. Furthermore, it may occur only where
highly turbulent conditions exist. Poor choice of specimen location has caused test
specimens to show little corrosion while the equipment containing the specimens
was severely attacked. Under such conditions, even the relative rates shown by
different specimens are of little value. Careful observation of equipment interiors
frequently provides guidance to proper specimen placement and interpretation of
test data.
Variables that Affect Corrosion Rates

Exposure Time. The calculation of a corrosion rate assumes that corrosion
proceeds at a uniform rate. This is roughly true for field tests where the length of
specimen exposure is a minimum of 90 days. It is certainly not true, however, for
relatively short laboratory tests. It is also untrue in the case of pitting, which seldom
proceeds at a uniform rate and is seldom detectable except after long exposures.

Temperature. While temperature directly affects the reaction rate of metals, the
corrosion rate is controlled by other variables as well. Thus, corrosion data obtained
at a given temperature usually cannot be extrapolated to a different temperature.
Fluid Composition. Where the process fluid undergoes chemical change, there may
be a corresponding change in its corrosivity that must be considered in choosing
specimen locations. Similar but less obvious differences may exist in distillation
units or in any liquid-vapor system where the two phases may change as a function
of temperature or pressure.
Fluid Velocity or Turbulence. In practice, previous inspection of equipment often
indicates velocity-accelerated corrosion and where to place the specimens.
Shutdown or Upset Conditions. Frequently, corrosion during shutdowns or oper-
ating upsets contribute appreciably to total metal loss. This possibility should be
considered, particularly if unexpectedly high corrosion rates are encountered during
a test.
534 Cleaning of Specimens After Test

Effect of Cleaning on Accuracy of Data
After test exposure, a specimen should be cleaned before weighing to remove scale
and foreign materials and to allow detailed visual examination. The cleaning
method depends on specimen exposure time, since some metal loss will occur
during cleaning and it is necessary to limit this loss. Cleaning methods should be no
more severe than is absolutely necessary. Regardless of the cleaning method, eval-
uate the cleaning procedure using a weighed but unexposed specimen to determine
the weight lost during cleaning. If significant, this loss in weight may be included as
a correction in the corrosion rate calculations.
Cleaning M ethods
Corrosion specimens may be cleaned in a number of stages of progressively
decreasing severity. It is evident that the more severe steps in the procedure should
be used only as matter of absolute necessity.
1. In the case of specimens containing a tightly adherent, heavy scale, initial
cleaning, if done with great care, may be accomplished by bending the spec-
imen to flake off the scale or, in extreme cases, through careful use of a power
wire brush.
2. Alternatively, the specimens may be descaled by soaking in warm (less than
120°F) inhibited hydrochloric acid using any commonly available and effec-
tive pickling inhibitor.
3. After the scale has been removed, and where specimens are not badly scaled
when received, final cleaning may be accomplished with soap and water. The
specimens may be rubbed with a mild abrasive soap if necessary, providing that
extreme care is used in the case of specimens from short-time laboratory tests.

4. After cleaning, the specimens should be rinsed and dried with either alcohol or
acetone prior to weighing.
Certain types of scale or corrosion product are extremely difficult to identify and
remove because of their adherence, hardness, and a metallic appearance that is
virtually indistinguishable from bare metal. In this category are graphitization of
cast iron and the sulfide scales that form in hot H2S-hydrogen atmospheres. In the
latter case, the difficulty is compounded by the fact that the scale exists in several
distinct layers and the inner layer will reproduce any surface imperfections or
stencil marks on the original specimen surface. If need be, weigh and then clean
more vigorously.
After cleaning and weighing, corrosion rates may be calculated by the following
formula:
6
876 × 10 W
R = ------------------------------
TAD
(Eq. 500-3)
where:
R = corrosion rate, mpy
W = weight loss, g
T = exposure time, hr
A = exposed surface area, in.2
D = density, g/in.3
535 Visual Examination of Specimens

Corrosion specimens should be visually examined before and after cleaning for
evidence of corrosion phenomena other than uniform attack. Where pitting occurs,
the maximum pit depth may be measured or estimated. Other forms of corrosion
that may be visually detectable are listed below. See Figure 500-26. These are
discussed in more detail in Section 400.
Hydrogen Blistering. Hydrogen attack may cause obvious surface blisters on
ferrous materials, most often carbon steel. This may occur in either aqueous envi-
ronments, especially H2S and HF, or in the presence of hot, high pressure hydrogen.
Intergranular Corrosion. This form of attack is usually confined to austenitic
stainless steels and will occur only when the material has been given a sensitizing
heat treatment or has been inadvertently sensitized in manufacture or welding. It
results in a “sugary” surface appearance or, in extreme cases, complete
disintegration.
Stress Corrosion Cracking. Almost any metal or alloy is susceptible to stress
corrosion cracking in certain environments. Stress corrosion cracking is most easily
detected using a deliberately stressed specimen. It will sometimes be found on

Fig. 500-26 Forms of Corrosive Attack that M ay Be Encountered in Field Corrosion Tests
conventional corrosion specimens with the cracks beginning at stressed areas such
as stencil marks or the edge of a punched hole. Although positive identification of
stress corrosion cracking requires detailed metallographic examination, the occur-
rence of any crack on the specimen should be viewed with suspicion.
Graphitization. In many aqueous environments, cast iron will corrode in a manner
in which the metallic constituents dissolve while the nonmetallic components
(largely graphite) remain. The graphite layer, while relatively soft, has a metallic
appearance and will reproduce the original surface of the metal. It is most easily
detected by scratching the surface with a sharp object.
536 Interpretation and Application of Data

Corrosion specimen data may be misleading. Corrosion rates shown by specimens
are accurate reproductions of corrosivity only at one point and for one period of
time; for instance, operating conditions in any piece of equipment may vary as a
function of time, and such variations may have a pronounced effect on corrosion.
Corrosivity may also vary widely from point to point in a given piece of equipment;
data obtained in one location are not necessarily applicable to another location in
either an absolute or a relative sense. For example, a distillation column may suffer

corrosion at a minimal rate in most areas but be rapidly attacked in a few locations
where fluid velocities and turbulence are high. If specimens are exposed at a point
of severe turbulence, they may reproduce the worst corrosion being experienced in
the column. Should they be exposed where turbulence is low, however, the data will
represent the performance of materials under these milder conditions. Worst-case
and average-case corrosion information is important.
Depending on the location of the specimens, the relative order of corrosion resis-
tance of different alloys may change completely, since materials may vary widely in
susceptibility to acceleration of corrosion in the presence of turbulence. For
instance, copper is superior to carbon steel in resistance to hydrofluoric acid under
relatively static conditions but will corrode at a much greater rate than steel where
fluid velocities are high.
Similarly, the comparative resistance of two metals may change completely with a
few degrees’ rise in temperature. Corrosion rates obtained from specimens exposed
in the shell of a heat exchanger are usually a poor performance criterion for tube
materials, since the tubes will be substantially hotter or cooler than the shell-side
fluid.
Therefore, the best test for validity of data is as follows: if the carbon steel spec-
imen from a corrosion specimen assembly accurately reproduces the attack on a
carbon steel vessel, the rates shown by other alloys on the assembly may also be
regarded as accurate. If the rate for the carbon steel specimen is substantially higher
than for the vessel, exposure conditions for the test assembly must have been excep-
tionally severe, but at least the specimens that showed low rates may be expected to
perform adequately in the vessel. The danger lies where the corrosion rate of the
carbon steel specimen is far below that of the vessel. Under these circumstances, the
rates shown by other alloys also are of little value (except that severely corroded
materials may be assumed inadequate for the more severe conditions). It is
completely erroneous to assume that the same relative corrosion rates that existed at
the specimen location will prevail under more severe conditions.
537 Summary
The best use can be made of corrosion specimen data if it is reviewed in conjunc-
tion with past corrosion experience in the location in question and within the context
of what may be known about the mechanism of corrosion. Any important conclu-
sions to be drawn from a corrosion test should take into account all other informa-
tion that may contribute to a better understanding of the problem.
Often corrosion tests in operating equipment are necessary or desirable but there is
not enough time to obtain help from specialists. The preceding information is
intended to provide some assistance under these circumstances. If time permits,
however, it may be convenient to obtain corrosion specimens from Materials and
Equipment Engineering at CRTC or from the Chevron Oil Field Research Labora-
tory at La Habra.

538 Vendors
The following vendors supply corrosion specimens:
Metal Samples Meta Spec Company
P.O. Box 8 P.O. Box 27707
Munford, AL 36268 San Antonio, TX 78227
(205) 358-4202 Tel: (210) 923-5999
FAX: (210) 923-5999
540 Hydrogen Probes

Because atomic hydrogen is a by-product of many corrosion mechanisms, detecting
the presence of hydrogen is a good way to assess corrosion damage. Low tempera-
ture hydrogen blistering of steels is a familiar problem within the petroleum
industry. Its occurrence has become more widespread in recent years because of
increased use of sour crudes and development of refinery processes such as cata-
lytic cracking which produce appreciable quantities of H2S. Sour stocks and hydrof-
luoric acid are the most common sources of hydrogen damage. The presence of
hydrogen and the potential for hydrogen damage can be determined by pressure
probes and patch probes.
The most modern method for monitoring hydrogen diffusion through steel is by
using hydrogen patch probes. Hydrogen pressure probes were developed some time
ago to detect conditions favorable to hydrogen blistering before serious equipment
damage occurred. Though patch probes are more sensitive, both methods are used
throughout the Company to provide information about the rate of attack and the
effectiveness of corrective measures.
Regardless of the hydrogen monitoring device chosen, the key to its effective use is
patience and vigilance. A baseline must be developed for the internal pressure
probes as well as for the external patch probes to make sense of the data for that
particular piece of equipment in the future. Hydrogen probes do not offer a way to
predict the exact corrosion rate occurring inside equipment, but they do present a
good relative measure of hydrogen activity, which can be extrapolated to hydrogen-
related problems such as corrosion, hydrogen embrittlement, or hydrogen blis-
tering. Most Operating Companies suggest using hydrogen probes in conjunction
with other corrosion monitoring devices such as Corrosometer probes, discussed in
Section 520, for a more complete corrosion description of a particular environment.
541 M echanism of Hydrogen Damage

A review of this phenomenon is useful in understanding how the hydrogen probe
functions. The mechanism of attack is described in detail in Section 450, “Hydrogen
Damage Due to Wet H2S (Sour Service) or HF Acid.” A brief summary is given
here.
Atomic hydrogen is the only species of hydrogen capable of diffusing through steel
and other metals. The molecular form of hydrogen does not diffuse through metals.

Sources of atomic hydrogen are high temperature, moist environments, electrolysis,

and corrosion reactions.
In the presence of moisture, corrosion reactions yield either atomic hydrogen or
water. Usually when hydrogen is generated, it immediately combines to the molec-
ular form and leaves the surface as a gas. But certain substances such as sulfide
ions, phosphorous, and arsenic compounds decrease the rate at which hydrogen
combines to form molecules. So in plants where some of these compounds exist,
such as FCC gas recovery plants, the change to molecular form is retarded and
atomic hydrogen can diffuse into the corroding steel. Much of this atomic hydrogen
passes through the steel to the outside atmosphere without creating a problem.
However, if the steel contains laminations, slag stringers, or other internal defects,
atomic hydrogen can combine at the flaws to form molecular hydrogen. Because the
diffusion rate of molecular hydrogen is negligible compared to atomic hydrogen, the
hydrogen molecules get trapped at the defect. Pressure continues to build up as
more hydrogen diffuses to the flaw. Ultimately, the pressure may increase to where
stresses in the metal locally exceed the yield strength, causing enlargement of the
defect and formation of a visible blister on the metal surface. In addition to blis-
tering, hydrogen can cause hydrogen-induced stress corrosion cracking, or hydrogen
embrittlement.
542 Hydrogen Pressure Probes (Internally M ounted)

See Figure 500-27 for a drawing of a typical hydrogen pressure probe. The probe
consists of a closed steel tube with attached pressure gage and a valve to bleed off
developed hydrogen pressure. In some designs, this valve also isolates the probe
element if it leaks. The probe is inserted into the vessel or piping where hydrogen
attack is suspected and becomes, in effect, a piece of metal containing an artificial
internal defect. If corrosion occurs and all hydrogen evolves or reacts with the
solution (as in most cases), pressure will not increase in the probe. If conditions
favor hydrogen diffusion into the shell, hydrogen atoms also diffuse into the probe
annulus where they combine to form molecular hydrogen and cause the pressure to
rise in the probe.
Since the diffusion rate of atomic hydrogen through the tube wall is an inverse func-
tion of metal thickness, the probe tube should be as thin as possible yet still with-
stand corrosion for a reasonable time. Maximum sensitivity is obtained by
minimizing the internal volume, so a solid rod largely fills the void space in the
tube. Other parts of the probe are also designed with minimum internal volume. On
most commercial hydrogen probes, the total internal volume of the complete probe
assembly does not exceed 15 milliliters.
Probe Use and Interpretation of Data

If the hydrogen pressure probe is in good condition and there are no leaks to the
atmosphere, lack of pressure indicates that the corrosive medium surrounding the
probe is not causing hydrogen attack. Conversely, a progressive increase in gage
pressure indicates hydrogen attack. The pressure in each probe in service should be
recorded often enough to show the rate of pressure rise. When pressure approaches
the limit of the gage, the hydrogen should be vented to approximately 1 psi, this fact

Fig. 500-27 Typical Internal Hydrogen Pressure Probe
recorded, and the readings continued. We suggest not venting completely because if
the temperature drops in the system, the resulting pressure decrease could peg the
needle backwards and break the gage. Also, keeping a positive pressure allows the
operator to detect a leak in the probe (that is, if the temperature is constant and the
pressure still drops).
There is some evidence that the minimum diffusion rate for significant hydrogen
attack is about 0.1 milliliter per square inch per day, which would cause a pressure
rise of roughly 1 psi per day in the most sensitive of the commercially available
probes. However, damage to equipment has been reported when the probes showed
a pressure rise not much over 5 psi per month. A rapid increase in probe pressure
indicates vigorous hydrogen attack. Pressure increases of 25 to 50 psi per day have
been observed under particularly severe attack.
When evaluating pressure probe data, it is necessary to establish a steady state base-
line for the equipment being monitored. Most probes require up to 4 hours to reach
the steady state hydrogen pressure after initial installation. When a baseline pres-
sure is achieved, the gage will probably not respond immediately to system changes.

Layers of deposits on the probe itself such as FeS or films of corrosion inhibitors
can hinder immediate pressure response.
The possibility of hydrogen damage to equipment should be considered under any
condition where a steady increase in probe pressure is noted, regardless of the rate
of increase. The rate of pressure increase is a guide to the urgency of inspecting the
equipment. Normally, damage to the steel does not warrant emergency shutdowns.
Problems and Precautions

Commercially manufactured pressure probes have a valve to permit periodic
venting of accumulated hydrogen. Should the probe element be perforated by corro-
sion, the pressure gage cannot be isolated from the process fluid. This is unsafe in
some instances, particularly for high pressure service.
The probe installation shown in Figure 500-27 overcomes this difficulty by incorpo-
rating a needle valve between the probe and the pressure gage. This permits
isolating the gage in the event of corrosion failure but sacrifices some sensitivity
due to greater internal volume. The needle valve must be a type that seats in both
the fully open and fully closed positions since valve packing cannot completely seal
against hydrogen loss. To vent the probe set the valve to an intermediate position
between the open and closed extremes, thus allowing accumulated hydrogen to
escape through the packing. Venting may also be accomplished by unscrewing the
pressure gage, although this may cause the joint to leak afterward.
The ability of hydrogen to escape through even the most minute opening can present
a problem of joint leakage with probes. Due to the small internal volume of probes,
the slightest leak is significant, so all joints must be made tight and given a
hydrogen pressure test.
So that a leak can be detected, it is a good idea to bleed the probe to about 1 psi. If
the probe is leaking (while temperature remains constant) the pressure drops and the
leak can be quickly noted.
Frequently, hydrogen attack is both highly localized and erratic with respect to time.
For example, in vessels where both liquid and vapor phases are present, hydrogen
attack may occur only in one phase and not the other. Thus, a probe may be located
where there is no hydrogen attack while blistering occurs a short distance away.
Select probe locations carefully.
543 Electrochemical Hydrogen Patch Probes (Externally M ounted)

There are two types of patch probe: one that measures changes in current flow in an
electrochemical circuit patched to the outside of a vessel as hydrogen passing
through the wall is oxidized, and one that measures actual hydrogen pressure from
the outside of a vessel or pipeline.
Both types of patch probe operate on the principle that atomic hydrogen inside the
vessel diffuses through the steel wall to the outside environment, where a patch
probe is mounted. Figure 500-28 is a schematic of an electrochemical patch probe
manufactured by Petrolite Instruments. As hydrogen passes through the steel, it is

oxidized at a palladium foil working electrode within the patch probe assembly. The
current measured in the circuit is proportional to the rate at which hydrogen atoms
are passing through the steel wall and being oxidized by the palladium foil. The
electrolyte is usually a high-boiling-point, electrically conductive solution such as
concentrated sulfuric acid. Palladium is used for the working electrode because it
allows hydrogen to diffuse through easily, is noble enough to oxidize hydrogen, and
is inert to the electrolyte. The reference electrode is usually a nickel-based alloy or
copper because of their low corrosion rate and steady corrosion potential. The auxil-
iary electrode must have excellent corrosion resistance, so again, nickel-based
alloys are generally used.
Fig. 500-28 Schematic of a Typical Electrochemical Patch Probe and its Operation,
Externally M ounted (Data Courtesy of M etal Samples Co.)
o
H
o
H
o
H
o
H
o
H
o
H
o
H
o
H


The outside wall of the vessel or pipe to be monitored is surface cleaned. Then a
transfer medium (paraffin) and a small piece of .010-inch thick palladium foil are
placed on the wall. The patch probe is then mounted over the foil with Viton and
Teflon gaskets shaped to the contour of the equipment to provide a leak-tight seal
with the foil. The entire assembly shown in Figure 500-28 is mounted directly to the
outside of the vessel or pipe by mechanical strapping or by welding straps. (If
welding, see Problems and Precautions, below.) The cell is then filled with an elec-
trolyte. As hydrogen emerges from the steel pipe or vessel wall, it is oxidized by the
foil electrode, changing the current flow through the patch probe’s circuit. Patch
probes can be linked to chart recorders to provide continuous monitoring. This type
of electrochemical patch probe can be used in the temperature range -10°F to 290°F.
Atomic hydrogen diffuses through steel quickly. Petrolite reports that in less than
one hour, an external electrochemical patch probe mounted on a one-inch-thick
vessel can detect internal changes in hydrogen activity. The steady state rate of
diffusion would be achieved in less than 4 hours.

This type of patch probe is usually fastened by mechanical straps, but its Teflon seat
must be machined on site to match the contour of the equipment, and the sulfuric
acid electrolyte must be added to the probe by syringe, through a 1/8-inch fill hole,
after the probe is attached to the equipment to be monitored. A printer can be
attached to the probe to chart the hydrogen activity of a particular piece of equip-
ment, but then the system requires battery maintenance or a 120-volt line to the site.
544 Pressure-measuring Patch Probes (Externally M ounted)

Rohrback-Cosasco manufactures this type of probe, shown in Figure 500-29, which
measures actual hydrogen pressure from the outside of a vessel or pipeline. It
consists of a contoured low alloy steel section which is welded onto the outside of
the vessel or pipeline. There is a chamber between the outer vessel wall and the
welded patch in which hydrogen diffusing through the vessel wall builds up. A pres-
sure/temperature sensing device is installed on top of the patch, and it measures
pressure in the chamber similar to the internally mounted hydrogen pressure probe.

Performing a soap test at about 50 psi through the hole where the gage will be
inserted is good practice to find any leaks in the attachment weld.
In service, Rohrback-Cosasco's rule of thumb is that a pressure increase of 10 psi
from the baseline pressure indicates “significant” hydrogen activity in the system.
This value is reportedly from field data, but each location should set its own stan-
dards from its experience.

Though patch probes are more sensitive to change than internal pressure probes,
problems occur with their use, too. The externally mounted pressure-type probes are

Fig. 500-29 Typical Pressure-type Patch Probe, Externally M ounted (Courtesy of Rohrback
Cosasco Systems, Inc.)
secured to the outside of equipment by welding. In a hydrogen charging environ-

ment, hard welds or weld heat affected zones can experience hydrogen embrittle-
ment. So a monitoring device secured by welding could be a source for cracking
problems. Using the procedure approved for other welds in the system will prevent
this problem.
545 Future Advancements

Petrolite is investigating a new type of patch probe called a “hydrogen button,” a
permanently-sealed electrochemical cell about the size of an ultrasonic transducer.
A palladium window in the cell transmits gaseous hydrogen. As hydrogen passes
across the “window,” it activates a fuel cell mechanism and produces an electric
current in an external circuit. A resistor is supplied between the anode and cathode
of the cell so that monitoring can be done by a voltmeter, where 1 millivolt across
the resistor equates to 1 microamp current generated by the hydrogen flux into the
cell. This experimental cell is only rated to 120°F now because it is supplied in a
plastic holder. It is strapped to a white metal blasted surface and gives a steady state
reading in about 15 minutes. Figure 500-30 is a diagram of this experimental device.
Before purchasing new hydrogen probes, this emerging technology might be worth
considering.

Fig. 500-30 Experimental Dry Contact Hydrogen Cell
550 Nondestructive Testing

Up to now, Section 500 has discussed test methods which measure rates of corro-
sion. These tests do not eliminate the need for detailed inspection of the equipment,
but rather provide information that can aid in setting up inspection schedules.
During inspection, the equipment must be nondestructively or destructively tested to
determine its remaining life or needed repairs.
Nondestructive testing (NDT) is almost always preferred to destructive testing.
Even if a piece of equipment could be patched and returned to service after destruc-
tive testing, as was the case with the drilling and gaging of storage tank walls which
was common years ago, the equipment had to be shut down and emptied of process
fluids before destructive testing could begin. Nondestructive testing allows inspec-
tion while the equipment is in use or onstream, and post inspection repairs are not
needed.
Proper application of nondestructive testing can help the Company to achieve
several important objectives:
• Reduced chance of injury to personnel.
• Reduced maintenance costs.
• Reduced operating costs.
• Improved, more uniform product quality.
• Increased productivity.

Over the past 30 years, increased use of and advances in NDT techniques have
contributed to increasing the average time between major maintenance shutdowns
of refinery process units from one year to three years.
While dozens of nondestructive techniques have been developed over the years, this
section will cover only those which have proved useful or show good potential for
use in monitoring corrosion phenomena in the petroleum industry. Figure 500-31
lists these NDT techniques and indicates the types of corrosion that each can detect.
The figure is an attempt to condense a substantial amount of information into a
usable quick reference guide and will serve as the focus for the rest of the section.
The remainder of this section will briefly review each of the NDT techniques. The
principles of the techniques will be reviewed, followed by a discussion of the appli-
cation of the technique in corrosion detection and monitoring. Pros and cons of the
method will be discussed and Company experience will be included where
appropriate.
Each of the techniques has particular strengths and limitations as well as specific
operational and safety concerns. Therefore, consult knowledgeable Company
inspectors or CRTC’s Materials and Equipment Engineering before you try to apply
any unfamiliar techniques to a given application.
This section is designed to be an overview of the primary techniques the Company
uses for corrosion monitoring and detection. More detail on each method and on
procedures for applying each method can be obtained from the sources listed in
Section 560, “References.” To determine which inspection methods have been
applied to particular pieces of equipment (and what the results of such testing were),
the Plant Equipment Information System (PEIS) can be used. PEIS is an online
computer system that contains information on equipment throughout the Company.
Ask the local inspection group how to access its PEIS (if available).

Fig. 500-31 Application of NDT Techniques (1) to Detect and M onitor Corrosion
August 1999
500 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods

Corrosion Phenomenon
High Temperature SCC on Inaccessible
Localized Stress Corrosion
Hydrogen Attack Surface
General Corrosion, Cracking (SCC)
Corrosion, Pitting, Advanced, Early on Accessible Hydrogen
NDT Technique Thickness Erosion, etc. Gross Stages Surface Detection Sizing Blistering Leaks
Visual C A C A A
M echanical, Gaging B A
Penetrant A (2)
M agnetic Particle A (3) A (2)
Longitudinal UT A C B (4) C(4) A
(4)
Shear Wave UT A C A B
Radiography B B B C C
(5)
500-44
Eddy Current B B B
Acoustic C C C C C
Emission (6)
Hydrostatic A
Corrosion Prevention and M etallurgy M anual

A = Preferred method
B = Often suitable
C = Questionable
(1) This table deals only w ith the application of NDT techniques to detec t and monitor corrosion phenomena. M any of the tec hniqu es are also useful for detecting original fabric ation defec ts
and other flaw s that affect the integrity of equipment.
(2) M agnetic partic le is preferred to penetrant but it can only be performed on ferromagnetic materials.
(3) If cracks present at ac cessible surfac e.
(4) M ethod under development based on attenuation and sound veloc ity.
Chevron Corporation
(5) For metal thic kness <0.25 in.

(6) Insufficient Company experience to highly recommend. Useful if used in conjunc tion w ith more proven testing tec hniques.
551 Visual/M echanical Testing

Visual inspection is the most commonly used method for examination of corrosion
damage in equipment and will remain an indispensable tool for inspection.
Tanks are routinely checked for external signs of leaks; telltale holes are left in rein-
forcing pads so that leaks otherwise undetected will be readily noticed; insulated
pipes or vessels often have rust stains, bulged, cracked or distorted insulation, and
hot spots which are indicative of corrosion damage. Examination of vessel or pipe
exteriors can reveal excessive corrosion and locate areas where thickness measure-
ments are needed.
Effective visual inspection requires good surface cleanliness. Wire brushing and
scraping may be necessary to remove scale that masks the surface condition of the
component. If coke, hard deposits, or tenacious scale are present, abrasive blasting,
descaling, or grinding can be used.
The unaided eye is limited as an inspection tool for two primary reasons. First,
many locations requiring inspection are not accessible, such as the inside diameter
of small piping. Second, the eye cannot provide an adequate quantitative evaluation
of the extent of corrosion damage in many instances. To compensate for this, many
instruments have been developed to aid in visual inspection of less accessible loca-
tions and mechanical measuring devices are used to accurately measure corrosion
damage. Excellent reviews of many of these inspection tools and techniques may be
found in Chapter 4, “Inspection Tools”, of API's Guide for Inspection of Refinery
Equipment. This document is included in the manual. Several of the more common
types of instruments used as an aid to visual inspection are discussed below.
Visual Instruments
Many tools have been developed for inspection of less accessible locations. Visual
instruments range from the simple (mirrors, magnifying glasses) to the advanced
(television, telescopes, borescopes, and fiber optic scopes).
The use of such equipment is as varied as the equipment itself. Mirrors and magni-
fying lenses are common inspection tools for examining around corners and through
small openings. Several refineries use telescopes to inspect flare tips from the
ground. Binoculars have been used from a helicopter for flare tip inspection as well.
Television has long been used as an inspection aid. In the 1970s, the El Segundo
Refinery used closed circuit television to inspect a water well casing. A 600-foot
deep, 16-inch casing was inspected to locate the point of sand and clay intrusion so
that it could be restored to its original productivity. This equipment was capable of
surveying to a depth of 1000 feet in 8-inch or larger casing. El Segundo now uses a
similar technique for coker drum inspection. A video camera fed down through the
drums inspects for cladding disbondment and other problems. The use of a video
camera avoids the need for staging to be built in the drums, reducing inspection
costs.
Borescopes are used throughout the Company for inspection of inaccessible
surfaces, such as small diameter tubing and bores. Initially developed for the
medical industry, such devices have evolved rapidly over the years. Originally, these

instruments were simply a telescope on a rigid line which could be fed into hard-to-
reach areas; now they come in a variety of types to meet different needs. Bores-
copes are defined as rigid or flexible, with flexible being the more diverse, as they
can be used to maneuver around bends. Advanced borescopes use fiber optic tech-
nology and can transmit an image to a screen or to a video tape for recording. Bore-
scope tips can now be maneuvered to allow more detailed viewing. Some
borescopes offer four-way tip articulation and can be operated via a joy stick. The
image transmitted by borescopes is typically magnified (3 to 15 times) with a large
depth of field and field of view. Borescopes range in length from a few inches to
100 feet.
Borescopes have been used in exchanger tube inspection for the detection of corro-
sion and pitting. The devices are particularly useful in viewing tube deposits. Using
color imaging, borescopes have been used in boiler tubes to check the color of the
deposits. Knowing the color gives information on water treatment quality. Bores-
copes cannot give quantitative corrosion information, however.
M echanical M easuring Devices

Visual inspection alone does not give the quantitative information often needed for
maintenance decisions. Therefore, as an aid to visual inspection, mechanical
measuring devices, many of which are hand-held, have been developed.
Measuring tapes and scales are common inspection aids. Calipers, shaped to fit over
flanges, fittings, valves, and furnace headers can measure wall thicknesses. Special
calipers exist for measuring the ID and OD of piping. Such calipers are useful for
detecting general or localized corrosion around the full circumference of tubing and
casings. However, deposits and scale must be thoroughly removed from the surface
in order for accurate measurements to be taken. These instruments have been
combined with video probes for thorough ID piping inspection, for example the
Probe Caliper system from J.C. Kinley Co.
J.C. Kinley Co.
5815 Royalton St.
Houston, Texas 77081
(713) 664-4501
Micrometers are used for precise thickness measurements, and pit depth gages have
been developed for measuring nonuniform corrosion. All of these tools can help
quantify the observations made during visual inspection, giving more accurate infor-
mation on the extent of general and localized corrosion.
552 Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT)

Liquid penetrant tests can be used on both ferrous and nonferrous alloys. These tests
are based on the “oil” and “whiting” technique once widely used in railroad
machine shops. In this method, parts were coated with kerosene, allowed to soak,
wiped dry, and dusted with finely divided chalk. If cracks were present, the kero-
sene stained the powder, producing the visible indications.

As years passed, the technique was improved in several ways. Visibility of indica-
tions, for example, has been considerably enhanced by the addition of brilliant red
dyes to the penetrating oils. Today, fluorescents are also added to oils so that indica-
tions will glow when coated parts are viewed under “black” or near-ultraviolet light.
The dye penetrant methods (Turco's Dychek, Magnaflux's Spotcheck, etc.) and the
fluorescent penetrants (Zyglo, etc.) depend upon capillary action to draw the pene-
trant into surface flaws or cracks in the thoroughly cleaned part. The excess pene-
trant is then washed off the part and a developer applied. The developer acts as a
blotter to draw the penetrant from the crack. Inspection is carried out by viewing the
part for color contrast between the penetrant drawn out and the background surface
of the developer. This is done under either white light for the visible red dye or
under a “black” light (near ultraviolet) for the fluorescent dyes.
Both the dye penetrants and the fluorescent penetrants exist in three different types
according to the manner in which excess penetrant is removed. They are:
1. Water-washable penetrants.
2. Solvent-removable penetrants.
3. Postemulsifiable penetrants.
The most commonly used penetrant for field use in the petroleum industry is the
solvent-removable type. The water-washable penetrants are the least sensitive but
are used where large surface areas have to be inspected. The postemulsifiable pene-
trants require an extra step, the application of an emulsifier, which prepares the oil
penetrant for a water wash. This is the most sensitive penetrant system, but also the
most difficult to use and isn't used much by our Company. Complete inspection kits
containing aerosol cans of cleaner, penetrant, and developer are available for a low
cost. Penetrant kits are also available for high temperature inspections.
In order for penetrant inspection to be effective, the surface being tested must be
clean and free of scale (which may require wire wheel brushing, grinding, or abra-
sive blasting), and adequate penetration time for the penetrant must be allowed.
Penetration time is strongly dependent on temperature, and additional penetration
time should be allowed at lower temperatures. For optimum penetration, a surface
temperature of approximately 120°F should be attained, possibly by the application
of hot water prior to testing.
Company experience has shown that penetrant inspection is less sensitive at
detecting tight cracks or cracks that have an oxide scale within them (such as
carbonate stress corrosion cracks in FCC overhead systems) than magnetic particle
inspection, discussed next. Additionally, heavily pitted surfaces are not effectively
dye checked. The penetrant tends to gather in the pits, masking the cracks.
553 M agnetic Particle Testing (M T)

Magnetic particle inspection can be used on ferromagnetic materials such as
carbon steel and Cr-Mo steels. It cannot be used to test materials which cannot be

magnetized, such as austenitic stainless steels, copper, brass, bronze, titanium,

aluminum, or lead.
The test consists of three basic operations:
1. Establishing a suitable magnetic field in the test object.
2. Applying magnetic particles to the surface of the test object.
3. Examining the test object surface for accumulations of the particles (indica-
tions) and evaluating the serviceability of the test object.
A suitable magnetic field can be induced into a part by a variety of methods,
including a bar magnet or yoke, or electric currents using prods, contact plates, or a
coil. A crack or other surface discontinuity causes leakage of electrical flux, which
establishes a local magnetic field.
Magnetic particles applied to the test surface will collect in the local magnetic field
at the discontinuity and reveal its size and shape.
It should be noted that cracks are shown best when they are at right angles to the
magnetic lines of force. The magnetic lines of force are, in turn, at right angles to
the current flow so that for crack detection work, the crack should be oriented in the
direction of current flow. In practice, a part should always be examined in two
directions—i.e., the magnetic field should be induced in two directions at
90 degrees to be sure defects are adequately surveyed (Figure 500-32). Normally,
this is done by rotating the yoke 90 degrees.
Fig. 500-32 Detection of Cracks Using M agnetic Particle Testing
The two basic methods of magnetic particle testing are the wet and the dry methods.
Wet Method. Magnetic particles are suspended in oil or water. The particles can be
visible black or red, or can be fluorescent for examination under “black” (near ultra-
violet) light (e.g., Magnaglo) which provides greater sensitivity for detecting fine
cracks.

Dry Method. There is no liquid vehicle. Dry powders are available in black, red, or
white to provide contrast to the part being inspected.
Wet fluorescent magnetic particle inspection (WFMT) has proven to be the most
effective method for the detection of stress corrosion cracks when optimum sensi-
tivity is needed. The technique is particularly useful in columns and vessels where it
is dark, as the black light, which is used to highlight the cracks, also serves as a light
source.
Magnetic particle inspection is generally preferred to penetrant inspection.
However, since this technique typically requires more equipment than PT and a
source of electrical power, use of MT is not always practical. Although MT inspec-
tion is more sensitive than liquid penetrant inspection, surface preparation to
remove scale and dirt is still very important. Tight, shallow cracks often will not
show up unless the surface is cleaned to a shiny finish by abrasive blasting, wire
wheel brushing, or grinding. MT inspection is intended for surface inspection, but
frequently it will detect defects which are slightly below the surface. Because of this
the operator needs to interpret the results with care.
554 Ultrasonic Testing (UT)

This section discusses the theory of ultrasonics; the two most commonly used types
of ultrasonic waves used in the inspection of metal (longitudinal waves and trans-
verse waves); and the advantages/limitations of ultrasonics.
Theory
Ultrasonics is defined as energy in a mechanical wave in the ultrasonic range above
20,000 cycles per second. This sound can propagate through most materials. For
nondestructive testing, useful ultrasonic vibrations range from frequencies of
200,000 to 25,000,000 cycles per second (0.2 to 25 MHz) and even higher.
Ultrasonic waves are generated by a device called a transducer. Transducers are
crystals which exhibit a phenomenon known as the “piezoelectric effect” which
transforms electrical pulses into mechanical vibrations and vice versa. Thus, a
rapidly fluctuating voltage will cause the transducer to change thickness and vibrate
at the same frequency as that with which the voltage fluctuates, producing an ultra-
sonic sound wave. Ultrasonic equipment uses conventional echo-ranging instrumen-
tation and incorporates electronic circuits for the generation of electrical signals.
Various types of transducers convert the electrical signals into the mechanical vibra-
tions (sound) and reversibly convert the sound echoes into electrical voltage pulses.
Additional circuitry then amplifies the weak returning signals and displays them on
the data readout device. This may either be a cathode-ray oscilloscope (commonly
referred to as “scope”) or a meter or digital thickness readout.
For testing, ultrasonic vibrations of the transducer are generally introduced into the
material through a couplant such as oil, grease, glycerine, or water. Within the test
material, the ultrasonic waves produced by the sending transducer are “beamed”
waves that progress almost as a column, like light from a flashlight. These sound
waves will reflect from various boundaries within the part, similar to the reflection

of light rays from reflecting surfaces such as mirrors. These reflected sound waves
return to the transducer, causing it to vibrate and send an electrical signal to the
instrument. The total time elapsed from when the electrical signal is sent to the
transducer until the reflected signal is returned is electronically measured on a
cathode ray tube. This measurement is empirically converted to either thickness of
material or distance from a reflecting surface.
Four types of ultrasonic waves can be used in the inspection of metal: longitudinal
(straight beam) waves, transverse (shear) waves, surface waves, and plate waves.
The first two types, straight beam and shear, are by far the more common, and
future discussion will be limited to them. For a more detailed discussion on ultra-
sonics, see Reference [4] in Section 560.
Figures 500-33 and 500-34 show schematics of straight beam and shear wave ultra-
sonics, respectively. Straight beam UT transmits a beam straight into the material.
By detecting back reflections, wall thickness or flaws parallel to the surface can be
detected. A similar principle applies for shear wave UT where the sound beam is
introduced into the material at an angle. Therefore, flaws that would not be detected
by straight beam UT, such as weld cracks and defects, fatigue cracks, or stress
corrosion cracks, can be detected.
Fig. 500-33 Straight Beam UT— Detecting Fig. 500-34 Shear Wave UT— Detecting
Flaw s Cracks
Typical ultrasonic techniques use a pulse-echo method for inspection. In this

method, short bursts of ultrasonic energy are introduced into the component being
inspected at regular intervals of time. The amount of energy reflected and the time
delay between transmission and reception (time-of-flight) is monitored. The infor-
mation from such testing can be displayed in several forms: A-scan, B-scan, C-scan,
or simulated 3-D. A-scan provides a quantitative display of intensity and time-of-
flight data obtained from a single point on the object being tested. This form of data
presentation is the most commonly used and is normally presented on an oscillo-
scope screen. B-scan is a quantitative display of time of flight versus distance
obtained along a line on the surface of the test object and is also typically presented
on the screen of a scope. C-scan adds another axis to B-scan information, displaying

time of flight data over an area. This information is typically displayed on an X-Y
plotter or can be processed by a computer to display the information in a 3-D
format. By using this format, complete thickness profiles or locations of defects
within a given area of surface can be mapped out.
Applications of Straight Beam UT

Straight beam (longitudinal) UT is an excellent method for monitoring general
corrosion through thickness measurements. This technique also yields information
on the degree of pitting that a component is experiencing and can detect lamina-
tions in materials such as those caused by hydrogen blistering. Recently, the straight
beam UT method has been investigated for use in the early detection of hydrogen
attack and shows significant promise.
Detection of General Corrosion, Pitting, Blistering. Straight beam UT is most
commonly used for thickness measurements and is used extensively throughout the
Company for manual inspection on all types of equipment. Thickness measure-
ments can be obtained rapidly and effectively using this technique, thus general
corrosion can easily be monitored over time.
These thickness measurements are often performed using digital thickness gages.
Digital thickness gages use UT but present only a summary of the time-of-flight
data (i.e., a thickness reading) with no intensity information. Although these digital
devices offer the advantage of very rapid measurements and ease of use, they can be
fooled by material discontinuities, such as blistering, yielding false results on occa-
sion. Such devices also provide no information as to the condition of the compo-
nent surfaces.
Alternatively, scope-type instruments with the A-scan presentation can be used.
With scopes, both reflected intensity and time-of-flight data are presented on the
screen. A-scan presentation is often capable of detecting a rough (pitted) internal
surface which causes a lower intensity in the reflected wave and a large amount of
noise in the time-of-flight data.
Recently, the Company has explored the possibility of using straight beam UT for
more than just manual spot thickness measurements. Richmond Refinery has been
working with CTI Inc., on the application of a computerized, mechanical, scanning,
UT device that is capable of mapping out a thickness profile for a particular area.
The device operates with magnetic wheels which hold it to the object being tested
and its mechanical arm holds a transducer. The device is capable of scanning a
3-foot by 1-foot area in approximately five minutes, storing information that can be
used to present A-, B-, or C-scan analyses. A 3-D simulation of an object’s thick-
ness profile can be prepared in minutes. Richmond is exploring the use of such a
device for detailed analysis of columns, vessels, and tanks. For more information,
contact the Richmond Refinery Inspection Group.
Early Detection of Hydrogen Attack. Hydrogen attack affects steel equipment
handling high-pressure, high-temperature hydrogen. Details of hydrogen attack are
discussed in Section 440 of this manual; therefore, only the basics will be presented
here. At high temperatures and pressures, hydrogen diffuses into steel and reacts
with carbides to form methane bubbles at grain boundaries. Hydrogen attack can

also decarburize the steel, reducing its strength. Pressure within these bubbles can
lead to microfissures and cracking.
In recent years, researchers have tried to find a nondestructive test method to detect
hydrogen attack in its early stages (before the onset of cracks and fissures).
Currently, radiography and UT shear wave measurements can detect only severe
hydrogen attack cracking.
As hydrogen attack proceeds, several ultrasonic parameters change: sound attenua-
tion increases as does the number of reflections, while apparent sound velocity
decreases. By monitoring these parameters, the presence and extent of hydrogen
attack can be determined.
Currently, there is debate about which method (attenuation, back reflection, or
sound velocity) is most sensitive to hydrogen attack and which is most suitable to
field inspection. Richmond Refinery and Materials and Equipment Engineering are
now jointly exploring the use of sound attenuation to characterize hydrogen attack.
Initial results show sound attenuation to be an effective, sensitive method. Attenua-
tion was found to increase rapidly in the early stages of hydrogen attack (from
0% to 90% before the mechanical properties of C-½Mo steel were significantly
affected. This suggests that sound attenuation may soon complement shear wave UT
and radiography in field testing for hydrogen attack.
The most reliable UT attenuation measurements are achieved using consistent oper-
ating methods, reproducible surface preparation, and the same operator and equip-
ment from one inspection period to the next. Many variables can alter the results of
an attenuation measurement, but these variables can be overcome. For more infor-
mation, contact CRTC’s Materials and Equipment Engineering or the Richmond
Refinery Inspection Office.
High-temperature Gaging. Because UT allows inspection of equipment during
operation, it helps extend shutdown intervals and allows many maintenance deci-
sions to be made prior to shutdown. Such onstream inspection of operating equip-
ment requires the use of high temperature transducers and special couplants. Several
techniques have been used over the years, including special transducer couplant
combinations and flowing water “bubblers.” The easiest and most popular systems
now are plastic standoffs to protect the transducer from heat and either commercial
grease-type couplants or Chevron's UT Plastic Couplant. The patented Chevron
Couplant is marketed by several U.S. distributors. It is available as strips in two
grades, for use in 325 to 650°F or 650 to 1100°F service. The plastic UT couplant
has definite advantages over the commercial grease-type couplants, especially in the
650 to 1100°F range. A commercially available Teflon “Super Lube” has proved to
be excellent up to 500°F, especially for high temperature shear wave inspections.
The correction factor generally used in high temperature gaging is a 1% reduction in
measured value for every 100°F over 200°F. This correction factor is necessary for
accurate work because sound velocities in steel decrease with temperature increases.
Applications of Shear Wave UT

UT can also be used for the detection of flaws and cracks in materials. However,
since most process induced (often stress corrosion) cracking occurs perpendicular to

the surface of a given component, longitudinal UT does not effectively detect it.
Therefore, shear wave (transverse) UT is used for the detection and, potentially, for
accurate sizing of such discontinuities.
Flaw Detection. Shear wave UT has long been used as a tool for the inspection of
welds. Additionally, the technique is very useful for the detection of mechanical and
process induced cracking. Unlike straight beam UT, effective shear wave inspection
requires a highly skilled operator. However, if properly used and interpreted, shear
wave is the preferred method for detecting process induced cracking in many cases.
El Segundo recently compared several nondestructive test methods to determine
which ones were most able to detect gross cracks caused by high temperature
hydrogen attack in their C-½Mo piping at their No. 2 catalytic reformer. While they
found that WFMT inspection detected the most cracks, such a technique is limited
to detecting surface cracks. Of the techniques that can inspect inaccessible surfaces,
shear wave UT was found to be much more sensitive than radiography, although
radiography can detect large cracks if they are oriented correctly.
Flaw Sizing. In addition to detecting cracks, shear wave UT can be used as a tool to
measure the size of detected cracks. Currently, however, flaw sizing of thin sections
and branchy cracks is unreliable, whereas flaws in thick sections and straight cracks
are far more easily sized. The Company is currently evaluating flaw sizing tech-
niques. Internal Rotary Inspection System (IRIS), a rotary ultrasonic technique, is
one such method that shows promise for sizing defects in heat exchanger tubes
and/or confirming eddy current results. Contact CRTC’s NDE/Corrosion specialists
for more information regarding its use and for qualified IRIS technicians.
Contact Materials and Equipment Engineering for more details and updated infor-
mation on the preferred techniques for given applications and flaw types.
Disadvantages/Limitations
Although ultrasonics is an extremely useful and proven inspection tool, it is not
without drawbacks. For example, rough, irregularly shaped, very small or thin, or
inhomogeneous components are difficult to inspect. Flaws are detected only in the
orientation of the UT equipment and shear wave UT requires highly trained, experi-
enced operators in order to be effective. Additionally, reference standards are neces-
sary for both straight beam and shear wave techniques. Neither technique typically
provides a permanent record (hard copy) on the condition of the equipment being
inspected, unlike the next NDT technique to be discussed—radiography.
A recently developed technique, Remote Field Eddy Current (RFEC), shows
promise as a tool for inspection of magnetic heat exchanger tubes. Consult CRTC’s
NDE/Corrosion specialists for current recommendations regarding this technique
and for a list of qualified RFEC technicians.
555 Radiographic Testing (RT)

Radiography is a very useful inspection technique that uses penetrating radiation
(X-rays, gamma rays) to detect discontinuities within components, to measure mate-
rial thickness, or to detect localized material degradation.

Theory
Radiographic testing requires three essential components: 1) a source of radiation,
2) the object to be evaluated, and 3) a recording medium (usually film).
The most common radioactive sources in use today are Iridium 192 and Cobalt 60.
X-rays generated from X-ray tubes are generally not suitable for the majority of our
process plant requirements, unless tube wall thicknesses are very thin (less than
0.10 inch). Tests have shown that Iridium 192 can be effectively used for wall thick-
ness applications up to a maximum single wall thickness of about 0.75 inch. If a
tube wall thickness is above 0.75 inch, Cobalt 60 is much more effective.
During testing, radiation goes from its source in a straight line to the specimen
under examination. Some of the rays pass through while others are absorbed or scat-
tered, the amount transmitted depending upon the energy of the radiation and the
nature and thickness of the material. The intensity of the transmitted radiation is
recorded on radiographic film placed behind the test object.
Darker regions on a film represent the more penetrable parts of the object. Film
radiography thus provides a permanent, visible record of the internal condition of an
object.
Figure 500-35 illustrates the use of projection radiography in detecting flaws or
pitting in a plate of uniform thickness.
Fig. 500-35 Basic Elements of a Radiographic System
Similarly, radiography can be used to detect cracks; however, radiography is gener-

ally only able to detect defects that are favorably oriented. For example, radiog-
raphy can only detect cracks that are relatively wide and oriented parallel to (in the
same plane as) the radiation beam. Therefore, in Figure 500-35, Crack A would
likely be detected. Crack B is a blister in the horizontal plane and would likely be
missed by radiography. This explains why radiation rarely detects blistering and
lamination in plate material.

In addition to detecting flaws, radiography can be used to measure wall thickness

and, therefore, is useful for monitoring general corrosion, particularly where longi-
tudinal ultrasonics or mechanical measurements are difficult to apply. Figure 500-36
shows a schematic of such a test for measuring pipe thickness. Figure 500-37 shows
typical radiographs from wall thickness measurements. Areas which are thinned
from corrosion or erosion can be easily seen. However, since the projection radiog-
raphy displays a three-dimensional object on a two-dimensional surface, the radio-
graph often shows a distorted image of the original component. Therefore, the
measured thickness of Figure 500-36 must be “corrected” to yield the actual thick-
ness of the pipe. This correction can be done using the equation shown in the figure.
The correction is best accomplished by including an object of known size with the
test object during radiography. By scaling the known component, the correction
factor for the test object can be found. Several Company refineries use a small metal
block with slots every 0.1 inches placed on the center line of pipe being radio-
graphed. The blow-up of the calibration block is the same as the blow-up of the pipe
on the film.
Fig. 500-36 Schematic of Radiographic Technique for M easuring Pipe Wall Thickness

Specific Applications
Contact radiographic techniques have been used for years in weld inspection and
control of casting quality. The petroleum industry also uses projection radiography
for onstream detection of corrosion and other abnormalities in operating process
equipment. Our Company has used radiography for many different things,
including:
• Measuring pipe and tube wall thicknesses, both onstream (hot) and during shut-
downs, with or without insulation
• Checking plugged lines and measuring scale or coke thicknesses
• Evaluating the effectiveness of chemical cleaning in scaled furnace tubes
• Measuring pit depth in lines by film density differences and detecting large pits
behind faulty strip lining in columns
• Radiographing valves to explain malfunctions such as those caused by broken
stems, corroded seats, broken springs, etc.
• Measuring thermowell corrosion
• Evaluating small diameter, threaded pipe nipple fitups and measuring internal
corrosion
• Detecting catalyst voids in vertical-tubed reformer furnaces
• Evaluating the extent of refractory lining system failure in an FCC U-bend
• Examining a column externally for evidence of tilted or missing trays
Radiography has proven to be particularly useful for onstream monitoring of piping
and vessels, particularly where insulation limits accessibility to the metal surface.
Onstream radiography (hot radiography) is being used at many locations within our
Company. Onstream radiography, possibly used in conjunction with ultrasonics, is a
valuable tool for pinpointing areas where repair is needed in advance of mainte-
nance shutdowns. Since radiographic film is sensitive to high temperatures, it must
be protected from the hot surfaces. For moderately high temperatures (200 to
300°F), the film can be insulated. Above that temperature, either an air-cooled or
water-cooled film holder should be used.
Another successful application of radiography is quantitative image analysis, where
defects or thicknesses are compared to known standards and quantitatively evalu-
ated on the basis of degree of exposure on the film. For example, pitting-type corro-
sion can be easily detected and quantitatively evaluated with radiography. The
presence of pitting in piping or tubes is distinguished by a “mottled” or black
appearance (pits appear dark). Pit depth can be estimated by the density differences.
A sample of the type of component being tested (piping, for example) must be made
up with holes (representing pits) drilled to different depths. Test radiographs can
then be made and the film densities at the pits must be accurately measured with a
film densitometer. A plot of pit depth versus film density (for equal background
densities) then enables an accurate estimate to be made of the “unknowns.”

Fig. 500-37 Typical Radiographs of Eroded 180-degree Fin Tube Bends

Detection of small isolated pits is very difficult for ultrasonics, but easy for radiog-
raphy. It is practical to use radiography over a limited area but too costly to use
100% X-ray.
The Company has made use of film radiography in many other very special applica-
tions. For more detail on applications of radiography and specifications on proper
procedures see References [2] and [4] in Section 560.
Perhaps the greatest disadvantage of RT is the safety hazard that radiation poses to
personnel. This hazard is particularly dangerous because the human senses do not
immediately detect exposure to radiation. Since workers must be cleared from areas
where RT is being used, the use of the technique is not always possible or cost
effective.
As with the other NDT techniques, radiography is not useful for detecting all types
of corrosion phenomena nor applicable in all situations. For example, El Segundo
recently found radiography to be relatively insensitive at detecting cracks caused by
gross high temperature hydrogen attack, compared to shear-wave UT and magnetic
particle testing.
Radiography can also affect radiation-based instruments in operating plants
(i.e., X-ray level transmitters). These instruments must be manually operated while
nearby equipment is being radiographed.
556 Eddy Current (EC)

This inspection method will detect pitting and cracks in metal components. For
materials less than ¼ to ½ inch thick, EC inspection can also be used for thickness
measurements and, therefore, can monitor general corrosion. EC inspection has
traditionally been used in tubing and piping inspection; however, many other appli-
cations have been found and are being considered for this NDT technique.
Theory
When an alternating current is applied to a coil, a magnetic field is established.
When this coil is brought close to the surface of a conducting material (a metal
piece of equipment, for example), the coil's magnetic field will cause ECs to flow in
the material with a corresponding change in the magnetic flux in the coil.
The geometry, electrical conductivity, and magnetic permeability of the material
influence the ECs and the net magnetic field within the material. These effects can
be observed indirectly by measuring the amplitude of the current flowing in the coil
under given conditions of voltage, amplitude, and frequency. The current flowing
through the coil is the source of the information describing a part's quality, proper-
ties, and characteristics.
These currents are analyzed and compared with those flowing in a “standard,” or
acceptable sample. Discontinuities, such as pits and cracks, result in EC distortions
which can be displayed on a strip chart or cathode ray tube. By calibrating

equipment on samples with known defects and of equivalent material, geometry,

and wall thickness to the item to be tested, the observed flaw type and size can be
determined.
When the EC principle listed above is applied to ferromagnetic materials (carbon
steel, etc.), additional magnetic effects occur that can overshadow the basic EC
fields. For this reason, EC technology was originally applied only to nonferromag-
netic materials (copper tubes, for example). Now, however, methods have been
developed that allow the EC principle to be applied to all conductive materials.
Applications
Specific applications of EC technology focus on detecting changes in variables
which alter one of the three factors affecting EC flow (material conductivity,
magnetic permeability, and geometry).
ECs are interrupted by discontinuities or boundaries. This feature makes EC particu-
larly useful in detecting defects (cracks, holes, pits, seams, or porous areas) in metal
parts of relatively uniform shape. Another factor influencing the behavior of ECs,
geometry of the test part, has led to the production of sensitive equipment for deter-
mining and controlling dimensions of metallic products. Also, since such measure-
ments can be made from one side, tests can be performed on a part that has been in
service, e.g., detection of corrosion in oil well casing or drill pipe.
EC Devices. Although many EC devices are used by manufacturing plants for
quality control, extensive field use has been limited to instruments such as the
Probolog or Ferrolog and several tailor-made devices for checking tubular goods
including drill pipe, line pipe, and heat exchanger and furnace tubing. The Probolog
was originally developed by the Shell Development Company and is now manufac-
tured and sold by Branson Instruments. It is a portable tool for detecting corrosion
and cracks in nonmagnetic tubes. The Ferrolog, also developed by Shell Develop-
ment, is an electronic variation of the Probolog, adapted for the measurement of
magnetic tubes.
Both instruments operate similarly. A probe containing the coil is pulled at a
constant rate through the tube being inspected. Irregularities in the tube wall are
automatically recorded on a moving strip chart. Chart speed and probe speed can be
controlled to give definite ratios of tube length to chart length. Corrosion effects are
determined by interpreting the chart signal markings. Abnormal readings on the
chart must be properly interpreted by an experienced operator. External or internal
attachments such as baffles, braces, reinforcing rings, etc., will affect the output
signal of the instrument. Additionally, other nearby parts can affect the signal if they
are within a few inches of the part being tested.
The Company has had mixed experience with EC equipment used to inspect heat
exchanger tubes and pipelines. El Segundo has had good experience with Ferrolog
inspection of ferromagnetic heat exchanger tubes when experienced competent
outside sources have performed the inspection. Other locations have also found
success of the technique to depend on the quality and experience of the operator.

EC inspection of pipelines is quite common. For inspection of relatively short

sections of pipe (less than 4000 feet), EC instrumentation can be fed through pipe
via wire lines (Linalog), similar to the methods used for heat exchanger tube inspec-
tions. The EC device can detect internal and external corrosion if wall thickness
does not exceed ¼ to ½ inch. As EC inspection is limited in penetration ability, only
the first ¼ inch on the ID of very thick pipelines will be evaluated. Video probes
have been combined with pipeline EC equipment to give visual inspection capa-
bility along with EC evaluation. “Intelligent pigs” are pipeline pigs which have been
equipped with electromagnetic, EC-based, equipment and are capable of evaluating
long lengths of line.
In addition to the use of EC technology for tubular product inspection, EC can be
used to evaluate the surface condition of nontubulars. EC has been used outside the
Company for turbine blade inspection. Richmond Refinery is exploring the use of
an EC device which can quickly evaluate tank bottoms for areas of thinning or
pitting. The instrument is pushed along the tank bottom like a lawn mower, and is
useful in detecting areas which may require further testing, such as thickness gaging
by UT (“mapping” as discussed in earlier section) or removal of a large section for
analysis. The EC technique offers rapid bottom coverage and does not require the
high degree of cleanliness required for UT gaging.
A recently developed technique, Remote Field Eddy Current (RFEC), shows
promise as a tool for inspection of magnetic heat exchanger tubes. Consult CRTC
NDE/Corrosion specialists for current recommendations regarding this technique
and for a list of qualified RFEC technicians.
Although many additional potential applications exist for EC testing, including
stress corrosion crack detection and depth measurement, the success of EC inspec-
tion is extremely dependent on the operator's skill and experience. Also, EC is
essentially a surface inspection technique and, therefore, is only a complete inspec-
tion tool on thin materials.
Perhaps the greatest drawback of EC testing is its extreme sensitivity; instrumenta-
tion must, therefore, be carefully designed and adjusted so that the variables
affecting test results can be held constant. Nonetheless, a substantial potential exists
for EC techniques as field inspection tools in the petroleum industry.
557 Acoustic Emission (AE)

Acoustic emission (AE) is a relatively new technique that is rapidly growing and
shows potential for use in the petroleum industry. Although Company experience
with the technique is limited, more advanced equipment and techniques using AE
may make the testing method a useful tool in the detection of cracks in equipment,
particularly in pressure vessels. The technique has been used, with mixed success,
for detecting leaks in tanks, vessels, and pipelines, and will be discussed in the
following section on Leak Testing.

Theory
Unlike most conventional NDT methods, which detect discontinuities by injecting a
beam of energy (X-ray, gamma ray, ultrasound, etc.) into the material being
inspected, AE involves the detection of released strain energy which had initially
been stored in a stress field. As discontinuities (or cracks) initiate or grow in a struc-
ture, they emit short bursts of energy (high frequency stress waves) called “emis-
sions,” as seen in Figure 500-38. These emissions can be detected by sensors
(transducers) and the source of the emissions can be evaluated by studying the
strength, rate, and location of the emissions. Currently, only the approximate loca-
tion of emission sources can be determined and several analysis methods can be
used to help locate the emission location.
Fig. 500-38 Acoustic Emission Testing— Defect-generated Acoustic Wave Reaching the
Sensor
• Zonal location
– AE data is recorded by each sensor individually
– Many sensors needed to narrow down location of emission source
– Good for piping systems
• Linear location
– Emissions are located between a pair of sensors
• Planar location
– Emissions are located by triangulation and hence must be detected by three
or four sensors
– Good for reactor, vessel, and column monitoring
Applications
AE can be used two ways. The first way is more common and reliable and is for the
detection of flaws or cracks. Stress is applied on the test material while emissions
are monitored. The applied stress need not reach the yield stress of the material,
because the local yielding at discontinuities is what produces the emissions that
allow the flaws to be detected.

This technique has been used outside the Company to monitor pressure vessels
during proof or hydrostatic testing and during onstream overpressurization where
defects are likely to grow and be detected. Thermal stresses, such as those experi-
enced during cool-down or startup, can also produce detectable emissions. The use
of AE during such testing allows the whole structure to be tested for defects during
a one-step process, whereas most other NDT techniques can only test a portion of
the structure at one time.
Although AE does not reveal the type or exact size of the discontinuities detected, it
can help to locate problem areas which can then be further studied by shear-wave
UT, magnetic particle inspection, or other NDT methods.
The second potential use of AE is for onstream continuous monitoring of stress
corrosion cracking or hydrogen-induced cracking. This method does not apply addi-
tional stresses to the structure. During these corrosion phenomena, high frequency
AE occur as the cracks initiate and grow and, therefore, there is the potential for
detection of such cracking in its early stages. Most of the work done in this area has
been experimental, and while the technique is capable of detecting extremely fine
cracks that are undetectable by conventional NDT techniques, significant problems
will need to be overcome before AE will be useful in the field for such applications.
Contact Materials and Equipment Engineering for more information.
AE is such a sensitive technique that it is extremely susceptible to background noise
which can interfere with or mask emissions from flaws. To date no method has been
developed that completely separates background noise, such as equipment vibra-
tion, from AE caused by flaws, making AE data interpretation a difficult task. Not
all flaws in equipment are detected by AE. Large flaws, if unfavorably oriented to
the applied stress, may not produce significant emissions and go undetected. Flaws
that are detected normally need to be further examined by UT or magnetic particle
inspection, since AE does not provide much information on the nature or size of the
flaw. Another oil company used AE for pressure vessel inspection and detected
significant acoustic emission from one location on a vessel. Substantial effort was
spent using other nondestructive techniques trying to determine the cause of the
emissions. A few extremely small cracks, not warranting repair, were found to be
the source, suggesting that the extreme sensitivity of AE needs to be considered
while implementing this technique.
558 Leak Testing

Leak detection methods, such as hydrotesting, are commonly used to demonstrate
the integrity of welds. However, leak detection methods can be used to detect corro-
sion (cracking, pitting, or thinning) that has extended through the wall of a compo-
nent. An example of the use of leak detection for corrosion monitoring is the
hydrostatic testing of line pipe.
In the leak testing field, numerous methods are available such as hydrotests, air or
nitrogen bubble tests, ultrasonic tests, halogen tests, mass spectrometer tests, etc.,
and each of the methods has its advantages and limitations. For most applications

within our Company, hydrostatic or gas bubble tests provide adequate sensitivity
and are the simplest methods.
Theory
Leak testing is the determination of the rate at which a liquid or gas will penetrate
from anywhere within a “tight” component or assembly to the outside, or vice versa,
as a result of a pressure differential between the two regions. Nothing made by man
can truly be considered absolutely leak-tight. Leak tightness is a relative term, and it
becomes necessary to establish a practical level of leak testing sensitivity for any
given component under test.
There are many different types of leak testing methods, most of which offer a
degree of sensitivity much above a practical level for most petroleum industry appli-
cations. However, it is helpful to have an insight into the relative sensitivities of the
various test methods, in order to choose one. Figure 500-39 lists the relative sensi-
tivity of various test methods. Not all of these methods are applicable to the petro-
leum industry.
Fig. 500-39 Sensitivity of Various Leak Test M ethods [12] (“ Leak Testing Welded Vessels: by
R.J. Roehers. From M aterials Evaluation , October, 1969. Courtesy of the Amer-
ican Society for Nondestructive Testing .)
Test M ethod Leakage, cc/sec.
Pressure Drop M ethod Using Liquids Depends on volume tested and pressure
range of gage
Pressure Rise M ethod Depends on volume tested
Ultrasonic Leak Detector 1 x 10-1
Volumetric-Displacement M ethod 1 x 10-2
(Gas-Type Flow meters)
Gas-Discharge M ethod 1 x 10-2
Ammonia and HCl 1 x 10-2 to 1 x 10-3
Halide Torch 1 x 10-3
Air Bubbles in Water 1 x 10-3 to 1 x 10-4
Air and Soap or Detergent 1 x 10-3 to 1 x 10-4
Thermal Conductivity 1 x 10-4
Hot Filament Ionization Gage 1 x 10-7
M ass Spectrometer Sniffer Test 1 x 10-8
Halogen Diode Detector 1 x 10-8
Hydrogen Bubbles in Alcohol 5 x 10-7
M ass Spectrometer Envelop Test 1 x 10-10
Radioactive Isotopes 1 x 10-12

Hydrostatic or Pneumatic Testing

These are the simplest and most commonly used methods. With liquids, either water
or hydrocarbon, a small amount of leakage results in a large pressure drop. For
maximum sensitivity, the system must be completely vented and free of any trapped
gases. If visual methods are used to detect liquid leakage, sometimes small leaks
will go undetected. Addition of fluorescent dyes to hydrotest water and the use of an
ultraviolet light can increase test sensitivity by a factor of 100. This method has
been used successfully at several refineries.
Sensitivity of this test method to air- or nitrogen-pressure loss is primarily a func-
tion of system volume. It is also affected by the test pressure, temperature control,
pressure gage type, and test period. By performing some simple calculations, it can
be shown that air leaks smaller than about 5 cubic inches per hour are the smallest
detectable, even on relatively small vessels of 1 to 10 cubic feet. This size leak will
drip oil, so this method has severe limitations for small leaks. Gas testing also has
inherent safety hazards. High pressure gas testing should always be a last resort.
Ultrasonic Leak Detectors

If a system is pressurized with air or another gas, large and moderate leaks may be
detected by audible sound vibrations produced by the escaping gas. However, the
human ear does not easily detect the sonic vibrations produced by small leaks.
Therefore, instruments such as ultrasonic leak detectors are used. These devices
employ the same principles as AE technology discussed in the previous section.
However, these leak detectors receive signals resulting from the fluid moving
through the gap or crack causing the leak, rather than from crack initiation and
growth. Some types of leaks are detectable at long distances, and others are diffused
and do not create the required conditions for easy detection.
Ultrasonic detectors of various brands (Delcon, Son-Tector, etc.) have been used
fairly successfully by several refineries to detect gross flange leakage during plant
startups. The ultrasonic method can attain sensitivities of approximately
1 × 10-1 cubic centimeters per second at a distance of 2 to 3 inches from the leak.
This sensitivity drops to 1 cubic centimeter per second at a distance of 2 feet from
the leak and decreases further to approximately 10 cubic centimeters per second if
the leak is located 20 feet away. While there are definite advantages to this system,
it is not sensitive to extremely small leaks.
El Segundo attempted to use AE/ultrasonic technology to detect leaks in tank
bottoms during the 1980s but found that such techniques were not sensitive under
certain conditions.
Bubble Testing
A common method is to submerge an air- or nitrogen-pressurized component in
water, then look for bubbles. If the vessel can’t be submerged, a bubble solution
(Snoop, Leak-Tec, etc.) can be spread over the pressurized part. Test sensitivity is
greatly enhanced by use of a test liquid with low surface tension, such as that
obtained with soap or detergent additions to water. Even this method requires a leak
rate of sufficient magnitude to produce, in a short time, a bubble large enough for

the human eye to see. For most plant applications, this degree of sensitivity is more
than adequate.
Bubble testing can be used by applying either a pressure inside the component or a
vacuum outside the component (i.e., vacuum testing of tank bottom welds).
560 References
1. C. R. Townsend, “Comparison of the 2- and 3-Electrode Polarization Resis-
tance Methods of Corrosion Measurement,” NACE, 1974.
2. ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section V, Nondestructive
Examination, 1986.
3. Guide for Inspection of Refinery Equipment, American Petroleum Institute,
Ch. IV, Inspection Tools.
4. Nondestructive Evaluation and Quality Control, Metals Handbook, Vol. 17,
9th Edition, 1989.
5. Corrosion Monitoring in Industrial Plants Using Nondestructive Testing and
Electrochemical Methods, ASTM STP 908, Moran/Labine, editors.
6. Nondestructive Testing Handbook, American Society for Nondestructive
Testing, Robert C. McMaster, editor.
7. Predictive/Preventative Maintenance Programs Utilizing Nondestructive
Testing, John W. Collier, Refinery and Petrochemical Plant Maintenance
Conference, 1986.
8. Nondestructive Testing, T. N. Crump, Process Industries Corrosion, NACE,
1986, pp. 775-783.
9. State of the Refinery NDT Art, 1983 Proceedings, Refinery Department, Amer-
ican Petroleum Institute, 1983.
10. Test for Detecting High Temperature Hydrogen Attack of Steels, 1983 Proceed-
ings, Refining Department, American Petroleum Institute, 1983.
11. “Effective Use of Ultrasonic Testing in Fitness-for-Service Evaluations,” C. D.
Confer and O. F. Hedden.
12. R. J. Roehers, Leak Testing Welded Vessels, Materials Evaluation,
October 1969.
13. Fixed Equipment Inspection Manual Inspection Strategies, Lotus Notes Reli-
ability Best Practice Data Base, revised May 1996.

Corrosion Monitoring Methods

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Corrosion Monitoring Methods

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

500 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods

Author: J.H. (John) Kmetz

510 Overview of Monitoring Tools 500-3

Chevron Corporation 500-1 August 1999

545 Future Advancements

August 1999 500-2 Chevron Corporation

510 Overview of M onitoring Tools

Fig. 500-1 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods (1 of 2)

Chevron Corporation 500-3 August 1999

Fig. 500-1 Corrosion M onitoring M ethods (2 of 2)

520 Electronic Corrosion-M onitoring Devices

August 1999 500-4 Chevron Corporation

Chevron Corporation 500-5 August 1999

Types of Corrosometer Probes

August 1999 500-6 Chevron Corporation

Probe Selection and Installation Guide

Chevron Corporation 500-7 August 1999

Specialty Probes (See Also “Possible Problems in Field Use”)

August 1999 500-8 Chevron Corporation

K03005 = Element Material (Carbon Steel).

Interpretation of Data. To obtain corrosion data using the Corrosometer, readings

Chevron Corporation 500-9 August 1999

Fig. 500-9 Typical Corrosometer Data Plot

Possible Problems in Field Use

August 1999 500-10 Chevron Corporation

Chevron Corporation 500-11 August 1999

Fig. 500-10 Safety Cable for Retractable Probes

W here Not to Use the Corrosometer

August 1999 500-12 Chevron Corporation

While the Corrosometer is capable of gathering corrosion data not obtainable by

522 Polarization Resistance Probes (PAIR and Corrater)

Chevron Corporation 500-13 August 1999

Solution Resistance Effects

August 1999 500-14 Chevron Corporation

Chevron Corporation 500-15 August 1999

Tw o- Versus Three-prong Probes

August 1999 500-16 Chevron Corporation

Fig. 500-14 Specific Resistance of Several Water Solutions

2. Placement of the third (reference) electrode in three-prong probes is critical.

Chevron Corporation 500-17 August 1999

Samples/Cortest (which purchased Petrolite) markets their “LP” (linear polariza-

August 1999 500-18 Chevron Corporation

Field Use of Polarization Resistance Probes

Chevron Corporation 500-19 August 1999

August 1999 500-20 Chevron Corporation

523 Galvanic Probes

Field Use of the Galvanic Probe

Chevron Corporation 500-21 August 1999

The galvanic probe is a reliable, rugged instrument. Inaccuracies can be caused by

530 Corrosion Specimens

August 1999 500-22 Chevron Corporation

531 Types of Corrosion Specimen Assemblies

Fig. 500-21 Conventional Corrosion Specimen Assembly w ith Noninsulated Specimens

Chevron Corporation 500-23 August 1999

Corrosion Specimens for Process Piping Systems

August 1999 500-24 Chevron Corporation

Fig. 500-22 Typical Corrosion Specimens for Piping Systems

Corrosion Specimens for Pipelines

Chevron Corporation 500-25 August 1999

Corrosion Specimens for Cooling Water Systems

Other Types of Test Specimens

August 1999 500-26 Chevron Corporation

Fig. 500-23 Piping System for Cooling Water Corrosion Specimens

Chevron Corporation 500-27 August 1999