4.7 Article

New insights into the hardening and pitting corrosion mechanisms of thermally aged duplex stainless steel at 475 °C: A comparative study between 2205 and 2101 steels

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 98, 期 -, 页码 123-135

出版社

JOURNAL MATER SCI TECHNOL
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmst.2021.04.046

关键词

Duplex stainless steel; Spinodal decomposition; G-phase precipitation; Pitting corrosion; Hardening

资金

  1. PPGCEM/UFSCar (Materials Science and Engineering Postgraduate Program at the Federal University of Sao Carlos)
  2. CNPq (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development, Brazil) [311163/2017-3, 312614/2020-9]
  3. FAPESP (Sao Paulo Research Foundation, Brazil) [2020/03205-6]
  4. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior - Brasil (CAPES) [001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study investigated the relationship between spinodal decomposition and the formation of Ni-rich clusters and G-phase in ferrite on the hardening and pitting corrosion of two thermally aged DSSs at 475 degrees C. It was found that for 2205 DSS, pitting corrosion behavior is influenced by G-phase precipitates, while for 2101 DSS, pitting corrosion resistance is mainly affected by the formation of Cr-richer nitrides.
In this study, the relationship between spinodal decomposition and the formation of Ni-rich clusters and G-phase in the ferrite on hardening and pitting corrosion of two thermally aged duplex stainless steels (DSSs) at 475 degrees C was investigated. Results indicate that, for 2205 DSS, pitting corrosion behavior is influenced by the presence and size of G-phase precipitates for longer aging times, but this contribution is masked by the advanced stage of spinodal decomposition in the ferritic structure. On the other hand, for 2101 DSS, the formation of Cr-richer nitrides impairs pitting corrosion resistance more than spinodal decomposition. (c) 2022 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of The editorial office of Journal of Materials Science & Technology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据