ML13312A800
| ML13312A800 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1995 |
| From: | Southern California Edison Co |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13312A799 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9503200118 | |
| Download: ML13312A800 (23) | |
Text
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool Liner Plate Evaluation March 1, 1995 9503200118 950310 PDR ADOCK 05000206 a
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The long-term integrity of the spent fuel pool stainless steel liner was evaluated and concluded to be adequate to provide a barrier that prevents significant leakage from the pool. Chemical analysis, visual inspection of the dewatered upender area, and metallurgical analysis of the liner plate have resulted in the assessment that the liner is expected to retain pool water sufficiently to maintain the safety of the spent fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool. Leakage monitoring will continue to be done on a weekly basis, and the spent fuel pool leak detection well will be pumped whenever the water level exceeds Elevation 2.5 feet. Procedural guidance was established to direct the chemical analysis of the leak detection well water subsequent to the NRC special inspection in October 1994. The frequency of performing chemical analysis will be modified when the measured parameters are observed to have constant trends. The waterproof membrane will continue to be evaluated to ascertain if groundwater is seeping into the leak chase system.
-2 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to provide the results of the evaluation on the long-term integrity of the spent fuel pool liner. The evaluation was initiated at the request of the NRC during their special inspection on October 3-6, 1994 (Reference 1). The NRC requested an evaluation of"...
the long-term metallurgical effects to the stainless steel from long-term contact with poor quality water." The evaluation was to include the chemical analyses of water samples from the leak detection well, and the potential for degradation of the stainless steel liner.
The spent fuel pool is located in the Fuel Storage Building and consists of three areas: the spent fuel storage pool, the upender equipment area and the shipping cask pool (see Figure 1). The spent fuel pool is about 66 feet long by 21 feet wide by 40 feet deep and is constructed of reinforced concrete and lined with welded stainless steel. The stainless steel plate is 11 gauge (0.12 inch) below Elevation 4' and 16 gauge (0.06 inch) above Elevation 4'. The stainless steel is ASTM A-240, Type 304. A minimum water level is maintained at Elevation 40'-3".
The liner is attached to the concrete by welding to embedded plates and structural angles. In order to monitor leakage passing through the liner, there is a leak chase system that is connected to a 12" diameter pipe which serves as the leak detection well (see Figure 2). The leak chase system consists of several 1" square channels that connect to a 2" square perimeter channel.
These channels direct any water leakage through a pipe into the leak detection well which is located outside the building north wall. The well extends down below the bottom of the pool to collect water leakage from any portion of the pool liner. The well is covered with a plate, in which there is a vent pipe and a closed inspection nozzle. Liner leakage is checked by measuring any water discharged from the vent, or by removing the inspection nozzle cover and measuring the water level in the well (See Figure 4).
The average site groundwater table is at Elevation 5' and has varied from Elevation 2.7' to 5.7'.
Also, the groundwater table has been correlated to reach a maximum elevation of 7' during a 23-year period of record (Reference 2). The Fuel Storage Building has a waterproof membrane that was installed between the concrete and the surrounding soil. The waterproof membrane encompasses the basemat and walls up to Elevation 12' (See Figure 3). The waterproof membrane serves the dual purpose of preventing in-leakage of groundwater into the building and its spent fuel pool, and leakage of spent fuel pool water to the groundwater and soil.
-3 EVALUATION In order to evaluate the long-term integrity of the spent fuel pool stainless steel liner, data was gathered on the chemical content of the leak detection well water, pool water temperature, liner plate stresses, and a visual inspection of the upender area was conducted.
- 1. WATER LEAKAGE The current leakage from the spent fuel pool is approximately 2 gal/week. Historical leakage rates are tabulated in Table 1 and are approximate. The leakage paths will follow the gap between the liner plate and concrete, and go to either the 1 inch square or 2 inch square trenches underneath the liner plate. The water is then drained to the leak det&ction monitoring well (see Figure 2).
Leakage in the pool was observed in 1986 and monitored on a weekly basis. The leakage rate was measured to be about 6 gal/day in September 1986. As pumping of the leak detection well commenced on a weekly interval, the leakage rate was about 10 gal/day and continued this trend through 1988. During the Cycle 10 refueling outage in January 1989, the leakage rate increased to 100 gal/day for a period of about three weeks until the liner in the upender area was repaired with a localized epoxy coating. After the repair, the leakage rate decreased to 3.5 gal/day. In May 1993, the leak detection well was found to be dry which signified that the leakage had stopped.
Possible ground contamination was investigated as a result of the leakage occurrence in 1986.
Contamination of the surrounding soil of the Fuel Storage Building was deemed to be a possibility as a result of the overflow of the leak detection well. The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program which requires sensitive radiological analyses of several environmental media including shoreline sediment, ocean bottom sediment, and ocean water, indicates that radio nuclides are not accumulating in the environment due to SONGS operations. The SONGS 1 Decommissioning Plan, submitted November 3, 1994, indicates the site will be adequately characterized for radiological contamination. This will include the area surrounding the Fuel Storage Building.
The current leakage rate in the pool is well below the makeup capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling water makeup system. The normal makeup supply (non Seismic Category A) is from the primary plant makeup storage tank via the primary plant makeup pump which has a capacity of 100 gpm. The emergency makeup supply (Seismic Category A) is from the auxiliary feedwater tank by gravity flow and has a minimum capacity of 12 gpm in the event of loss of offsite power.
The evaporation loss is calculated to be less than 2.3 gpm based on a scenario that the pool is cooled by natural cooling upon the loss of the spent fuel pool cooling system and the maximum pool water temperature reaches 160 degrees F. This loss will decrease to less than 1 gpm afier October 1997 due to the decaying spent fuel heat load. As of the date of this report, the pool
-4 water will reach a maximum temperature of less than 120 degrees F. Thus, there is ample makeup capacity to mitigate the consequences of water leakage and evaporation from the spent fuel pool and ensure the safety of the spent fuel assemblies.
- 2. CHEMICAL ANALYSES The chemical analyses of the leak detection well water and the spent fuel pool water are shown in Table 2. The data indicates that the water in the leak chase system is different from the spent fuel pool water chemistry. There are two possible explanations for the differences. Either the leaking pool water is being contaminated as it travels along the leak chase system or there may be groundwater intrusion. No groundwater samples were taken during this investigation, but the results from a 1986 investigation into the corrosion of the rebar in the intake structure showed that the groundwater had chloride content of less than 300 ppm at the:site. Typical salt water contains 19,000 ppm of chlorides.
Groundwater intrusion will continue to be evaluated as a possible source of water in the spent fuel pool leak chase system. The average groundwater table is at Elevation 5' and has been correlated to reach a maximum elevation of 7' during a 23-year period of record (Reference 2). The Fuel Storage Building has a waterproof membrane that was installed between the concrete and the surrounding soil. The waterproof membrane is 40 mils thick and encompasses the basemat and walls up to Elevation 12' (See Figure 3). The waterproof membrane serves the dual purpose of preventing in-leakage of groundwater into the building and leakage of spent fuel pool water to the groundwater and soil.
Records indicate that with spent fuel pool cooling system operating, the pool water temperature has varied from 65 degrees F. to a maximum of 99 degrees F. since February 1986. The pool water temperature over the last two years has averaged about 80 degrees F. The pool water temperature was allowed to reach almost 140 degrees F. during a heat-up test in May 1993 that was conducted to confirm a natural cooling calculation.
- 3. LINER INSPECTION To investigate the current condition of the liner, the upender area was drained and visually inspected. Nothing was noted that would be detrimental to the liner's integrity. The long-term metallurgical integrity of the stainless steel liner was evaluated for contact with an uncertain water quality as a result of liner leakage. The leaks that occurred in 1986 through 1989 were all in the form of pin-hole leaks associated with welds that join the liner plates in the upender area of the spent fuel pool. These pin-holes were epoxy repaired and the leaks eventually stopped. The concern for the metallurgical integrity of the liner arises from the potential of borated water interaction with the concrete which allows the release of corrosive ingredients in the concrete (such as chlorides, sulfites, sulfates) that may corrode the seam welds and ultimately cause stress
-5 corrosion cracking.
The objective of this evaluation is to verify the presence or absence of any cracking in the welds or the heat affected zone at the most susceptible locations in the pool. The upender area has in the past been the primary source of leakage and the cause can be attributed to the cycles of stress changes due to the filling and draining as well as other refueling activities. Thus the visual inspection concentrated on the drained upender area. A video camera was utilized to scan the two lower horizontal seam welds and the vertical seams of the upender area walls. The videos were studied and the horizontal welds were determined to warrant visual inspection with magnifying glasses. Optical photographs were taken that are representative of the welds' current condition. The chemical analyses of the water from the leak detection well were reviewed for correlation with corrosion potential and stress corrosion cracking of the stainless steel liner.
The visual inspection of the lower horizontal and vertical welds in the-upender area did not reveal any cracking. The previous leak repairs were intact and in good condition with no signs of degradation (See photographs 1 to 4). Weld defects were few and consisted of excessive weld build-up, mismatch and weld repairs. The weld repairs were most likely done during the initial construction of the liner since the search of pool history did not reflect any weld repairs. Despite the presence of the small number of localized weld defects, no corrosion or cracking was detected on the visible side of the liner.
The effects of borated water and boric acid on concrete are negligible as stated in ACI 515. 1 R-79 (Reference 3). Accumulation of pool water behind the liner and in contact with concrete will not degrade the concrete. However, it may produce minimal corrosion of any exposed rebars (approximately 0.002 inch per year according to EPRI Report NP2520-7). The presence of any localized weld defects may create locations susceptible to pitting corrosion and may produce localized pinhole leaks as previously experienced in the upender area.
The current leak rate (December 1994) is approximately 2 gallons per week. Since the leak rate did not change when the upender pool was dewatered, the current leak is outside the upender area and produced by a small pin-hole leak (estimated hole diameter is less than.0001 inch).
Stress corrosion cracking of Type 304 stainless steel is a function of the applied stress, and the environment (such as the concentration of chlorides, sulfates, pH and temperature). At temperatures of 260-300 degrees C. with chloride concentrations greater than 70 ppm, stresses equal to or greater than yield stress (welding residual stress), and low pH values, stainless steel is susceptible to stress corrosion cracking (Reference 5). However, at low temperatures (room temperature) and high pH values (greater than 6), the susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking is quite different and Type 304 stainless steel is practically immune to stress corrosion cracking (References 6 and 8). The effect of sulfates on Type 304 stainless steel is also known to be negligible even at high temperatures (boiling temperatures of 10% sodium bisulfates) because sulfates are oxidizing salts that do not affect austenitic stainless steels (Reference 7). The average pH of the leak detection well water is 9.
-6 Results of the inspection revealed the following conditions. The visual examination did not reveal any cracking, even after being exposed to chloride contaminated borated water. All leaks were most likely associated with localized pitted weld defects. Literature review has revealed negligible degradation of the concrete if exposed to borated waters. Also the current leak detection well chemistry of high pH values, low temperature, low chloride and sulfate concentrations does not cause stress corrosion cracking in austenitic Type 304 stainless steel even when stresses are as high as the yield stress. This is supported by the fact that no cracks were observed in the liner seam welds and adjacent areas during the recently conducted visual inspection. Therefore, no stress corrosion cracking is anticipated in the pool liner.
- 4. PROCEDURAL CHANGES Since the stainless steel liner will not be adversely affected by the water that is collected in the leak chase system, the operating procedure will be revised to require pumping of the spent fuel pool leak detection well when the water level exceeds Elevation 2.5 feet. Elevation 2.5 feet will provide a 9.5 feet margin to the top of the waterproof membrane and thus prevent leakage into the surrounding soil. Maintaining the water level below Elevation 2.5 feet will also prevent both a positive hydrostatic head above the minimum groundwater table recorded of Elevation 2.7 feet and water seepage to the soil if the waterproof membrane were to leak. Procedural guidance was established to direct the chemical analysis of the leak detection well water subsequent to the NRC special inspection in October 1994. Chemical analysis will initially be performed whenever water is pumped out. If the measured parameters are observed to exhibit a constant trend, the frequency of doing chemical analyses will be reduced. The following parameters will be measured: pH, activity, tritium, boron, chlorides, fluorides, and sulfates. Since chlorides are the primary concern for corrosion of the stainless steel liner, an acceptance level dependent on pH will be noted. These steps will be in addition to continuing the water level check in the wells on a weekly interval.
- 5. UNITS 2 & 3 The possibility of groundwater intrusion into the Units 2 and 3 spent fuel pool is not credible because the bottom of the basemat is at Elevation 10'-6". The spent fuel pool floor liner is at Elevation 17-6". This height is above the average groundwater table of Elevation 5 feet. There has been no observed leakage from the spent fuel pools of Units 2 and 3.
Control of liquid leakage from the spent fuel pool is maintained by a system of leak chases which are placed behind the spent fuel pool liner plates. The leak chases are connected to drain lines that terminate in the leak detection sump. Observance of leakage from a drain line will allow identification of the general location of the leak. The bottom of the leak detection sump is at Elevation 13'-6" and the top of the sump is at Elevation 17'-6". Therefore, the open sump would have to overflow in order for water leakage to come in contact with the bottom of the pool liner.
-7
- 6. CONCLUSIONS The long-term integrity of the stainless steel liner has been examined and found to be acceptable for continuing to safely store the spent fuel assemblies of SONGS 1. Although there is leakage occurring, the leakage rate is very small and there is a large safety margin of makeup water capacity to refill the pool. The spent fuel pool and leak chase system environments consist of low stresses and low temperature in the liner, and low chlorides and high pH in the water. These conditions are not conducive to stress corrosion cracking. Leakage monitoring will continue to be done on a weekly basis, and the spent fuel pool leak detection well will be pumped whenever the water level exceeds Elevation +2.5 feet. Procedural guidance has been established to direct the chemical analysis of the leak detection well water. The frequency of performing chemical analysis will be modified when the measured parameters are observed to have constant trends.
The waterproof membrane will continue to be evaluated to ascertairfif groundwater is seeping into the leak chase system.
REFERENCES
- 1.
NRC Inspection Report 50-206/94-23, dated December 12, 1994.
- 2.
SONGS 1 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Appendix 2.4A.
- 3.
American Concrete Institute (ACI) 515. 1R-79, "A Guide to the Use of Water Proofing, Dampproofing, Protective and Decorative Barrier Systems for Concrete."
4 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Report NP2520-7.
- 5.
Atlas of Stress Corrosion and Corrosion Fatigue Curves, Page 174.
- 6.
Atlas of Stress Corrosion and Corrosion Fatigue Curves, Page 175.
- 7.
H. E. Uhlig, "Corrosion Handbook," 24th printing; Pages 150-155.
- 8.
Journal of Science and Engineering, "Corrosion", "Effect of pH and Chloride Contents on Stress Corrosion Cracking of Austenitic Stainless Steels at Room Temperatures", by H. K.
Juang and C, Altstettler; Vol. 46, No. 11, Page 881.
- 9.
Failure Analysis Report #95-003, "Spent Fuel Pool Liner Corrosion Analysis, Unit 1,"
M. S. Mostafa, dated February 2, 1995.
CASK POOL AREA 12" DIA. LEAKAGE o
\\G-o MONITORING WELL UPENDER AREA SPENT FUEL STORAGE POOL FUEL STORAGE BUILDING SPENT FUEL POOL PLAN EL.42'-0" FIGURE 1
TRENCH DRAIN I
FLOOR EL.2'-0" 12" DIA.
LEAKAGE MONITORING WELL B
TRENCH DRAIN 1" SQ. MONITOR TRENCH 1" SQ. MONITOR TRENCH
- 2"X 2" MONITORING TRENCH TYP.
INSIDE PERIMETER OF ALL WALLS 1" SQ. MONITOR TRENCH FLOOR EL.3'-0" 1" SQ. MONITOR TRENCH A
.STAINLESS STEEL LINER FUEL STORAGE BUILDING SPENT FUEL POOL LINER PLAN EL.
3'-@"
MONITORING TRENCH MONI TORING FIGURE 2 TRENCH SECTION A
STAINLESS STEEL LINER MONITORING WELL EL.20'-0" EL.16'-0" I n EL.12'-0" E
.2' 0"
2X2 MONITORING TRENCH INSIDE PERIMETER (TYP.)
2" PROTECTIVE WATERPROOF MEMBRANE CONCRETE SLAB FUEL STORAGE BUILDING SECTION FIGURE 3
FI EL. ~
21 '-0 TOP OF CONC.
GRADE EL.19'-0" E.00 TRANSFER TUBE SLEEVE MONITORING WELL we
-SPENT FUEL POOL 12" PIPE MONITORING WELL TRANSFER TUBE EL.5'-7" EL.3'-4" DRAI NOZZLEL.2'-0" TOP OF PIPE EL. 0'-6" MONITORING W.ELL SECTION FIGURE 4
Photo 1:
Appearance of an epoxy repaired spot on west wall, showing intact conditon, and absence of cracking in the weld.
Photo 2:
Appearance of weld in the vicinity of an epoxy repaired spot showing absence of cracking.
Photo 3:
Appearance of weld, east wall showing absence of cracking and pitting.
Photo 4:
Appearance of vertical/horizontal weld joint illustrating absence of cracking (east wall).
TABLE 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LEAKAGE RATE DATE LEAKAGE DATE LEAKAGE (gal/week)
(gal/week) 09/08/86 42 01/01/94 3
12/05/88 70 01/08/94 4
01/17/89 717 01/15/94 4
02/06/89 25 01/22/94 4
11/07/89 25 01/29/94 1
05/03/93 0
02/05/94 1
05/15/93 5
02/12/94 2
06/15/93 5
02/19/94 2
06/19/93 5
02/26/94 2
06/26/93 5
03/05/94 1
07/03/93 5
03/12/94 2
07/10/93 5
03/19/94 2
07/17/93 1
03/26/94 1
07/24/93 1
04/02/94 1
07/31/93 1
04/09/94 1
08/07/93 1
04/16/94 1
08/14/93 1
04/23/94 2
08/21/93 1
04/30/94 2
08/28/93 1
05/07/94 1
09/04/93 1
05/14/94 1
09/11/93 1
05/21/94 1
09/18/93 2
05/28/94 2
09/25/93 2
06/04/94 1
10/03/93 1
06/11/94 2
10/10/93 1
10/18/94 2
10/17/93 1
10/25/94 1
10/24/93 1
11/01/94 3
10/31/93 1
11/08/94 2
11/06/93 1
11/15/94 2
11/13/93 1
11/22/94 2
11/20/93 2
11/29/94 2
11/27/93 2
12/06/94 2
12/04/93 2
12/14/94 2
12/11/93 2
12/19/94 2
12/18/93 2
12/27/94 2
12/25/93 3
01/03/95 2
01/11/95 3
01/19/95 3
01/24/95 1
01/31/95 4
02/07/95 2
02/14/95 2
TABLE 2 UNIT 1 LEAK DETECTION WELL SAMPLE ANALYSIS WEST WELL - SFP LINER DATE TIME pH COND ACT TRITIUM BORON CHLOR.
FLUOR.
SULFATE CALCIUM MAGNESIU SODIUM IRON uS uCl/ML uCUML PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM 10/07/94 1500 9.6 5630 1.10E-04 2.60E-02 1320 24.3 0.4 169 32 1
<0.05 10/11/94 1340 9.3 5700 1.06E-04 2.40E-02 1320 29.8
<0.4 162 116 16 0.37 10/18194 1430 9.4.
5650 2.80E-04 2.22E-02 1513 77.4
<0.2 186 1390 2.5 10/25/94 0905 9.4 5200 3.98E-04 2.33E-02 1560 54.1
<0.7 108 212 20 11101/94 1400 9.2 4900 1.85E-04 2.32E-02 1480 132
<0.2 130 321 33 1170 3.16 11/08/94 0940 9.1 4670 1.64E-04 2.59E-02 1685 66
<0.2 149 82 10 1.28 11115/94 0835 9.1 4520 3.95E-04 2.94E-02 805*
44.3
<0.2 126 11/22/94 0830 9
4270 2.28E-04 3.24E-02 1610 37.2
<0.2 85 11/29/94 0930 9
4000 1.24E-04 2.82E-02 1860 50.8
<0.2 188 43 47
'0.05 12/06/94 1345 9.1 4000 2.86E-04 2.66E-02 1750 21.7
<0.2 72.4 41 45 1050 12/14194 915 8.9 3800 1.43E-04 2.90E-02 1750 15.4
<0.2 62.2 12/19194 1100 9.1 4000 1.01E-04 2.76E-02 1560 13
'0.2 64.3 49 5.8 12/27/94 1030 9.3 3800 8.75E-05 2.50E-02 1180 9.3
<0.2 40.6 01/03195 1000 9.2 3750 8.03E-05 2.37E-02 1100 10.1
'0.2 35.7 01/11/95 1205 9.2 4010 6.72E-05 2.37E-02 1110 9.2
'0.2 38.1 01/19195 1330 9.2 3680 1.12E-04 2.18E-02 1140 10.6 0.16 52.2 01/24/95 1623 9.2 3650 1.04E-04 2.14E-02 1050 7.6 0.1 31.2 01/31195 1300 9.1 3510 1.76E-04 2.23E-02 1230 13 0.18 34.2 02/07/95 920 9.1 3790 9.94E-05 1.99E-02 1310 14.5 0.16 33.8 02/14/95 1900 9.1 3610 9.98E-05 2.00E-02 1340 13.7
'0.2 42.6 Average 9.18 4307.00 1.67E-04 2.48E-02 1343 32.70 0.05 90.52 112.0 22.2 1203 1.2
FLUOR.
SULF.
CALC.
MAG.
SODIUM IRON uS uCUML uCI/ML PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM 11/30/94 110 4.6 8.7 2.59E-03 4.70E-02 2437 0.004 0.0012 0.015 (10/94)
TYPICAL SEA WATER DATE TIME pH COND ACT TRITIUM BORON CHLOR.
FLUOR.
SULF.
CALC.
MAG.
SODIUM IRON uS uCI/ML uCI/ML PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM 8-9 73698
'LLD
<LLD 4.6 19000 1.4 2650 400 1272 10561 2-20 SAN CLEMENTE GROUND WATER DATE TIME pH COND ACT TRITIUM BORON CHLOR.
FLUOR.
SULF.
CALC.
MAG.
SODIUM IRON uS uCI/ML uCI/ML PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM PPM 7-7.5 830 98.5 0.46 105 55 23 76 0.01
Atlas of Stress-Corrosion and Corrosion Fatigue Curves Edited by A.J. McEvily, Jr.
ASM INTERNATIONAL Materials Park, Ohio 44073
174 Type 304 Stainless Steel: Effect of Dissolved Oxygen and Chloride on Stress-Corrosion Cracking 1000 SCC-olt heol treatments 304 SCC rSO crvnealed U F
CL3 3o
- 0 0
I -
-yU-100 0.01 SOC-safe area 00 0.001 0.0 S 0.c I
tO to0 t000 t0000 CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION ppm Concentration ranges of dissolved oxygen and chloride that may lead to stress-corrosion cracking of type 304 stainless steel in waterat 260 to 300 0C. Applied stresses in excess ofyield strength and test times in excess of 100 h, or strain rates greater thtan 10-5/s.
Source: A.J. Sedriks, Corrosion of Stainless Steels, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1979, p 158.
Type 304 Stainless Steel: Time-to-Breaking at 100% of 175 Yield Stress I
too -\\
\\
0 0
Wire Specimen 038arv-dia 10 Type 304 Anal.d NoCI-Ioppn.
9 80% YieM 02 10-Is P
- B.inq MqCzao 90%Y..nw 0100 300 400 Temperature,*C Time-to-breaking of first specimen at 100% of yield stress for type 304 stainless steel versus temperature.
Source: J.W. Frey and R.W. Staehle, Effect of Temperature, Stress and Alloy Composition on the Role of Stress Corrosion Cracking in Fe-Ni-Cr Alloys, in High Purity Water Corrosion of Metals, National Association of Corrosion Engineers, Houston, 1968.
THE CORROSION HANDBOOK HERBERT H. UHLIG, PH.D.
tROFESS()R OF
?M.TAr.LNIRC.Y IN CIIARCV.
OF THlE C:,RICUSION I.AHC(RATMV~, NIASSACIIUSFA11s INSTREUIT.
OF
- 11:I INCI O(Y,
(:AhllICRI IX E,
?. A SSA( :11USIT1S and sponsored by THE ELECTROCHEMICAL SOCIETY, IN(.
NEW YORK, N. Y.
JOHN WILEY & SONS, INc.
NEWV YORK LONDON -SYDNEY
1M CORROSION IN LIQUID MEDIA, ATAlOSPHERE, GASES TABLE 2.
CORROSION OF 18-8 STEEL (TYPE 304) IN VARIOUS MEDIA (Air-cooled fron 10500 C 11020e F)
Corrosive Medium Temperature Duration of Test, houra WL Loss mdd ipy 20% Nitric acid Room Nil*
20% Nitria acid Boiling Nil.
3% Nitric acid Boiling is Nil 1% Nitric acid Boiling 0
Nil 0.0 Nitric acid fumes 110* C (230' F) 13 100 0.018 10% Hydrochloric acid Roons 1
300 0.065 10% Sulfuric acid Room 1
N32 0.079 1% HZSOt + 2% 1INOs Roown 17 Nil 0.25% H:S04 + 0.25% IINO Room 17 Nil 10% Acetio scld, C. P.
Room Nil 10% Acetic acid, C. P.
Boiling 12 Nil Glacial acetic acid, U.S. 1'.
Room 276 0.1 0.024 Glacial acetic acid, U. S. P.
Boiling 107 130 0.024 Crude acetic acid Boiling 16 375.5 0.008 10% Phosphoric acid. C. P.
Boiling 17 Nil 10% Carbolic acid, C. 1'.
Boiling 10 Nil 10% Chromic acid (tech.)
Boiling 41 204 0.037 Conoentrated sulfurous acid oon 22 Nil 0.5% LactIc acid Iluilisg 10 4.1 0.001 1.0% Laotic acid 0s C (130* F) 5.1 001 2.0% Lactic acid Boiling 10 1
.1 0.23 50% Lactic acid Boiling 16 12,240 2.23 85% Lactic acid Boiling 16 1.5G0 0.2S4 10% Tartaric acid Boiling 33 Nil 1% Ozalio acid Boiling 30 177.2 0.032 10% Oxalic acid Room 17 139.2 0.025 10% Formic acid Boiling 1
3,240 0.590 10% Formic acid Roln 17 2.4 0.000 10% Malio aid Room 17 Nil 10% Sodium sulfite Boiling 10 1
10% Sodium bioulfate Boiling 10 Nil 10% Ammonium sullato Boiling 1P Nil 10% Ammonium chlorido Boiling 1
Pitted Lemou juice Ioom 01 Nil Orange juice Room 01 Nil Mwr.ot lcder ltmn Nil Canned rhubarb ilin 0
Nil Canned tomatoes Boiling Nil 10% Sodium hydroxide Boiling 41 Nil..
- "Nil" refers to a weight luss of the specimCn1 nout detecLUble within 6i11no of the test.