API-571 Corrosion and Materials Professional Questions and Answers

According to API RP 571, under the section "Corrosion in Aqueous Environments – Cooling Water Corrosion", one of the key contributors to corrosion in carbon steel and other materials used in heat exchangers is the presence of dissolved oxygen. API RP 571 states:

"Oxygen is a primary contributor to corrosion in cooling water systems. Systems open to the atmosphere are typically more corrosive than closed systems due to the continual replenishment of oxygen."

"Corrosion rates are highest where oxygen concentration is the greatest, especially in systems using untreated or poorly treated water."

"Carbon steel corrodes in the presence of oxygen and water, forming corrosion products that may or may not adhere to the surface."

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.1.1 – Cooling Water Corrosion)

Therefore, increasing oxygen content directly increases corrosion activity in exchanger tubes, making option C the correct and documented answer.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.4.2 (Erosion and Erosion/Corrosion):

“Erosion can occur downstream of flow disturbances such as control valves, orifice plates, elbows... It is characterized by localized metal loss with a directional pattern such as grooves or sharp-edged pits in areas of high velocity or turbulence.”

Cavitation and flashing cause damage with different signatures like pitting and spongy surface texture, while sharp-edged pitting strongly indicates erosion, especially downstream of flow restriction devices.

Thus, the correct answer is Option C (Erosion).

API RP 571 discusses Hydrogen-Induced Cracking (HIC) and Blistering under the section:

“HIC and blistering are most strongly influenced by non-metallic inclusions, particularly elongated manganese sulfide (MnS) inclusions, which serve as trap sites for hydrogen atoms.”

“These inclusions create local planes of weakness where atomic hydrogen recombines into molecular hydrogen (H₂), causing high pressure and cracking.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.2.7 – Hydrogen Blistering and HIC)

Thus, inclusions are the critical material factor, making option A correct.

API RP 571 on Brittle Fracture notes:

“The primary factor influencing brittle fracture is material toughness, especially at low temperatures.”

“Materials with low fracture toughness are susceptible to catastrophic failure when stressed below their ductile-to-brittle transition temperature.”

Hence, option A is correct.

API RP 571 – Sulfidation:

“Sulfidation generally results in uniform thinning of iron-based alloys at temperatures above 500°F (260°C).”

“It is classified as a form of general corrosion, although it can be accelerated in turbulent flow areas.”

So, option A is correct.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.3 (Spheroidization):

“Spheroidization is the transformation of the microstructure of carbon and low alloy steels when exposed to elevated temperatures for long durations. The rate of spheroidization depends on temperature, prior microstructure, and exposure time... The microstructure becomes less effective at carrying loads, and strength is reduced.”

Key influencing factors for the rate of spheroidization are:

Temperature (higher accelerates the process),

Microstructure (initial phase distribution and morphology).

Pressure and hydrogen partial pressure are not relevant for this transformation, nor is stress a primary driver.

Therefore, Option D (temperature and microstructure) is correct.

In API RP 571, Carbonate SCC and Alkaline SCC are both discussed under mechanisms that occur in basic (high pH) environments, often with similar contributing conditions and prevention methods. The document highlights:

“Carbonate SCC is considered a subcategory of alkaline stress corrosion cracking. It results from the concentration of alkaline carbonates under thermal insulation or deposits.”

“Both mechanisms involve the same key parameters: elevated temperatures, tensile stress, and high pH solutions.”

(Reference: API RP 571, 3rd Edition, Section 4.2.2.4 and 4.2.2.3)

Because these mechanisms share similar material susceptibility and operating conditions, they are indeed closely related—option B is therefore the accurate and supported answer.

Galvanic corrosion occurs when two dissimilar metals are electrically connected in the presence of an electrolyte such as brackish water or seawater. The rate and severity of galvanic corrosion depend on:

The relative position of the metals on the galvanic series (potential difference)

Area ratio between anode and cathode

Conductivity of the electrolyte

API RP 571 explains:

“The more active (anodic) metal in the galvanic couple corrodes preferentially. The more noble (cathodic) metal is protected.”

“The greater the difference in potential between the two metals, the more aggressive the galvanic reaction.”

“Aluminum is highly anodic compared to steel. In seawater or brackish conditions, aluminum will corrode rapidly when electrically coupled to steel, especially if the aluminum surface area is small relative to the steel.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.5.1 – Galvanic Corrosion)

Referring to the galvanic series presented in your table:

Aluminum is much higher (more anodic) than steel.

This makes aluminum the sacrificial metal in such a pair.

This is not the case for brass-to-nickel or cast iron-to-Ni-Resist, which are much closer together on the galvanic scale.

Therefore, among all the listed pairs, Aluminum coupled to Steel creates the most significant galvanic potential difference and is most likely to result in galvanic corrosion in brackish or seawater service.

Correct Answer: B

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Caustic stress corrosion cracking (Caustic SCC) occurs when carbon and low-alloy steels are exposed to caustic environments in the presence of tensile stress.

Per API RP 571, the most effective and proven prevention method is postweld stress-relief heat treatment, which:

Reduces residual welding stresses

Eliminates one leg of the SCC triangle (stress)

Why other options are incorrect:

300 series stainless steels are also susceptible under some caustic conditions.

SCC can occur even at low caustic concentrations.

SCC has been observed below 150 °F in high-stress areas.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Caustic Stress Corrosion Cracking

======================

According to API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.1 – Sulfidation, and also echoed in API RP 939-C, the presence of certain compounds significantly increases sulfidic corrosion:

“Chlorides are known to accelerate sulfidation and other high-temperature corrosion mechanisms by forming low-melting eutectics and breaking down protective scales on alloy surfaces.”

“Chlorine-containing species also interfere with the formation of stable sulfide or oxide scales, leading to more aggressive metal loss.”

Therefore, chlorides are the most critical accelerant among the listed substances in high-temperature sulfur compound environments, making option C correct.

API RP 571 on Thermal Fatigue:

“Mixing of hot and cold streams, particularly where hydrogen is present, can induce thermal cycling stresses, leading to thermal fatigue cracking, especially at fittings like tees.”

“Hydrogen embrittlement typically affects stressed zones, but this pattern strongly indicates thermal fatigue.”

So the correct answer is C – Thermal fatigue.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, mechanical fatigue failures are identified by the presence of beach marks or clam shell patterns on the fracture surface.

These features:

Appear as concentric rings

Represent successive crack growth increments

Radiate outward from the crack initiation site

This “clam shell” or “beach mark” appearance is one of the most recognizable signatures of fatigue failure.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Mechanical Fatigue

======================

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Microbiologically Induced Corrosion (MIC) is one of the most universally applicable corrosion mechanisms, affecting:

Carbon steel

Low-alloy steel

Stainless steels

Copper alloys

Aluminum alloys

According to API RP 571, MIC can occur in any aqueous system where microorganisms are present, regardless of metallurgy.

By contrast:

Sour water corrosion and amine corrosion mainly affect carbon steel

Polythionic acid corrosion is limited to austenitic stainless steels

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Microbiologically Induced Corrosion

From API RP 571 and RP 932-B:

“In hydroprocessing reactor effluent systems, the most common corrosion mechanism is ammonium bisulfide (NH₄HS) corrosion, which forms in the presence of hydrogen sulfide and ammonia.”

“NH₄HS attacks carbon steel aggressively under turbulent flow and at low pH.”

Correct answer is B – ammonium bisulfide corrosion.

As per API RP 945 (4th Edition, 2022):

“Post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) is the most effective method for reducing residual stresses that contribute to amine SCC. PWHT minimizes the stress intensity required for crack initiation and growth.”

Lowering temperature helps but is not always feasible.

Water content and amine concentration affect SCC but are not as impactful as PWHT.

Thus, Option A (Post-weld heat treatment) is the most effective mitigation.

API RP 571 explains the typical location of dissimilar metal weld (DMW) cracks as follows:

“DMW cracking usually occurs in the heat-affected zone (HAZ) on the ferritic side of the weld.”

“The difference in thermal expansion coefficients, grain structures, and creep rates between the ferritic and austenitic materials contributes to the development of high stress and strain concentrations in the HAZ of the ferritic material.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.6 – Dissimilar Metal Weld Cracking)

Thus, these cracks do not occur in the center of the weld or on the austenitic side, but rather at the ferritic HAZ, making option A correct.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.6 (Carbonate Stress Corrosion Cracking - CSCC):

“The cracking is usually intergranular and is most commonly detected using wet fluorescent magnetic-particle testing (WFMT) after surface cleaning. PT may not be sensitive enough to detect fine cracks formed by this mechanism.”

Because CSCC cracks are typically surface-connected and very fine, WFMT offers the best visibility, especially after proper surface prep.

Therefore, Option D is correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, sulfidation corrosion is controlled by three primary variables:

Sulfur species concentration (e.g., H₂S, sulfur compounds)

Operating temperature

Metallurgy, especially chromium content

Chromium significantly improves sulfidation resistance by forming protective sulfide scales. All three factors must be considered in RBI assessments.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Sulfidation Corrosion

======================

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, sulfidation corrosion rates are significantly accelerated by the presence of hydrogen. Hydrogen promotes:

Breakdown of protective sulfide scales

Increased diffusion of sulfur into the metal

Higher metal loss rates

This phenomenon is often referred to as hydrogen-assisted sulfidation and is commonly observed in refinery process units.

Moisture is more closely associated with oxidation mechanisms rather than high-temperature sulfidation.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Sulfidation and High-Temperature Corrosion

In TR 942-B and API RP 582, it is emphasized:

“Nickel-based buttering is often used as an intermediate layer to reduce thermal stress mismatch during welding of ferritic and austenitic materials.”

“Nickel alloys have a coefficient of thermal expansion closer to that of both stainless steels and carbon steels, reducing stress concentrations and mitigating dissimilar weld cracking.”

“This technique also assists in achieving metallurgical compatibility and mitigating solidification cracking.”

Hence, option C is correct as it directly relates to minimizing thermal expansion mismatches.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Ethanol stress corrosion cracking (SCC) of carbon steel is strongly dependent on the presence of water.

Per API RP 571, moisture content is the primary controlling factor, because:

Water enables formation of corrosive species

Dry or very low-water ethanol does not cause SCC

Even small amounts of water significantly increase cracking risk

Other factors influence severity, but without moisture, ethanol SCC does not occur.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Ethanol Stress Corrosion Cracking

======================

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, chloride stress corrosion cracking (Cl-SCC) of austenitic (300 series) stainless steels becomes a credible concern when:

Chlorides are present

Tensile stress exists

Metal temperatures exceed approximately 140 °F (60 °C)

Below this temperature, Cl-SCC is far less likely, while susceptibility increases rapidly above this threshold.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking

======================

According to API RP 571, under Sulfuric Acid Corrosion:

“The most aggressive corrosion typically occurs below 65% H₂SO₄, particularly between 20% to 50% concentration range.”

“Above 95% concentration, sulfuric acid becomes less corrosive to carbon steel due to its dehydrating nature.”

“Dilute sulfuric acid is highly ionized and conducts electricity well, increasing corrosion rates.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.2 – Sulfuric Acid Corrosion)

Hence, the most severe corrosion occurs below 65% concentration, making option B the accurate answer.

API RP 571 on Naphthenic Acid Corrosion (NAC) details:

“NAC is most aggressive in two-phase flow where the shear stress is high, such as in elbows, reducers, and at orifices.”

“High velocity and turbulence in two-phase flow strip protective layers and accelerate corrosion.”

Therefore, option A is the correct and most critical phase.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, corrosion in cooling water systems often increases at low flow velocities due to:

Stagnation

Deposit formation

Increased risk of underdeposit corrosion and MIC

Higher velocities tend to:

Sweep away deposits

Maintain protective films (within erosion limits)

Therefore, decreasing velocity is strongly associated with increased corrosion risk.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Cooling Water Corrosion

======================

As per API RP 571 on Sigma Phase Embrittlement:

“Sigma phase embrittlement occurs in stainless steels and nickel-based alloys due to the formation of a brittle intermetallic phase in the temperature range of 1050°F to 1650°F (565°C to 900°C).”

“This damage mechanism is not easily detected through surface or hardness testing and typically requires metallographic examination to confirm the presence of sigma phase in the microstructure.”

Metallographic testing allows clear identification of sigma phase particles and is thus the most reliable method, making option D correct.

From API RP 571 Section 4.2.3 (Galvanic Corrosion):

“Galvanic corrosion occurs when two dissimilar metals are in electrical contact in the presence of an electrolyte. The more anodic metal corrodes preferentially.”

Contact without insulation and in presence of an electrolyte (like water or brine) is key to galvanic action.

Insulating or coating prevents electrical connection or electrolyte contact, reducing corrosion risk.

Hence, Option D correctly describes the condition that increases galvanic corrosion potential.

As per API RP 571 and further clarified in API RP 939-C:

“An arbitrary threshold of 50 ppmw H₂S in the aqueous phase is often used to define when carbon and low alloy steels become susceptible to cracking damage in wet H₂S environments.”

“Below this level, the risk of SSC, HIC, and SOHIC is considered lower, although damage has still occurred at lower concentrations depending on stress and metallurgical conditions.”

Therefore, the correct answer is option D (50 ppmw).

According to API RP 571 Section 5.2.1 (Fatigue – High Cycle and Low Cycle):

“Unsupported small-bore attachments like vents and drains are prone to high-cycle mechanical fatigue due to vibration. These attachments experience cyclic stress, especially near welds or bends.”

Thermal overload is unlikely without over-temperature data.

SSC (Option C) requires a wet H2S environment, which is not indicated.

Weld defects may contribute but are less likely the root cause without other signs.

Hence, mechanical fatigue (Option A) is most probable in this configuration.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, ammonium bisulfide (NH₄HS) corrosion typically occurs in high-velocity, wet sour service, such as hydroprocessing reactor effluent systems. The damage is characterized by localized wall thinning, often with highly irregular corrosion profiles that vary with flow regime.

API RP 571 emphasizes that the most effective inspection techniques for NH₄HS corrosion are those capable of:

Detecting localized thinning

Identifying corrosion patterns related to flow velocity

Covering large areas efficiently

Ultrasonic scanning (C-scan) and profile radiography are specifically recommended because they:

Reveal localized and preferential metal loss

Allow comparison between high- and low-velocity zones

Are far superior to spot UT, which may miss localized attack

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion

======================

According to API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.3 (Spheroidization):

“Spheroidization is a microstructural degradation that occurs in carbon steels and low alloy steels when exposed to elevated temperatures for long periods, typically beginning at temperatures as low as 650°F (345°C). It involves the transformation of lamellar pearlite into spherical cementite particles, reducing strength and hardness.”

Thus, Option A (650°F / 345°C) is the minimum threshold temperature for spheroidization to begin.

According to API RP 571 and API RP 583:

“The most effective mitigation of CUI is the use of appropriate coatings underneath the insulation, which are resistant to moisture and chloride ingress.”

“Inspection and insulation selection are also important but are secondary controls.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.4 – Corrosion Under Insulation; API RP 583)

Hence, option D is correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, chloride stress corrosion cracking (Cl-SCC) of austenitic stainless steels is strongly influenced by low pH environments in the presence of chlorides, tensile stress, and elevated temperature.

API RP 571 identifies that:

Chloride SCC can initiate at very low pH levels

pH values near 2 represent a threshold where aggressive chloride attack and cracking become possible

Increasing acidity dramatically increases SCC susceptibility

Therefore, pH = 2 is the lowest and most critical value listed where chloride SCC can begin.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking

======================

According to API RP 571, under Naphthenic Acid Corrosion (NAC):

“The most severe corrosion is typically found in areas of high velocity and turbulence, such as at pump around nozzles, transfer lines, elbows, reducers, and orifices.”

“NAC is characterized by uniform thinning and can accelerate significantly where flow-induced erosion is present.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.4.1 – Naphthenic Acid Corrosion)

This clearly establishes that high velocity and turbulence increase NAC severity, making option D correct.

API RP 571 under Polythionic Acid Stress Corrosion Cracking (PTA SCC) specifies:

“Cracking is usually intergranular, and often localized, especially in sensitized austenitic stainless steels exposed to sulfur-containing environments during shutdown or cleaning.”

“It is not always visible on inspection and may only become evident when a leak occurs.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.2.5 – PTA SCC)

Hence, option C is correct as it best describes the detection difficulty and behavior of PTA SCC.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, temper embrittlement is a metallurgical condition that affects Cr-Mo low-alloy steels, including 1-1/4 Cr-1/2 Mo, when exposed to temperatures typically in the range of 650 °F to 1100 °F (345 °C to 595 °C) over extended periods. This damage mechanism results in a significant loss of fracture toughness and ductility, particularly at lower temperatures.

API RP 939-C further explains that temper embrittlement does not significantly reduce tensile strength, but it raises the ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (DBTT). As a result, equipment that appears structurally sound may fail catastrophically under sudden loading conditions.

Once ductility is reduced, the material becomes especially vulnerable to rapid temperature changes, which induce high thermal stresses. Thermal shock is therefore a critical secondary damage mechanism. Sudden quenching, cold feed introduction, startup, shutdown, or uneven heating can cause cracking because the embrittled material can no longer accommodate strain plastically.

Option A (Ductile rupture) is incorrect because temper embrittlement promotes brittle fracture, not ductile failure.

Option B (885 °F embrittlement) is incorrect because 885 °F (475 °C) embrittlement primarily affects carbon steels and some stainless steels, not Cr-Mo steels.

Option D (Graphitization) occurs at prolonged exposure above approximately 800 °F (425 °C) in carbon steels and is not the dominant concern for 1-1/4 Cr-1/2 Mo steel in this context.

API RP 571 explicitly emphasizes that embrittled Cr-Mo steels are highly susceptible to cracking during thermal transients, making thermal shock the most likely and dangerous subsequent damage mechanism.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Temper Embrittlement of Low-Alloy Steels

API RP 939-C – Metallurgical Effects and Service Risks of Temper Embrittlement

======================

According to API RP 571:

“Ammonium chloride corrosion is most aggressive when dry salts are exposed to a small amount of free water. This condition allows the formation of a concentrated acidic aqueous solution, which is highly corrosive to carbon steel.”

“The corrosion mechanism is activated especially during startup and shutdown when condensation may occur on salt deposits.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.1 – Ammonium Chloride Corrosion)

Hence, while salt deposition begins as temperatures drop, the most aggressive corrosion happens when water is introduced to dry salt, making option D correct.

API RP 571 describes temper embrittlement as a subtle metallurgical change that reduces impact toughness without obvious macrostructural change:

“Temper embrittlement is not readily apparent by visual or standard tensile testing. It is confirmed by Charpy impact testing which measures toughness at low temperatures.”

“It typically affects Cr-Mo steels exposed to intermediate temperatures (650°F to 1100°F) for extended times.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.4 – Temper Embrittlement)

Thus, the condition is not visually or physically apparent, but is confirmed through impact testing, making option D correct.

API RP 571 describes Temper Embrittlement as:

“A metallurgical degradation mechanism that leads to a reduction in fracture toughness due to long-term exposure in the temperature range of 650°F to 1070°F (345°C to 575°C).”

“It affects Cr-Mo steels and is not easily detected except by impact testing.”

Therefore, option C most accurately defines the condition based on the recognized API description.

API RP 571 on Organic Acid Corrosion in Overheads explains:

“Corrosion caused by organic acids (e.g., formic, acetic) in overhead systems is best mitigated by neutralization, usually via injection of alkaline neutralizing amines that raise pH and reduce acidity.”

“Water wash can be helpful but is often insufficient by itself.”

Therefore, the most effective approach is option C – injection of neutralizer.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, creep damage is a time-dependent, high-temperature damage mechanism that occurs when materials are exposed to stress at temperatures typically above about 700 °F (370 °C) for extended periods. Creep damage results in void formation, microcracking, grain boundary separation, and eventual rupture.

Once creep damage has occurred, it is considered irreversible metallurgical degradation. API RP 571 clearly states that heat treatments cannot restore creep life because the material’s microstructure has already been permanently damaged.

Option A (PWHT at 1150 °F) may relieve residual stresses but does not heal creep voids or microcracks.

Option B (Solution annealing) is applicable to certain stainless steels but is not effective for reversing creep damage, particularly in low-alloy and Cr-Mo steels.

Option D (Preheating during welding) helps prevent hydrogen-related cracking but has no effect on existing creep damage.

API RP 571 emphasizes that the only effective mitigation for creep damage is to remove the affected material and replace it with sound material, or to retire the component if damage is widespread. Fitness-for-service assessments (API 579-1/ASME FFS-1) may be used to evaluate remaining life, but mitigation requires material removal.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Creep and Stress Rupture Damage

API Corrosion and Materials Study Guide

======================