Home

Search

Collections

Journals

About

Contact us

My IOPscience

Considerations upon the cavitation erosion resistance of stainless steel with variable chromium and nickel content

This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article. 2010 IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 12 012036 (http://iopscience.iop.org/1755-1315/12/1/012036) View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details: IP Address: 97.67.68.66 The article was downloaded on 30/12/2010 at 15:38

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

Considerations upon the cavitation erosion resistance of stainless steel with variable Chromium and Nickel content
A Karabenciov1, A D Jurchela1, I Bordeau1, M Popoviciu2, N Biru1 and A Lustyan1
1

Department of Hydraulic Machinery, Politehnica University of Timisoara, Bv. Mihai Viteazu, no. 1, Timisoara, 300222, Romania 2 Academy of Romanian Scientists, Timisoara Branch E-mail: karabenciov@yahoo.com
Abstract. Paper presents results of experimental investigations regarding the cavitation erosion of eight different stainless steels with constant carbon content (0.1 %). Four of them have constant chromium (12%) and variable nickel content. The other four have constant nickel (10 %) and variable chromium content. Using the images of the eroded specimens, the parameters MDPR and MDP as well as the characteristic curves, the influence of chemical and structural modifications, upon the cavitation erosion, are put into evidence. The investigated steels, manufactured through casting, maintain the general composition of the materials with good cavitation erosion qualities. The experimental researches were carried out in Timisoara Hydraulic Machinery Laboratory on a magnetostrictive facility, taking into account the ASTM G32-2008 Standards [10].

1. Introduction
Cavitation erosion is one of the causes, which raises the maintenance costs in Hydraulic Power Plants. This phenomenon is present in all hydraulic systems and machinery (i.e. hydraulic turbines, pumps, propellers, etc.). For a long time, scientists and engineers tried to control this problem by optimizing the design of components in danger or by employing new materials with a good cavitation erosion resistance. Numerous investigations were conducted in researching the mechanism of cavitation erosion and correlating the cavitation erosion behavior with the materials microstructure and mechanical properties. In general, the cavitation erosion resistance of austenitic and martensitic stainless steels is better than that of ferrite stainless steels. This paper analyze the cavitation erosion resistance of eight stainless steels: four stainless steels with constant content of chromium (12%) and variable nickel content, and four stainless steels with constant content of nickel (10%) and variable chromium content.

2. Experimental procedure
2.1 Studied materials This paper presents researches conducted upon eight stainless steels, with constant carbon content. Four of them have a constant nickel content of 10% and variable chromium content, and the other four have a constant chromium content of 12% and variable nickel content. All the steels were obtained by casting small samples, at SC. Prod SRL Bucharest. The cavitation erosion tests were conducted without using additional heat treatments on the studied specimens. Simple notations were used for the materials studied in the paper, aiming to simplify their identification A1-A4 constant nickel, A5-A8 constant chromium. Table 1 shows the main alloying elements for the eight stainless steels that were subjected to cavitation erosion. The chemical compositions were determined at the Bucharest Polytechnic CEMS Laboratory (Laboratory for Researches and Survey of Special Materials), using the Fe-30-M program. The mechanical characteristics (Table 2) and the microstructure were also determined in the same laboratory.

c 2010 IOP Publishing Ltd

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

Table 1 Chemical composition of the investigated steels (Mass, %)

Alloy
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8

C 0,119 0,115 0,097 0,118 0,121 0,114 0,112 0,105

Cr 6,48 10,62 17,91 23,86 12,08 12,02 12,07 12,02

Ni 10,06 10,08 9,97 10,09 0,50 2,15 5,95 10,28

Mn 3,06 2,62 2,45 2,89 1,36 1,36 1,67 2,62

Chemical composition, % Si Mo W 1,45 0,095 0,0070 1,72 0,037 0,007 1,55 0,100 0,037 2,32 0,038 0,0070 1,55 0,185 0,058 1,35 0,050 0,025 1,79 0,031 0,016 1,72 0,037 0,0070

V 0,345 0,043 0,069 0,071 1,20 0,097 0,047 0,043

Ti 0,83 0,017 0,64 0,85 0,075 0,257 0,047 0,017

Nb 0,0040 0,04 0,035 0,41 0,087 0,034 0,031 0,040

Fe 75,912 73,166 65,9458 58,218 82,5 81,7 76,9 72,1

Table 2 Mechanical properties of the investigated steels

Alloy
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8

Rm [N/mm ]
1550 1450 1335 1280 1450 1336 1540 835

Rp0,2 [N/mm2]
1120 1020 934 901 1020 935.2 1083 626

Property

HRC
48 45 38 30 44 40 46 25

2.2 Test device Cavitation erosion tests were conducted on a magnetostrictive vibratory apparatus with nickel tube T1 [3], [6], belonging to the Hydraulic Machinery Laboratory of the Politehnica University of Timisoara. The running parameters of the vibratory facility are: vibratory double amplitude: 94 m specimens oscillation frequency: 7000 3% Hz electrical power of the ultrasound generator: 500 W immersion depth of the specimens active surface = 3 5 mm specimens diameter D = 14 mm total duration of cavitation attack = 165 minute Tap water was used as the testing environment. During the tests, the water temperature was maintained at 20 1 0C. The choice of tap water is justified by the fact that there properties are similar to those of river water, used in running hydraulic turbines. Before the beginning of the tests, the test specimens (Fig. 1) were cleaned and weighed. The tests were stopped at regular time intervals for the cleaning, drying and weighing of the specimens.

Fig.1. Shape and dimensions of test specimen

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

3. Experimental results
The figure presented below, show the curves mass loss against time. Comparing the slopes of the curves in Figures 2a and 2b, we can see that alloy A7 presents the lowest mass loss, followed by alloys A5 and A1. The highest mass loss was recorded for the alloys A4 and A8.

a) b) Fig.2 Variation of the eroded mass against the attack time for specimens with constant nickel content (a) and for specimens with constant chromium content (b) The erosion rates of the tested alloys are shown in Fig.3. The erosion rate tends to remain stable after 90 minutes of cavitation. Unlike the other alloys, the stabilization after 60 minutes occurs for alloy A7 and after 135 minutes for alloy A8.

a) b) Fig.3 Variation of the erosion speed against the attack time for specimens with constant nickel content (a) and for specimens with constant chromium content (b)

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

Figure 4 points out that the alloy A7, with 6% Ni and 12% Cr, has the highest cavitation erosion rate, while the lowest cavitation erosion resistance was recorded for the alloy A8, with 10% Ni and 12% Cr. The cavitation erosion resistance increases with the increase in chromium content (Fig. 4a). From the diagram presented in Fig. 5 it can be seen that manganese, silicon and titanium have greater influence on the cavitation erosion resistance in comparison with molybdenum, niobium and vanadium. For the alloys A5 to A8, a slightly higher influence of vanadium on the cavitation erosion resistance occurs.

a) b) Fig. 4 Variation of cavitation erosion resistance with the chromium content (a) and with the nickel content (b).

a)

c)

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

b)

d)

Fig. 5 The influence of the main alloying elements: a) on the cavitation erosion resistance for specimens with constant Ni content; b) on the maximum erosion depth for specimens with constant Ni content; c) on the cavitation erosion resistance for specimens with constant Cr content; d) on the maximum erosion depth for specimens with constant Cr content. For all tested materials (constant nickel content and constant chromium content), the cavitation erosion resistance increases with the surface hardness as can be seen in Fig. 6a and 6b.

a) b) Fig. 6 Variation of cavitation erosion resistance with the surface hardness of the specimens with constant nickel content (a) and with constant chromium content (b). Cavitation erosion resistance is in inverse ratio to the increase of mechanical resistance characteristics (ultimate strength Rm and yield limit Rp0,2 ) (Fig. 7).

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

a b Fig. 7 Variation of cavitation erosion resistance with ultimate strength Rm and yield limit Rp0,2 for specimens with constant nickel content (a) and constant chromium content (b). Table 3 Erosion speed and maximum depth penetration

Alloy
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8

Microstructure
68 % martensite - 32% austenite 100 % austenite 98 % austenite - 2 % ferrite 81% austenite - 19 % ferrite 75% martensite - 25 % ferrite 90 % martensite - 10 % ferrite 60 % austenite - 40 % martensite 100 % austenite

Erosion speed (mg/min)

0.1 0.15 0.16 0.17 0.09 0.17 0.04 0.23

MDPmax (m)
97.36 136.4 228.8 331.1 63.28 204.4 53.55 331.1

The microstructure of the eight alloys was determined using the Schffler diagram and can be seen in Table 3. The examination of the eroded surfaces on the scanning electron microscope (Fig. 8) reveals the following: Alloys A7, A5 and A1 show an even degradation of the material and a maximum depth penetration smaller than 100 m (Table 3); Alloys A8, A4 show an uneven degradation of the eroded surface with aspects of brittle fracture, and a maximum depth penetration higher than 300 m (Table 3).

A1

A2

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7 A8 Fig. 8 Specimens structure obtained with the scanning electron microscope (SEM), after the final time of cavitation (x100)

4. Conclusion
The distribution range of the erosion speed curves is higher for the alloys with variable nickel content compared to the range for the alloys with variable chromium content. The nature and the proportion of the alloying elements have a major effect on the cavitation erosion resistance. The cavitation erosion resistance tends to rise exponentially with the hardness of the exposed surface, as long as the surface does not become brittle. The cavitation erosion resistance tends to decrease with the increase of the mechanical characteristics (Rm i Rp0,2). The presence of martensite in the microstructure of alloys A7, A5 and A1 leads to a higher cavitation erosion resistance resulting in an even degradation.

25th IAHR Symposium on Hydraulic Machinery and Systems IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 12 (2010) 012036

IOP Publishing doi:10.1088/1755-1315/12/1/012036

Acknowledgments
The present work has been supported from the National University Research Council Grant (CNCSIS) PNII, ID 34/77/2007 (Models Development for the Evaluation of Materials Behavior to Cavitation)

References
Anton I 1984 Cavitatia vol I (Editura Academiei RSR, Bucuresti) Anton I 1985 Cavitatia Vol II (Editura Academiei RSR, Bucuresti) Bordeau I 2006 Eroziunea cavitaional a materialelor (Editura Politehnica, Timioara) Mitelea I 1999 tiina materialelor n construcia de maini (Editura Sudura, Timioara) Bordeau I, Karabenciov A, Jurchela A, Bdru R, Bloiu V, Mitelea I and Ghimban B Considerations on the Influence of Nickel on the Cavitation Damage to Stainless Steels with 0,1% Carbon content and Constant Chromium Content Metalurgia International XIV 5-8 [6] Jurchela A, Karabenciov A and Biru N 2009 Study of Stainless Steels Cavitation Erosion with 0.1 % Charbon and 10 % Nickel Machine Design Monograpf University of Novi Sad 421-26 [7] Bordeasu I, Anton L E, Baya A and Jurchela A The Necessity of Considering Cavitation Erosion a Mechanic Phenomena Against Chemical Corrosion DAAAM 2008 145-46 [8] Bordeasu I, Ghimban B, Popoviciu M O, Bloiu V, Biru N and Karabenciov A The Damage of Austenite-Ferrite Stainless Steels by Cavitation Erosion DAAAM 2008 147-48 [9] Standard Method of Vibratory Cavitation Erosion Test 2008 ASTM (Standard G32) [10] Proiect de Cercetare Exploratorie (CNCSIS-PN II) ID-34/2007 Dezvoltarea de modele pentru evaluarea comportrii materialelor la eroziunea prin cavitaie [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]