Nickel alloys with a PREN greater than 40 are very resistant to crevice corrosion in natural seawater
service. Table 4 compares the crevice corrosion resistance of corrosion-resistant alloys in seawater.
Under both stagnant and flowing conditions, the weight losses are extremely low.
Resistance to General Corrosion in Sour Environments
In mineral acids3, INCONEL alloy 725 in the age-hardened condition has comparable corrosion resistance to INCONEL alloy 625. Good general corrosion resistance can be important in resisting the various chemicals injected as inhibitors and dispersants.
Environmental Cracking
Wellhead and downhole components must resist stress corrosion cracking (SCC). The potential for
SCC becomes greater with higher temperature and higher concentration of H2S and the presence of
chloride ions and elemental sulfur. Lower temperature hydrogen embrittlement and sulfide stress
cracking (SSC) are also potential failure mechanisms which may be promoted by galvanic
corrosion, acidic conditions, and dissolved H2S.
Resistance to Sulfide Stress Cracking and Hydrogen Embrittlement
In general, resistance to SCC, SSC, and hydrogen embrittlement increases with increasing content
of nickel, chromium, molybdenum, tungsten and niobium in an alloy.
Stress Corrosion Cracking
Alloy strength is a factor in environmental cracking susceptibility. Materials become more prone to
environmental cracking as their strength increases. In order to obtain the optimum level of strength,
ductility and toughness, and cracking resistance, maximum hardness levels are specified for each
alloy in NACE International’s Materials Requirement MR0175'5.
H. R. Copson 6 originally reported the beneficial effect of alloy nickel content on chloride SCC
resistance of austenitic type alloys in 1959. Alloys 825, 925, 718, 625 and 725 all contain 42% or
greater nickel and, as a result, are all very resistant to stress corrosion cracking in water containing
chlorides.
A more severe test in ranking materials performance is the slow strain rate (SSR) test.
Common pass/fail criteria for SSR testing is a ratio of time to failure (TTF), %
reduction of area (%RA) and % elongation (%El) measured in a simulated oil patch
environment relative to the same parameter in an inert environment (gases such as
air or nitrogen). These are referred to as "critical ratios". TTF, %RA and %El ratios of
0.80 typically represent passing behavior in SSR tests. If the ratios are below 0.90,
the specimen is examined under a scanning electron microscope for evidence of ductile
or brittle fracture on the primary fracture surface. Tests exhibiting ductile behavior
are acceptable while those with brittle fracture are not. All specimens are examined
for secondary cracking in the gage length away from the primary fracture. The absence
of secondary cracking is indicative of good SCC or SSR resistance and passes. The
presence of secondary cracks is cause for rejection. One or more inert (air) SSR tests
are conducted along with two or more environmental SSR tests for each test lot of
material 7. The decision to use the critical ratio of 0.80 as the acceptance criterion in
SSR tests was based upon results obtained earlier for cold worked solid solution
nickel-base alloys 8,9. Studies 10 have shown that INCOLOY alloy 925 is consistently more
crack resistant in severe Mobile Bay type sour brine environments than alloy 718, based on SSR
stress corrosion cracking data.
SUMMARY
Ultimately, it is the user's responsibility to establish the acceptability of an alloy for a specific
oilfield environment. The data presented here should be helpful in selecting materials for the
corrosive environments of sour oilfields. A group of alloys that represents a range of alternatives
can be selected for testing in an environment simulating the oilfield environment under study. A
final material selection for a specific application should be made based on test results and an
economic analysis of cost-effective alternatives.
INCONEL alloy 725 offers resistance to corrosion in extremely sour brine environments and in the
presence of elemental sulfur at temperatures up to 242C. The maximum permitted hardness under
NACE MR0175 requirements is 40 HRc. The stress corrosion cracking resistance of age-hardened
INCONEL alloy 725 is superior to that of INCONEL alloy 718 in sour environments.
A high-strength grade of alloy 725, INCONEL alloy 725HS, has been assigned a NACE MR0175
maximum hardness level of 43 HRc and can be used for high-strength applications in sour service
up to NACE test level VI at 175C.
The corrosion resistance of age-hardened nickel-base alloys in sour brine environments is as
follows11:
INCONEL alloy 725> INCONEL alloy 725HS > INCOLOY alloy 925 > INCONEL alloy 718 >
MONEL alloy K-500 and INCONEL alloy X-750
INCOLOY, INCONEL®, MONEL®, 925™ and 725™ are trademarks of the Special Metals
Corporation group of companies.
REFERENCES
1. E. L. Hibner and C. S. Tassen, “Corrosion Resistant Oil Country Tubular Goods and Completion
Alloys for Moderately Sour Service,” EUROCORR 2000, paper no. C014/18, London, UK,
September 2000.
2. ASTM G48 ASTM Standard Test Method G48, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 03.02 (West
Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 1995)
3. E. L. Hibner, et. al., Effect of Alloy Content vs. PREN on the Selection of Austenitic Oil Country
Tubular Goods for Sour Gas Service,” CORROSIOIN/98, paper no. 98106, NACE International,
Houston, TX, USA, 1998.
4. Standard TM-01-77. “ Testing of Metals for Resistance to Sulfide Stress Cracking at Ambient
Temperatures”. NACE, Houston, TX 1986 revision.
5. NACE Standard Test Method MR0175-2000, “Sulfide Stress Cracking Resistance Metallic Materials
for Oilfield Equipment”.
6. H. R. Copson, T. Rhodin (ed.), Effect of Composition on Stress Corrosion Cracking of Some Alloys
Containing Nickel, “Physical Metallurgy of Stress Corrosion Fracture,” Interscience Publishers, Inc.,
New York, 1959.
7. E.L.Hibner, "Improved SSR Test for Lot Acceptance Criterion," Slow Strain Rate Testing for the
Evaluation of Environmentally Induced Cracking: Research and Engineering Applications, ASTM
STP1210, R.D.Kane, Ed., p.290, American Society for Testing Materials, West Conshohocken, PA,
USA, 1993.
8. H.E.Chaung, M.Watkins and G.A.Vaughn, "Stress-Corrosion Cracking Resistance of Stainless Alloys
in Sour Environments," Corrosion/85, Paper no. 277, NACE International, Houston, TX, USA, 1985.
9. M.Watkins, H.E.Chaung and G.A.Vaughn, "Laboratory Testing of SCC Resistance of Stainless
Alloys," Corrosion/87, Paper no. 0283, NACE International, Houston, TX, USA, 1987.
10. R. B. Bhavsar and E. L. Hibner, “Evaluation of Testing Techniques for Selection of Corrosion
Resistant Alloys for Sour Gas Service,” CORROSION/96, paper no. 59, NACE International,
Houston, TX, USA, 1996.
1. E. L. Hibner and C. S. Tassen, “Corrosion Resistant OCTG’s and Matching Bar Products for a range
of sour gas service conditions,” CORROSION/2001, paper no. 01102, NACE International,
Houston, TX, USA, 2001.