Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PT10
PT10
Metallurgical Conditioning of
AISI 304 Stainless Steel Specimens
Test specimens for each of the following
metallurgical conditions were used in the
evaluation: (1) solution annealed,
(2) sensitized and (3) sensitized and
etched. The solution annealed specimens
were included because AISI 304 stainless
steel in this metallurgical condition is
much less susceptible to halogen induced
stress corrosion cracking than material in
the sensitized condition. Specimens that
Conclusions on Control of
Stress Corrosion Cracking
As long as the ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code3 limits total halogens in liquid
materials for nondestructive testing
methods to one percent, materials for use
on austenitic stainless steel components
should be selected for minimum halide
content consistent with effectiveness and
cost. The lower the halide residual
concentration in the environment, the
lower the possibility of stress corrosion.
Thorough cleaning for removal of halide
containing materials after their use will
effectively eliminate any potential for
stress corrosion.
Stainless steels containing a nominal
8 percent nickel — such as AISI 304,
AISI 316 and AISI 347 — have maximum
sensitivity to chloride stress corrosion
cracking. Attainment of minimum stress
levels in stainless steel components is
therefore desirable. Thermal, vibrational
or peening stress relief can reduce residual
stresses. Residual and/or applied tensile
stresses as low as 14 MPa (2000 lbf·in.–2)
in combination with 74 °C (165 °F) or
higher fluid environments containing 1 to
50 µg·g–1 or less of certain chlorides and 1
FIGURE 7. Schematic cross section drawing of permeator showing membrane used to pass oil
free water radially outward and retain oily contaminants in tubular enclosure.
Membrane
Dilute
oil feed Oil concentrate
Oil
free
water
Ultrafiltration process
1 60.8
2 57.6 Water Immiscible Solvent
3 57.2 Removers
4 64.0 Another approach to the effluent problem
5 48.0 is the removal of non–water washable
6 64.0 liquid penetrants by aqueous dispersions
of volatile, water immiscible solvents. This
results in an effluent whose typical
composition is as follows: (1) 99 percent
water, (2) 0.98 percent solvent and
(3) 0.02 percent liquid penetrant.
Liquid Penetrant Removal The mutual compatibility of the liquid
by Adsorption penetrant and solvent remover and their
Studies have shown that the clarification combined immiscibility in water
of effluent containing liquid penetrant predetermines an easy separation of water
waste also can be accomplished by the by centrifugation or gravity stratification
adsorption technique. It is essentially in a holding tank. Apart from exhibiting a
based on the affinity of certain absorbent slight bluish fluorescence, the recovered
particles toward typical ingredients of water is sufficiently uncontaminated (oil
liquid penetrants. In practice, the oil content less than 100 µg·g–1) to be
contaminant is extracted by stirring disposed of as a regular aqueous waste.
vigorously 7 kg (15 lb) of absorbent into The density of the removing solvent must
10 000 L (2600 gal) of waste water be either lighter than water or heavier
containing about 0.06 percent liquid than water in order for it to be separated
penetrant. A solution of a flocculating by centrifugation or gravity. The
agent is then added and the treated batch considerably smaller volume of the
Economic Feasibility of
Liquid Penetrant Waste Comparison of Hydrophilic with
Water Clarification Lipophilic Liquid Penetrant
In many localities, effluents from Techniques
nonprewash liquid penetrant processes
cannot go directly to the sewer. They Using the hydrophilic technique is like
require extensive treatment (1) to break using the lipophilic postemulsification
the emulsion, (2) to separate the organics technique inasmuch as a postemulsifiable
and (3) to clarify the water. Although liquid penetrant is used for both.
water may be reclaimed after expensive Nevertheless, the two processes differ
processing, the separated liquid penetrant slightly. In the hydrophilic process, a
and emulsifier oils will be chemically plain water wash precedes application of
altered and the economics of reclaiming an emulsifying agent. Also, instead of a
these materials might be questioned. If full strength emulsifier solution, the
the effluent is not an emulsion, then hydrophilic system relies on a very dilute
treatment costs are reduced. A solution of hydrophilic emulsifier. The
nonemulsified effluent separates by hydrophilic and lipophilic systems are
gravity. Whether the pollutants float to distinguished elsewhere in this volume.
the top of the tank or sink to the bottom Although an additional step is required to
depends on their specific gravity. In either perform the hydrophilic process, this
case, separation takes place without disadvantage may be more than offset by
expensive filtration or chemical addition. savings in the costs of material and
Therefore, a nonemulsified effluent can reclaiming rinse water.
minimize water clarification cost.