Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade

stainless steel
Kiran Lakkam ⇑, Shirish M.Kerur, Anilkumar Shirahatti
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jain College of Engineering, Belagavi, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Stainless steel, due to its high corrosion resistance finds exhaustive industrial and architectural applica-
Received 1 August 2019 tions. This resistance to corrosion in stainless steel can be attributed to the presence of about 18% of
Received in revised form 25 November 2019 Chromium. Chromium forms a shining, thin passive film that protects the surface from the external cor-
Accepted 27 November 2019
rosive environment. By increasing chromium and nickel contents, this type of steel becomes increasingly
Available online xxxx
resistant to pitting corrosion. However, higher concentrations of these alloying elements results in lower
carbon solubility and carbide segregation. The main objective of accelerated corrosion testing is to sim-
Keywords:
ulate the field environment under laboratory conditions. To see the actual effect of corrosion on stainless
Stainless steel 316
Pitting corrosion
steel it takes a few years. Therefore, the controlling factors for accelerated corrosion test are similar to
Mechanical properties those in the field tests.
pH value Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Ferric chloride solution Selection and Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the First International Con-
ference on Recent Advances in Materials and Manufacturing 2019.

1. Introduction
Pitting corrosion is one of the most widespread and a devious
form of localized corrosion of passive metals and it commonly
occurs in a range of aggressive environments [17]; Lee et al.,
2011). This type of corrosion is generally restricted to a small area
of the metal surface and it can cause the structure to fail by perfo-
ration or by generating stress corrosion cracks (Tian et al., 2014).
Pitting corrosion is normallyseen in austenitic steel exposed to
aqueous media containing chloride ions. The most aggressive ion
is chloride in Pitting corrosion and has always been considered
one of the major operational problems in power plants and anion
found in many natural and industrial environments including sea-
water. Field performance testing in a relevant environment is the
most reliable form of evaluating pitting resistance of steel but it
can take many years to produce useful performance data. There-
fore, laboratory tests, which simulate natural exposure in an accel-
erated manner consistent with the field performance, are required
to produce data in months rather than years [4]. The main objec-
tive of accelerated corrosion testing is to simulate the field envi-
ronment under laboratory conditions and therefore, the
controlling factors for accelerated corrosion test are similar to
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: klakkam@gmail.com (K. Lakkam).
those in the field tests. Research shows the common factors con-
tributing to the initiation and propagation of pitting corrosion are:
 Localized chemical or mechanical damage to the protective
oxide film
 Factors that can cause breakdown of a passive film, such as
acidity, low dissolved oxygen concentrations and high chloride
concentrations; these are likely to turn a protective oxide film
less stable, and thereby initiate pit.
 Localized damage to, or poor application of, protective coating
 Presence of non-uniformities in the metal structure of the com-
ponent such as non-metallic inclusions.
Pitting corrosion can produce pits with their mouth open (un-
covered) or covered with a semi-permeable membrane of corro-
sion products. Pits can be of various shapes. Fig. 1 shows the
common pit shapes divided in two groups namely: trough pits (up-
per) and sideway pits (lower):
Pitting cavities may fill with corrosion products and form caps
over the pit cavities, sometimes creating nodules or tubercles.
While the shapes of the pits vary widely, as observed in Fig. 1, they
are usually roughly saucer-shaped, conical, or hemispherical for
steel and many associated alloys.
Zaya et al. studied pitting theory and stages of pit development;
the schematic of different stages for the development of an individ-

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293
2214-7853/Ó 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the First International Conference on Recent Advances in Materials and Manufacturing 2019.

Please cite this article as: K. Lakkam, S. M.Kerur and A. Shirahatti, Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade stainless steel,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293
2 K. Lakkam et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 1. Common pit shapes [23].

pits appears to be unpredictable. This form of localized corrosion

can lead to accelerated failure of structural components by perfo-
ration or by acting as an initiation site of cracking. Fig. 3 shows
an SEM image of the deep pits on a metal surface. As the oxygen
content in the sea water is higher at the surface water, there will
be higher electrode potential of the metal in the sea. Hence there
will be faster corrosion rate of the metal. But when stainless steel
is oxidized, the surface forms a thin layer of oxide film to protect
the metal and prevents further corrosion, that is, to maintain a pas-
sive state [27,28].

2. Objectives of this research

The present work employs the ASTM G48-11 [12] standard to

evaluate the extent of pitting corrosion damage on 316 stainless
steel specimen. During the experimental procedure, several chal-
lenges were encountered, including the limited information avail-
Fig. 2. Various stages of pitting corrosion process [24]. able on experimental factors and response variables such as the
pH, chemical properties of the ferric chloride and its proper con-
centration, orientation of the specimens, and time of exposure,
ual pit can be seen in the Fig. 2. They distinguished various stages all of which control the pitting process. Empirical knowledge,
of the pitting corrosion process and divided them into four stages. gained through experimentation is presented in this paper to
Stage 0 represents an un-attacked metallic surface which is com-
pletely covered with the passive films. Stage 1 involves the rupture
of the passive layer; the substrate is still protected except for a
small patch in contact with the electrolyte. The dimension of the
small patch in stage 1 can be smaller or comparable to the thick-
ness of the passive film. Subsequently, the dissolution of the sub-
strate begins. Stage 2 is reached when the conditions for pit
growth are met and re-passivation cannot occur anymore i.e. the
pit begins to grow. Therefore, in stage 3 the dissolution of the sub-
strate begins to grow and the pit becomes about 1 to 10 which can
be seen under optical microscope. Pits have a shape of hemisphere
or of a polyhedron by stage 3. At the final stage 4 the pits can be
seen with the naked eye. The pit can have an irregular shape if par-
tially covered around the mouth with solid corrosion products.
Many researchers, as Evens and Bannister in 1931, and later
Richardson in 1973, claim that local weak spots or defects are
always present in the passive films. Therefore stage 0 never exists
and, immediately after immersion in a corrosive solution, the pro-
cess starts at stage 1, where the metal and solution are in contact.
The induction period only corresponds to the rate time necessary
for the corrosion to be well developed and detectable. Additionally,
the corrosive attack is highly localised and the precise location of Fig.3. Deep pits on a metal surface [17].

Please cite this article as: K. Lakkam, S. M.Kerur and A. Shirahatti, Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade stainless steel,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293
 K. Lakkam et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 3

address these challenges. We have attempted to achieve the fol-
lowing objectives:
 To carry out accelerated pitting corrosion on stainless steel
grade 316 by immersing the specimen in a corrosive solution
for varying time periods i.e. 24 h, 48 h, 72 h and 96 h
 To study the effect of corrosion on the mechanical properties of
the specimen. Focus was on the main mechanical properties viz.
Tensile strength, Impact strength and Hardness.
 To evaluate the loss of mass in the specimen after corrosion.
 To Study the pH of ferric chloride solution.
The specimen are prepared as per [10] standards for conducting
tensile test as shown if Fig. 4 and [11] standard is used for impact
test as shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 4 shows a rectangular cross section ten-
sile test specimen. The width at the gripper end is maintained to
10 mm, with its length as 30 mm. The gauge length is 25 mm. suit-
able fillet radius were provided when there was a sudden change
in the cross section to reduce the stress. Fig. 5 shows the specimen
used to test the impact strength. Charpy impact test is conducted
where the angle of swing of the hammer is 140°. The notch was
kept facing away from the hammer. The specimen is kept in the
form of simply supported beam.

3. Experimental studies 3.1. Procedure for pitting corrosion (ASTM G48)

Grade 316 is the standard ‘‘18/8” stainless steel; it is the most
versatile and most widely used stainless steel, available in a wider
range of products, forms and finishes than any other. It has excel-
lent forming and welding characteristics. Grade 316 is readily roll
formed into a variety of components for applications in the indus-
trial, architectural, and transportation fields. Grade 316 also has
supreme welding characteristics. Post-weld annealing is not
required when welding thin sections. The composition of 316
grade stainless steel used for the present work is tabulated in
Table 1 and the mechanical properties 316 stainless steel are
tabulated in Table 2.
 600 ml of ferric chloride test solution was poured in a 1000 ml
test beaker. Provide a solution volume of at least 5 ml/cm2(30 -
ml/in.2) more than of specific surface area. Transfer the test bea-
ker to a constant temperature bath and allow the test solution
to come to the equilibrium temperature of interest. Recom-
mended temperatures for evaluation are 22 ± 2 °C and 50 ± 2 °C.
 The specimen is placed in a glass cradle and immersed in the
test solution after it has reached the desired temperature. Main-
tain test solution temperature throughout the test.
 Cover the test vessel with a watch glass. Specimen is kept in the
solution for 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 96 h.

Table 1
Composition of 316 stainless steel.

Grade C Mn Si P S Cr Mo Ni N
316 Min – – – – – 16 2.00 10.0 –
Max 0.08 2.0 0.75 0.045 0.030 18 3.00 14 0.10

Table 2
Mechanical properties of 316 stainless steel.

Grade Tensile Strength (MPa) min. Yield Strength 0.2% Proof (MPa) min. Elongation (% in 50 mm) min. Rockwell Hardness (HR B) max.
316 515 205 40 95

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of the stainless steel test specimen for tensile testing. (ASTM E8/E8M-13a).

Fig. 5. Stainless steel specimen for impact testing [11].

Please cite this article as: K. Lakkam, S. M.Kerur and A. Shirahatti, Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade stainless steel,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293
4 K. Lakkam et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 6. Experimental setup for pitting test [25].

4. Results and discussion

Impact test was conducted on two specimens each for varying

times of corrosion to obtain the average value. Table 3 shows the
average impact strength for specimen with different corrosion
times. These values are graphically represented in Fig. 8. The ten-
sile test results are tabulated in Table 4 and represented graphi-
cally in Fig. 9. It can be easily concluded from Fig. 8 that
corrosion treatment has a positive effect on the impact strength.
This is mainly because corrosion essentially is a surface or sub-
surface phenomenon. During this, the internal grain structure
modifies itself to resist corrosion thereby increasing its impact
strength. Keeping the specimen in a corrosive environment for
(a) Container for conducting 72 h resulted the maximum impact strength. Size parameters like
Corrosion experiment pit depth and pit density i.e. measured in terms of pits per square
inch or millimetre, can easily influence the mechanical properties
Fig. 7a. Container for conducting Corrosion experiment.
of the material (David and Hoeppner). Plate thickness does not
have significant impact because pitting corrosion essentially
occurs at the surface. Material hardness varies with intensity of
corrosion since it is a surface property. pH of solution used for test-
ing also influences the rate of corrosion. Further, it is observed that
as the exposure time increases the pH level of solution decreases
Tables 5–7.
Specimen without corrosion treatment exhibited better tensile
strength than specimen with corrosion treatment (24 h, 48 h and
92 h respectively). However, specimen with 72-hour corrosion
treatment showed a higher tensile strength amongst the entire
specimen. A SEM analysis of the entire specimen can give a clear
understanding as to the reason behind this phenomenon.

(b) Chemicals used for
Corrosion experiment
Fig. 7b. Chemicals used for Corrosion experiment.
 Remove the specimen, rinse with water and scrub with a nylon
bristle brush under running water to remove corrosion prod-
ucts, dip in acetone or methanol, and air-dry.
 Weigh each specimen to an accuracy of 0.001 g or better and
reserve for examination
Figs. 6, 7a and 7b show the schematic representation of the set
up used to conduct the corrosion experiment.
5. Conclusion
Increase in time duration of corrosion, results in increase of
impact strength of stainless steel grade 316. This may be attributed
to the compaction of microstructure in the presence of a corrosive
environment. The microstructure rearranges itself to resist the
attack from corrosion ions. The tensile strength after immersing
the specimen in the corrosive bath reduces. However, it is observed
that for 24 h, 48 h the tensile strength keeps on increasing, reaches
a maximum at 72 h and later reduces at 96 h of immersion. The
trend can be further assessed by keeping the specimen for 120 h.
There is a marginal reduction in the hardness of specimen with
respect to the increase in the time of immersion. Hardness being

Table 3
Impact test results for stainless steel grade 316.

Sample No. Normal 24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h

01 1.6125 1.9873 2.2692 2.4625 2.1428
02 1.6538 1.8125 2.200 2.0519 2.1375
Average in J/mm2 1.6331 1.8999 2.2346 2.2572 2.1401

Please cite this article as: K. Lakkam, S. M.Kerur and A. Shirahatti, Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade stainless steel,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293
 K. Lakkam et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx 5

2.5

Impact strength (J/mm2)

2
Normal
1.5 24 hours

48 hours
1
72 hours
0.5
96 hours

0
Normal 24hours 48hours 72hours 96hours

Fig. 8. Graphical representation of impact strength values for stainless steel grade 316.

Table 4
Tensile test results for stainless steel grade 316.

Sample No. Normal 24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h

01 977.7 708.3 738.8 802.5 751.3
02 975.8 672.2 726.3 736.1 746.9
Average in MPa 976.7 690.2 732.6 769.3 749.1

1200

1000
Tensile strength (MPa)

Normal
800
24 hours
600
48 hours
400
72 hours

200 96 hours

0
Normal 24 hours 48 hours 72 hours 96 hours

Fig. 9. Graphical representation of tensile strength values for stainless steel grade 316.

Table 5
Weight loss in the specimen for varying corrosion times.

Tensile specimens Impact specimens

Duration in Hours Before corrosion (grams) After corrosion (grams) Weight loss in grams Before corrosion (grams) After corrosion (grams) Weight loss in grams

24 84.65 80.08 4.57 42.79 41.43 1.36

24 83.74 78.92 4.82 42.83 41.61 0.22
24 81.20 76.21 4.99 41.45 40.19 1.26
Average 83.19 78.64 4.79 42.34 41.07 0.94
48 83.28 78.58 4.70 42.54 41.23 1.31
48 80.51 74.88 5.63 43.02 41.79 1.23
48 81.86 76.52 5.34 42.82 41.57 1.25
Average 81.88 76.66 5.22 42.79 41.53 1.26
72 92.28 86.92 5.36 43.01 41.48 1.53
72 84.77 79.33 5.44 43.08 41.89 1.19
72 84.15 79.26 4.89 42.64 41.47 1.17
Average 87.06 81.83 5.23 42.91 41.61 1.29
96 87.19 78.72 8.47 42.57 41.07 1.50
96 82.40 76.38 6.02 42.86 40.57 2.30
96 82.49 75.68 6.81 42.83 40.87 1.97
Average 84.02 76.76 7.1 42.75 40.83 1.92
Normal 92.60 – – 42.93 – –
Normal 82.54 – – 43.14 – –
Normal 83.50 – – 42.80 – –
Average 86.21 42.95

Please cite this article as: K. Lakkam, S. M.Kerur and A. Shirahatti, Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade stainless steel,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293
6 K. Lakkam et al. / Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 6 [24] P.G.R. Zaya, Evaluation of Theories for the Initial Stages of Pitting Corrosion,
Brinell Hardness values after testing of stainless steel 316. McMaster University, McMaster, 1984.
[25] Jyoti Bhandari et al. ‘‘Accelerated pitting corrosion test of 304 stainless steel
Sample No. Normal 24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h using ASTM G48; Experimental investigation and concomitant challenges”
Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2017.
01 129.7 128.2 128 129.0 126.5
[27] M. Doddamani, M. Mathapati, M.R. Ramesh, Plasma sprayed Cr3C2-NiCr/fly
02 128.5 130.5 129.2 128. 126.2
ash cenosphere coating: cyclic oxidation behavior at elevated temperature,
Average 129.1 129.3 128.6 128.6 126.3 Mater. Res. Express 5 (12) (2018) 126404.
[28] M. Mathapati, M. Doddamani, Cyclic oxidation behavior of plasma sprayed
NiCrAlY/WC-Co/cenosphere coating, AIP Conference Proceedings 1943 (2018).

Table 7
Variation in pH value with respect to time of immersion. Further reading

Grade Normal 24 h 48 h 72 h 96 h
316 1.02 1.56 1.44 1.66 1.5
a surface property, cannot be directly evaluated at the pits that are
formed. At other surface, corrosive environment is found to have a
less effect on hardness. There is a substantial decrease in the pH
value of the solution as the time of immersion increases. This is
due to the reaction occurring between the solution and the
specimen.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Kiran Lakkam: Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation,
Data curation, Writing - original draft, , Visualization. Shirish M.
Kerur: Conceptualization, Validation, Resources, Writing - review
& editing, Supervision, Project administration. Anilkumar Shira-
hatti: Conceptualization, Validation, Resources, Writing - review
& editing, Supervision, Project administration.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[4] D. Ward, Correlation of accelerated corrosion testing with natural exposure
after 6 years in a coastal environment, Corrosion NACE Int. (2008).
[10] ASTM E18, ASTM E8/E8M-13a International, ‘‘West Conshohocken United
States for hardness test and tensile test”. PA 19428-2959. 100 Barr Harbor
Drive, PO Box C700.
[11] ASTM E2248-15, ASTM, ‘‘Test Method for Impact Testing of
MiniaturizedCharpy V-Notch Specimens”. International, 100 Barr Harbor
Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States.
[12] ASTM G48 ‘‘Standard Test Method for Pitting and Crevice Corrosion Resistance
of Stainless Steels and Related Alloys by Use of the Ferric Chloride Solution -
Methods E and F”, February 1, 2002.
[17] J. Bhandari, F. Khan, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, R. Ojeda, Modelling of pitting
corrosion in marine and offshore steel structures-a technical review, J. Loss
Prev. Process Ind. 37 (2015) 39e62.
[23] ASTM G46 ‘‘Standard Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting
Corrosion1”, Designation: G 46 – 94 (Reapproved 2005).
[1] N.J. Laycock, D.P. Krouse, S.C. Hendy, D.E. Williams, Computer simulation of
pitting corrosion of stainless steels, Electrochem. Soc. Interface 23 (2014) 65–
71.
[2] R.B. Ribeiro, J. Silva, L. Hein, M. Pereira, E. Corodo, N. Matias, Morphology
characterization of pitting corrosion on sensitized Austenitic Stainless Steel by
Digital Image Analysis, ISRN Corrosion (2013).
[3] J. Bhandari, F. Khan, R. Abbassi, V. Garaniya, R. Ojeda, Reliability assessment of
offshore asset under pitting corrosion using Bayesian network, Corrosion NACE
Int. 35 (2016) 399–406.
[5] I. Chaves, R. Melchers, Long term localized corrosion of marine steel pilling
welds, Corrosion Eng. Sci. Technol. 48 (2013) 469–474.
[6] S. Caines, F. Khan, J. Shirokoff, W. Qiu, Experimental design to study corrosion
under insulation in harsh marine environments, J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 33
(2012) 39–51.
[7] M.T. Woldemedhin, R.G. Kelly, Evaluation of maximum pit size model on
stainless steel under atmospheric conditions, ECSV Trans. 58 (2014) 41–50.
[8] E. Otero, A. Pardo, M. Utrilla, E. S_aenz, F. Perez, Influence of microstructure in
the corrosion resistance of AISI type 304L and type 316L sintered stainless
steels exposed to ferric chloride solution, Mater. Charat. 35 (1995) 145–151.
[9] V. Zatkaliková, M. Bulovina, V. Škorik, L. Petreková, Pitting corrosion AISI 316
steel with polished surface, Mater. Eng. 17 (2010) 135–147.
[13] A.U. Malik, S. Ahmad, I. Andijani, S. Al-Fouzan, Corrosion behavior of steels in
Gulf seawater environment, Desalination 123 (1999) 205e213.
[14] T.H. Abood. The Influence of Various Parameters on Pitting Corrosion of 316l
and 202 Stainless Steel. Department of Chemical Engineering of the University
of Technology. University of Technology, 2008.
[15] Z. Szklarska-Smialowska. Pitting corrosion of metals. Natl. Assoc. Corros. Eng.
Tang, X., Cheng, Y., 2011. Quantitative characterization by micro-
electrochemical measurements of the synergism of hydrogen, stress and
dissolution on near neutral pH stress corrosion cracking of pipelines. Corros.
Sci. 53, 2927e2933, 1986.
[16] X. Tang, Y.F. Cheng. Quantitative characterization by micro-electrochemical
measurements of the synergism of hydrogen, stress and dissolution on near-
neutral pH stress corrosion cracking of pipelines Corrosion Science 53 9 2011
2927 2933 DOI: 10.1016/j.corsci.2011.05.032 https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/
retrieve/pii/S0010938X1100254X.
[18] R. Melchers, Effect of temperature on the marine immersion corrosion of
carbon steels, Corrosion 58 (2002) 768e782.
[19] W. Maureen, V.A.A. Lisa, V.W. Lorenzo, Corrosion-Related Accidents in
Petroleum Refineries: Lessons Learned from Accidents in EU and OECD
Countries, Publications Office of the European Union, 2013.
[20] L.T. Popoola, A.S. Grema, G.K. Latinwo, B. Gutti, A.S. Balogun, Corrosion
problems during oil and gas production and its mitigation, Int. J. Ind. Chem. 4
(2013) 35.
[21] G. Frankel, Pitting corrosion of metals a review of the critical factors, J.
Electrochem. Soc. 145 (1998) 2186–2198.
[22] R. Abdel-Ghany, S. Saad-Eldeen, H. Leheta, The effect of pitting corrosion on
the strength capacity of steel offshore structures, in: ASME 2008 27th
International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering,
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2008, pp. 801–805.
[26] David W. Hoeppner ‘‘Pitting corrosion:morphology and characterization” RTO-
AG-AVT-140.

Please cite this article as: K. Lakkam, S. M.Kerur and A. Shirahatti, Effect of pitting corrosion on the mechanical properties of 316 grade stainless steel,
Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.11.293