Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Corrosion Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/corsci

Pitting and uniform corrosion source recognition using acoustic

emission parameters
C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen *
Department of Production Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangmod, Toong-kru, Bangkok 10140, Thailand

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

Article history: Acoustic emission (AE) can be used to detect corrosion in various applications. In cases of severe back-
Received 15 December 2008 ground noise, good noise elimination techniques and source identification approaches are required to
Accepted 2 September 2009 increase signal-to-noise ratio. In this paper, a new AE parameter is presented as an alternative to AE activ-
Available online 10 September 2009
ity for classification of corrosion sources. The duration and frequency of AE signals are found to be helpful
in identifying the source of pitting and uniform corrosion processes. Results are explained in terms of the-
Keywords: ories of corrosion mechanisms and AE, as well as using experiment results. Finally, new AE source-based
A. Acid solutions
approaches to monitor both corrosion processes are proposed.
A. Mild steel
A. Stainless steel
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
B. Potentiostatic
C. Passive films
C. Pitting corrosion

1. Introduction and literature review
Acoustic emission monitoring refers to the detection of tran-
sient waves during the rapid release of energy from localised
sources within a material [1,2]. This in-service test technique ex-
plores damage due to corrosion [3–7]. Compared to alternative
methods of corrosion monitoring (corrosion coupons analysis,
electric resistance monitoring, chemical analysis, etc.) [8–10],
acoustic emission provides a direct measure of failure mechanisms
in the context of corrosive action.
Other researchers have shown that acoustic emission signals
are related to corrosion factors (weight loss, density of current)
and electrochemical mechanisms [11–19]. However, the acoustic
emission as a result of corrosion is usually merged with emissions
from other nearby acoustic sources. Consequently, it is difficult to
generate meaningful data in a field environment. Erroneous de-
tected signals (ones unrelated to corrosion-relevant emissions)
may lead to incorrect AE corrosion analysis results. Noisy signals
in the environment can be filtered by signal-conditioning systems.
However, it is difficult to separate the AE noise from the signal.
Various researchers have attempted to identify and characterise
AE sources in corrosion processes. Metal damage, passive film rup-
tures and gas bubble activation [20–22] have been proposed as
probable AE sources in corrosion processes. AE activity (hits, events
and amplitude), acoustic waveforms, and correlation plot analyses
[23–30] have partially explained the different AE sources. The
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +66 814560121; fax: +66 24709296.
E-mail address: iasaasen@kmutt.ac.th (A. Prateepasen).
problem is that AE activity depends on AE system settings such
as gain and on the severity of the corrosion rate. One possible ap-
proach is the use of AE parameters that vary significantly less with
corrosive severity, such as duration (assigned as the time interval
between the triggered time of one AE signal (waveform) and the
time of disappearance), rise time (assigned as the time interval be-
tween the triggering time of AE signal and the time of the peak
amplitude), energy (definitions vary across AE system suppliers),
and frequency of AE signal.
In this paper, a novel technique using AE parameter analyses
was implemented to characterise each AE source in a corrosion
process. The theories of mechanisms and electrochemical charac-
teristics of uniform and pitting corrosion were studied. The condi-
tions of acoustic bubbles and corrosion mechanisms were
considered. Finally, an AE parameter was selected and used to ex-
plain and classify sources of AE in both pitting and uniform
corrosion.
2. Theoretical background
2.1. Mechanisms and electrochemical nature of corrosion processes
[31]
The type of corrosion mechanism and its rate depend on various
factors (material type, corrosive condition, etc.). The corrosion of
steel in an acid environment proceeds according to the overall
reaction: M + 2H+ ? M2+ + H2. This reaction involves ion transfer
between the anode and cathode. Electrochemical reactions in steel
consist of oxidation and reduction. The oxidation occurs at the

0010-938X/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.corsci.2009.09.001
188 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197
anode: M ? M2+ + 2e; the reduction, at the cathode: 2H+ +
2e ? H2. Bubbles of hydrogen are formed as a corrosion product.
Electrochemical polarisation methods are classified as controlled
potential (potentiostatic, potentiodynamic) and controlled current
(galvanostatic) approaches. In this work, potentiostatic and poten-
tiodynamic methods were used for corrosion control and measure-
ment. For a potentiostatic method, a potentiostat automatically
adjusts the applied polarising potential between a working electrode
(WE) and a reference electrode (RE) at any prescribed value to mea-
sure the current density on a counting electrode (CE). The polarisa-
tion curve associated with a potentiodynamic method allows
detailed study of the important parameters that impact the forma-
tion and growth of passive films (Ecorr) and pit propagation (Epit).
2.1.1. Pitting corrosion
The initial propagation of pitting corrosion on stainless steel in
the presence of chloride solution is described in terms of both elec-
trochemical and corrosion steps. For simplicity, the elementary pit-
ting process can be divided into three phases. First, pit nucleation
leads to the formation of a small area of bare, un-filmed passive
surface of metal. Second, the development of a metastable pit leads
to local dissolution of a significant part of the underlying metal.
The dissolved metal region is referred to as a pit embryo. The result
is either the formation of a stable pit or re-passivation. Subse-
quently, in the third step, the growth of a stable pit leads to metal
damage and pit propagation.
The current density can separate the electrochemical analysis of
pitting corrosion tests into three stages, pit nucleation, metastable
pit and stable pit, which are described and relate with the acoustic
source in the result analysis section (see Section 4.2).
2.1.2. Uniform corrosion
General or uniform corrosion is the name given to the corrosion
process dominated by uniform thinning, which proceeds without
appreciable localised attack.
Two theoretical basic stages of the uniform corrosion mecha-
nism are:
(a) The initial stage, in which the primary surface of the metal is
attacked by chemical solutions. The anodic and cathodic
sites are virtually inseparable.
(b) A corrosion nucleus propagates on the surface area of the
metal as a uniform corrosive engine. After this phenomenon
has occurred, the re-passivation of the protective film cannot
take place.
In concentrated acidic solutions, the corrosion mechanism pro-
duces substantial amounts of gas. Acoustic emissions can be de-
tected from the bubbles.
2.2. Bubbles in the corrosion process
2.2.1. AE of bubbles
The AE signal from bubble break-up is often detectable. In gen-
eral, the energy generated from bubble breakage is significant.
Bubble break-up was investigated theoretically and experimen-
tally. One of the causes of bubble break-up in corrosion processes
is bubble instability [32]. The upper limit of bubble size is set by
the maximum stable bubble size, Dmax, above which the bubble
is subjected to break-up and becomes unstable. The bubble could
break anywhere, including within the liquid or at the surface of
liquid where the centrifugal force exceeds the surface tension
force. However, the experiment was performed under the same
conditions to reduce the effect of liquid level. The characteristics
of the released acoustic signals can help identify AE sources from
corrosion processes.
2.2.2. Resonant frequencies of bubble break-up
To discover the characteristic frequencies of bubble break-up,
the resonant frequency of bubble oscillation was considered.
Acoustic vibrations are typically small in amplitude, which leads
to linearisation of the standard wave equation and other simplifi-
cations. The radial vibration of a gas bubble in a fluid is modelled
well as a simple harmonic oscillator, the stiffness and mass param-
eters of which relate to the properties of the gas and fluid. In par-
ticular, the inertial mass of the bubble will directly relate to the
work required to move the surrounding fluid. The bubble will have
a resonant frequency at which it will vibrate after being subjected
to an impulsive force. The static pressure in the fluid [P0 ; kg/m2],
the specific heats for the gas [c; J/(kgK)], a Newtonian fluid of con-
stant density [q0 ; kg/m3], and a spherical body of rest radius [R0 ;
m] are commonly used to characterise the linear resonant fre-
quency (m0 ) in Hertz [33,34]:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 3cP0
m0  ð1Þ
2pR0 q0
To determine the acoustic frequency of bubble break-up, we as-
sume that the resonant frequency of an unstable bubble corre-
sponds to the break-up frequency. Given Eq. (1), consider the
maximum diameter of a stable bubble, Dmax, to be the actual size
of a bubble. The break-up frequency becomes:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 3cP0
mb  ð2Þ
pDmax q0
This estimated frequency is important to identifying acoustic fea-
tures of bubble activity in corrosion processes.
2.3. AE sources in corrosion processes
AE sources in corrosion processes can help evaluate metal dam-
age. It is necessary to properly apply signal conditioning. Passive
film rupture, bubble formation, metal damage and other corro-
sion-relevant phenomena are considered to be sources of AE sig-
nals [35]. Most AE sources reveal information about the
mechanism of corrosion and environmental action. Pitting and uni-
form corrosion are similar in the case of the gas bubbles generating
AE signals due to their movement and oscillation [33,34,36].
Acoustic bubble signals can instantaneously drown the emitted
metal damage signals. These were filtered out by signal condition-
ing hardware. In addition, the AE source from passive film rupture
was only identified at the start of corrosion, except in the case of
corrosion on film-based materials such as stainless steel and cer-
tain alloys. The AE source for pitting corrosion on stainless steel
was from the passive film [25,37]. Pit-based initiation of corrosion
on stainless steel then emitted an AE signal. However, it was diffi-
cult to identify the AE signal source. Many researchers are working
to solve this problem with additional experiments [25–27].
2.4. Development of AE-based applications of corrosion analysis
The objective of AE application development for corrosion anal-
ysis is to evaluate and predict damage. The first step was to relate
AE signal to corrosive damage mechanisms [38]. An application of
a group of AE sensors presents the time difference for arrival data
to perform source location analysis [39], which has been continu-
ously developed [40]. The classification of corrosion was explored
through violent corrosion evaluation by means of acoustic emis-
sion and competent classification techniques [41]. Various signal
conditioning methods were developed to increase efficiency [37].
Our research in this field began in 2002 [35–43]. Variables such
as the type of corrosion [37,36,43] and effects of the environment
 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197 189

have been studied [36]. The location of AE sources due to corrosion
was deciphered [39], and development of a new source location
system was presented [40]. Classifications of corrosion severity
using AE signals were proposed [41] and refined [42]. Identification
of AE sources in corrosion processes was also demonstrated. How-
ever, the AE signal in the field depended not only on the equipment
and conditions but also on environment noise. The use of new AE
parameters will help address this.
3. Experimental setup
To discover which AE parameters encode information about AE
sources from bubbles, the experiment was performed on both
pitting and uniform corrosion tests, as shown in Figs. 1 and 3,
respectively. One experiment featured undetectable acoustic
bubbles (Figs. 1a and 3a), and the other exhibited detectable bub-
bles (Figs. 1b and 3b). The information regarding AE sources from
the metal damage and passive film rupture was studied by relating
it to the corrosion mechanism.
3.1. Acoustic emission data acquisition setup
An AE sensor, type R15 from Physical Acoustic Corp. (PAC), was
mounted on the specimen, which was an additional part of the bot-
tom tank in the test (see Figs. 1a, 1b and 3a). The AE signal was
amplified by a preamplifier set at 60 dB and filtered by band pass
between 20 and 1200 kHz. The signal was then sent to an AE data
acquisition system (LOCAN320 from PAC) to extract AE parameters
in the time domain. Background noise was eliminated by setting
the threshold level at 40 dB. The background noise level was

Fig. 1. Two experimental setups of pitting corrosion analysis by AE. (a) Acoustic bubble undetectable. (b) Acoustic bubble detectable.

Fig. 2. The polarisation curve of the SS304 corrosion test in 3% NaCl solution, with a pH of 2 controlled by HCl.
190 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197

Fig. 3. Two experimental setups of uniform corrosion analysis by AE. (a) Acoustic bubble undetectable. (b) Acoustic bubble detectable.

evaluated by the maximum level of the detected signal at the free
corrosion condition.
3.2. Specimen preparation and corrosion analysis setup
3.2.1. Pitting corrosion electrochemical setup
Fig. 3 illustrates the equipment used. The specimen was a sheet
of austenitic stainless steel (SS304) of size 4  6  0.05 cm3 and
used as the working electrode in the electro-chemical process.
The specimens were prepared by being polished using successive
grades of wet emery paper up to Mesh No. 1200. They were sub-
jected to passivation treatment at 60 °C for 30 min in 20% HNO3
solution. They were then rinsed with de-ionised water, dried by
hot air and left in desiccators overnight. The test was done at room
temperature in 3% NaCl solution with a pH of 2 controlled by HCl.
The solution level was fixed was fixed at 80% height of the test cell
to neglect the influence of the wave propagation path. The Epit
potentiostatic test was applied to the specimens using a potentio-
stat. In Fig. 1a, an electrolytic bridge was used to distinguish sound
waves generated by hydrogen bubbles far away from the AE sen-
sor. Because of this, the acoustic bubbles could not be detected
in Fig. 1a, but they were detectable in Fig. 1b. Although there are
also bubbles within the pit and on the surface of specimen, by
observation, they comprise a very small amount and could be ne-
glected in this work.
The electrochemical potential was controlled to replicate corro-
sive conditions. The electrochemical potential was kept at a level of
0.3041 V(Ag/AgCl/KCl) using the potentiostat to control the pitting
corrosion. Its level was Epit, which was chosen from a potentiody-
namic test at 0.5 mV/s polarisation rate, shown as the test result in
Fig. 2.
3.2.2. Uniform corrosion electrochemical setup
In Fig. 3, the test specimens were prepared from mild steel of
type A36. The exposed surface was mechanically ground. The sur-
faces were then cleaned with distilled water, dried in a stream of
warm air, and stored overnight in desiccators. In the bubble-free
experiment, Fig. 3a, the exposed surface area of the A36 sample

Fig. 4. The polarisation curve of the A36 steel of corrosion test in H2SO4 solution, pH 4.5. Ecorr was 0.476 V(Ag/AgCl/KCl).
 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197
was in a solution, the pH of which was adjusted using H2SO4 to 4.5.
This pH value was the free bubble condition [44], confirmed by
monitoring in the experiments. A potentiostat was used to control
the electrochemical corrosion process at the static corrosive poten-
tial (Ecorr = 0.476 V(Ag/AgCl/KCl). Ecorr was determined from the
polarisation curve shown in Fig. 4. For the other experiment as a
non-potential control, with bubbles on the specimen (Fig. 3b),
the specimen was a sheet of carbon steel (A36) of size
2.5  20  0.3 cm3, which was set as an angle of 45 degrees with
the tank floor. The concentration of H2SO4 solution was adjusted
to a pH of 0.80 by referencing the sulphur concentrate in crude
oil (0.05–2%), which influences corrosion processes in crude oil
storage tanks [44].
In the AE analysis process, AE parameters had been chosen by
observation of the test results. Previous works showed that many
AE parameters were related to the corrosion mechanism [35–42].
However, some AE parameters exhibit identical relations. The scat-
ter plot matrix is a helpful technique to consider the relation of
each AE parameter shown in Fig. 5.
A scatter plot matrix is an array of pair-wise scatter plots show-
ing the relationship between any pair of AE parameters and the
corrosion severity. The description ‘‘Rise time” shown at the top
left corner of the scatter plot matrix in Fig. 5 refers to the AE
parameter of rise time. This AE parameter is the value of the y-axis
for all plots along the top row and is the value of the x-axis for all
plots down the first column. Similarly, ‘‘count” refers to the AE
parameter of count and applies to the second row and column of
scatter plots in the matrix. The plots that show a linear trend sug-
gest that the two parameters involved are linearly proportional to
each other. For the experimental data in this work, in Fig. 5, the
coherence values in the AE parameters of ‘‘count”, ‘‘energy”,
‘‘amplitude”, and ‘‘duration” are linearly related, which not surpris-
Fig. 5. The scatter plot of AE parameters and corrosion severity.
191
ing, as one is a subset of the other. In this work, ‘‘duration time” (AE
duration) was chosen to correlate with corrosion phenomena be-
cause it exhibited high correlation with the corrosion process;
moreover, the duration time at 65 ls can be used to divide the rup-
ture of passive film and pit growth signal (see results in Section
4.2). It should be remarked that duration time is a time interval be-
tween the triggered time of one AE signal (waveform) and the as-
signed time of disappearance. In addition, the other parameter,
‘‘frequency,” used in this work was based on the bubble theorem
(see Section 2.2.2).
4. Results and discussion
In our study, AE sources of pitting and uniform corrosion were
identified by AE parameters. The bubble activity source was first
considered for both corrosion types. The assumption of break-up
frequency was matched to the recorded characteristics. AE sources
of passive film rupture and corrosion were identified using corro-
sion theorems and electrochemical analysis. The SEM analysis of
the specimens after tests is shown in Fig. 6a and b for pitting and
uniform corrosion, respectively.
4.1. Hydrogen bubbles
First, the identification of bubble phenomena was considered.
The hydrogen bubble size was related to the acoustic resonant fre-
quency, as discussed in Section 2.2. The diameter of each bubble
was measured using image processing techniques, which created
a scale by referring to the magnified value of the photo. The largest
diameter, consistent with our previous work [35], was about 0.9
mm (stable bubble size, Dmax) for both corrosion tests (see
192 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197

Fig. 6. Scanning electron microscope analysis (at 100) of specimens after tests. (a) Pitting corrosion. (b) Uniform corrosion.

Fig. 7). Therefore, the break-up frequency of the maximum diame-

ter of the bubble was about 125 kHz, computed using Eq. (2),
where the liquid density and viscosity were 1000 kg/m3 and
0.001 Pa s, respectively. The bubbles were assumed to be filled
with an ideal gas, with c = 1.4 J/(kg K), and the liquid was assumed
to be nearly incompressible, with P0 = 3.110  107 kg/m2.
For the aforementioned reason, the frequency of bubbling used
in this research was above 125 kHz. Further justification for fre-
quencies of bubbling above 125 kHz will be discussed in the next
section in the context of experiments with both undetectable and
detectable bubbles.

4.2. Pitting corrosion analysis

Fig. 7. Gas bubbles on the test specimen in a corrosion process, pH 0.8. Plots of average frequency (kHz) against duration of AE signal
are shown in Fig. 8. Plots of time against duration are in Fig. 9. Figs.

Fig. 8. Source identification on pitting corrosion by AE parameter. (a) All AE sources. (b) Bubble (). (c) Passive film rupture ( ). (d) Pitting corrosion ().
 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197 193

Fig. 9. Mechanism and source identification on pitting corrosion by AE. (a) All AE sources. (b) Bubble (). (c) Passive film rupture ( ). (d) Pitting corrosion ().

Fig. 10. AE signal of pitting corrosion tests of an undetectable acoustic bubble.

8a and 9a demonstrate all AE sources, while Figs. 8b, c, d, and 9b, c,
and d refer to each AE source. AE sources for pitting corrosion were
divided into three groups. The resonance frequency of the AE signal
of above 125 kHz was used to group AEs relevant to bubble rup-
Fig. 11. The current density of electrochemical analysis of pitting corrosion tests in
three stages: pit nucleation, metastable pit and stable pit.
ture. Duration can be classified into rupture of passive films and
pit growth signal sources. These were recorded in terms of AE
194 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197

Fig. 12. The cumulative AE hits of corrosion and film rupture signal, with filtered bubble signal.

Fig. 13. AE source identification of uniform corrosion by frequency. (a) All AE sources. (b) Propagation of corrosion. (c) Bubble breakage.
 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197
duration at above 65 ls, and below, otherwise. Our assumption
was based on the dissipated energy as the film rapidly ruptures,
considering that surface tension forces are higher than atom dislo-
cation forces in the context of corrosion. The description and evi-
dence for separating the AE sources into three different groups is
further discussed in subsequent sections.
4.2.1. Acoustic gas bubbles
As mentioned above, AE signals with frequencies of over
125 kHz were consistent with breakages of bubbles. Figs. 8b and
9b present AE bubble sources. In Fig. 9b, the bubble was created
and broken down over the course of the experiment, consistent
with our observations. Fig. 10 shows AE signals of pit propagation
and film rupture obtained from undetectable AE bubbles (Fig. 1a).
Nearly all the AE data were below 125 kHz.
4.2.2. Passive film rupture
AEs of passive film rupture sources, with the duration of AE sig-
nals of above 65 ls and with frequencies between 3 and 125 kHz,
are shown in Figs. 8c and 9c. In Fig. 9c, AE data with a duration of
above 65 ls decrease at the time of initial metastable pit forma-
tion, which occurs between 10,000 and 20,000 s. In the metastable
Fig. 14. AE source identification of uniform corrosion by average duration time. (a) All AE sources. (b) Propagation of corrosion. (c) Bubble breakage.
195
stage, the re-passivating film covers the exposed surface areas. This
causes a reduction in rupture rates of passive films. At this stage,
the current density change rate of pitting corrosion decreased, as
shown in Fig. 11. The acoustic signals of bubble source were fil-
tered by bubbling frequency in Figs. 11 and 12 for easy analysis
of the signals of passive film rupture and pit growth.
4.2.3. Pit growth or pit propagation
To allow better comparison between the evolutions of the
cumulated acoustic activity and the current density during steps
of corrosion damage (pitting and uniform), the dotted line shown
in Fig. 12 represents the current density apparent in Fig. 11. The
AEs of pit growth, with the average duration of AE signals of below
65 ls and with frequency between 3 and 125 kHz, are shown in
Figs. 8d and 9d. In Figs. 9d and 12, pit growth started 1000 s after
film rupture was confirmed. The cumulative total of detected sig-
nals (cumulative hits) of AE from pit growth was lower than that
from film rupture during the pit nucleation stage. The signal was
higher at the next stage of corrosion, as shown in Fig. 12. At the sta-
ble pit growth stage, current density became constant, and the
number of hits from both AE sources decreased.
196 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197
Fig. 15. Correlation plot of AE parameters of a uniform corrosion test with no acoustic bubble signal.
4.3. Uniform Corrosion Analysis
From the literature, it is clear that AE sources in uniform corro-
sion processes can be categorised into three groups. The first is the
source of damage of the primary metal surface when the corrosion
starts. Next is the nucleation and propagation of corrosion on the
metal, called uniform corrosion. The last involves the gas bubble
breaking up during the corrosion process.
A resonant frequency of above 125 kHz in the context of gas
bubble break-up is equal to that in the pitting corrosion case. It
can be used to separate AE sources into two groups, as shown in
the correlation plot, between average filter and duration, as shown
in Fig. 13. In Fig. 14, the AE sources were divided into two groups
according to AE average durations.
4.3.1. Acoustic gas bubble
We considered a bubble resonant frequency above 125 kHz,
which is the same frequency as that in the pitting corrosion test
case. The bubble size in both pitting and uniform corrosion tests
was similar, as measured by image analysis. In addition, the aver-
age duration was about 350 ls.
4.3.2. Metal damage in the uniform corrosion scenario
Through uniform corrosion signal analysis, it became clear that
the duration of AE signals was compatible with the range of bubble
break-ups and above. In addition, the average duration was about
1000 ls. In Fig. 15, the resonant frequency of metal damage was in
the range of 5–140 kHz. This is the result of undetectable bubbles,
as shown in Fig. 3b.
5. Conclusions
The results of this paper can be summarised as follows:
5.1 Correlations of various AE parameters with corrosion pro-
cesses were determined by observation of the corrosion
mechanism in tests and using acoustic theory. Subsequently,
duration and resonance frequency were selected as AE
parameters to classify the AE source of corrosive pitting
and uniform processes.
5.2 AE sources in the context of pitting corrosion can be classi-
fied into three groups using the selected AE parameters,
together with the theory of corrosion mechanisms: (i) gas
bubbles by using their resonant frequency, (ii) passive film
rupture by using duration time and relating to the initial
time of metastable pit formation according to electrochem-
ical analysis, and (iii) pit propagation as related to the time
of occurrence and pitting corrosion mechanisms.
5.3 AE sources in uniform corrosion scenarios can be divided
into two categories, namely, gas bubble and uniform corro-
sion. The categorisation can be determined using the key
AE parameters of resonant frequency.
5.4 A novel technique that uses the selected AE parameters
instead of AE activity was presented. The benefit of this
approach is that one can better classify AE sources. Signals
from actual AE sources can be derived and processed. In
addition, the resulting information is essential to separate
noise from signal in corrosion applications.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank The Thailand Research Fund for supporting
this research.
References
[1] C.B. Scruby, An introduction to acoustic emission, J. Phys E: Sci. Instrum. 20
(1987) 946–953.
[2] C.B. Scruby, J.C. Collingwood, H.N.G. Wadley, A new technique for the
measurement of acoustic emission transients and their relationship to crack
propagation, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 11 (1978) 2359–2369.
[3] T. Sakoda, T. Arita, H. Nieda, M. Otsubo, C. Honda, K. Ando, Acoustic emissions
caused by the corona discharge in an oil-tank, High Voltage Engineering
Symposium, 1999.
[4] S.J. Ternowchek, T.J. Gandy, M.V. Calva, T.S. Patterson, Acoustic emission and
ultrasonic testing for mechanical integrity, in: S.J. Vahaviolos (Ed.), Acoustic
Emission: Standards and Technology Update, ASTM STP 1353, American
Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 1999.
[5] J. Dimopoulos, D. Foo, D. Olsen, A. Lim, Case Study: Applications and
Limitations of Acoustic Emission (AE) Testing of Tank Bottoms of
Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs), Corrosion Control & NDT, Melbourn,
Australia, 2003.
[6] G. Lackner, P. Tscheliesnig, Field testing of flat bottomed storage tanks with
acoustic emission – a review on the gained experience, EWGAE 2004, 201–209.
 C. Jirarungsatian, A. Prateepasen / Corrosion Science 52 (2010) 187–197
[7] J.R. Kwon, G.J. Lyu, T.H. Lee, J.Y. Kim, Acoustic emission testing of repaired
storage tank, Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping 78 (2001) 373–378.
[8] R. Oltra, Corrosion monitoring from laboratory advances to industrial control, J.
Corros. Sci. Eng. 6 (2003) C080.
[9] T. Ford, Corrosion detection and control, Aircr. Eng. Aerosp. Technol. – An Int. J.
71 (1999) 249–254.
[10] K. Katoh, S. Imai, Y. Tomita, Study on Localized Corrosion on Cargo Oil-tank
Bottom Plate of Oil Tanker, World Marine Technology, San Francisco, 2003.
[11] R. Oltra, B. Chapey, L. Renaud, Abrasion–corrosion studies of passive stainless
steels in acidic media: combination of acoustic emission and electrochemical
techniques, Wear 186–187 (1995) 533–541.
[12] F. Ferrer, H. Idrissi, H. Mazille, P. Fleischmann, P. Labeeuw, A study of abrasion–
corrosion of AISI 304L austenitic stainless steel in saline solution using
acoustic emission technique. NDT & E Int. 33(6) (2000) 363–371.
[13] F. Ferrer, H. Idrissi, H. Mazille, P. Fleischmann, P. Labeeuw, On the potential of
acoustic emission for the characterization and understanding of mechanical
damaging during abrasion–corrosion processes, Wear 231(1) (1999) 108–115.
[14] G.T. Burstein, K. Sasaki, Effect of impact angle on the slurry erosion–corrosion
of 304L stainless steel, Wear 240(1–2) (2000) 80–94.
[15] D.J. Yoon, W.J. Weiss, S.P. Shah, Detecting the extent of corrosion with acoustic
emission, Transport. Res. Rec. (1698) 54–60.
[16] E. Santos-Leal, R.J. Lopez, Simultaneous measurement of acoustic emission and
electrical resistance variation in stress-corrosion cracking, Meas. Sci. Technol.
(1995) 188–195.
[17] L. Xidong, F. Ju, C. Lin, Research on the brittle fracture of FRP rods and its
acoustic emission detection, Power Eng. Soc. Winter Meet. IEEE 4(23–27)
(2000) 2812–2816.
[18] R.V. Nieuwenhove, R.W. Bosch, Acoustic emission detection during stress
corrosion cracking at elevated pressure and temperature, in: 24th European
Conference on Acoustic Emission Testing EWGAE 2000, Senlis France, May 2000.
[19] K.W. Nam, K.P. Wei, A.K. Mal, Characteristics of acoustic emission waveforms
generated by fatigue crack extension from corrosion sites in aluminum alloy,
Third FAA/DOE NASA 1999, September 20–23.
[20] Y.P. Kim, M. Fregonese, H. Mazille, D. Féron, G. Santarini, Study of oxygen
reduction on stainless steel surfaces and its contribution to acoustic emission
recorded during corrosion processes, Corros. Sci. 48(12) (2006) 3945–3959.
[21] Y.P. Kim, M. Fregonese, H. Mazille, D. Féron, G. Santarini, Ability of acoustic
emission technique for detection and monitoring of crevice corrosion on 304L
austenitic stainless steel, NDT&E Int. 36(8) (2003) 553–562.
[22] B. Assouli, A. Srhir, H. Idrissi, Characterization and control of selective
corrosion of a,b-brass by acoustic emission, NDT&E Int. 36(2) (2003) 117–126.
[23] F. Mansfield, P.J. Stocker, Acoustic Emission from Corroding Electrodes, Corros.
Eng. 35(12) (1979) 541–544.
[24] H. Mazille, R. Rothea, C. Tronel, An acoustic emission technique for monitoring
pitting corrosion of austenitic stainless steels, Corros. Sci. 37(9) (1995) 1365–
1375.
[25] M. Fregonese, H. Idrissi, H. Mazille, L. Renaud, Y. Cetre, Initiation and
propagation steps in pitting corrosion of austenitic stainless steels:
monitoring by AE, Corros. Sci. 43 (2001) 627–641.
197
[26] K. Darowicki, A. Mirakowski, S. Krakowiak, Investigation of pitting corrosion of
stainless steel by means of acoustic emission and potentiodynamic methods,
Corros. Sci. 45(8) (2003) 1747–1756.
[27] A. Cakir, S. Tuncell, A. Aydin, AE response of 316L SS during SSR test under
potentiostatic control, Corros. Sci. 41(6) (1999) 1175–1183.
[28] F. Bellenger, H. Mazille, H. Idrissi, Use of acoustic emission technique for the
early detection of aluminum alloys exfoliation corrosion, NDT&E Int. 35(6)
(2002) 385–392.
[29] F. Ferrer, T. Faure, J. Goudiakas, E. Andrès, Acoustic emission study of active–
passive transitions during carbon steel erosion–corrosion in concentrated
sulfuric acid, Corros. Sci. 44(7) (2002) 1529–1540.
[30] J.W.R. Boyd, J. Varley, The uses of passive measurement of acoustic
emissions from chemical engineering processes, Chem. Eng. Sci. 56(5)
(2001) 1749–1767.
[31] D.A. Jones, Principles and prevention of corrosion, second ed., Simon &
Schuster (Asia) Pte Ltd., Singapore, 1997, pp. 75–115.
[32] G.Q. Yang, B. Du, L.S. Fan, Bubble formation and dynamics in gas–liquid–solid
fluidization – A review, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (2007) 2–27.
[33] T.G. Leighton, The acoustic bubble, San Diego, 2002, pp. 75–79.
[34] R.M. Lec, P.A. Lewin, M. Musavi, S.W. Bang, S. Goel, S. Kwoun, E. Radulescu,
Acoustic emission sensor for identification of chemical reactions, in: The 1999
Joint Meeting of The European Frequency and Time Forum and The IEEE
International Frequency Control Symposium, 1999, pp. 978–982.
[35] A. Prateepasen, C. Jirarungsatean, P. Tuengsook, Identification of AE source in
corrosion process, J. Key Eng. Mater. 321–323 (2006) 545–548.
[36] A. Prateepasen, C. Jirarungsatean, P. Tuengsook, Effect of sulfuric acid
concentration on acoustic emission signals obtained form uniform-corrosion,
J. Key Eng. Mater. 321–323 (2006) 553–556.
[37] C. Jirarungsatean, A. Prateepasen, P. Kaewtrakulpong, Pitting Corrosion
Monitoring of Stainless Steels by Acoustic Emission, Corrosion Control &
NDT, Melbourn, Australia,, 2003.
[38] C. Jirarungsatean, A. Prateepasen, P. Tuengsook, Corrosion monitoring using
acoustic emission, Sci. Mater. Technol., Thailand 2 (2002) 152–154.
[39] C. Jirarungsatean, A. Prateepasen, P. Tuengsook, The corrosion locating using
acoustic emission technique, in: IE Network Conference, October, Thailand,
2002, pp. 376–387.
[40] C. Jomdecha, A. Prateepasen, P. Kaewtrakulpong, P. Thungsuk, Corrosion-
source location by an FPGA-PC based acoustic-emission system, IEEE TENCON,
Chiangmai, Thailand, 2004.
[41] N. Saenkhum, A. Prateepasen, P. Kaewtrakulpong, Classification of corrosion
detected by AE signal, IMECE, Washington, DC, 2003.
[42] A. Prateepasen, P. Kaewtrakulpong, C. Jirarungsatean, Semi-parametric
learning for classification of pitting corrosion detected by acoustic emission,
J. Key Eng. Mater. 321–323 (2006) 549–552.
[43] C. Jomdecha, A. Prateepasen, P. Kaewtrakulpong, A study on source location
using an acoustic emission system on various types of corrosion in industry,
NDT&E Int. 40 (2007) 584–593.
[44] H. Herbert, R. Winston, Corrosion and Corrosion Control, third ed., John Wiley
& Sons (SEA) Pte. Ltd., New York, 1991, pp. 96–99.