4.5 Article

Pitting and Stress Corrosion Cracking Susceptibility of Nanostructured Al-Mg Alloys in Natural and Artificial Environments

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS ENGINEERING AND PERFORMANCE
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages 870-878

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11665-008-9215-7

Keywords

aluminum; corrosion testing; failure analysis; mechanical testing

Funding

  1. Office of Naval Research (ONR) [N00014-00-1-0153]
  2. NACE international seed [N000140210024]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The stress corrosion cracking (SCC) behavior of two developmental nanocrystalline 5083 alloys with varied composition and processing conditions was studied. The results were compared to a commercial aluminum AA 5083 (H111) alloy. The pitting densities, size and depths, and residual tensile strengths were measured after alternate immersion in artificial seawater and atmospheric exposure under different loading conditions. Optical and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with EDX was used to analyze the fracture surfaces of failed specimen after removal at selected intervals and tensile testing. One of the nanostructured Al-Mg alloys exhibited significantly superior pitting resistance when compared to conventional microstructured AA 5083. Under conditions where pitting corrosion showed up as local tunnels toward phase inclusions, transgranular cracking was observed, whereas under conditions when pitting corrosion evolved along grain boundaries, intergranular cracking inside the pit was observed. Pit initiation resistance of the nano alloys appears to be better than that of the conventional alloys. However, long-term pit propagation is a concern and warrants further study. The objective of this investigation was to obtain information regarding the role that ultra-fine microstructures play in their degradation in marine environments and to provide insight into the corrosion mechanisms and damage processes of these alloys.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available