The stress corrosion cracking (SCC) susceptibility in NaCl, CaCl2, and MgCl2 of 18 stainless steels and nickel-base alloys was examined in the annealed or cold worked conditions to temperatures including 232°C (450°F). The alloys can be grouped as follows:

Most resistant: 1. HASTELLOY alloys B and B-2, and CABOT alloy Nos. 600 and 200 
 2. HASTELLOY alloys C-276 and C-4 
 3. HASTELLOY alloy G-3 
 4. CABOT alloy Nos. 718 and 800 and INCOLOY alloy 825 
 5. Alloys 29-4 and 29-4-2, E-BRITE 26-1 alloy, and FERRALIUM alloy 255 
Least Resistant: 6. SANICRO alloy 28, HASTELLOY alloy M-532, UDDEHOLM alloy 904L, and Carpenter 20CB-3 alloy 
Most resistant: 1. HASTELLOY alloys B and B-2, and CABOT alloy Nos. 600 and 200 
 2. HASTELLOY alloys C-276 and C-4 
 3. HASTELLOY alloy G-3 
 4. CABOT alloy Nos. 718 and 800 and INCOLOY alloy 825 
 5. Alloys 29-4 and 29-4-2, E-BRITE 26-1 alloy, and FERRALIUM alloy 255 
Least Resistant: 6. SANICRO alloy 28, HASTELLOY alloy M-532, UDDEHOLM alloy 904L, and Carpenter 20CB-3 alloy 
View Large

Increasing the temperature of the environments beyond the boiling points increased the severity, and previously reported immune alloys exhibited SCC. Cations played an important role in determining environmental severity for nickel-base alloys, with MgCl2 being the most severe and CaCl2 the least severe. The ferritic stainless steels generally failed in all three environments above a critical temperature, with little dependence on the cation in solution. Cold work had little effect on SCC susceptibility.

Subject
Test methods, Stainless alloys, Nickel based alloys, Molybdenum alloys, Sodium chloride, Inspection, Nickel content, Stainless steel, Cracking, Alloys, Ferritic stainless steel, Stress corrosion cracking, Chloride stress corrosion cracking
© 1982 Association for Materials Protection and Performance (AMPP). All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) without the prior written permission of AMPP. Positions and opinions advanced in this work are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of AMPP. Responsibility for the content of the work lies solely with the author(s).
1982
Association for Materials Protection and Performance (AMPP)
You do not currently have access to this content.