Research Papers: Friction and Wear

Slurry Erosion of Pipeline Steel: Effect of Velocity and Microstructure

[+] Author and Article Information
Tahrim Alam, Md. Aminul Islam, Zoheir N. Farhat

Department of Process Engineering and
Applied Science,
Materials Engineering Program,
Dalhousie University,
Halifax, NS B3J 2X4 Canada

Contributed by the Tribology Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF TRIBOLOGY. Manuscript received July 3, 2015; final manuscript received September 2, 2015; published online November 4, 2015. Assoc. Editor: George K. Nikas.

J. Tribol 138(2), 021604 (Nov 04, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: TRIB-15-1240; doi: 10.1115/1.4031599 History: Received July 03, 2015; Revised September 02, 2015

Pipelines are the most flexible, economic, and convenient way for oil and gas transportation. Material degradation by slurry erosion is a common feature in oil transmission pipeline. In the present work, slurry erosion of AISI 1018, AISI 1080, API X42, and API X70 steels is investigated in terms of slurry velocity and target material microstructure. The slurry velocity and impact angle employed were 0.2, 0.29, 0.36, and 0.43 m s−1 and 90 deg, respectively. It is found that erosion rate increases with increasing slurry velocity. Scanning electron microscopy was employed to investigate the eroded surface and subsurface of the steels. Plastic deformation, microcutting, and fracture are identified as dominant erosion mechanisms. Pearlitic microstructure exhibits superior erosion resistance compared to ferrite depending upon slurry velocity and microstructural orientation.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Optical micrograph of (a) AISI 1018, (b) AISI 1080, (c) API X42, and (d) API X70 steels

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic diagram of the slurry erosion tester showing specimen holder, slurry flow meter, slurry inlet, and air flow meter

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Air jet dynamic pressure versus slurry velocity (1 wt. % Al2O3)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Weight loss versus time for AISI 1018, AISI 1080, API X42, and API X70 steel at 0.43 m s−1 slurry velocity and normal impact angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Normalized erosion rate versus slurry velocity for AISI 1018, AISI 1080, API X42, and API X70 steel at normal impact angles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

SEM micrograph of steel samples after slurry erosion: (a) formation of platelets due to plastic deformation (AISI 1018, 0.20 m s−1), (b) plastic deformation (API X70, 0.20 m s−1), (c) initiation of fracture at deformed platelets (API X70, 0.29 m s−1), (d) detachment of deformed platelets (API X70, 0.29 m s−1), (e) microcutting (API X70, 0.36 m s−1), (f) embedded abrasive particle (API X42, 0.36 m s−1), (g) crack propagation in embedded particle (API X42, 0.43 m s−1), and (h) removal of embedded particle (API X42, 0.43 m s−1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

SEM close-up image of AISI 1018 steel: (a) uniform deformation due to fluid impact, (b) flattened pearlite, (c) localized deformation of ferrite, (d) localized deformation of pearlite, (e) heavy deformation of cementite lamellae due to particle impact, and (f) deformation of cementite lamellae due to penetration of abrasive particle along the interface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

SEM micrograph of the cross section of AISI 1018 steel: (a) and (b) different erosion responses of ferrite and pearlite, (c) and (d) accumulation of deformed material in ferrite, (e) abrasive particle strikes pearlitic phase, and the cross section of AISI 1080 steel: (f) fracture and deformation of cementite lamellae due to abrasive particle impact

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Effect of rebound particle on slurry erosion mechanism: (a) abrasive particle impacts on the sample surface at 90 deg angle, (b) plastic deformation and formation of vulnerable lip due to impact of abrasive particle impact and rebound abrasive particle collides with new incoming abrasive particle, (c) deflection of abrasive particle after collision, (d) deflected abrasive particle strikes sample surface at acute angle and material is removed through microcutting, and (e) and (f) repeated impact by the abrasive particle causes fracture and removed vulnerable lips




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In