The influence of the structural-mechanical state of the transit gas pipeline steel on the susceptibility to hydrogen embrittlement

Keywords

pipeline steel, microstructure, long-term operation, hydrogen charging regimes, hydrogen embrittlement mechanism.

Cite as

Zvirko О. І., Tsyrulnyk O. T., Krechkovska H. V., Hredil М. І., Nykyforchyn H. M., Venhryniuk О. І., and Tsybailo І. О. The influence of the structural-mechanical state of the transit gas pipeline steel on the susceptibility to hydrogen embrittlement. Physicochemical Mechanics of Materials. 2024. 60(1), 026-033.

https://doi.org/10.15407/pcmm2024.01.026

Abstract

Different modes of cathodic polarization of pipe steel specimens based on current den­sity, which determine its moderate and intense hydrogen charging, are substantiated. The hy­drogen embrittlement resistance of 17H1S steel in the as-delivered and post-opera­ted states was determined by the change in plasticity depending on the hydrogen charging intensity and the direction of cutting the specimens relative to the pipe axis. Unexploited steel is not prone to hydrogen embrittlement under moderate hydrogen charging, while exploited steel has shown this feature. The impor­tant role of non-metallic inclusions in the hydrogen embrittlement of steel, which depen­ded on its structural-mechanical and hydrogen charging conditions, was determined using metallographic and fractographic analyses. Under moderate hydrogen charging the intergranular embrittlement takes place while under in­tense transgranular embrittlement; the differences are due, obviously, to different mechanisms of transport of hydrogen absorbed by the metal.

References

1. Hanley E. S., Deane J., and Gallachóir B. Ó., “The role of hydrogen in low carbon energy futures – A review of existing perspectives,” Sust. Energ. Rev, 82, 3027-3045 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.10.034
2. Gondal I. A., “Hydrogen integration in power-to-gas networks,” J. Hydrogen Energy, 44, Is. 3, 1803-1815 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.164
3. M. A. Kappes, and T. Perez, “Hydrogen blending in existing natural gas transmission pipelines: a review of hydrogen embrittlement, governing codes, and life prediction methods,” Corros. Rev., 41, Is. 3, 319-347 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1515/corrrev-2022-0083
4. A. Saeedmanesh, M. A. Mac Kinnon, and J. Brouwer, “Hydrogen is essential for sustainability,” Electrochemistry, 12, 166-181 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coelec.2018.11.009
5. G. Pluvinage, L. Toth, and J. Capelle, “Effects of hydrogen addition on design, maintenance and surveillance of gas networks,” Processes, 9, Is. 7 (2021). Article number 1219. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9071219
6. A. Laureys, R. Depraetere, M. Cauwels, T. Depover, S. Hertelé, and K. Verbeken, “Use of existing steel pipeline infrastructure for gaseous hydrogen storage and transport: A review of factors affecting hydrogen induced degradation,” J. Nat. Gas Sci., 101 (2022). Article number 104534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2022.104534
7. A. Neacsa, C. N. Eparu, and D. B. Stoica, “Hydrogen-natural gas blending in distribution systems – An energy, economic, and environmental assessment,” Energies, 15, Is. 17, 1-26 (2022). Article number 6143. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15176143
8. J. Cao, “Effect of hydrogen embrittlement on the safety assessment of low-strength hydrogen transmission pipeline,” Eng. Fail. Anal., 156 (2024). Article number 107787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107787
9. J. Hoschke, M. F. W. Chowdhury, J. Venezuela, and A. Atrens, “A review of hydrogen embrittlement in gas transmission pipeline steels,” Corros. Rev., 41, Is. 3, 277-317 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1515/corrrev-2022-0052
10. A. Campari, F. Ustolin, A. Alvaro, and N. Paltrinieri, “A review on hydrogen embrittlement and risk-based inspection of hydrogen technologies,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 48, Is. 90, 35316-35346 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.293
11. I. Okipnyi, L Poberezhny, V. Zapukhliak, A. Hrytsanchuk, L. Poberezhna, A. Stanetsky, V. Kravchenko, and I. Rybitskyi, “Impact of long term operation on the reliability and durability of transit gas pipelines,” Strojnicky Casopis, 70, Is. 1, 115-126 (2020).
12. Y. Shinohara, J. Besson, and Y. Madi, “Anisotropic damage behavior in high-strength line pipe steels,” Int. J. Offshore Polar Eng., 22, Is. 1, 83-89 (2012).
13. T. A. Jack, R. Pourazizi, E. Ohaeri, J. Szpunar, J. Zhang, and J. Qu, “Investigation of the hydrogen-induced cracking behaviour of API 5L X65 pipeline steel,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 45, Is. 35, 17671-17684 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.04.211
14. B. Tekkaya, M. Dölz, and S. Münstermann, “Modeling of local hydrogen concentration on microscopic scale to characterize the influence of stress states and non-metallic inclusions in pipeline steels,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 50,Part A, 1274-1287 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.10.158
15. O. I. Zvirko, M. I. Hredil, O. T. Tsyrulnyk, O. Z. Student, and H. M. Nykyforchyn, “Mechanism of development of damages of low-strength pipe steel due to hydrogenation under operation,” Mater. Sci., 59, No. 3, 306-312 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11003-024-00778-7
16. O. I. Zvirko, M. I. Hredil, O. T. Tsyrulnyk, O. I. Venhryniuk, and H. M. Nykyforchyn, “A method forassessing the influence of gaseous hydrogen on corrodsion and hydrogenation of steels,” Mater. Sci., 59, No. 5, 524-531 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11003-024-00807-5
17. O. T. Tsyrulnyk, O. Z. Student, O. I. Zvirko, D. O. Demianchuk, and O. I. Venhryniuk, “Evaluation of hydrogen brittleness of operated pipe steel by J-integral method,” Mater. Sci., 59, No. 6, 694-701 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11003-024-00830-6
18. T. Depover, D. Pérez Escobar, E. Wallaert, Z. Zermout, and K. Verbeken, “Effect of hydrogen charging on the mechanical properties of advanced high strength steels,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 39, Is. 9, 4647-4656 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.12.190
19. M. L. Martin, and P. Sofronis, “Hydrogen-induced cracking and blistering in steels: A review,” J. Nat. Gas Eng., 101 (2022). Article number 104547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2022.104547
20. T. T. Nguyen, K.-O. Bae, P. Jaeyeong, S. H. Nahm, and U. B. Baek, “Damage associated with interactions between microstructural characteristics and hydrogen/methane gas mixtures of pipeline steels,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 47, Is. 73, 31499-31520 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.07.060
21. M. Koyama, M. Rohwerder, C. C. Tasan, A. Bashir, E. Akiyama, K. Takai, D Raabe, and K. Tsuzaki, “Recent progress in microstructural hydrogen mapping in steels: quantification, kinetic analysis, and multi-scale characterization,” Mater. Sci. Tech., 33, Is. 13, 1481-1496 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/02670836.2017.1299276
22. M. Dadfarnia, P. Sofronis, J. Brouwer, and S. Sosa, “Assessment of resistance to fatigue crack growth of natural gas line pipe steels carrying gas mixed with hydrogen,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 44, Is. 21, 10808-10822 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.02.216
23. M. S. Khoma, “Problems of fracture of metals in hydrogen-sulfide media,” Mater. Sci., 46, No. 2, 190-200 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11003-010-9277-1
24. V. Krechkovska, A. A. Vitovich, A. R. Dzyubyk, D. I. Kindratskyi, O. S. Lampitskyi, and L. I. Bohun, “Differences in structure and properties of the metal of the beam of bridge construction,” Mater. Sci., 59, No. 6, 720-726 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11003-024-00833-3
25. H. V. Krechkovs’ka, O. T. Tsyrul’nyk, and O. Z. Student, “In-service degradation of mechanical characteristics of pipe steels in gas mains,” Strength of Materials, 51, Is. 3, 406-417 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11223-019-00087-4
26. N. E. Nanninga, Y. S. Levy, E. S. Drexler, R. T. Condon, A. E. Stevenson, and A. J. Slifka, “Comparison of hydrogen embrittlement in three pipeline steels in high pressure gaseous hydrogen environments,” Corros. Sci., 59, 1-9 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2012.01.028
27. H. Nykyforchyn, O. Tsyrulnyk, O. Zvirko, and M. Hredil, “Role of hydrogen in operational degradation of pipeline steel,” Proc. Struct. Integrity, 28, 896-902 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2020.11.060
28. M. A. Stopher, P. Lang, E. Kozeschnik, and P. E. Rivera-Diaz-del-Castillo, “Modelling hydrogen migration and trapping in steels,” Mater. Des., 106, 205-215 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.05.051
29. G. S. Mogilny, V. N. Shyvaniuk, S. M. Teus, L. M. Ivaskevich, and V. G. Gavriljuk, “On a mechanism for enhanced hydrogen flux along grain boundaries in metals,” Acta Mater., 194, 516-521 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2020.05.005
30. A. Díaz, I. I. Cuesta, E. Martinez-Pañeda, and J. M. Alegre, “Analysis of hydrogen permeation tests considering two different modelling approaches for grain boundary trapping in iron,” Int. J. Fract., 223, 17-35 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-019-00411-8
31. A. Thomas, and J. A. Szpunar, “Hydrogen diffusion and trapping in X70 pipeline steel,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 45, Is. 3, 2390-2404 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.11.096