×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

PREN equation
3

PREN equation

PREN equation

(OP)
I have seen the formula for pitting resistance equivalent number (PREN) presented with different values of the multiplier for percent Nitrogen.  I have seen 13,16 and even 30 used.  Which is correct.  Also, Does anyone know where this formula was first presented?  Was it by ASTM, ASM, NACE?  Alot of literature on ss refers to it so it seems to be an accepted concept.  But where did it come from.  Thanks

RE: PREN equation

2
Somewhere I have seen the information you want - when I find the link again I shall post it. If I remember correctly, the formula is somehow related to the type of stainless steel it is being used for.

The general formula in use for duplex stainless is %Cr + 3.3(%Mo) + 16(%N). I have seen it with 1.5(%W) added in for super-duplex type alloys but this is rare.

RE: PREN equation

bruv has found some good references. The formula is more a useful correlation than a rule because it tends to over simplify.
I posted a FAQ on this site giving the mulitiplier if 16 for nitrogen because the latest technical papers used 16. But, clearly it is not correct for ferritic stainless steels, since nitrogen is essentially insoluble in ferrite and combines with chromium to LOWER corrosion resistance. Likewise the formula overlooks the complicated role of sulfur which is often present in stainless and has a notably negative effect. Titanium in small amounts can greatly increase corrosion resistance by combining with sulfur rendering the sulfides insoluble and unable to initiate pitting.
 Silicon, copper and nickel also have some beneficial effect.
 

RE: PREN equation

The origin of the PRE formula appears to date to 1982 - it's in the following reference: Duplex Stainless Steel Conference Proceedings, St Louis 1982, ed RA Lula, published by the ASM. ISBN 0-87170-166-9. Check pages 603-629. The authors were working with duplex alloys, and used 16 as the multiplying factor for N

McGuire - Do you think that small amount of Ti would have a similar effect in Ni-base alloys, for example cast Inconel 625 and Hastelloy C type alloys?

     Thanks

        Chris

RE: PREN equation

It would except that these alloys are usually very highly refined and contain diminishingly small amounts of sulfur. The same is true of duplex stainlesses, which are virtually impossible to hot roll if their sulfur exceeds 8 ppm.In this case titanium would tie up nitrogen and hurt pitting resistance.
 The effect is also dependent upon whether the sulfides are exposed on the surface. Usually they are removed by pickling or passivation before service. If fresh sulfides are exposed, as by surface abrasion, i.e. polishing, then they can promote pitting.
  This normally only happens for appearance-oriented applications, such as for appliances or architectural stuff.

RE: PREN equation

(OP)
My thanks to all for the helpful information.  The responses have put another question in my mind.

mcguire - Can polishing of electro-polishing (in order to obtain desired surface roughness)in 316L expose surface sulfides?

Also, I am looking for reference information that puts forth a maximum Chloride pppm that 316L and 304L can be used for.  I am trying to definitively prove to our operations department the negative effects of certain process changes.

Thanks in advance.

RE: PREN equation

Although electropolishing can and does remove metal and thus can expose sulfides, it will also remove the sulfides already exposed as well as those it exposes...net result is fewer exposed sulfides.
 As far as a maximum chloride level, let me refer you to the FAQ in this section. The maximum level of chlorides is a function of pH, temperature, alloying levels within the limits of the specification, surface condition and other anions and cations in the environment.
 If you can pin down all these variables, a permissible max on chlorides can be established for a given time span. I'm not sure I can do it, however.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources