×
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

Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?
3

Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

(OP)
Hello,
I have a galvanic/stress corrosion question for some of you material guru's if you don't mind.

The situation is that we have two 316 SST tubes are to be brazed together into another subassembly. Our vendor used a spot weld technique to keep the tubes together during the braze process. The wall thickness of the tubes is a minimum of .0065" and a maximum of .0085".

The first issue that QA wrote up was that there is material removed from the stainless steel tubes due to the process. I am guessing that in a worst case, an estimated .003" was removed or "flashed" by the spot weld process.

The second issue was found on closer observation under a microscope that there was another metal that was fused into the stainless steel. I am waiting for a response from the vendor as to the material but would assume it is a copper alloy.

The part is a sensor that is used in a jet fuel or polyalphoolephin (PAO) application. At times, there could be small amounts of water in the fuel that range from a temperature of -40°F to 135°F.

In looking at the Anodic index for copper (0.35 Volt) and that for 18% chromium type corrosion resistant steels which is 316 (0.50 Volt) the difference is 0.15 Volt which from what I am reading, is acceptable for harsh environments which state the there should not be more than .015 Volt difference. Sited from http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Definitions/galva...

The problem is that due to the spot welding process, not only is material removed making the tube wall thinner but also the fused material has gone through the passivation layer.

My concern is that although theoretically the copper alloy and the 316 stainless are compatable from a numbers and chart look up point of view, that due to the spot weld fusing the copper into the 316 pass the passivation layer that further problems such as a galvanic or stress corrosion issue will develop over time. Most undesireable in a fuel situation.

My question:
1. Is there a galvanic/stress corrosion concern?

Your response in helping me figure this out would be most appreciated.

Trey

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

(OP)
Typo:
...harsh environments which state the there should not be more than 0.15 Volt difference. Sited from http://www.corrosion-doctors.org/Definitions/galva...

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

The copper may have caused liquid metal embrittlement of the material.
Reject it and start over.
The grain boundaries in that area may only be together mechanically and not truly bonded.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

(OP)
Thank you for your reply EdStainless. Most appreciated.

Regards,

Trey

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

(OP)
Hi EdStainless,
I have one more question if you would.

Is it possible for the spotweld itself to cause liquid metal embrittlement as well of the material? If so, I will need to let our vendor know and probably place a note on the drawing stating that spot welding is prohibited.

Thanks,

Trey

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

The tiny amount of the braze won't cause galvanic corrosion- its the ratio of anode area (copper) to cathode area (316) that is the issue. The lower the better. Yours (depending on the tube length) could be close to zero depending on how big the water bubble is (and the issue is how it long it sits right on the join) .

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

If the copper contains any zinc by alloy, this will cause LME of austenitic stainless steel.

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

Both zinc and copper cause liquid metal embrittlement of stainless steels. If either shows up in the analysis, scrap and start over if cracking cannot be tolerated.

RE: Copper melted into 316 SST Tube_.094 OD and .078 ID. Galvanic/Stress Corrosion issue or not?

Cu on SS will cause localized corrosion also, not really galvanic but it allows for a local change in the repassivation that will result in corrosion.

I sure don't like spot welding on SS with Cu (or Cu bearing) tools. It is just too much of a risk.
I have seen SS tubes that hit the head of a brass bolt develop LME when they were annealed.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

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