d

lle

on
tro

nc

py

co
if

in
t

pr

ed

Corrosion Rate Assessment

te
d

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

Revision Status

Issue/Rev

Date

Change Requests in this issue

First Issue of Document

if
pr
in

Note: Any comments or suggestions relating to this document should be passed to the custodian to allow
full consideration at the time of the next review of this technical work instruction.

16/07/12

Departmental name change from Integrity Services to Integrity Engineering Services ,Change in
copyright date to 2012, , Minor amendments 4.4.3

22/07/13

MS20-02-150 reference removed use MS20-02-185 added corrosion mechanisms section 4.3. add
theoretical starting point at 4.5

nc

on

tro

lle

co

py

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 2 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

Identify Types of
Corrosion for
Assessment

Perform Corrosion
Assessment
Corrosion Rate
Determination

Perform Corrosion
Assessment
Remaining Life
Determination

Peer Review

if
pr
in

Agree Scope of Work

and Responsibilities

te
d

Process Flowchart

Reporting

py

1. Application

co

This procedure is for use by all Lloyds Register EMEA (LR) staff who undertake corrosion rate predictions
on behalf of Energy Business Stream clients.
This procedure is applicable when there is a requirement to perform a corrosion rate assessment,
including determination of corrosion mechanisms, corrosion rate determination and remaining life
determination.

2. Objective

This procedure provides a consistent and auditable methodology to perform a corrosion rate assessment.

lle

3. Responsibilities

nc

on

tro

The Project Manager shall be responsible for the overall management of the corrosion rate assessment
work scope.
An appropriately authorised engineer (i.e. typically a Corrosion Engineer) shall be responsible for
obtaining all relevant information from client/project team, performing the corrosion rate assessment and
reporting any areas of concern with suitable recommendations.
Any documentation that is to be issued to the client shall be subject to peer review by an appropriately
authorised engineer, i.e. typically a Senior Corrosion Engineer.
The main responsibilities and work flow pertaining to the corrosion rate assessment work scope is
presented in the RACI chart below.

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 3 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

3. Obtain Process Information

4. Obtain Materials Information

te
d

Peer Reviewer

Client

if
pr
in

co

2. Obtain Equipment/Pipework
Register, details, etc.

py

1. Project Work Request

Senior/Corrosion Engineer

Project Manager

Work Instruction
Corrosion Rate Assessment
MS20-02-158

ITL/Senior/Project Engineer

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

PWR to be raised by Project

Manager for corrosion rate
assessment
Pipework and equipment lists,
mechanical details, drawings,
etc. should be obtained from
client or project team.

Process stream data should be

obtained from client or project
team.

Materials data, GA drawings,

piping specifications etc. should
be obtained from client or
project team.
Determine corrosion rates using
accepted models or pertinent
technical literature.
Determine remaining life in
accordance with LR procedures,
if required.

6. Perform corrosion assessment remaining life determination

Prepare a written report

detailing methodology,
assumptions, conclusions,
recommendations, etc.

Report to be peer reviewed by

an engineer with an appropriate
competency/ authorisation
category.
Deliver report either directly to
client or via the LR project team,
as appropriate.

tro

lle

5. Perform corrosion assessment corrosion rate determination

on

7. Reporting

nc

8. Peer Review

9. Delivery

August 2013

Responsible

Accountable

Consulted

Informed

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 4 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

te
d

4. Method
4.1 General

if
pr
in

Corrosion rate assessments are most commonly required to support the activities of a semi quantitative
corrosion risk assessment as described in LR work procedure MS20-02-185.
Any deviation(s) from this procedure must have written authorisation from the Project Manager. A
record of all changes must be held in the appropriate Project Reference File. Any changes specifically
required by the client must be noted as such.

4.2 The Workscope

co

py

The scope of the activity is to be clearly identified by the Project Manager at the beginning of the project.
It is important that the scope is fully understood by members of the project team.
Where the work is requested directly by a client (e.g. as consultancy), the scope of work must be agreed
in writing.
The workscope will typically involve predicting corrosion rates and possibly a remaining life for an item, a
group of items or an entire process facility. This type of work is most commonly associated with
hydrocarbon process systems and the utilities systems, including vendor packages.
The following sections describe the steps required to perform a corrosion rate assessment and are
presented in the order in which they should be performed.

4.3 Identification of Corrosion Mechanisms

tro

lle

Prior to prediction of corrosion rates and determination of remaining life it is necessary to define the likely
corrosion mechanisms e.g. CO2, H2S etc. along with the type of corrosion:
General,
Pitting,
Crevice,
Galvanic,
Environment induced cracking,
Intergranular,

on

Of the above only General Corrosion and Pitting are measureable from inspection data and the rate
predicted.
This information can be used to identify inspection requirements upon completion of the assessment and
may assist the project team, client and OIE's in subsequent decision-making.

General corrosion

4.3.2

Pitting

nc

4.3.1

Corrosion is a chemical reaction between the metal and its environment, Corrosion returns the
metal to its combined state in chemical compounds that are similar or even identical to the
minerals from which the metals were extracted. This is normally the preferred type of corrosion
because it is predictable.

Pitting or localised attack in an otherwise resistant surface produces pitting, the pit may be deep,
shallow or undercutting. Pitting share the same mechanism as crevice corrosion.

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 5 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

4.3.3

Crevice

4.3.4

Galvanic

4.3.5

Environment induced cracking

4.3.6

Intergranular

if
pr
in

te
d

A crevice shields part of the surface, enhancing the formation of differential aeration and
chloride concentration cells, both play a large role in the initiation and propagation of crevice
corrosion as they do in pitting.

Galvanic is where two dissimilar metals are coupled and one corrodes while the other is
protected

co

py

There are three related but different types, Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC), Corrosion Fatigue
Cracking (CFC) and Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC).
SCC normally occurs in alloys, stainless steels are susceptible to hot chlorides, brass in ammonia
solutions and carbon steel in Nitrates.
CFC occurs under cyclic stress in a corrosive environment
HIC is caused by relatively low levels of hydrogen diffusing into alloy lattice when hydrogen
evolves during corrosion, electro plating cleaning or pickling or cathodic protection. Molecular
hydrogen gas can nucleate, generating sufficient internal pressure to deform and rupture metal
locally

lle

Grain boundaries or adjacent regions become less corrosion resistant and preferential corrosion
can be severe enough to drop grains out of the surface causing corrosion

4.4 Corrosion Rate Determination

on

tro

This section details the method to be followed when determining the corrosion rate prediction model to
be used. If the scope of work is large it is advisable to use an MS Access database to hold the asset
inventory and data relating to mechanical properties, process fluids, operating conditions, etc. It is usually
also appropriate to use the database to perform the relevant assessment calculations, i.e. in accordance
with the methods described in the applicable standards, published papers or prediction models. The use
of MS Access allows the assessment algorithms to be uniformly applied across all components in the
scope of work and allows updates to be made efficiently.

CO2 Corrosion

4.4.2

O2 Corrosion

nc

4.4.1

There are various models available for prediction of CO2 corrosion rates. The most widely
accepted model for CO2 corrosion rate predictions is that given by de Waard and Lotz (1) whilst
a second model by de Waard, et al. (2), incorporates the effects of flow. BPs Cassandra
spreadsheet (3) provides a freely-available tool that is based on this model but which incorporates
a number of industry accepted modifications/improvements.
An alternative model is provided by Norsok as described in their standard M-506 (4). Norsok
freely provides an M-506 MS Excel spreadsheet and guidance documents that can be
downloaded from their website.

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 6 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

nc

on

tro

lle

co

py

if
pr
in

te
d

Oxygen corrosion rates can be predicted using the Oldfield, Swales and Todd prediction model
(0). The model is based on the mass transfer effect of oxygen to the substrate surface in largelydeoxygenated waters (e.g. offshore water injection systems). As such, it is not applicable to
seawater systems where the oxygen content is high. A second model by Berger & Hau (0) is also
available and gives more realistic corrosion rate predictions for fluids which contain high
concentrations of oxygen.

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 7 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

H2S Corrosion

4.4.4

Other Forms of Corrosion

te
d

4.4.3

py

if
pr
in

The Cassandra model allows the user to alter the calculated corrosion rate to account for the
presence of H2S in the fluid. The BP guidance document which accompanies the model estimates
the corrosivity of 1 mol% H2S to be comparable to 0.01 mol% CO2. In the spreadsheet, the
effect is incorporated by adding the partial pressure H2S to the partial pressure CO2 in the
calculation of pH (i.e. using the XLpH add-in) within the model. This approach typically results in
H2S having a negligible effect on the overall corrosion rate. The use of Cassandra is therefore
not recommended by LR for modelling CO2/ H2S systems.
Nei et al. 2009 (7) provide a downloadable prediction model (8) which takes account of the
presence of H2S and the FeS scale that is formed on the surface of the metal. The model
identifies that the diffusion of H2S through the protective scale does not stop once the scale is
formed and that corrosion of the substrate will continue but is affected by the mass transfer of
H2S through the scale. This model provides predictive rates for CO2 and organic acid (e.g. acetic
acid, etc.) corrosion and identifies how the rate will be affected (either positively and negatively)
by the concentration of H2S in the fluid.

lle

co

Where corrosion is expected as a result of mechanisms other than CO2 and/or H2S, it is important
to identify all corrosive species which may be present in the fluids. This will generally be achieved
by discussion with the client, examination of the heat and mass balances, review of sampling
reports/databases, etc.
Where the corrosive species are not covered by the prediction models discussed above, the client
may be able to provide guidance regarding published papers, assessment methodologies, etc.
that are relevant to the specific process/conditions on their facility. Alternatively, a literature
search should be performed to identify other relevant prediction models or general guidance on
expected corrosion rates, i.e. based on the material types, fluids, etc. Typical sources of such
information include ASM Handbooks, NACE conference papers and industry
standards/recommended practices, e.g. API 581 contains clear guidance on how to predict
corrosion rates in amine systems.

tro

4.5 Validation of Predicted Rates

nc

on

Where possible, corrosion rate predictions should be validated by comparison with measured corrosion
rates, i.e. by review of existing inspection data, failure history, etc. In some cases, it may be appropriate to
draw upon historical performance data from other assets. The validation of predicted corrosion rates is
particularly valuable where the calculations have been made using methodologies that are not widely
known, not supported by extensively-documented laboratory/field testing, etc.
Assuming that the starting point is theoretical, you need to know the sample size and assign expected
corrosion rates for that material and service.

4.6 Remaining Life Determination

If required, the remaining life can be calculated using the predicted corrosion rate, in accordance with the
requirements outlined in MS20-02-185 and the described in API 510 (0) and API 570 (0).
Remaining life should be calculated from the date on which the wall thickness was measured (or from the
commissioning date, if the nominal wall thickness is used in the absence of inspection data. Where
appropriate, the remaining life may be presented to reflect the date of the report. In all cases, the report
should clearly state the basis upon which the remaining life was calculated.

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 8 of 9

Corrosion Rate Assessment

te
d

Doc Number MS20-02-158 Rev 2

4.7 Reporting & Peer Review

if
pr
in

Reports shall be produced in a timely manner and reviewed by an appropriately competent engineer.
Dependent on the extent of the scope of work, this peer review shall include either a sample or a full
review of the input data, assessment methodology and results.
The reporting style will be dependant on the scope of work and client requirements but will in general
contain the input data, description of methodology followed and the results of the assessment, i.e.
corrosion rates and possibly the remaining life.

5. References

co

py

C. de Waard and U. Lotz, Prediction of CO2 Corrosion of Carbon Steel, Paper No. 69, NACE
Corrosion 93, 1993.
C. de Waard, U. Lotz and A. Dugstad, Influence of Liquid Flow Velocity on CO2 Corrosion: A SemiEmpirical Model, Paper No. 128, NACE Corrosion 95, 1995.
A. Petersen, R. Chapman and B. Hedges, Corrosion Prediction with Cassandra, BP Upstream
Technology Group, Sunbury, Report No. S/UTG/013/03, 2003. (G:\Groups\ETG\Corrosion\Cassandra
training)
NORSOK Standard M-506, CO2 Corrosion Rate Calculation Model, rev. 02, June 2005
Oldfield, J.W., Swales, G.L. and Todd, B. (1981). Corrosion of Metals in Deaerated Seawater, paper
presented at NACE Middle East Corrosion Conference, Bahrain.
Berger, F.P. and Hau, K.-F. (1977). Int. J. Heat and Mass Transfer, 20, 11851199.
An open source mechanistic model for CO2/H2S corrosion of carbon steel, Srdjan Nei, Hui Li, Jing Huang
and Dusan Sormaz, NACE paper 09572, 2009

http://www.corrosioncenter.ohiou.edu/freecorp

th

nc

on

tro

lle

API 510, Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration, 9
Edition, American Petroleum Institute, 2006
rd
API 570, Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Repair, and Alteration of Piping Systems, 3
Edition, American Petroleum Institute, 2009

August 2013

Lloyd's Register AIS

Page 9 of 9