acom No.

3-95

Stainless Steel for High Pressure Piping

in SWRO Plants.
Are there any Options?
by
Johan Nordstrm and Jan Olsson
Avesta Sheffield AB, R&D, S-774 80 Avesta, Sweden

Summary
Service experience from 27 seawater
reverse osmosis (SWRO) plants
confirms that there is an evident risk
of corrosion if wrong steel grade is
used for the high pressure piping.
Neither 316L nor 317L possesses
sufficient corrosion resistance. Not
even highly alloyed grades like 2205
and 904L show reliable service
performance. However, no corrosion
has been reported for 254 SMO,
which has been used in 16 full
strength SWRO plants and several
plants using high salinity brackish
water.

Are stainless steels

really stainless?
Stainless steels are not fundamentally
noble in the same way as gold, for
instance. They owe their corrosion
resistance to passivity, i.e. their
surfaces react with oxygen to form a
thin, invisible layer of oxide that
prevents corrosion. They are said to
be passivated, in the same way as
aluminium and titanium. This oxide
film, or passive film, forms spontaneously in any environment with a
sufficient amount of oxidant, provided that the chromium content of
the steel is sufficiently high.
Corrosion will occur if the passive
film should break down, either partially or entirely. In saline environments localized breakdown of the
passive film is the main problem,
which gives rise to local corrosion
attacks such as pitting and crevice
corrosion.
Pitting is characterized by small,
localized areas of attack on the
surface. The appearance on the

surface is often not alarming but the

pits can easily grow deep at a high
rate. Also the amount of crevice
corrosion can be under-estimated
since the attacks are hidden inside
crevices. If a component contains
crevices, either due to its design or
caused by incrustation, corrosion
attacks will often occur inside the
crevices before pitting takes place
on free surfaces.
High halide concentrations, low pH
and oxidizing substances in the
solution in contact with the stainless
steel are factors that promote pitting
as well as crevice corrosion. Saline
water contains large amounts of
halides in the form of chlorides, and
to avoid biofouling the water is
sometimes chlorinated which will
create a highly oxidizing environment.
The conditions are quite favourable
for corrosion to occur. However, the
number of steel grades included
under the designation stainless steel
is great. Furthermore, the resistance to
corrosion varies considerably between different grades, so there are
both stainless grades that corrode
heavily in saline environments and
those that are fully resistant.

Steel composition
in relation to
corrosion resistance
The resistance of a steel, austenitic
or ferritic-austenitic, to pitting and
crevice corrosion is enhanced by
increasing contents of chromium,
molybdenum, and nitrogen. A rough
estimation of the resistance of a steel
to pitting and crevice corrosion can
be obtained by assigning different
weighting factors to these three most
important alloying elements when
calculating a so called Pitting Resistance Equivalent (PRE) factor. The
following formula is often used (1):
PRE = %Cr + 3.3 x %Mo + 30 x %N
The PRE-factor can be used as an
indication of what pitting and crevice
corrosion resistance a steel with a
certain composition can be expected
to have, provided the steel has been
manufactured, heat treated and
conditioned in a proper way. The
typical chemical compositions and
corresponding PRE values of some
commonly used stainless steels are
shown in Table 1.

Table 1.
Typical chemical compositions and PRE values for various steel grades.
Steel designations
Avesta Sheffield

ASTM

Typical alloying content, weight %

C
Cr
Ni
Mo

17-11-2L
18-14-3L
2205
904L
254 SMO
654 SMO

316L
317L
S31803
N08904
S31254
S32654

0.02
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01

0.06
0.08
0.15
0.06
0.20
0.50

17
18.5
22
20
20
24

11.5
13.5
5.5
25
18
22

2.2
3.2
3
4.5
6.1
7.3

254 SMO and 654 SMO are registered trademarks of Avesta Sheffield AB.

PRE
26
31
36
37
46
63

acom No. 3-95

Laboratory ranking
of steel grades
A calculated PRE value will give an
indication of the corrosion resistance,
but the ranking of different steel
grades in a specific environment is
best carried out by some form of
corrosion testing. Crevice corrosion is
often the main problem in SWRO
plants but it might be difficult to
reproduce crevice conditions when
performing crevice corrosion tests, so
pitting tests are often used instead.
One commonly used pitting corrosion test is to measure the lowest
temperature, CPT or critical pitting
temperature, at which pitting occurs
on the steel surface after 24 hours of
exposure to 6% FeCl3. Another way of
settling a CPT value is from polarization curves plotted for a series of
temperatures at which the steel is
exposed to 1M NaCI. By utilizing a
special electrochemical cellthe
Avesta Pitting Celldisturbing effects
from simultaneous crevice corrosion
are eliminated (2). Results from both
tests are compared to PRE values in
Table 2. The table illustrates that a
high PRE factor usually accounts for
good results in corrosion tests. However, the corrosion resistance of the
different steel grades differs so much
that all of them cannot be compared
in the same test. The CPT for 316L is
just above the freezing point of the
ferric chloride solution while the best
grade, 654 SMO, resists the highest
obtainable temperatures in both test
methods.
Since steels with high resistance to
pitting also have a high resistance to
crevice corrosion, the same ranking is
usually obtained in pitting tests and
crevice corrosion tests. However, the
critical temperatures are consistently
lower for crevice corrosion.
Table 2.
Resistance to pitting, typical values.
Steel grades PRE CPT in 6% CPT in 1M
FeCI3, C NaCI, C
316L
26
<5
15
317L
31
35
40
2205
36
40
50
904L
37
40
60
_
254 SMO
46
75
>90
654 SMO
63
>100
>95

Service experience
The number of desalination plants
erected each year has been quite
large for several decades, but the
SWRO-share has not been of any
significance until the eighties. A
consequence is that only a small
number of plants can show long term
service experiences.
In the early plants the high pressure parts were made of 316L. One
example is the Jeddah plant built in
1978, being the first major size
SWRO plant. But 316L turned out to
corrode and give rise to excessive
mainenance (3). Figure 1 shows one
of the 316L pipes that suffered severe crevice corrosion. The same
experience was made at other
plants, e.g. Doha (4), Ghar Lapsi,
Tigne, and Cirkewwa (5). Table 3
shows service experiences from high
pressure piping at 27 plants out of
which six show corrosion of 316L,

Figure 1.
Crevice corrosion of 316L pipe.

Table 3.
High pressure piping service experience.
Plant, installation year
Bahrain, Al Dur, -89
Gibraltar, Glen Rocky, -88
Great Britain, Eurotunnel, -89
Kuwait, Doha, -81
, -84
Malta, Ghar Lapsi, -82, -90
, Tigne, -86, -90
, Cirkewwa, -88, -91
, Pembroke, -91
Oman, Masirah, -85
Saudi Arabia, Jeddah, -78
, Al Birk, -83
, Tanajib, -83
, Umm Lujj, -86
, Safaniyah, -86
, Jeddah 1, -89
, Duba, -89
, HaqI, -89
Spain, Galdar-Agaete, -89
, Lanzarote II, -86, -89
, Inalsa I, -90
, Lanzarote III, -91
, Agragua, -91
, Corralejo, -93
, Gran Tarajal, -93
, Gando, -93
USA, Gaviota, -88

Corrosion
2205
2205
316L
904L
316L
316L
316L

No corrosion
904L

254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO

316L
316L
317LN
317L
254 SMO
254 SMO
317L
317L
316L

254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO
254 SMO

Reference
(8)
(8)
(8)
(4)
(9)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(3)
(6)
(7)
(6)
(7)
(6)
(6)
(6)
(11)
(12)

(13)

acom No. 3-95

while only one plant, Al Birk, reports

good results with the same grade (6).
For some other plants 317L was
chosen, but also this grade suffered
corrosion in several cases, Tanajib (7),
Umm Lujj, and HaqI (6). Corrosion
problems are reported even from
plants with piping systems made of
high-alloyed grades like 2205 and
904L (8, 9). But, as can be seen in
Table 3, one installation of 904L is
found to be working fine.
The most highly alloyed grade used
in this kind of equipment, 254 SMO,
has been used in 16 plants and in no
case corrosion has been reported.
Since the actual corrosion problems
encountered when using grades like
316L, 317L, and even 2205 and 904L,
have not been realized until during
the second part of the eighties, most
of the 254 SMO installations have
been made during the last years.
However, 254 SMO has been used
for this type of equipment since 1984
when the Ras Abu Jarjur RO plant
was taken into service. Although the
feed is not seawater, it still contains
more than 13,000 ppm TDS of which
6,700 ppm are chlorides. High
pressure piping, well pumps column
pipe, and micro-guard filters were
made of this grade and the performance was reported as excellent
at the desalination conference in
Cannes 1987 (10). The plant has
been operating for nine years now
and no corrosion has been reported
for the components of 254 SMO.
Stainless steels are mainly used for
the high pressure piping, but the
mico-guard filters at Ras Abu Jarjur,
Figure 2, is one example of other
equipment in which 254 SMO has
been utilized. Another successful
application is brine lines at GaldarAgaete (11).
A Danish manufacturer of small ROunits experienced crevice corrosion
on 904L, but has successfully used
254 SMO since 1985 in more than
10 plants.

Figure 2.
Micro-guard filters of 254 SMO.

Conclusions
As can be predicted, to some extent
from the chemical composition of
different steel grades, but mainly from
corrosion testing in high chloride
environment, the different steel grades
have different resistance to corrosion
when applied in practical SWRO
service.
Neither 316L nor 317L possesses
sufficient corrosion resistance in
practical SWRO service. Out of
eleven known plants using 316L or
317L piping, good experiences are
reported only from two.
Not even highly alloyed grades like
2205 and 904L show reliable service
performance since corrosion failures
are reported from several plants using
these grades.
No corrosion at all has been
reported for 254 SMO, which has
been used in 16 full strength SWRO
plants and at least as many plants
using high salinity brackish water.
All these plants together represent
an extensive number of years of
successful service experiences.
Based on laboratory testing, the use
of 654 SMO can be expected to
increase the safety margin above all
requirements.
9

acom No. 3-95

References
1. G. Herbsleb, Werkstoffe und Korrosion, 33
(1982), 334.
2. R. Qvarfort and E. Alfonsson, An improved
cell for electrochemical pitting corrosion
testing. Presented at the 11th Scandinavian
Corrosion Congress, Stavanger, (1989),
article F-79.
3. A.M. Hassan, S. AI-Jarrah, T. AI-Lohibi, A.
AI-Hamdan, L.M. Bekheet, and M. AI-Amri,
Performance evaluation of SWCC SWRO
plants, Desalination, 74 (1989), 37.
4. J. Carew, M. Abdel-Jawad, A. Julka, and Y.
AI-Wazzan, Performance of materials used
in seawater reverse osmosis plants,
Desalination, 74 (1989), 85.
5. Polymetrics, personal communication.
6. A.M. Hassan, A.M. AI-Abanmy M. AlThobiety, T. AI-Lohabi, I AI-Masudi, A.A. AlGrier, L.M. Bakheet, M.M.I. Amri, and K.
Aryah, Performance evaluation of SWCC
SWRO plants, Desalination and Water
Reuse, Washington DC 1991, Vol. 1.
7. Aramco, personal communication.
8. Weir Westgarth, personal communication.
9. A. Abu-Safiah, Material selection for the
high pressure section of seawater RO
plants, Desalination, 84 (1991), 279-308.
10.M. AI-Arrayedh, B. Ericsson, M.A. Saad,
and H. Yoshioka, Reverse osmosis
desalination plant, Ra's Abu Jarjur, State of
BahrainTwo years operational experience
for the 46,000 m3/day RO plant, Desalination, 65 (1987), 197.
11.J.F. Henriquez, J. Bonet, and J. Etxaniz,
Galdar-Agaete seawater desalination
plant construction and one year operational experience for the 3 500 m3/day
R. O. plant. Desalination, 82 (1991),
71-106.
12.J.M. Sanchez and J.M. Garcia, Experiments
on the design, installation and operation of
desalination plants by O.I. - Inalsa I,
Desalination, 82 (1991), 119-130.
13.Hydranautics, personal communication.

This paper is a slightly revised version

of a paper originally published in
Desalination, 97 (1994) 213-220,
Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam,
Netherlands

10

acom No. 3-95

Although Avesta Sheffield has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this publication, neither it nor any contributor can accept any legal
responsibility whatsoever for errors or omissions or information found to be misleading or any opinions or advice given.

11

acom is distributed free of charge to

persons actively involved in process
industry development and other areas
where stainless steels are important.

acom appears four times a year, and

we welcome applications for addition
to the mailing list from all interested
parties.

Name: ____________________________________________________________________
Please type or write legibly.
Company
Position: ___________________________

activity: ______________________________

Company: _________________________________________________________________
Mailing address: ____________________________________________________________
Postcode/City: _____________________________________________________________
Country: __________________________________________________________________
Please, add my name to your mailing list
I have changed my address as shown above.
My previous label is enclosed.

acom No. 3-95

Avesta Sheffield AB (publ)

R&D
SE-77480 Avesta
Sweden
Tel.+46 (0)226 810 00
Telefax+46 (0)226 810 77

All rights reserved.

Comments and correspondence can be directed to Jan Olsson, Technical
Editor, Avesta Sheffield AB, R&D, S-774 80 Avesta, Sweden.
Tel. +46 (0)226 812 48. Telefax +46 (0)226 810 77.
ISSN 1101-0681