Systematic quantification of hydrogen in pipeline steel by atom probe tomography after ambient charging and transfer
Source abstract
Abstract
Atom probe tomography (APT) is a promising tool to measure the atomic-scale distribution of hydrogen in solid matter for the assessment of hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility of materials. However, the accuracy of such measurements resulting from ambient charging and transfer experiments needs to be established. In this work, APT quantification of hydrogen (H) and deuterium (D) in a typical X65 pipeline steel has been determined after ambient charging and transfer to ascertain the contribution of artifacts to the measured H/D signal. A series of experimental workflows related to sample preparation (electropolishing, focussed ion beam) and electrochemical charging conditions (different electrolytes and charging potentials) were explored for H/D measurement using APT. The results show that APT can be used to measure charged H/D with statistical confidence after ambient charging and transfer, that hydrogen ingress occurs during electropolishing, and using a more negative charging potential will introduce more H/D into the material.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Materials Characterization Techniques · Hydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals · Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Steels
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (87)
Show source-provided references
1. Tarhan, C. & Çil, M. A. A study on hydrogen, the clean energy of the future: Hydrogen storage methods. J. Energy Storage 40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.102676 (2021).10.1016/j.est.2021.102676 ↗
2. Briottet, L., Moro, I. & Lemoine, P. Quantifying the hydrogen embrittlement of pipeline steels for safety considerations. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 37, 17616–17623 (2012).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.05.143 ↗
3. Li, H. et al. Hydrogen in pipeline steels: recent advances in characterization and embrittlement mitigation. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 105, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2022.104709 (2022).10.1016/j.jngse.2022.104709 ↗
4. Timmerberg, S. & Kaltschmitt, M. Hydrogen from renewables: supply from North Africa to Central Europe as blend in existing pipelines – Potentials and costs. Appl. Energy 237, 795–809 (2019).10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.030 ↗
5. Robertson, I. M. et al. Hydrogen embrittlement understood. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 46, 2323–2341 (2015).10.1007/s11661-015-2836-1 ↗
6. Dwivedi, S. K. & Vishwakarma, M. Hydrogen embrittlement in different materials: a review. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 43, 21603–21616 (2018).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.09.201 ↗
7. Lynch, S. Hydrogen embrittlement phenomena and mechanisms. Corrosion Rev. 30, https://doi.org/10.1515/corrrev-2012-0502 (2012).10.1515/corrrev-2012-0502 ↗
8. Yu, H. et al. Hydrogen embrittlement as a conspicuous material challenge─comprehensive review and future directions. Chem. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.3c00624 (2024).10.1021/acs.chemrev.3c00624 ↗
9. Mohtadi-Bonab, M. A., Masoumi, M. & Szpunar, J. A. A comparative fracture analysis on as-received and electrochemically hydrogen charged API X60 and API X60SS pipeline steels subjected to tensile testing. Eng. Failure Anal. 129, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105721 (2021).10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105721 ↗
10. Beidokhti, B., Dolati, A. & Koukabi, A. H. Effects of alloying elements and microstructure on the susceptibility of the welded HSLA steel to hydrogen-induced cracking and sulfide stress cracking. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 507, 167–173 (2009).10.1016/j.msea.2008.11.064 ↗
11. Zhang, T. et al. Comparison of hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility of three cathodic protected subsea pipeline steels from a point of view of hydrogen permeation. Corros. Sci. 131, 104–115 (2018).10.1016/j.corsci.2017.11.013 ↗
12. Johnson, W. H. II On some remarkable changes produced in iron and steel by the action of hydrogen and acids. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 23, 168–179 (1875).10.1098/rspl.1874.0024 ↗
13. Lynch, S. Discussion of some recent literature on hydrogen-embrittlement mechanisms: addressing common misunderstandings. Corros. Rev. 37, 377–395 (2019).10.1515/corrrev-2019-0017 ↗
14. Robertson, I. M. The effect of hydrogen on dislocation dynamics. Eng. Fract. Mech. 68, 671–692 (2001).10.1016/S0013-7944(01)00011-X ↗
15. Liu, H. W. Hydrogen assisted intergranular cracking in steels. Eng. Fract. Mech. 78, 2563–2571 (2011).10.1016/j.engfracmech.2011.06.019 ↗
16. Takahashi, Y. et al. Direct evaluation of grain boundary hydrogen embrittlement: a micro-mechanical approach. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 661, 211–216 (2016).10.1016/j.msea.2016.03.035 ↗
17. Bhadeshia, H. K. D. H. Prevention of hydrogen embrittlement in steels. ISIJ Int. 56, 24–36 (2016).10.2355/isijinternational.ISIJINT-2015-430 ↗
18. Chen, Y.-S. et al. Hydrogen trapping and embrittlement in metals – a review. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.04.076 (2024).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.04.076 ↗
19. Koren, E. et al. Experimental comparison of gaseous and electrochemical hydrogen charging in X65 pipeline steel using the permeation technique. Corros. Sci. 215, 111025 (2023).10.1016/j.corsci.2023.111025 ↗
20. Laureys, A., Van den Eeckhout, E., Petrov, R. & Verbeken, K. Effect of deformation and charging conditions on crack and blister formation during electrochemical hydrogen charging. Acta Mater. 127, 192–202 (2017).10.1016/j.actamat.2017.01.013 ↗
21. Khanchandani, H. et al. Hydrogen and deuterium charging of lifted-out specimens for atom probe tomography [version 2; peer review: 2 approved].Open Res. Europe 1, 122 (2022).10.12688/openreseurope.14176.2 ↗
22. Wan, D., Deng, Y. & Barnoush, A. Hydrogen embrittlement effect observed by in-situ hydrogen plasma charging on a ferritic alloy. Scr. Mater. 151, 24–27 (2018).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2018.03.038 ↗
23. Wan, D. et al. Evaluation of hydrogen effect on the fatigue crack growth behavior of medium-Mn steels via in-situ hydrogen plasma charging in an environmental scanning electron microscope. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 85, 30–43 (2021).10.1016/j.jmst.2020.12.069 ↗
24. Rawls, G. B., Adams, T. & Newhouse, N. L. in Gaseous Hydrogen Embrittlement of Materials in Energy Technologies (Woodhead Publishing, 2012).
25. Martin, M. L., Fenske, J. A., Liu, G. S., Sofronis, P. & Robertson, I. M. On the formation and nature of quasi-cleavage fracture surfaces in hydrogen embrittled steels. Acta Mater. 59, 1601–1606 (2011).10.1016/j.actamat.2010.11.024 ↗
26. Guedes, F. M. F., Maffi, S., Razzini, G., Bicelli, L. P. & Ponciano, J. A. C. Scanning photoelectrochemical analysis of hydrogen permeation on ASTM A516 grade60 steel welded joints in a H2S containing solution. Corros. Sci. 45, 2129–2142 (2003).10.1016/S0010-938X(03)00033-7 ↗
27. Ishikawa, R. et al. Direct imaging of hydrogen-atom columns in a crystal by annular bright-field electron microscopy. Nat. Mater. 10, 278–281 (2011).10.1038/nmat2957 ↗
28. Tatsumi, K., Muto, S. & Yoshida, T. Detection of hydrogen at localized regions by unoccupied electronic states in iron carbides: Towards high spatial resolution mapping of hydrogen distributions. J. Appl. Phys. 101, 023523 (2007).10.1063/1.2424540 ↗
29. Martin, M. L., Robertson, I. M. & Sofronis, P. Interpreting hydrogen-induced fracture surfaces in terms of deformation processes: A new approach. Acta Mater. 59, 3680–3687 (2011).10.1016/j.actamat.2011.03.002 ↗
30. Kesten, P. et al. H- and D distribution in metallic multilayers studied by 3-dimensional atom probe analysis and secondary ion mass spectrometry. J. Alloy. Compd. 330-332, 225–228 (2002).10.1016/S0925-8388(01)01596-1 ↗
31. Aboura, Y. & Moore, K. L. NanoSIMS analysis of hydrogen and deuterium in metallic alloys: Artefacts and best practice. Applied Surface Science 557, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2021.149736 (2021).10.1016/j.apsusc.2021.149736 ↗
32. Lockyer, N. P. et al. Secondary ion mass spectrometry. Nat. Rev. Methods Prim. 4, 32 (2024).10.1038/s43586-024-00311-9 ↗
33. Nagashima, T. et al. Interfacial hydrogen localization in austenite/martensite dual‐phase steel visualized through optimized silver decoration and scanning Kelvin probe force microscopy. Mater. Corros. 68, 306–310 (2017).10.1002/maco.201609104 ↗
34. Koyama, M., Yamasaki, D., Nagashima, T., Tasan, C. C. & Tsuzaki, K. In situ observations of silver-decoration evolution under hydrogen permeation: Effects of grain boundary misorientation on hydrogen flux in pure iron. Scr. Mater. 129, 48–51 (2017).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2016.10.027 ↗
35. Evers, S., Senoz, C. & Rohwerder, M. Hydrogen detection in metals: a review and introduction of a Kelvin probe approach. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 14, 014201 (2013).10.1088/1468-6996/14/1/014201 ↗
36. Koyama, M. et al. Spatially and kinetically resolved mapping of hydrogen in a twinning-induced plasticity steel by use of scanning kelvin probe force microscopy. J. Electrochem. Soc. 162, C638–C647 (2015).10.1149/2.0131512jes ↗
37. Koyama, M. et al. Recent progress in microstructural hydrogen mapping in steels: quantification, kinetic analysis, and multi-scale characterisation. Mater. Sci. Technol. 33, 1481–1496 (2017).10.1080/02670836.2017.1299276 ↗
38. Martin, M. L., Connolly, M. J., DelRio, F. W. & Slifka, A. J. Hydrogen embrittlement in ferritic steels. Appl. Phys. Rev. 7, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0012851 (2020).10.1063/5.0012851 ↗
39. Chen, Y.-S. et al. Atom probe tomography for the observation of hydrogen in materials: a review. Microsc. Microanal. https://doi.org/10.1093/micmic/ozac005 (2022).10.1093/micmic/ozac005 ↗
40. Gault, B. et al. Atom probe tomography. Nat. Rev. Methods Prim.1, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-021-00047-w (2021).10.1038/s43586-021-00047-w ↗
41. Chen, Y.-S. et al. Observation of hydrogen trapping at dislocations, grain boundaries, and precipitates. Science 367, 171–175 (2020).10.1126/science.aaz0122 ↗
42. Sundell, G., Thuvander, M. & Andren, H. O. Hydrogen analysis in APT: methods to control adsorption and dissociation of H(2). Ultramicroscopy 132, 285–289 (2013).10.1016/j.ultramic.2013.01.007 ↗
43. Meier, M. S., Jones, M. E., Felfer, P. J., Moody, M. P. & Haley, D. Extending estimating hydrogen content in atom probe tomography experiments where H2 molecule formation occurs. Microsc. Microanal. 28, 1231–1244 (2022).10.1017/S1431927621012332 ↗
44. Felfer, P. et al. An atom probe with ultra-low hydrogen background. Microsc. Microanal. 28, 1255–1263 (2022).10.1017/S1431927621013702 ↗
45. Breen, A. J. et al. Solute hydrogen and deuterium observed at the near atomic scale in high-strength steel. Acta Mater. 188, 108–120 (2020).10.1016/j.actamat.2020.02.004 ↗
46. Saksena, A. et al. Optimizing site-specific specimen preparation for atom probe tomography by using hydrogen for visualizing radiation-induced damage. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.09.057 (2023).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.09.057 ↗
47. Yoo, S.-H. et al. Origins of the hydrogen signal in atom probe tomography: case studies of alkali and noble metals. N. J. Phys. 24, 013008 (2022).10.1088/1367-2630/ac40cd ↗
48. Takahashi, J., Kawakami, K. & Tarui, T. Direct observation of hydrogen-trapping sites in vanadium carbide precipitation steel by atom probe tomography. Scr. Mater. 67, 213–216 (2012).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2012.04.022 ↗
49. Gemma, R., Al-Kassab, T., Kirchheim, R. & Pundt, A. Visualization of deuterium dead layer by atom probe tomography. Scr. Mater. 67, 903–906 (2012).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2012.08.025 ↗
50. Takahashi, J., Kawakami, K., Sakiyama, Y. & Ohmura, T. Atomic-scale observation of hydrogen trap sites in bainite–austenite dual-phase steel by APT. Mater. Charact. 178, 111282 (2021).10.1016/j.matchar.2021.111282 ↗
51. McCarroll, I. E., Lin, Y.-C., Rosenthal, A., Yen, H.-W. & Cairney, J. M. Hydrogen trapping at dislocations, carbides, copper precipitates and grain boundaries in a dual precipitating low-carbon martensitic steel. Scr. Mater. 221, 114934 (2022).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2022.114934 ↗
52. Khanchandani, H. & Gault, B. Atomic scale understanding of the role of hydrogen and oxygen segregation in the embrittlement of grain boundaries in a twinning induced plasticity steel. Scripta Mater. 234, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115593 (2023).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115593 ↗
53. Mouton, I. et al. Quantification challenges for atom probe tomography of hydrogen and deuterium in Zircaloy-4. Microsc. Microanal. 25, 481–488 (2019).10.1017/S143192761801615X ↗
54. Kolli, R. P. Controlling residual hydrogen gas in mass spectra during pulsed laser atom probe tomography. Adv. Struct. Chem. Imaging 3, 10 (2017).10.1186/s40679-017-0043-4 ↗
55. Wilkes, T. et al. The fracture of field-ion microscope specimens. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 5, 2226 (1972).10.1088/0022-3727/5/12/312 ↗
56. Moy, C., Ranzi, G., Petersen, T. C. & Ringer, S. Macroscopic electrical field distribution and field-induced surface stresses of needle-shaped field emitters. Ultramicroscopy 111, 397–404 (2011).10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.01.024 ↗
57. Chen, Y.-S., Bagot, P. A. J., Moody, M. P. & Haley, D. Observing hydrogen in steel using cryogenic atom probe tomography: A simplified approach. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 44, 32280–32291 (2019).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.09.232 ↗
58. Zhang, P. et al. Effect of microstructure on hydrogen embrittlement and hydrogen-induced cracking behaviour of a high-strength pipeline steel weldment. Corros. Sci. 227, 111764 (2024).10.1016/j.corsci.2023.111764 ↗
59. Ozdirik, B. et al. Development of an Electrochemical procedure for monitoring hydrogen sorption/desorption in steel. J. Electrochem. Soc. 164, C747–C757 (2017).10.1149/2.0521713jes ↗
60. Haley, D., Merzlikin, S. V., Choi, P. & Raabe, D. Atom probe tomography observation of hydrogen in high-Mn steel and silver charged via an electrolytic route. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 39, 12221–12229 (2014).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.05.169 ↗
61. Zhao, H. et al. How solute atoms control aqueous corrosion of Al-alloys. Nat. Commun. 15, 561 (2024).10.1038/s41467-024-44802-5 ↗
62. Gault, B., Moody, M. P., Cairney, J. M. & Ringer, S. P. Atom probe microscopy (Springer Science & Business Media, 2012).10.1007/978-1-4614-3436-8 ↗
63. Hellman, O. C., Vandenbroucke, J. A., Rüsing, J., Isheim, D. & Seidman, D. N. Analysis of three-dimensional atom-probe data by the proximity histogram. Microsc. Microanal. 6, 437–444 (2002).10.1007/S100050010051 ↗
64. Takahashi, J., Kawakami, K., Kobayashi, Y. & Tarui, T. The first direct observation of hydrogen trapping sites in TiC precipitation-hardening steel through atom probe tomography. Scr. Mater. 63, 261–264 (2010).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2010.03.012 ↗
65. Zhu, X., Li, W., Zhao, H., Wang, L. & Jin, X. Hydrogen trapping sites and hydrogen-induced cracking in high strength quenching & partitioning (Q&P) treated steel. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 39, 13031–13040 (2014).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.06.079 ↗
66. Zhu, X. et al. Improved resistance to hydrogen embrittlement in a high-strength steel by quenching–partitioning–tempering treatment. Scr. Mater. 97, 21–24 (2015).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2014.10.030 ↗
67. Chen, Y.-S. et al. Direct observation of individual hydrogen atoms at trapping sites in a ferritic steel. Science 355, 1196–1199 (2017).10.1126/science.aal2418 ↗
68. Takahashi, J., Kawakami, K. & Kobayashi, Y. Origin of hydrogen trapping site in vanadium carbide precipitation strengthening steel. Acta Mater. 153, 193–204 (2018).10.1016/j.actamat.2018.05.003 ↗
69. Samanta, S. et al. Atomic-scale investigation of H-trapping by fine NbC precipitates in a low C ferritic steel. Scripta Mater. 234, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115537 (2023).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115537 ↗
70. Li, Z. H. et al. Role of deformation on the hydrogen trapping in the pearlitic steel. Scripta Mater. 241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115859 (2024).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115859 ↗
71. Jakob, S., Sattari, M., Sefer, B., Ooi, S. & Thuvander, M. Characterization of hydrogen traps in a co-precipitation steel investigated by atom probe experiments without cryogenic transfer. Scripta Mater. 243, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115963 (2024).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115963 ↗
72. Liu, P. Y. et al. Engineering metal-carbide hydrogen traps in steels. Nat. Commun. 15, 724 (2024).10.1038/s41467-024-45017-4 ↗
73. Miller, M. K., Forbes, R. G., Miller, M. K. & Forbes, R. G. The local electrode atom probe. (Springer, 2014).10.1007/978-1-4899-7430-3_5 ↗
74. Gault, B., Danoix, F., Hoummada, K., Mangelinck, D. & Leitner, H. Impact of directional walk on atom probe microanalysis. Ultramicroscopy 113, 182–191 (2012).10.1016/j.ultramic.2011.06.005 ↗
75. Banhart, J., Chen, Y. S., Guo, Q. N., Marceau, R. K. W. & Cairney, J. M. Direct ageing experiments on nanometre-scale aluminium alloy samples. Acta Mater. 231, 117848 (2022).10.1016/j.actamat.2022.117848 ↗
76. Pérez Escobar, D., Verbeken, K., Duprez, L. & Verhaege, M. Evaluation of hydrogen trapping in high strength steels by thermal desorption spectroscopy. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 551, 50–58 (2012).10.1016/j.msea.2012.04.078 ↗
77. Zhang, P. et al. A systematic study on the influence of electrochemical charging conditions on the hydrogen embrittlement behaviour of a pipeline steel. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 48, 16501–16516 (2023).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.01.149 ↗
78. Beverskog, B. & Puigdomenech, I. Revised pourbaix diagrams for iron at 25–300 °C. Corros. Sci. 38, 2121–2135 (1996).10.1016/S0010-938X(96)00067-4 ↗
79. Jerkiewicz, G. Electrochemical hydrogen adsorption and absorption. Part 1: under-potential deposition of hydrogen. Electrocatalysis 1, 179–199 (2010).10.1007/s12678-010-0022-1 ↗
80. Ding, F. & Yakobson, B. I. Challenges in hydrogen adsorptions: from physisorption to chemisorption. Front. Phys. 6, 142–150 (2011).10.1007/s11467-011-0171-6 ↗
81. Jeong, Y. J. & Kim, S. J. Possibility of false interpretations of hydrogen measurements in ferritic steel after an electrochemical cathodic charging process. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 46, 7615–7621 (2021).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.11.198 ↗
82. Felfer, P., Ringer, S. P. & Cairney, J. M. Shaping the lens of the atom probe: fabrication of site specific, oriented specimens and application to grain boundary analysis. Ultramicroscopy 111, 435–439 (2011).10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.12.005 ↗
83. Thomas, S. et al. The effect of absorbed hydrogen on the dissolution of steel. Heliyon 2, e00209 (2016).10.1016/j.heliyon.2016.e00209 ↗
84. Röthig, M., Hoschke, J., Tapia, C., Venezuela, J. & Atrens, A. A review of gas phase inhibition of gaseous hydrogen embrittlement in pipeline steels. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 60, 1239–1265 (2024).10.1016/j.ijhydene.2024.02.245 ↗
85. Kingham, D. R. The post-ionization of field evaporated ions: a theoretical explanation of multiple charge states. Surf. Sci. 116, 273–301 (1982).10.1016/0039-6028(82)90434-4 ↗
86. Tegg, L., Stephenson, L. T. & Cairney, J. M. Estimation of the electric field in atom probe tomography experiments using charge state ratios. Microsc. Microanal. 30, 466–475 (2024).10.1093/mam/ozae047 ↗
87. Meier, M. S., Bagot, P. A., Moody, M. P. & Haley, D. Large-scale atom probe tomography data mining: Methods and application to inform hydrogen behavior. Microsc. Microanal. 29, 879–889 (2023).10.1093/micmic/ozad027 ↗