Effect of flow velocity on pipeline steel corrosion behaviour in H 2 S/CO 2 environment with sulphur deposition
Source abstract
Abstract
The effect of element sulphur on the performance of corrosion inhibitor in H2S/CO2 gas field solution was investigated at different velocities. The morphology and composition of corrosion products were characterised by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) methods. The results indicated that L360 QS steel surface suffered from sulphur-induced pitting corrosion at a low velocity due to insufficient sulphur-carrying fluid power. At high flow velocities, the steel surface is likely to be suffered high fluid power which can remove the inhibitor film and corrosion scales by the mechanical erosion effect. The sulphur corrosion mechanism model and the flow-induced corrosion model due to the high wall shear force have been proposed in the study. This work suggested that the gas production rate should be controlled at an acceptable level to guarantee the service safety of pipeline system.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Corrosion Behavior and Inhibition · Hydrogen embrittlement and corrosion behaviors in metals · Concrete Corrosion and Durability
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu People’s Republic of China
Shu’nan Gas Field Exploration and Development Institute of Petro China Southwest Oil and Gas Field Company, Luzhou, China
Engineering Technology Institute of Sinopec Southwest Oil and Gas Branch Company, Guanghan, China
Funding
National Science and Technology Major Project of China · National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.2118/8778-PA10.2118/8778-PA ↗
2. 10.1080/1478422X.2017.136821610.1080/1478422X.2017.1368216 ↗
3. 10.1080/1478422X.2017.135565710.1080/1478422X.2017.1355657 ↗
4. 10.1179/1743278212Y.000000006910.1179/1743278212Y.0000000069 ↗
5. Abboud Y · Br Corros J · 2015 · 51 · 557
6. 10.1179/1743278212Y.000000004610.1179/1743278212Y.0000000046 ↗
7. 10.1179/174327808X31565010.1179/174327808X315650 ↗
8. 10.1080/1478422X.2015.110406210.1080/1478422X.2015.1104062 ↗
9. 10.1002/maco.20120656510.1002/maco.201206565 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.porgcoat.2013.04.00210.1016/j.porgcoat.2013.04.002 ↗
11. 10.1007/s10008-009-0963-610.1007/s10008-009-0963-6 ↗
12. 10.1021/ie201569710.1021/ie2015697 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.corsci.2014.11.03810.1016/j.corsci.2014.11.038 ↗
14. 10.14773/cst.2017.16.1.2310.14773/cst.2017.16.1.23 ↗
15. 10.5006/160010.5006/1600 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.desal.2005.03.03710.1016/j.desal.2005.03.037 ↗
17. 10.5006/1.329923510.5006/1.3299235 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.desal.2013.05.00110.1016/j.desal.2013.05.001 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.09.00210.1016/j.ijggc.2017.09.002 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.cep.2003.09.00110.1016/j.cep.2003.09.001 ↗
21. Li Y · Corros Prot · 2015 · 7 · 687
22. Ren XC · Chin Sci Bull · 2005 · 50 · 168910.1360/972004-581 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.corsci.2008.02.00310.1016/j.corsci.2008.02.003 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.electacta.2010.08.04910.1016/j.electacta.2010.08.049 ↗
25. 10.1016/S0010-938X(98)00180-210.1016/S0010-938X(98)00180-2 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2004.03.24710.1016/j.apsusc.2004.03.247 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.jngse.2016.02.05510.1016/j.jngse.2016.02.055 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.corsci.2016.02.02810.1016/j.corsci.2016.02.028 ↗
29. 10.1002/maco.20170967610.1002/maco.201709676 ↗
30. 10.1007/s11595-012-0523-210.1007/s11595-012-0523-2 ↗
31. 10.1111/fcp.1205310.1111/fcp.12053 ↗