首页> 外文OA文献 >Metal dusting on heat-resistant alloys under thermal cyclic conditions
【2h】

Metal dusting on heat-resistant alloys under thermal cyclic conditions

机译:在高温下对耐热合金进行金属喷粉热循环条件

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Solid oxide fuel cells operate at elevated temperature, oxidising fuel gases to generate electricity. The fuel gas streams in the fuel cell systems are rich in carbon and have very low oxygen potential. Under these conditions, alloys can undergo metal dusting, which causes pitting or general thinning of the alloys. This process is not yet fully understood. It is, hence, not possible to accurately predict the susceptibility of a particular alloy in the atmospheres relevant to SOFC. Model Fe-Cr and Fe-Ni-Cr alloys were exposed to test the hypothesis that cementite formation and its decomposition is necessary for metal dusting to occur. A series of ferritic and austenitic engineering alloys were also exposed to compare their dusting rates. Two specimens of each alloy were studied, one was etched in a H3PO4-15%H2SO4-21%H2O solution and the other was ground to a 600-grit finish. The alloys were exposed to a CO-26%H2-6%H2O gas mixture at 680oC under thermal cyclic conditions. The hot gas composition corresponded to ac = 2.9 and an oxygen potential high enough to oxidise chromium, but not iron or nickel.All the alloys were shown to undergo internal carburisation, metal dusting and coking once the protective chromium oxide scale was damaged. Fe-25Cr was less resistant than Fe-60Cr because of its lower chromium content. However, ferritic Fe-25Cr-based steels are more resistant to dusting than austenitic Fe-25Cr-25Ni. The present findings are consistent with the earlier conclusions that cementite formation is essential for dusting on ferritic steels and that dusting of austenitic alloys does not involve the prior formation of cementite and its decomposition. The onset of metal dusting was more accelerated for most austenitic engineering alloys (Alloy 800, Inconel 601, 690, 693 and Alloy 602CA) than for engineering ferritic steels (Fe-27Cr-0.001Y). However, the alloy with the best performance was austenitic Inconel 625, which was still protected by its Cr2O3 scale after 500 one-hour cycles. In both ferritic and austenitic chromia-formers alloys, the surface ground specimens were more resistant to metal dusting than the electropolished specimens. In contrast, ferritic alumina-formers with electropolished surfaces did not dust during the entire experimental periods of 1200 one-hour cycle, but the alloys with ground surfaces slowly underwent dusting attack. The coke deposits formed consisted largely of graphite nanotubes, containing small particles at the tube tips. These particles were identified as single crystal cementite, in the case of ferritic steels, and austenite, for the austenitic alloys. This is not in agreement with the currently accepted dusting model for ferritic steels that cementite decomposition yields iron particles, which catalyse coke deposition. EDX analysis of the cementite particles, showed that the only metal detected was iron, thus differing in chemistry from the (Fe,Cr)3C surface layer. Similarly, the austenite particles contained only nickel and iron, differing in chemistry from the disintegrated alloy surfaces. These results suggested that the particles were formed in the coke in the carbon-supersaturated gas, rather than disintegration of the alloy surface layer. Strong orientation relationships were determined between the graphite and cementite particles; however, no clear crystallographic relationship was deduced between the graphite and austenite. Relative alloy performance appears consistent using the present multiple one-hour cycle and the results of others using a smaller number of lengthy cycles. Hourly thermal cycling was shown to accelerate the dusting onset for both electropolished chromia-formers and surface ground alumina-formers. Protective oxide scales spall at a critical thickness and carbon attack results when the alloy surfaces are depleted of scale-forming elements and healing becomes impossible. On this basis, analytical models were developed and used to predict the incubation periods for oxide failure and the subsequent carbon attack. Upon testing, these models were, however, found to be not qualitatively meaningful in predicting the onset of dusting observed in the present study. Gross oversimplifications involved in the model and the absence of reliable data for many parameters required for the computations prevented even an approximate quantitative prediction.
机译:固体氧化物燃料电池在高温下运行,氧化燃料气体以发电。燃料电池系统中的燃料气流富含碳且氧势极低。在这些条件下,合金可能会经历金属喷粉,这会导致合金出现点蚀或普遍变薄。此过程尚未完全理解。因此,不可能准确地预测特定合金在与SOFC有关的大气中的磁化率。暴露了模型Fe-Cr和Fe-Ni-Cr合金以检验假说,渗碳体的形成及其分解对于发生金属粉尘是必要的。还暴露了一系列铁素体和奥氏体工程合金,以比较它们的喷粉率。研究了每种合金的两个试样,一个在H3PO4-15%H2SO4-21%H2O溶液中蚀刻,另一个在600粒度下研磨。合金在热循环条件下于680oC暴露于CO-26%H2-6%H2O气体混合物中。热气成分对应于ac = 2.9,并且具有足以氧化铬的氧势,但不能氧化铁或镍。一旦保护性氧化铬垢损坏,所有合金均会发生内部渗碳,金属粉尘和焦化。 Fe-25Cr的铬含量较低,因此其抗性不如Fe-60Cr。但是,铁素体Fe-25Cr基钢比奥氏体Fe-25Cr-25Ni更具抗粉尘性。目前的发现与先前的结论一致,渗碳体的形成对于铁素体钢上的起尘是必不可少的,而奥氏体合金的起尘不涉及渗碳体的先期形成及其分解。大多数奥氏体工程合金(合金800,Inconel 601、690、693和602CA合金)的金属粉尘起爆比工程铁素体钢(Fe-27Cr-0.001Y)要快得多。但是,性能最佳的合金是奥氏体Inconel 625,在经过500个1小时的循环后,仍受到Cr2O3垢的保护。在铁素体和奥氏体氧化铬合金中,与电抛光试样相比,表面研磨试样对金属粉尘的抵抗力更高。相反,具有电抛光表面的铁素体氧化铝形成剂在1200个1小时循环的整个实验期间都没有起尘,但是具有地面表面的合金却缓慢地受到起尘作用。形成的焦炭沉积物主要由石墨纳米管组成,在管头处含有小颗粒。对于铁素体钢,这些颗粒被鉴定为单晶渗碳体,对于奥氏体合金,这些颗粒被鉴定为奥氏体。这与当前公认的铁素体钢除尘模型不一致,渗碳体分解会产生铁颗粒,从而催化焦炭沉积。渗碳体颗粒的EDX分析表明,检测到的唯一金属是铁,因此化学性质与(Fe,Cr)3C表面层不同。类似地,奥氏体颗粒仅包含镍和铁,化学性质与崩解的合金表面不同。这些结果表明颗粒是在碳过饱和气体中的焦炭中形成的,而不是合金表面层的崩解。确定了石墨和渗碳体颗粒之间的强取向关系。然而,没有推断出石墨与奥氏体之间明确的晶体学关系。使用当前的多个一小时循环,相对合金性能似乎保持一致,而使用较少数量的较长循环,其他合金的结果则保持一致。每小时进行的热循环显示可加快电抛光氧化铬形成剂和表面研磨氧化铝形成剂的起尘速度。保护性氧化皮在临界厚度处剥落,当合金表面的氧化皮形成元素耗尽且无法修复时,会产生碳侵蚀。在此基础上,开发了分析模型并将其用于预测氧化物失效和随后发生的碳腐蚀的潜伏期。经测试,这些模型在预测本研究中观察到的起尘开始时在质量上没有意义。模型中涉及的过度简化以及计算所需的许多参数缺乏可靠数据,甚至无法进行近似的定量预测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号