Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "316L SS" wg kryterium: Wszystkie pola

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4
    Tytuł:
    XPS Analysis of nanolayers obtained on AISI 316L SS after Magnetoelectropolishing
    Autorzy:
    Rokosz, Krzysztof
    Hryniewicz, Tadeusz
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1192093.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2016
    Wydawca:
    Przedsiębiorstwo Wydawnictw Naukowych Darwin / Scientific Publishing House DARWIN
    Tematy:
    XPS Analysis
    Magnetoelectropolishing (MEP)
    AISI 316L SS
    Nanolayers
    Opis:
    In the present paper, the passive layers' chemical compositions of AISI 316L austenitic stainless steel samples after three treatments, such as mechanical/abrasive polishing (MP), standard electropolishing (EP) and magnetoelectropolishing (MEP) are displayed. For the surface studies after each treatment, XPS analysis was performed. It has been noted that after MP treatment the Cr/Fe ratio in the passive layer is the lowest and equals to about 1, whereas after the MEP it is close to 3. Additionally, it has to be reported that the passive layers after MP consist mainly of Cr2O3 and Fe2O3, after a standard EP treatment – of CrOOH and FeOOH, and after MEP – of Cr(OH)3 and FeOOH compounds. Concerning the surface layer compositions, in the passive layer formed after MP the detected iron consisted partly of Fe0 (46.5 at %) and partly of iron compounds Fe2+ and Fe3+ (53.5 at %), whereas the detected chromium consisted of Cr0 (16.5 at %) and mostly of chromium compounds Cr3+ (80.8 at%), with a small amount of Cr6+ (2.7 at %). In case of the nanolayer after EP treatment, the detected iron consisted of Fe0 (39.5 at %) and iron compounds Fe2+ and Fe3+ (60.5 at %), whereas the detected chromium consisted in a small amount of Cr0 (6.6 at %), and mostly chromium compounds Cr3+ (83.8 at %) with some Cr6+ (9.6 at %). The XPS analysis of nanolayer formed on AISI 316L after MEP indicates that the detected iron consisted partly of Fe0 (27.1 at %) and mostly of iron compounds Fe2+ and Fe3+ (72.9 at %) whereas the detected chromium contained Cr0 (18 at %) and chromium compounds of Cr3+ (76 at %) and Cr6+ (6 at %).
    Źródło:
    World Scientific News; 2016, 37; 232-248
    2392-2192
    Pojawia się w:
    World Scientific News
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    A Study of Corrosion Behavior of Austenitic AISI 304L and 316Ti Stainless Steels in the Animal Slurry
    Autorzy:
    Rokosz, Krzysztof
    Hryniewicz, Tadeusz
    Uran, Michał
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1192037.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2016
    Wydawca:
    Przedsiębiorstwo Wydawnictw Naukowych Darwin / Scientific Publishing House DARWIN
    Tematy:
    Animal slurry
    AISI 304L and 316Ti SS
    Pitting corrosion
    Comparison
    Opis:
    The aim of this study was to compare the pitting corrosion resistance of two austenitic stainless steels, AISI 304L and AISI 316Ti, which are often used for agricultural machinery building. For the corrosion experiments, animal slurry from a pig farm was used. The results obtained from electrochemical corrosion experiments were proceeded by significance tests in Statistica software. The average value of the pitting corrosion potential of AISI 304L stainless steel in the animal slurry is equal 1044.3±146.6 mVSCE whereas the average potential for AISI 316Ti SS equals 1058.4 ±28.3m mVSCE. Corrosion potential of AISI 304L SS is equal 549±80.5 mVSCE, while for AISI 316Ti SS it equals 425.9±80.5 mVSCE. The range of pitting corrosion potentials of AISI 304L SS (364 mVSCE) was over four times higher than that for AISI 316Ti SS (84 mVSCE); the minimum values of pitting corrosion potential for AISI 304L SS (779 mVSCE) was lower than that obtained for AISI 316Ti SS (1012 mVSCE). On the basis of the results it may be concluded that AISI 304L stainless steel is less resistant in case of pitting corrosion resistance than AISI 316Ti SS. For this reason, austenitic AISI 316Ti stainless steel should be used for the transportation or storage of animal slurry.
    Źródło:
    World Scientific News; 2016, 50; 174-185
    2392-2192
    Pojawia się w:
    World Scientific News
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Comparative Corrosion Study of Austenitic AISI 304L and 316Ti Stainless Steels in the Ammonium nitrate/Urea Solution (AUS)
    Autorzy:
    Rokosz, Krzysztof
    Hryniewicz, Tadeusz
    Trzeszczkowski, Stanisław
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1182940.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2016
    Wydawca:
    Przedsiębiorstwo Wydawnictw Naukowych Darwin / Scientific Publishing House DARWIN
    Tematy:
    ammonium nitrate/urea solution (aus)
    cold-rolled 304l and 316ti ss
    comparison
    pitting corrosion
    Opis:
    The aim of the study was to determine the corrosion behavior of two austenitic stainless steels, AISI 304L and AISI 316Ti, after cold rolling (AR) and mechanical polishing/grinding (MP), in a 32% aqueous solution of AUS (RSM®) Ammonium Nitrate/Urea Solution, used as fertilizer, and compared with the corrosion resistance results obtained in 3% aqueous solution of sodium chloride (NaCl). The studies have shown that cold rolled austenitic stainless steels (AISI 304L and AISI 316Ti) in the 32% aqueous solution of AUS have more than two times higher pitting corrosion resistance than that obtained in 3% aqueous solution of sodium chloride (NaCl). Surface scratch of the cold rolled austenitic AISI 304L stainless steel and submersion of the samples in 3% aqueous solution of sodium chloride resulted in decreasing of its pitting corrosion resistance of more than three times; on the other hand, the pitting corrosion resistance of AISI 316Ti in the same solution decreased of two times. It was found that for both stainless steels (AISI 304L and AISI 316Ti) after mechanical grinding, as simulated by the surface scratch, and submersion of the samples in 32% aqueous solution of AUS, the pitting corrosion resistance was not worsened, because of the passivation properties of AUS solution. The study results have shown that in the natural environments containing aqueous solutions of sodium chloride (NaCl), the use of austenitic stainless steel containing chromium, nickel, molybdenum and titanium (AISI 316Ti) is advised. In other environments without chlorides, such as the AUS fertilizer, the use of austenitic AISI 304L stainless steel may be considered as adequate.
    Źródło:
    World Scientific News; 2016, 49, 2; 249-271
    2392-2192
    Pojawia się w:
    World Scientific News
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Corrosion studies of austenitic and duplex stainless steels in the environment of ferment of biogas plants
    Autorzy:
    Rokosz, Krzysztof
    Hryniewicz, Tadeusz
    Kara, Marta
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1179602.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2017
    Wydawca:
    Przedsiębiorstwo Wydawnictw Naukowych Darwin / Scientific Publishing House DARWIN
    Tematy:
    AISI 304L
    AISI 316Ti
    austenitic SS
    biogas plant
    corrosion
    duplex SS 2205
    Opis:
    In the present paper, the study of pitting and general corrosion of stainless steels used in agriculture, specifically for the agricultural biogas plant constructions, is presented. The austenitic stainless steels AISI 304L, AISI 316Ti, and duplex steel 2205, were investigated. For the evaluation of corrosion resistance, the potentiodynamic studies were performed. General corrosion was determined in the Tafel region of potentiodynamic curve, while pitting corrosion was examined on the basis of the pitting corrosion initiation potential. Based on the studies carried out, it can be stated that the alloyed cold-rolled austenitic stainless steel AISI 304L placed in the environment of the biogas plant ferment has the lowest resistance to pitting and general corrosion of all studied steels. The cold-rolled duplex stainless steel 2205 placed in the same corrosive environment revealed the highest resistance to these types of corrosion. It should be also noted that the pitting and general corrosion resistances of tested alloy austenitic stainless steel AISI 316Ti are higher than those ones of AISI 304L, and less than those ones of duplex steel 2205. In conclusion, as could be expected, the best material for the biogas plant construction is duplex stainless 2205 because it shows the highest resistance to both types of corrosion studied. This steel can be advised as a material for construction of fermentation tanks and heating installations for mixture ferment.
    Źródło:
    World Scientific News; 2017, 74; 194-208
    2392-2192
    Pojawia się w:
    World Scientific News
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies