API-571 Questions and Answers

API RP 571 explains that both Sulfide Stress Cracking (SSC) and SOHIC are:

“Strongly influenced by material hardness. Carbon and low alloy steels with hardness exceeding 22 HRC (248 Brinell) are most susceptible.”

“They occur in hardened steels under tensile stress, in the presence of wet H₂S environments.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Sections 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.7 – SSC and SOHIC)

Therefore, hardened steels are the common factor for both mechanisms, making option C the correct choice.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, corrosion fatigue results from the combined action of a cyclic stress and a corrosive environment. One of the most important distinguishing features between corrosion fatigue and SCC is crack morphology.

Corrosion fatigue cracks are typically transgranular and show little or no branching

Stress corrosion cracking is characterized by extensive crack branching

Therefore, the absence of significant branching is a key diagnostic feature of corrosion fatigue.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Corrosion Fatigue

======================

API RP 571 on Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC) clearly states:

“Austenitic stainless steels such as 304 and 316 are highly susceptible to Cl-SCC when subjected to tensile stress and exposed to chloride-bearing environments.”

“Susceptibility is greatest in non-stress-relieved weldments or cold-worked areas.”

Brass and carbon steels are not typical Cl-SCC candidates; low alloy steels such as 1.25Cr-0.5Mo are also not commonly affected.

Thus, option C is the correct answer.

In TR 942-B and API RP 582, it is emphasized:

“Nickel-based buttering is often used as an intermediate layer to reduce thermal stress mismatch during welding of ferritic and austenitic materials.”

“Nickel alloys have a coefficient of thermal expansion closer to that of both stainless steels and carbon steels, reducing stress concentrations and mitigating dissimilar weld cracking.”

“This technique also assists in achieving metallurgical compatibility and mitigating solidification cracking.”

Hence, option C is correct as it directly relates to minimizing thermal expansion mismatches.

API RP 571 – Sulfidation:

“Sulfidation generally results in uniform thinning of iron-based alloys at temperatures above 500°F (260°C).”

“It is classified as a form of general corrosion, although it can be accelerated in turbulent flow areas.”

So, option A is correct.

As per API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.2 (Sigma Phase Embrittlement):

“Sigma phase embrittlement occurs in austenitic stainless steels (like 300 series) and duplex stainless steels exposed to 1000°F to 1800°F (540°C to 980°C)... This embrittlement results in a significant loss of toughness and ductility.”

Sigma phase is not a concern in Monel (nickel-copper alloy) or 5Cr steels.

400 series are ferritic and not typically affected by sigma phase.

Hence, Option A (300 series stainless steel) is correct.

From API RP 571 Section 5.1.1.3 (Amine Corrosion):

“Amine corrosion is a form of general or localized corrosion caused by the presence of amine solutions used to remove acid gases (H₂S and CO₂)... Corrosion is most severe in areas where acid gas loading is high.”

While temperature and concentration are contributing factors, the primary driver is dissolved acid gases such as CO₂ and H₂S.

Thus, the correct answer is Option C.

Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC) is a serious form of corrosion primarily affecting austenitic stainless steels and some duplex stainless steels, particularly when exposed to chloride-containing environments at elevated temperatures.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.3 (Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking – Cl-SCC):

“Austenitic stainless steels (e.g., 300 series such as Types 304 and 316) are the most susceptible to Cl-SCC... Duplex stainless steels have greater resistance but are not immune, especially at temperatures >150°F (65°C)... Ferritic stainless steels (400 series) are generally not susceptible.”

Thus, Option A (400 Series Stainless Steel) is not susceptible to chloride SCC, making it the correct answer.

According to API RP 571:

“Ammonium chloride corrosion is most aggressive when dry salts are exposed to a small amount of free water. This condition allows the formation of a concentrated acidic aqueous solution, which is highly corrosive to carbon steel.”

“The corrosion mechanism is activated especially during startup and shutdown when condensation may occur on salt deposits.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.1 – Ammonium Chloride Corrosion)

Hence, while salt deposition begins as temperatures drop, the most aggressive corrosion happens when water is introduced to dry salt, making option D correct.

According to API RP 571, in the section on "Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC)", several critical factors are outlined that contribute to the initiation and propagation of this mechanism. The document states:

“Critical factors include the presence of chlorides (even at ppm levels), oxygen, elevated temperatures, tensile stress, and susceptible materials such as austenitic stainless steels and some nickel alloys.”

“Oxygen is an accelerant and promotes pitting that can lead to SCC initiation.”

(Reference: API RP 571, 3rd Edition, Section 4.2.2.2)

Therefore, the presence of oxygen is a well-documented critical factor in Cl-SCC. It acts in conjunction with chlorides to initiate localized pitting, which then progresses into cracking. Hence, option B is the correct choice.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, deaerators often operate in environments where concentrated caustic solutions can form locally due to oxygen scavengers and water chemistry control additives.

When postweld heat treatment (PWHT) is not performed:

High residual welding stresses remain

Conditions are ideal for caustic stress corrosion cracking (Caustic SCC)

API RP 571 identifies deaerators as classic examples of equipment that has experienced caustic SCC when PWHT was omitted.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Caustic Stress Corrosion Cracking

======================

Galvanic corrosion occurs when two dissimilar metals are electrically connected in the presence of an electrolyte such as brackish water or seawater. The rate and severity of galvanic corrosion depend on:

The relative position of the metals on the galvanic series (potential difference)

Area ratio between anode and cathode

Conductivity of the electrolyte

API RP 571 explains:

“The more active (anodic) metal in the galvanic couple corrodes preferentially. The more noble (cathodic) metal is protected.”

“The greater the difference in potential between the two metals, the more aggressive the galvanic reaction.”

“Aluminum is highly anodic compared to steel. In seawater or brackish conditions, aluminum will corrode rapidly when electrically coupled to steel, especially if the aluminum surface area is small relative to the steel.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.5.1 – Galvanic Corrosion)

Referring to the galvanic series presented in your table:

Aluminum is much higher (more anodic) than steel.

This makes aluminum the sacrificial metal in such a pair.

This is not the case for brass-to-nickel or cast iron-to-Ni-Resist, which are much closer together on the galvanic scale.

Therefore, among all the listed pairs, Aluminum coupled to Steel creates the most significant galvanic potential difference and is most likely to result in galvanic corrosion in brackish or seawater service.

Correct Answer: B

API RP 571 under Oxidation states:

“Resistance to oxidation is improved significantly by increasing chromium content, as it promotes the formation of a protective chromium oxide (Cr₂O₃) layer.”

“Nickel may aid in high-temperature strength but does not directly improve oxidation resistance like chromium does.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 5.1.1 – Oxidation)

Hence, option A is correct.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.1 (Hydrogen-Induced Cracking) and Publ 939-A, blistering in carbon and low alloy steels exposed to wet H2S environments can be exacerbated by the presence of cyanides. These accelerate hydrogen entry into steel, increasing the chance of hydrogen blistering.

API RP 571 states:

“HIC and blistering are forms of hydrogen damage that occur in wet H2S environments. The presence of cyanides can significantly increase hydrogen entry and the risk of blistering.”

Publ 939-A (Research on Cracking in Wet H2S Service) also notes:

“Cyanides act as catalytic agents in hydrogen charging, which promotes internal pressure build-up and increases blistering.”

Thus, cyanides (Option B) are the most critical in enhancing blistering in H2S environments.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

High-Temperature Hydrogen Attack (HTHA) is described in API RP 571 and API RP 941 as a damage mechanism where hydrogen reacts with carbides at elevated temperature and pressure, forming methane and causing loss of strength and fissuring.

Prevention is primarily achieved by selecting materials with stable carbides that resist hydrogen attack. Chromium and molybdenum alloying elements:

Form more stable carbides

Reduce susceptibility to methane formation

Extend safe operating limits

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option B may be used in some services but is not the usual prevention method.

Option C is incorrect because RP 941 does not recommend high-nickel alloys as the primary solution.

Option D low-carbon steels are more susceptible, not resistant.

API RP 571 clearly identifies Cr-Mo alloy steels as the standard mitigation approach.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on High-Temperature Hydrogen Attack

API RP 941 – Nelson Curves and Material Selection

======================

Per API RP 571, susceptibility to hydrogen embrittlement is strongly influenced by:

Material strength level

Microstructure

Heat treatment condition

Heat treatment determines:

Dislocation density

Trap sites for hydrogen

Residual stress state

The modulus of elasticity does not significantly affect hydrogen embrittlement susceptibility, making Option A incorrect.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Hydrogen Embrittlement

======================

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Hydrochloric acid (HCl) corrosion, particularly in crude unit overhead systems, is aggressive toward carbon steel and stainless steels.

According to API RP 571, nickel-based alloys, such as Monel (Ni–Cu alloys), exhibit excellent resistance to hydrochloric acid corrosion and are commonly used for:

Overhead piping

Injection quills

High-risk corrosion zones

Why the other options are incorrect:

Duplex and 300 series stainless steels are highly susceptible to chloride corrosion and SCC.

Copper-based materials alone lack sufficient resistance and structural strength in refinery HCl environments.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Hydrochloric Acid Corrosion

======================

Same as above. Sigma phase formation is a microstructural phenomenon and not typically detected by NDE methods like magnetic particle or surface hardness testing.

Therefore, metallographic testing remains the definitive detection method, confirming option D again as the correct answer.

API RP 571 under Polythionic Acid Stress Corrosion Cracking (PTA SCC) specifies:

“Cracking is usually intergranular, and often localized, especially in sensitized austenitic stainless steels exposed to sulfur-containing environments during shutdown or cleaning.”

“It is not always visible on inspection and may only become evident when a leak occurs.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.2.5 – PTA SCC)

Hence, option C is correct as it best describes the detection difficulty and behavior of PTA SCC.

As per API RP 571 and further clarified in API RP 939-C:

“An arbitrary threshold of 50 ppmw H₂S in the aqueous phase is often used to define when carbon and low alloy steels become susceptible to cracking damage in wet H₂S environments.”

“Below this level, the risk of SSC, HIC, and SOHIC is considered lower, although damage has still occurred at lower concentrations depending on stress and metallurgical conditions.”

Therefore, the correct answer is option D (50 ppmw).

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, sulfidation corrosion rates are significantly accelerated by the presence of hydrogen. Hydrogen promotes:

Breakdown of protective sulfide scales

Increased diffusion of sulfur into the metal

Higher metal loss rates

This phenomenon is often referred to as hydrogen-assisted sulfidation and is commonly observed in refinery process units.

Moisture is more closely associated with oxidation mechanisms rather than high-temperature sulfidation.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Sulfidation and High-Temperature Corrosion

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, refractory materials are non-metallic and therefore do not experience metallic corrosion mechanisms such as carburization, sulfidation, or oxidation.

Instead, refractories degrade through:

Dusting (loss of material due to chemical or thermal attack)

Checking (crack formation caused by thermal cycling and differential expansion)

These are the primary and characteristic damage modes of refractories in high-temperature service.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Refractory Degradation

======================

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, graphitization is a high-temperature degradation mechanism that occurs in carbon and carbon-molybdenum steels exposed for long periods at temperatures typically above 800 °F (425 °C).

In this process:

Iron carbides decompose into free graphite nodules

The steel loses strength, ductility, and pressure-retaining capability

Failures can occur without significant wall loss

Graphitization does not occur in aluminum, stainless steels, or nickel-copper alloys such as Monel.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Graphitization

======================

API RP 571 on Oxidation indicates:

“Oxidation is a surface loss phenomenon that generally results in uniform thinning. Ultrasonic thickness measurements are typically used to monitor metal loss in oxidizing environments.”

“Metallography may be used to confirm oxide scale structure but is not necessary for routine evaluation.”

Hence, option B is the most appropriate standard method.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Ethanol stress corrosion cracking (SCC) of carbon steel is strongly dependent on the presence of water.

Per API RP 571, moisture content is the primary controlling factor, because:

Water enables formation of corrosive species

Dry or very low-water ethanol does not cause SCC

Even small amounts of water significantly increase cracking risk

Other factors influence severity, but without moisture, ethanol SCC does not occur.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Ethanol Stress Corrosion Cracking

======================

As per API RP 945 (4th Edition, 2022):

“Post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) is the most effective method for reducing residual stresses that contribute to amine SCC. PWHT minimizes the stress intensity required for crack initiation and growth.”

Lowering temperature helps but is not always feasible.

Water content and amine concentration affect SCC but are not as impactful as PWHT.

Thus, Option A (Post-weld heat treatment) is the most effective mitigation.

According to API RP 571 and API RP 583 (CUI-specific guidance):

“Neutron backscatter techniques are effective in detecting moisture within insulation systems, which can indicate areas of concern for corrosion under insulation (CUI).”

“This method provides non-invasive, quick identification of wet insulation without removing cladding.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.5.1 – Corrosion Under Insulation and API RP 583 – CUI Detection Techniques)

Thus, neutron backscatter is the preferred NDE method for moisture detection, making option B correct.

According to API RP 571, in the section on Boiler Water Condensate Corrosion:

“The major contributors to condensate corrosion are dissolved CO₂ and O₂. Carbon dioxide forms carbonic acid in the presence of water, lowering pH and causing generalized corrosion.”

“Oxygen causes pitting and localized corrosion unless chemically treated.”

Thus, option B (Carbon dioxide and oxygen) is the primary root cause and the correct answer.

According to API RP 571, under High Temperature Hydrogen Attack (HTHA):

“HTHA occurs when hydrogen diffuses into steel at elevated temperatures and reacts with carbides in the steel matrix to form methane (CH₄).”

“The methane is unable to diffuse out of the steel and forms internal pressures, leading to fissuring, decarburization, and eventual failure.”

“HTHA typically affects carbon steels and low alloy steels exposed to high temperature hydrogen services, particularly above 400°F (204°C) depending on partial pressure of hydrogen.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.3 – High Temperature Hydrogen Attack)

Hence, option D is the correct and technically supported answer.

API RP 571 under Ammonium Chloride Corrosion details:

“The corrosion results from the deposition of ammonium chloride salts from high-temperature process streams as they cool.”

“This typically occurs in crude unit overheads or other systems where salts condense out as the stream temperature drops below their dew point.”

“Corrosion becomes especially aggressive when the salts are wetted by condensation.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.1 – Ammonium Chloride Corrosion)

Therefore, option A is technically accurate and supported.

API RP 571 states under Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC):

“Nickel contents above approximately 35% provide significant resistance to chloride stress corrosion cracking. Alloys such as Alloy 625 and Alloy 825 exhibit excellent resistance.”

“Austenitic stainless steels with lower nickel contents, such as 304 and 316, are more susceptible to Cl-SCC.”

Hence, option C (35%) is correct.

From API RP 571 on Microbiologically Influenced Corrosion (MIC):

“MIC depends on the presence of water, nutrients, and specific microbial species such as SRB (sulfate-reducing bacteria).”

“While flow velocity may influence deposition and oxygen content, MIC can occur in both stagnant and flowing systems. Hence, it's not strongly dependent on velocity.”

Thus, option D is correct — MIC is largely independent of flow velocity.

As per API RP 571 Section 5.1.4.2 (Metal Dusting):

“Metal dusting is a type of carburization attack that typically occurs in high carbon activity environments, with temperatures generally between 900°F and 1200°F (480°C to 650°C), although damage has been reported as low as 600°F (315°C).”

Therefore, the commonly accepted operational range is best described by Option A: 600°F–1200°F (315°C–650°C).

According to API RP 571, under Sulfuric Acid Corrosion:

“The most aggressive corrosion typically occurs below 65% H₂SO₄, particularly between 20% to 50% concentration range.”

“Above 95% concentration, sulfuric acid becomes less corrosive to carbon steel due to its dehydrating nature.”

“Dilute sulfuric acid is highly ionized and conducts electricity well, increasing corrosion rates.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.2 – Sulfuric Acid Corrosion)

Hence, the most severe corrosion occurs below 65% concentration, making option B the accurate answer.

API RP 571 notes under Sour Water Corrosion:

“Localized thinning or under-deposit corrosion in sour water services is best detected by profile radiography, which provides a visual comparison of wall thickness over a length of pipe.”

“This technique is especially useful for assessing localized metal loss due to under-deposit attack or flow regime effects.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.2.3 – Sour Water Corrosion)

Hence, profile radiographic testing is most effective, making option B correct.

As defined in API RP 571, under Hydrogen Blistering and HIC/SOHIC:

“SOHIC typically manifests as subsurface stepwise cracking, generally oriented perpendicular to the direction of stress.”

“This mechanism initiates below the surface, typically in weld heat-affected zones, and requires metallographic or advanced ultrasonic methods to detect.”

By contrast, SSC, caustic cracking, and amine SCC are primarily surface-initiated, stress-related cracking mechanisms.

Thus, SOHIC is the subsurface mechanism in this list, making option D correct.

API RP 571 discusses Hydrogen-Induced Cracking (HIC) and Blistering:

“Postweld heat treatment (PWHT) does not significantly reduce susceptibility to HIC, as the mechanism is primarily driven by hydrogen charging in wet H₂S environments and steel cleanliness, not residual stresses.”

“PWHT is more effective for SSC, SOHIC, and other stress-driven mechanisms.”

Thus, HIC will not benefit much from PWHT, making option C correct.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.1 (Creep):

“Creep damage is exponentially dependent on temperature. A small increase in temperature (e.g., 25°F or 15°C) can reduce remaining life by more than half. This is because the creep rate increases rapidly with temperature, especially above design limits.”

Stress is a contributing factor, but the dominant and most sensitive variable is temperature.

Thus, Option C (increase in temperature of 25°F/15°C) is the correct answer.

Under Thermal Fatigue and Shock, API RP 571 explains:

“Thermal shock damage often initiates at locations with sudden temperature changes, such as quench zones, cold/hot injection points, and areas subjected to rapid cycling.”

“These are critical inspection points for detecting cracking from thermal shock.”

Thus, option B best matches the described mechanism.