The present invention relates to corrosion of components in various environments. More specifically, the present invention relates to measurement of corrosion rate in such environments.
Corrosion is the gradual destruction of materials by chemical reaction or abrasion with the environment. Corrosion degrades the useful properties of materials and structures including strength, appearance, and permeability to fluids. Many structural alloys corrode merely from exposure to moisture in air. The process can be accelerated by exposure to certain substances. Corrosion can be concentrated locally to form a pit or crack, or it can extend across a wide area uniformly corroding the surface.
The field of corrosion measurement, control, and prevention is expansive. Corrosion measurement employs a variety of techniques to determine how corrosive the environment is and the rate of material loss. Some corrosion measurement techniques can be used on-line, constantly exposed to the process, while others provide off-line measurement, determined in a laboratory analysis. Some techniques give a direct measure of material loss or corrosion rate while others are used to infer that a corrosive environment may exist.
The rate of corrosion dictates how long a process plant or component can be usefully and safely operated. The measurement of corrosion and the action to remedy high corrosion rates permits the most cost effective plant operation to be achieved while reducing the life-cycle costs associated with the operation. However, due to their nature, many corrosion sensors require frequent maintenance and replacement. Further, one type of localized corrosion known as “pitting” is difficult to measure.
A corrosion rate measurement system includes a sacrificial probe configured to be exposed to a corrosive material. A sensor is arranged to detect physical changes in the sacrificial probe due to corrosion of the sacrificial probe from the corrosive material. Measurement circuitry is connected to the sensor and provides an output indicative of a corrosion rate of the sacrificial probe from exposure to the corrosive material. The sacrificial probe has a physical characteristic which causes the sacrificial probe to corrode at a non-linear rate.
This Summary and the Abstract are provided to introduce a selection of concepts in a simplified form that are further described below in the Detailed Description. The Summary and the Abstract are not intended to identify key features or essential features of the claimed subject matter, nor are they intended to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.
A corrosion rate measurement system is provided in which a sacrificial probe is configured to corrode at differing rates over time when exposed to a corrosive fluid. For example, the probe can be configured to corrode at a relatively rapid rate during initial period to provide a high sensitivity for corrosion measurement. However, after prolonged use, the probe can be configured to corrode at a different rate, for example a slower rate. This allows the probe to continue operating and provide limited functionality without requiring immediate replacement. Configurations can also be provided which increase the sensitivity of the probe to specific types of corrosion such as pitting type corrosion.
Various intrusive and nonintrusive methods are used to monitor corrosion including material loss, electrochemical measurements, and analytical measurements. Techniques include measuring resistance, eddy currents, conductivity, ultrasonics, and acoustics. The most common techniques in the process industry are corrosion coupons, electrical resistance (ER), and linear polarization resistance (LPR).
The weight loss technique is the best known and simplest corrosion monitoring technique. The method involves exposing a specimen of material (referred to as a “coupon”) to a process environment for a given duration, then removing the specimen for analysis. The basic measurement which is determined from corrosion coupons is weight loss. Corrosion rate is the weight loss divided by the product of density, coupon surface area, and time of exposure. Coupon monitoring is most useful in environments where corrosion rates do not significantly change over long time periods. However, they can provide a useful correlation with other techniques.
ER probes can be thought of as “electronic” corrosion coupons. ER probes provide a basic measurement of metal loss and the value of metal loss can be measured at any time while the probe is in-situ. The ER technique measures the change in electrical resistance of a corroding metal element (probe) exposed to the process. The action of corrosion on the surface of the probe produces a decrease in its cross-sectional area with a corresponding increase in its electrical resistance.
The LPR technique is based on electro-chemical theory. A small voltage is applied to an electrode (probe) in solution. The current needed to maintain a specific voltage shift (typically 10 mV) in the probe is directly related to the corrosion on the surface of the electrode in the solution. By measuring the current, a corrosion rate can be derived. The advantage of the LPR technique is that the measurement of corrosion rate is made instantaneously whereas with coupons or ER some period of exposure is required to determine corrosion rate. The LPR technique can only be performed in clean aqueous electrolytic environments and will not work in gases.
Another technique which can be used to measure corrosion rate is to monitor the change in the shape of a membrane. For example, a thinner membrane will deflect to a greater extend for a given applied pressure than a thicker membrane.
As mentioned above, corrosion monitoring systems typically include some type of sacrificial element referred to herein as a “sacrificial probe.” This sacrificial element corrodes over time and must be replaced. For example, one typical corrosion monitoring system has a useful life of only six to nine months. One specific complaint about ER type probes is the high maintenance cost of probe replacement. Some systems use a retractable probe. However, this configuration is expensive and simply reduces the time required to replace the probe.
Typical corrosive measurement devices are effective at measuring uniform corrosion, but typically do not perform as well in measuring localized corrosion. Localized corrosion has various causes, and is difficult to detect. One example of localized corrosion is pitting where a relatively small surface area is attacked and corroded. Pitting may begin months or years before it is visible. However, in some highly corrosive environments, serious pitting can occur in stainless steel in only a few days. Once started, the pitting penetrates at an ever increasing rate tending to undermine the surface as the pitted area increases. Pits normally grow in the direction of gravity. Pitting is typically not easily detected using a solid sacrificial probe. For example, if the amount of deflection of a membrane is being used to identify pitting, the de-stressed area due to pitting would typically only minimally affect the stiffness of the membrane.
The example configurations discussed herein are applicable to any corrosion probe that measures material loss, including coupon as well as ER type probes. Such ER probes can be made with multiple material layers. Rapid material loss allows the probe to have an initially high sensitivity to corrosion, followed by slower material loss to extend the probe life. The pillared probe illustrated in
As discussed above, the particular technique and technology of sensor 110 used to measure the corrosion of the sacrificial probe 106 may in accordance with any appropriate technology. One technique which can be used to measure corrosion of a sacrificial probe is by measuring the deflection of a sacrificial membrane in response to an applied pressure.
As illustrated in
The configurations set forth herein allow a user to have customizable corrosion probes which can be based upon specific applications. This provides the ability to extend the life of the probe and/or to measure pitting corrosion. A tradeoff between probe accuracy and life span may be controlled over the lifetime of the probe. Further, the sensor will output a relative step change in the corrosion of the probe as the corrosion transitions from one region to another. This allows a determination as to how much the probe is corroded. This information can be used for calibration of the corrosion sensor. Further, when corrosion of the probe transitions from one material to another, the corrosion rate calibration should be updated for continued measurement accuracy. Such calibration information related to corrosion rate may be stored in memory 124 shown in
Although the present invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments, workers skilled in the art will recognize that changes may be made in form and detail without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. The sacrificial probe can be made of any appropriate materials, layers, physical configuration of layers, etc., alone or in combination as desired. The above discussion provides examples of multi-material probes, probes with an exostructure, pillared sacrificial probes, and combinations thereof. Corrosion of the sacrificial probe can be measured using any appropriate technique, including changes in the stiffness of the probe, changes in an electrical parameter such as the electrical resistance of the probe, weight of the probe or other technique. Although a pressure sensor is specifically illustrated, in one configuration sensor 110 comprises an ER sensor or some other sensor that senses a physical characteristic of the probe which can be correlated to corrosion. The sacrificial probe may be manufactured in accordance to any appropriate technique, including additive techniques such as 3D printing. Another example probe of sacrificial configuration can be that of a resonant structure such as a tuning fork. In such a configuration, the resonant frequency of the probe changes as the probe material is corroded. In one configuration, the sacrificial probe is a generally planar structure which operates as a membrane. In the above examples, the probe is fabricated in a manner such that its corrosion rate is non-linear when exposed to a corrosive material. Although the term “non-linear” is used, other terms may be applicable as well in which the rate at which the probe corrodes when exposed to a given corrosive material changes as the corrosion progresses. The change may be from a fast rate of corrosion to a slower rate of corrosion, from a slow rate of corrosion to a faster rate of corrosion, and may also include intermediary steps such as multiple rate changes.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2976123 | Marsh et al. | Mar 1961 | A |
3841158 | Hunter | Oct 1974 | A |
4046010 | Akeley | Sep 1977 | A |
4468613 | Slough et al. | Aug 1984 | A |
4506540 | Marsh | Mar 1985 | A |
4935195 | Palusamy et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
5061846 | Gergely | Oct 1991 | A |
5092177 | Varacca | Mar 1992 | A |
5127433 | Argyle et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5253674 | Argyle et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5301001 | Murphy et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5446369 | Byrne et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5447073 | Kalinoski | Sep 1995 | A |
5571955 | Beavers et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5659128 | Goldenberg | Aug 1997 | A |
5683594 | Hocker et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5731523 | Cusumano et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5854557 | Tiefnig | Dec 1998 | A |
5948971 | Brooker et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6079276 | Frick et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6280603 | Jovancicevic | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6294133 | Sawada et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6341185 | Elster et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6383451 | Kim | May 2002 | B1 |
6426796 | Pulliam et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6439055 | Maron | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6451212 | Iseri et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
6487895 | Brooker et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6571639 | May et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6671055 | Wavering et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6931937 | Tanaka et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
7024918 | Bell et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7034553 | Gilboe | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7131335 | Textor | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7131337 | Kato et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7290450 | Brown et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7295131 | Anderson et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7437939 | Chakroborty et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
7540197 | Wavering et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7814798 | Filippi et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7866211 | Brown | Jan 2011 | B2 |
20030006148 | Nielsen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20040055391 | Douglas et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20050011278 | Brown | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050122121 | Gilboe | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050150279 | Taber et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050151546 | Taber | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20060016265 | Kaneko et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060162431 | Harris | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060217902 | Bernard et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060260409 | Yane et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070019898 | Chimenti et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070074563 | Liu et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070120572 | Chen et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070199379 | Wolf et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070227252 | Leitko et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080141780 | Wavering | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080253058 | Chakraborty et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090288493 | Larson | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100064816 | Filippi et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20150007976 | Godager | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150177033 | Clarke | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150260633 | Hedtke et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150268111 | Hedtke | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160011066 | Taverner | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160091411 | Hedtke | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160363525 | Friedersdorf | Dec 2016 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1225733 | Aug 1999 | CN |
1338043 | Feb 2002 | CN |
1347496 | May 2002 | CN |
1651883 | Aug 2005 | CN |
1651886 | Aug 2005 | CN |
1657893 | Aug 2005 | CN |
1699191 | Nov 2005 | CN |
1784589 | Jun 2006 | CN |
1853098 | Oct 2006 | CN |
201218797 | Apr 2009 | CN |
102159928 | Aug 2011 | CN |
103672239 | Mar 2014 | CN |
204085538 | Jan 2015 | CN |
0 240 236 | Oct 1987 | EP |
0 971 214 | Jan 2000 | EP |
0 984 252 | Mar 2000 | EP |
2 124 034 | Nov 2009 | EP |
53-065783 | Jun 1978 | JP |
56-24510 | Mar 1981 | JP |
61-177783 | Aug 1986 | JP |
H02-114149 | Apr 1990 | JP |
3-183946 | Aug 1991 | JP |
2000-131174 | May 2000 | JP |
2000-171386 | Jun 2000 | JP |
2000-266662 | Sep 2000 | JP |
2001-4527 | Jan 2001 | JP |
2002-181692 | Jun 2002 | JP |
2002-277339 | Sep 2002 | JP |
2003-014682 | Jan 2003 | JP |
2006-258601 | Sep 2006 | JP |
2007-021996 | Feb 2007 | JP |
2008-261652 | Oct 2008 | JP |
2009-250110 | Oct 2009 | JP |
2010-523999 | Jul 2010 | JP |
2012-503179 | Feb 2012 | JP |
2012-093175 | May 2012 | JP |
2012-237697 | Dec 2012 | JP |
2013-523345 | Jun 2013 | JP |
2225594 | Mar 2004 | RU |
2286558 | Oct 2006 | RU |
1797012 | Feb 1993 | SU |
WO 200216908 | Feb 2002 | WO |
WO 2006065770 | Jun 2006 | WO |
WO 2009016594 | Feb 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Brochure entitled “CorrTran® MV Corrosion Monitoring Transmitter”, by Pepperl+Fuchs, pp. 1-61, Mar. 2012. |
Device Measurement and Maintenance, Issue 9, 1997, pp. 38-41. |
Device Management and Maintenance, Issue 10, 1997, pp. 35-38. |
Corrosion Test Methods and Monitoring Technology, Edition 1, May 2007, 9 pages. |
1000 Examples of Water Disposal Anti-Corrosion and Invalidation Analysis, Sep. 2000, 4 pages. |
Metal Corrosion Theory and Application, Dec. 1984, pp. 337-341. |
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority from PCT/US2016/032020, dated Sep. 23, 2016. |
Communication from European Patent Application No. 15714072.4, dated Oct. 21, 2016. |
Examination Report from Australian Patent Application No. 2015229218, dated Feb. 1, 2017. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201510114343.5, dated Feb. 28, 2017. |
Examination Report from Australian Patent Application No. 2015229218, dated Aug. 4, 2017. |
Communication from European Patent Application No. 15714072.4, dated Jun. 26, 2017. |
Office Action from Canadian Patent Application No. 2,941,012, dated Jun. 6, 2017. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201410788042.6, dated Jan. 12, 2018. |
Office Action from Australian Patent Application No. 2015324462, dated Dec. 21, 2017. |
Office Action from Canadian Patent Application No. 2,962,566, dated Mar. 1, 2018. |
Office Action from Japanese Patent Application No. 2017-517089, dated Feb. 20, 2018. |
Office Action from Japanese Patent Application No. 2016-557291, dated Aug. 23, 2017. |
Office Action from European Patent Application No. 15714072.4, dated Oct. 31, 2017. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201510114343.5, dated Oct. 31, 2017. |
Examination Report for Australian Patent Application No. 2015324462, dated Oct. 10, 2017, 3 pages. |
Office Action from European Patent Application No. 16736266.4, dated Feb. 2, 2018. |
Communication from European Patent Application No. 15763727.3, dated May 10, 2017. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201410788042.6, dated Nov. 29, 2018. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201410788042.6, dated Mar. 26, 2018. |
Office Action from Russian Patent Application No. 2017114982, dated Mar. 19, 2018. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201510931578.3, dated Jun. 1, 2018. |
Office Action from Russian Patent Application No. 2018102896, dated Jun. 26, 2018. |
Office Action from Canadian Patent Application No. 2,988,562, dated Oct. 23, 2018. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201410788042.6, dated Mar. 6, 2019. |
Office Action from Japanese Patent Application No. 2017-567131, dated Dec. 4, 2018. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201410788042.6, dated Aug. 3, 2018. |
Translation of “Practical Anticorrosion Technology for Oil and Gas Field Engineering”, edited by Zhang, Qingyu, China Petrochemical Press, the first edition, Sep. 2009, p. 618. |
Examination Report from Indian Patent Application No. 201727006258, dated Feb. 24, 2020. |
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority from PCT/US2015/020354, dated Jun. 2, 2015. |
Office Action from Chinese Patent Application No. 201520148367.8, dated May 19, 2015. |
Notification of Transmittal of the International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority from PCT/US2015/047905, dated Nov. 5, 2015. |
Communication from European Patent Application No. 15763727.3, dated Jul. 1, 2020. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160091411 A1 | Mar 2016 | US |