Patent Grant
9650698
This application is the National Stage of PCT/DE2013/000269 filed on May 15, 2013, which claims priority under 35 U.S.C. §119 of German Application No. 10 2012 011 162.2 filed on Jun. 5, 2012, the disclosure of which is incorporated by reference. The international application under PCT article 21(2) was not published in English.
The invention relates to a nickel-chromium alloy with good high-temperature corrosion resistance, good creep resistance and improved processability.
Nickel alloys with different nickel, chromium and aluminum contents have long been used in furnace construction and in the chemical as well as petrochemical industry. For this use, a good high-temperature corrosion resistance even in carburizing atmospheres and a good heat resistance/creep resistance are necessary.
In general, it may be remarked that the high-temperature corrosion resistance of the alloys listed in Table 1 increases with increasing chromium content. All these alloys form a chromium oxide layer (Cr2O3) with an underlying, more or less closed Al2O3 layer. Small additions of strongly oxygen-affine elements such as, e.g. Y or Ce improve the oxidation resistance. The chromium content is slowly consumed for build-up of the protecting layer in the course of use in the application zone. Therefore the lifetime of the material is prolonged by a higher chromium content, since a higher content of the element chromium forming the protective layer extends the time at which the Cr content lies below the critical limit and oxides other than Cr2O3 are formed, which are, e.g. iron-containing and nickel-containing oxides. A further increase of the high-temperature corrosion resistance could be achieved if necessary by additions of aluminum and silicon. Starting from a certain minimum content, these elements form a closed layer under the chromium oxide layer and thus reduce the consumption of chromium.
In carburizing atmospheres (CO, H2, CH4, CO2, H2O mixtures), carbon may penetrate into the material, and so the formation of internal carbides may take place. These cause a loss of notch impact toughness. Also, the melting point may sink to very low values (down to 350° C.) and transformation processes may occur due to chromium depletion in the matrix.
A high resistance to carburization is achieved by materials with low solubility for carbon and low rate of diffusion of the carbon. In general, therefore, nickel alloys are more resistant to carburization than iron-base alloys, since both the diffusion of carbon and also the solubility of carbon in nickel are smaller than in iron. An increase of the chromium content brings about a higher carburization resistance by formation of a protecting chromium oxide layer, unless the oxygen partial pressure in the gas is not sufficient for the formation of this protecting chromium oxide layer. At very low oxygen partial pressure, it is possible to use materials that form a layer of silicon oxide or of the even more stable aluminum oxide, both of which are still able to form protecting oxide layers at much lower oxygen contents.
In the case that the carbon activity is >1, the so-called “metal dusting” may occur in alloys based on nickel, iron or cobalt. In contact with the supersaturated gas, the alloys may absorb large amounts of carbon. The segregation processes taking place in the alloy supersaturated with carbon leads to material destruction. In the process, the alloy decomposes into a mixture of metal particles, graphite, carbides and/or oxides. This type of material destruction takes place in the temperature range from 500° C. to 750° C.
Typical conditions for the occurrence of metal dusting are strongly carburizing CO, H2 or CH4 gas mixtures, such as occur in the synthesis of ammonia, in methanol plants, in metallurgical processes but also in hardening furnaces.
The resistance to metal dusting tends to increase with increasing nickel content of the alloy (Grabke, H. J., Krajak, R., Müller-Lorenz, E. M., Strauss, S.: Materials and Corrosion 47 (1996), p. 495), although even nickel alloys are not generally resistant to metal dusting.
The chromium and the aluminum content have a distinct influence on the corrosion resistance under metal dusting conditions (see
The heat resistance or creep resistance at the indicated temperatures is improved by a high carbon content among other factors. However, high contents of solid-solution-strengthening elements such as chromium, aluminum, silicon, molybdenum and tungsten improve the heat resistance. In the range of 500° C. to 900° C., additions of aluminum, titanium and/or niobium can improve the resistance, and specifically by precipitation of the γ′ and/or γ″ phase.
Examples according to the prior art are listed in Table 1.
Alloys such as Alloy 602 CA (N06025), Alloy 693 (N06693) or Alloy 603 (N06603) are known for their excellent corrosion resistance in comparison with Alloy 600 (N06600) or Alloy 601 (N06601) by virtue of the high aluminum content of more than 1.8%. Alloy 602 CA (N06025), Alloy 693 (N06693), Alloy 603 (N06603) and Alloy 690 (N06690) exhibit excellent carburization resistance or metal dusting resistance by virtue of their high chromium and/or aluminum contents. At the same time, by virtue of the high carbon or aluminum content, alloys such as Alloy 602 CA (N06025), Alloy 693 (N06693) or Alloy 603 (N06603) have excellent heat resistance or creep resistance in the temperature range in which metal dusting occurs. Alloy 602 CA (N06025) and Alloy 603 (N06603) still have excellent heat resistance or creep resistance even at temperatures above 1000° C. Because of, for example, the high aluminum content, however, the processability is impaired, and the impairment is greater the higher the aluminum content (Alloy 693-N06693). The same is true to a greater extent for silicon, which forms low-melting intermetallic phases with nickel. In Alloy 602 CA (N06025) or Alloy 603 (N06603), the cold formability in particular is limited by the high proportion of primary carbides.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,623,869 B1 discloses a metallic material that consists of ≦0.2% C, 0.01-4% Si, 0.05-2.0% Mn, ≦0.04% P, ≦0.015% S, 10-35% Cr, 30-78% Ni, 0.005-4.5% Al, 0.005-0.2% N and at least one element 0.015-3% Cu or 0.015-3% Co, with the rest up to 100% iron. Therein the value of 40Si+Ni+5Al+40N+10(Cu+Co) is not smaller than 50, where the symbols of the elements denote the fractional content of the corresponding elements. The material has an excellent corrosion resistance in an environment in which metal dusting can occur and it may therefore be used for furnace pipes, pipe systems, heat-exchanger tubes and the like in petroleum refineries or petrochemical plants, and it can markedly improve the lifetime and safety of the plant.
EP 0 549 286 discloses a high-temperature-resistant Ni—Cr alloy containing 55-65% Ni, 19-25% Cr, 1-4.5% AI, 0.045-0.3% Y, 0.15-1% Ti, 0.005-0.5% C, 0.1-1.5% Si, 0-1% Mn and at least 0.005% in total of at least one of the elements of the group containing Mg, Ca, Ce, <0.5% in total of Mg+Ca, <1% Ce, 0.0001-0.1% B, 0-0.5% Zr, 0.0001-0.2% N, 0-10% Co, 0-0.5% Cu, 0-0.5% Mo, 0-0.3% Nb, 0-0.1% V, 0-0.1% W, the rest iron and impurities.
The task underlying the invention consists in designing a nickel-chromium alloy that exceeds the metal dusting resistance of Alloy 690, so that an excellent metal dusting resistance is assured, but which at the same time exhibits
Furthermore, it would be desirable if this alloy additionally had
This task is accomplished by a nickel-chromium alloy with (in % by wt) 29 to 37% chromium 0.001 to 1.8% aluminum, 0.10 to 7.0% iron, 0.001 to 0.50% silicon, 0.005 to 2.0% manganese, 0.00 to 1.00% titanium and/or 0.00 to 1.10% niobium, respectively 0.0002 to 0.05% magnesium and/or calcium, 0.005 to 0.12% carbon, 0.001 to 0.050% nitrogen, 0.001 to 0.030% phosphorus, 0.0001-0.020% oxygen, max. 0.010% sulfur, max. 2.0% molybdenum, max. 2.0% tungsten, the rest nickel and the usual process-related impurities, wherein the following relationships must be satisfied:
Cr+Al>30 (2a)
and Fp≦39.9 with (3a)
Fp=Cr+0.272*Fe+2.36*AI+2.22*Si+2.48*Ti+1.26*Nb+0.374*Mo+0.538*W−11.8*C (4a)
where Cr, Fe, Al, Si, Ti, Nb, Mo, W and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Advantageous further embodiments of the subject matter of the invention are also described in the disclosure.
The spread for the element chromium lies between 29 and 37%, wherein preferred ranges may be adjusted as follows:
The aluminum content lies between 0.001 and 1.8%, wherein here also preferred aluminum contents may be adjusted as follows depending on the field of use of the alloy:
The iron content lies between 0.1 and 7.0%, wherein defined contents may be adjusted within the following spread depending on the area of application:
The silicon content lies between 0.001 and 0.50%. Preferably Si may be adjusted in the alloy within the spread as follows:
The same is true for the element manganese, which may be contained in proportions of 0.005 to 2.0% in the alloy. Alternatively, the following spread is also conceivable:
The titanium content lies between 0.00 and 1.0%. Preferably Ti may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
The Nb content lies between 0.00 and 1.1%. Preferably Nb may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
Magnesium and/or calcium is also contained in contents of 0.0002 to 0.05%. Preferably the possibility exists of adjusting these elements respectively as follows in the alloy:
The alloy contains 0.005 to 0.12% carbon. Preferably this may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
This is true in the same way for the element nitrogen, which is contained in contents between 0.001 and 0.05%. Preferred contents may be stated as follows:
The alloy further contains phosphorus in contents between 0.001 and 0.030%. Preferred contents may be stated as follows:
The alloy further contains oxygen in contents between 0.0001 and 0.020%, containing especially 0.0001 to 0.010%.
The element sulfur is specified as follows in the alloy:
Molybdenum and tungsten are contained individually or in combination in the alloy in a content of respectively at most 2.0%. Preferred contents may be stated as follows:
The following relationship between Cr and Al must be satisfied, so that a sufficient resistance to metal dusting is achieved:
Cr+AI>30 (2a)
where Cr and AI are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Preferred ranges may be adjusted with
Cr+AI≧31 (2b)
Furthermore the following relationship must be satisfied, so that a sufficient phase stability is achieved:
Fp≦39.9 with (3a)
Fp=Cr+0.272*Fe+2.36*AI+2.22*Si+2.48*Ti+1.26*Nb+0.374*Mo+0.538*W−11.8*C (4a)
where Cr, Fe, AI, Si, Ti, Nb, Mo, W and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Preferred ranges may be adjusted with:
Fp≦38.4 (3b)
Fp≦36.6 (3c)
Optionally the element yttrium may be adjusted in contents of 0.01 to 0.20% in the alloy. Preferably Y may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
Optionally the element lanthanum may be adjusted in contents of 0.001 to 0.20% in the alloy. Preferably La may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
Optionally the element Ce may be adjusted in contents of 0.001 to 0.20% in the alloy. Preferably Ce may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
Optionally, in the case of simultaneous addition of Ce and La, cerium mixed metal may also be used in contents of 0.001 to 0.20%. Preferably cerium mixed metal may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
If necessary, Zr may also be added to the alloy. The zirconium content lies between 0.01 and 0.20%. Preferably Zr may be adjusted within the spread as follows in the alloy:
Optionally, zirconium may be replaced completely or partly by
Optionally, 0.001 to 0.60% tantalum may also be contained in the alloy.
Optionally, the element boron may be contained as follows in the alloy:
Preferably, contents of boron may be stated as follows:
Furthermore, the alloy may contain between 0.00 and 5.0% cobalt if necessary, which furthermore may be limited even more as follows:
Furthermore, at most 0.5% Cu may be contained in the alloy if necessary.
The copper content may be further restricted as follows:
If Cu is contained in the alloy, Formula 4a must be supplemented with a term for Cu as follows:
Fp=Cr+0.272*Fe+2.36*AI+2.22*Si+2.48*Ti+1.26*Nb+0.477*Cu+0.374*Mo+0.538*W−11.8*C (4b)
where Cr, Fe, Al, Si, Ti, Nb, Cu, Mo, W and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Furthermore, at most 0.5% vanadium may be contained in the alloy if necessary.
Finally, the elements lead, zinc and tin may be stated as impurities in contents as follows:
Furthermore, the following relationship, which assures a particularly good processability, may be satisfied:
Fa≦60 with (5a)
Fa=Cr+6.15*Nb+20.4*Ti+201*C (6a)
where Cr, Ti, Nb and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Preferred ranges may be adjusted with:
Fa≧54 (5b)
Furthermore, the following relationship, which describes a particularly good heat resistance or creep resistance, may be satisfied:
Fk≧40 with (7a)
Fk=Cr+19*Ti+34.3*Nb+10.2*Al+12.5*Si+98*C (8a)
where Cr, Ti, Nb, Al, Si and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Preferred ranges may be adjusted with:
Fk≧45 (7b)
Fk≧49 (7c)
If boron is contained in the alloy, Formula 6a must be supplemented with a term for boron as follows:
Fk=Cr+19*Ti+34.3*Nb+10.2*A+12.5*Si+98*C+2245*B (8b)
where Cr, Ti, Nb, Al, Si, C and B are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
The alloy according to the invention is preferably smelted in an open system, followed by a treatment in a VOD or VLF system. However, a smelting and pouring in vacuum is also possible. Thereafter the alloy is cast in ingots or as continuous strand. If necessary, the ingot is then annealed for 0.1 h to 70 h at temperatures between 900° C. and 1270° C. Furthermore, it is possible to remelt the alloy additionally with ESU and/or VAR. Thereafter the alloy is worked into the desired semifinished product shape. For this it is annealed if necessary for 0.1 h to 70 h at temperatures between 900° C. and 1270° C., then hot-formed, if necessary with intermediate annealings for 0.05 h to 70 h between 900° C. and 1270° C. If necessary, the surface of the material may also be milled chemically and/or mechanically occasionally (even several times) and/or at the end for cleaning. After the end of hot shaping, cold shaping to the desired semifinished product shape with reduction ratios up to 98% may take place if necessary, with intermediate annealings for 0.1 min to 70 h between 700° C. and 1250° C. if necessary, under shielding gas, if necessary, such as argon or hydrogen, for example, followed by cooling in air, in the agitated annealing atmosphere or in the water bath. Thereafter a solution annealing takes place for 0.1 min to 70 h between 700° C. and 1250° C., under shielding gas, if necessary, such as argon or hydrogen, for example, followed by cooling in air, in the agitated annealing atmosphere or in the water bath. If necessary, chemical and/or mechanical cleanings of the material surface may take place occasionally and/or after the last annealing.
The alloy according to the invention can be readily manufactured and used in the product forms of strip, sheet, bar, wire, longitudinally seam-welded pipe and seamless pipe.
These product forms are manufactured with a mean grain size of 5 μm to 600 μm. The preferred grain-size range lies between 20 μm and 200 μm.
The alloy according to the invention will preferably be used in zones in which carburizing conditions prevail, such as, for example, in structural parts, especially pipes, in the petrochemical industry. Furthermore, it is also suitable for furnace construction.
Tests Performed:
The phases occurring at equilibrium were calculated for the different alloy variants with the JMatPro program of Thermotech. The TTNI7 database of Thermotech for nickel-base alloys was used as the database for the calculations.
The formability is determined in a tension test according to DIN EN ISO 6892-1 at room temperature. Therein the yield strength Rp0.2, the tensile strength Rm and the elongation A at break are determined. The elongation A is determined on the broken specimen from the elongation of the original gauge length L0:
A=(Lu−L0)/L0100%=ΔL/L0100%
where Lu=measured length after break.
Depending on gauge length, the elongation at break is characterized by indices:
For example, for A5 the gauge length is L0=5·d0, where d0=initial diameter of a round specimen.
The tests were performed on round specimens with a diameter of 6 mm in the measurement zone and a gauge length L0 of 30 mm. The sampling took place transversely relative to the forming direction of the semifinished product. The deformation rate was 10 MPa/s for Rp0.2 and 6.7 10−3 l/s (40%/min) for Rm.
The magnitude of the elongation A in the tension test at room temperature may be taken as a measure of the deformability. A readily processable material should have an elongation of at least 50%.
The heat resistance is determined in a hot tension test according to DIN EN ISO 6892-2. Therein the yield strength Rp0.2, the tensile strength Rm and the elongation A at break are determined by analogy with the tension test at room temperature (DIN EN ISO 6892-1).
The tests were performed on round specimens with a diameter of 6 mm in the measurement zone and an initial gauge length L0 of 30 mm. The sampling took place transversely relative to the forming direction of the semifinished product. The deformation rate was 8.33 10−5 l/s (0.5%/min) for Rp0.2 and 8.33 10−4 l/s (5%/min) for Rm.
The specimen is mounted at room temperature in a tension testing machine and heated without loading by a tensile force to the desired temperature. After reaching the test temperature, the specimen is held without loading for one hour (600° C.) or two hours (700° C. to 1100° C.) for temperature equilibration. Thereafter the specimen is loaded with tensile force in such a way that the desired strain rates are maintained, and the test begins.
The creep resistance of a material improves with increasing heat resistance. Therefore the heat resistance is also used for appraisal of the creep resistance of the various materials.
The corrosion resistance at elevated temperatures was determined in an oxidation test at 1000° C. in air, wherein the test was interrupted every 96 hours and the dimensional changes of the specimens due to oxidation were determined. The specimens were placed in ceramic crucibles during the test, so that any oxide that may have spalled was collected and the mass of the spalled oxide can be determined by weighing the crucible containing the oxides. The sum of the mass of the spalled oxide and of the change in mass of the specimens is the gross change in mass of the respective specimen. The specific change in mass is the change in mass relative to the surface area of the specimens. Hereinafter these are denoted by mnet for the specific change in net mass, mgross for the specific change in gross mass, mspall for the specific change in mass of the spalled oxides. The tests were carried out on specimens of approximately 5 mm thickness. Three specimens were extracted from each batch, and the reported values are the mean values of these 3 specimens.
Description of the Properties
In addition to an excellent metal dusting resistance, the alloy according to the invention should also have the following properties:
Also desirable is
Phase Stability
In the nickel-chromium-aluminum-iron system with additions of Ti and/or Nb, various embrittling TCP phases such as, for example, the Laves phases, sigma phases or the μ-phases as well as also the embrittling η-phase or ε-phases can be formed, depending on alloying contents (see, for example, Ralf Bürgel, Handbook of High-Temperature Materials Engineering [in German], 3rd Edition, Vieweg Verlag, Wiesbaden, 2006, page 370-374). The calculation of the equilibrium phase fractions as a function of temperature, for example of N06690, the batch 111389 (see Table 2, typical compositions) shows theoretically the formation of α-chromium (BCC phase in
This is the case in particular when the following formula is satisfied:
Fp≦39.9 with (3a)
Fp=Cr+0.272*Fe+2.36*AI+2.22*Si+2.48*Ti+1.26*Nb+0.374*Mo+0.538*W−11.8*C (4a)
where Cr, Al, Fe, Si, Ti, Nb, Mo, W and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass. Table 2 with the alloys according to the prior art shows that Fp for Alloy 8, Alloy 3 and Alloy 2 is >39.9 and for Alloy 10 is exactly 39.9. For all other alloys with Ts BCC≦939° C., Fp is ≦39.9.
Processability
The formability will be considered here as an example of processability.
An alloy can be hardened by several mechanisms, so that it has a high heat resistance or creep resistance. Thus the alloying addition of another element brings about a more or less large increase of the strength (solid-solution hardening), depending on element. An increase of the strength by fine particles or precipitates (precipitation hardening) is far more effective. This may take place, for example, by the γ′-phase, which is formed by additions of Al and further elements, such as, for example: Ti to a nickel alloy, or by carbides, which are formed by addition of carbon to a chromium-containing nickel alloy (see, for example, Ralf Bürgel, Handbook of High-Temperature Materials Engineering, 3rd Edition, Vieweg Verlag, Wiesbaden, 2006, page 358-369).
The increase of the content of elements forming the γ′-phase, or of the C content, indeed increases the heat resistance, but increasingly impairs the formability, even in the solution-annealed condition.
For a very readily formable material, elongations A5 of ≧50% but at least ≧45% are desired in the tension test at room temperature.
This is achieved in particular when the following relationship between the elements Cr, Nb, Ti and C forming the carbide is satisfied:
Fa≦60 with (5a)
Fa=Cr+6.15*Nb+20.4*Ti+201*C (6b)
where Cr, Nb, Ti and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Heat Resistance/Creep Resistance
The chromium content in the alloy according to the invention is stated as ≧29%, preferably ≧30% or ≧31%. To ensure phase stability at such high chromium contents, the aluminum content has been chosen more in the lower range as ≦1.8%, preferably ≦1.4%. However, since the aluminum content contributes substantially to the tensile strength or creep resistance (both by solid-solution hardening and also by γ′ hardening), this has the consequence that the target for the heat resistance or the creep resistance was taken not as that of Alloy 602 CA but instead that of Alloy 601, even though much higher values for the heat resistance and creep resistance naturally would be desirable.
It was desired that the yield strength or the tensile strength at higher temperatures lie at least in the range of the values of Alloy 601 or Alloy 690 (see Table 4). At least 3 of the 4 following relationships should be satisfied:
600° C.: yield strength Rp0.2>140 MPa; tensile strength Rm>450 MPa (7a, 7b)
800° C.: yield strength Rp0.2>130 MPa; tensile strength Rm>135 MPa (7c, 7d)
This is achieved in particular when the following relationship between the mainly hardening elements is satisfied:
Fk≧40 with (7a)
Fk=Cr+19*Ti+34.3*Nb+10.2*Al+12.5*Si+98*C+2245*B (8b)
where Cr, Ti, Nb, Al, Si, C and B are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass.
Corrosion Resistance:
The oxidation resistance of a good chromium oxide builder is adequate. The alloy according to the invention should therefore have a corrosion resistance in air similar to that of Alloy 690 or Alloy 601.
Tables 3a and 3b show the analyses of the batches smelted on the laboratory scale together with some industrially smelted batches, cited for comparison, according to the prior art, of Alloy 602CA (N06025), Alloy 690 (N06690), Alloy 601 (N06601). The batches according to the prior art are marked with a T, those according to the invention with an E. The batches corresponding to the laboratory scale are marked with an L, those smelted industrially with a G.
The ingots of the alloys smelted in vacuum on the laboratory scale in Table 3a and b were annealed for 8 h between 900° C. and 1270° C. and hot-rolled to a final thickness of 13 mm or 6 mm by means of hot rolls and further intermediate annealings for 0.1 to 1 h between 900° C. and 1270° C. The sheets produced in this way were solution-annealed for 1 h between 900° C. and 1270° C. The specimens needed for the measurements were taken from these sheets.
For the industrially smelted alloys, a sample from the industrial production was taken from a commercially produced sheet of suitable thickness. The specimens needed for the measurements were taken from this sample.
All alloy variants typically had a grain size between 65 and 310 μm.
For the exemplary batches in Table 3a and 3b, the following properties were compared.
Batches 2294 to 2314 and 250053 to 250150 were smelted on the laboratory scale. The batches according to the invention marked with E satisfy the Formula (2a) with Cr+AI>30 and are therefore more resistant to metal dusting than is Alloy 690. Batches 2298, 2299, 2303, 2304, 2305, 2308, 2314, 250063, 260065, 250066, 250067, 250068, 250079, 250139, 250140 and 250141 satisfy formula (2b) AI+Cr≧31. They are therefore particularly resistant to metal dusting.
For the selected alloys according to the prior art in Table 2 and for all laboratory batches (Tables 3a and 3b), the phase diagrams were calculated and the formation temperature Ts BCC was entered in Tables 2 and 3a. For the compositions in Tables 2 as well as 3a and 3b, the value for Fp according to Formula 4a was also calculated. Fp is larger the higher the formation temperature Ts BCC. All examples of Alloy 693 (N06693) with a formation temperature Ts BCC higher than that of Alloy 10 have an Fp>39.9. The requirement Fp≦39.9 (Formula 3a) is therefore a good criterion for obtaining an adequate phase stability in an alloy. All laboratory batches (marking L) in Table 3a and 3b satisfy the criterion Fp≦39.9.
The yield strength Rp0.2, the tensile strength Rm and the elongation A5 for room temperature RT and for 600° C. are entered in Table 4, as is the tensile strength Rm for 800° C. The values for Fa and Fk are also entered.
Exemplary batches 156817 and 160483 of the alloy according to the prior art, Alloy 602 CA in Table 4, have a comparatively small elongation A5 at room temperature of 36 or 42%, which fall short of the requirements for good formability. Fa is >60 and therefore above the range that characterizes good formability. All alloys according to the invention exhibit an elongation >50%. Thus they satisfy the requirements. Fa is <60 for all alloys according to the invention. They therefore lie in the range of good formability. The elongation is particularly high when Fa is comparatively small.
Exemplary batch 156658 of the alloy according to the prior art, Alloy 601 in Table 4, is an example of the range that the yield strength and tensile strength should reach at 600° C. and 800° C. This is described by the Formulas 7a to 7d. The value for Fk is >40. The alloys 2298, 2299, 2303, 2304, 2305, 2308, 2314, 250060, 250063, 260065, 250066, 250067, 250068, 250079, 250139, 250140, 250141, 250143, 250150 meet the requirement that at least 3 of the 4 Formulas 7a to 7d be satisfied. For these alloys, Fk is also larger than 40. The laboratory batches 2295, 2303, 250053, 250054 and 250057 are examples wherein fewer than 3 of the 4 Formulas 7a to 7d are satisfied. Then Fk is also <45.
Table 5 shows the specific changes in mass after an oxidation test at 1100° C. in air after 11 cycles of 96 h, i.e. a total of 1056 h. The gross change in mass, the net change in mass and the specific change in mass of the spalled oxides after 1056 h are indicated in Table 5. The alloys according to the prior art, Alloy 601 and Alloy 690, exhibited a much higher gross change in weight than Alloy 602 CA. This is due to the fact that, although Alloy 601 and Alloy 690 form a chromium oxide layer that grows faster than an aluminum oxide layer, Alloy 602 CA has an at least partly closed aluminum oxide layer under the chromium oxide layer. This reduces the growth of the oxide layer markedly and thus also the specific increase in mass. The alloys according to the invention should have a corrosion resistance in air similar to that of Alloy 690 or Alloy 601. This means that the gross change in mass should be smaller than 60 g/m2. This is the case for all laboratory batches in Table 5, and therefore also for the batches according to the invention.
The claimed limits for the alloy “E” according to the invention can therefore be substantiated in detail as follows:
Too low Cr contents mean that the Cr concentration sinks very rapidly below the critical limit during use of the alloy in a corrosive atmosphere, and so a closed chromium oxide can no longer be formed. Therefore 29% Cr is the lower limit for chromium. Too high Cr contents impair the phase stability of the alloy. Therefore 37% Cr must be regarded as the upper limit.
A certain minimum aluminum content of 0.001% is necessary for the manufacturability of the alloy. Too high Al contents, especially in the case of very high chromium contents, impair the processability and the phase stability of the alloy. Therefore an Al content of 1.8% constitutes the upper limit.
The costs for the alloy rise with the reduction of the iron content. Below 0.1%, the costs rise disproportionately, since special raw material must be used. For cost reasons, therefore, 0.1% Fe must be regarded as the lower limit.
With increase of the iron content, the phase stability decreases (formation of embrittling phases), especially at high chromium contents. Therefore 7% Fe is a practical upper limit for ensuring the phase stability of the alloy according to the invention.
Si is needed during the manufacture of the alloy. Thus a minimum content of 0.001% is necessary. Too high contents again impair the processability and the phase stability, especially at high chromium contents. The Si content is therefore limited to 0.50%.
A minimum content of 0.005% Mn is necessary for the improvement of the processability. Manganese is limited to 2.0%, since this element reduces the oxidation resistance.
Titanium increases the high-temperature resistance. From 1.0%, the oxidation behavior can be greatly impaired, and so 1.0% is the maximum value.
Just as titanium, niobium increases the high-temperature resistance. Higher contents increase the costs very greatly. The upper limit is therefore set at 1.1%.
Even very low Mg contents and/or Ca contents improve the processability by binding sulfur, whereby the occurrence of low-melting NiS eutectics is prevented. Therefore a minimum content of respectively 0.0002% is necessary for Mg and/or Ca. At too high contents, intermetallic Ni—Mg phases or Ni—Ca phases may form, which again greatly impair the processability. The Mg and/or Ca content is therefore limited to at most 0.05%.
A minimum content of 0.005% C is necessary for a good creep resistance. C is limited to a maximum of 0.12%, since above that content this element reduces the processability due to the excessive formation of primary carbides.
A minimum content of 0.001% N is necessary, whereby the processability of the material is improved. N is limited to at most 0.05%, since this element reduces the processability by the formation of coarse carbonitrides.
The oxygen content must be ≦0.020%, in order to ensure manufacturability of the alloy. A too low oxygen content increases the costs. The oxygen content is therefore 0.001%.
The content of phosphorus should be 0.030%, since this surface-active element impairs the oxidation resistance. A too low P content increases the costs. The P content is therefore ≦0.0001%.
The contents of sulfur should be adjusted as low as possible, since this surface-active element impairs the oxidation resistance. Therefore 0.010% S is set as the maximum.
Molybdenum is limited to at most 2.0%, since this element reduces the oxidation resistance.
Tungsten is limited to at most 2.0%, since this element also reduces the oxidation resistance.
The following relationship between Cr and Al must be satisfied, in order that sufficient resistance to metal dusting is achieved:
Cr+Al>30 (2a)
where Cr and Al are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass. Only then is the content of oxide-forming elements high enough to ensure a metal dusting resistance better than Alloy 690.
Furthermore, the following relationship must be satisfied, in order that sufficient phase stability is achieved:
Fp≦39.9 with (3a)
Fp=Cr+0.272*Fe+2.36*AI+2.22*Si+2.48*Ti+1.26*Nb+0.374*Mo+0.538*W−11.8*C (4a)
where Cr, Fe, Al, Si, Ti, Nb, Mo, W and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass. The limits for Fp as well as possible incorporation of further elements have been substantiated in detail in the foregoing description.
If necessary, the oxidation resistance may be further improved with additions of oxygen-affine elements. They achieve this by being incorporated in the oxide layer and blocking the diffusion paths of the oxygen at the grain boundaries therein.
A minimum content of 0.01% Y is necessary, in order to obtain the oxidation-resistance-increasing effect of the Y. For cost reasons, the upper limit is set at 0.20%.
A minimum content of 0.001% La is necessary, in order to obtain the oxidation-resistance-increasing effect of the La. For cost reasons, the upper limit is set at 0.20%.
A minimum content of 0.001% Ce is necessary, in order to obtain the oxidation-resistance-increasing effect of the Ce. For cost reasons, the upper limit is set at 0.20%.
A minimum content of 0.001% cerium mixed metal is necessary, in order to obtain the oxidation-resistance-increasing effect of the cerium mixed metal. For cost reasons, the upper limit is set at 0.20%.
If necessary, the alloy may also contain Zr. A minimum content of 0.01% Zr is necessary, in order to obtain the high-temperature-resistance-increasing and oxidation-resistance-increasing effect of the Zr. For cost reasons, the upper limit is set at 0.20% Zr.
If necessary, Zr may be replaced completely or partly by Hf, since this element, just as Zr, increases the high-temperature resistance and the oxidation resistance. The replacement is possible starting from contents of 0.001%. For cost reasons, the upper limit is set at 0.20% Hf.
If necessary, the alloy may also contain tantalum, since tantalum also increases the high-temperature resistance. Higher contents raise the costs very greatly. The upper limit is therefore set at 0.60%. A minimum content of 0.001% is necessary in order to achieve an effect.
If necessary, boron may be added to the alloy, since boron increases the creep resistance. Therefore a content of at least 0.0001% should be present. At the same time, this surface-active element impairs the oxidation resistance. Therefore 0.008% boron is set as the maximum.
Cobalt may be present in this alloy up to 5.0%. Higher contents reduce the oxidation resistance markedly.
Copper is limited to at most 0.5%, since this element reduces the oxidation resistance.
Vanadium is limited to at most 0.5%, since this element reduces the oxidation resistance.
Pb is limited to at most 0.002%, since this element reduces the oxidation resistance. The same is true for Zn and Sn.
Furthermore, the following relationship, which describes a particularly good processability, may be satisfied for carbide-forming elements Cr, Ti and C:
Fa≦60 with (5a)
Fa=Cr+6.15*Nb+20.4*Ti+201*C (6a)
where Cr, Nb, Ti and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass. The limits for Fa have been substantiated in detail in the foregoing description.
Furthermore, the following relationship, which describes a particularly good heat resistance or creep resistance, between the strength-increasing elements may be satisfied:
Fk≧40 with (7a)
Fk=Cr+19*Ti+34.3*Nb+10.2*Al+12.5*Si+98*C (8a)
where Cr, Ti, Nb, Al, Si and C are the concentrations of the elements in question in % by mass. The limits for Fa and the possible incorporation of further elements have been substantiated in detail in the foregoing description.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 2012 011 162 | Jun 2012 | DE | national |
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/DE2013/000269 | 5/15/2013 | WO | 00 |
| Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| WO2013/182178 | 12/12/2013 | WO | A |
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4882125 | Smith et al. | Nov 1989 | A |
| 5543109 | Senba et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5980821 | Brill | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5997809 | Smith et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6458318 | Nishiyama et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6623869 | Nishiyama et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6852177 | Kubota et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 8470106 | Cloue et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
| 8568901 | Kiser et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
| 8696836 | Takahata et al. | Apr 2014 | B2 |
| 9249482 | Jakobi et al. | Feb 2016 | B2 |
| 20050129567 | Kirchheiner et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20060207696 | Takahata et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20100166594 | Hirata | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20160108501 | Jakobi et al. | Apr 2016 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1463296 | Dec 2003 | CN |
| 1742106 | Mar 2006 | CN |
| 1831165 | Sep 2006 | CN |
| 101600814 | Dec 2009 | CN |
| 600 04 737 | Jun 2004 | DE |
| 201170560 | Dec 2011 | EA |
| 0 508 058 | Oct 1992 | EP |
| 0 549 286 | Jun 1993 | EP |
| 1 698 708 | Sep 2006 | EP |
| H01-312051 | Dec 1989 | JP |
| H07-11366 | Jan 1995 | JP |
| H07-216511 | Aug 1995 | JP |
| H08-127848 | May 1996 | JP |
| 2002-003970 | Jan 2002 | JP |
| 2002-531709 | Sep 2002 | JP |
| 2003-073763 | Mar 2003 | JP |
| 2003-138334 | May 2003 | JP |
| 2009-052084 | Mar 2009 | JP |
| 2010-510074 | Apr 2010 | JP |
| 2011121088 | Jun 2011 | JP |
| 2125110 | Jan 1999 | RU |
| Entry |
|---|
| International Search Report of PCT/DE2013/000269, mailed Nov. 11, 2013. |
| Grabke et al: “Metal dusting of nickel-base alloys”, Materials and Corrosion 47, (1996), pp. 495-504. |
| Hermse et al: “Metal dusting: relationship between alloy composition and degradation rate”, Corrosion Engineering, Science and Technology 2009, vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 182-185. |
| Slevolden et al: Tjeldbergodden Methanol Plant: Metal Dusting Investigations, NACE International Corrosion 2011 Conference & Expo, Paper No. 11144, pp. 1-15 (2011). |
| Buergel, Handbuch Hochtemperatur-Werkstofftechnik, Vieweg VEriag, Wiesbaden, 2006, pp. 358-374. |
| INCONEL alloy 690, Oct. 9, 2009, XP055085643, Url:http://www.specialmetals.com/documents/Inconelalloy690.pdf, pp. 1-8. |
| INCONEL R Alloy 693—Excellent Resistance to Metal Dusting and High Temperature Corrosion, internet citation, Nov. 17, 2004, URL:http://www.specialmetals.com/documents/Inconel%2Oalloy%2020693.pdf, pp. 1-8. |
| Baker et al: 02394, Nickel-Base Material Solutions to Metal Dusting Problems, 2002 NACE Conference papers (NACE International), Jan. 2, 2002, URL:http://www.asminternational.org/portal/site/www/AsmStore/ProductDEtals/?vgnetoid=3c2ee604e3d33210VgnVcM100000701e010aRCR, 16 pages. |
| DIN EN ISO 6892-1, Metallic materials—Tensile testing—Part 1: Method of test at room temperature, First edition Aug. 15, 2009. |
| DIN EN ISO 6892-2, Metallic materials—Tensile testing—Part 2: Method of test at elevated temperature, May 2011. |
| International Search Report of PCT/DE2013/000268, mailed Nov. 6, 2013. |
| R. T. Holt et al: “Impurities and trace elements in nickel-base superalloys”, International Materials Reviews, Review 203, (Mar. 1976), pp. 1-24. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20150093288 A1 | Apr 2015 | US |
