Galvanic Corrosion
Galvanic Corrosion
S.M. Wilhelm*
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
Galvanic corrosion between dissimilar materials was investi-               Historically, galvanic corrosion was not a major engi-
gated using laboratory simulations of oil/gas production                   neering problem in production systems when low-
environments. Galvanic corrosion of materials used in pro-                 alloy steels were the primary materials of construction.
duction equipment (4130, 9 Cr, 13 Cr, 2205, 718, 825, NIC                  Table 1 provides a compilation of oilfield alloys used in
32, NIC 42, SM 2550, Beta-C Ti, C-276, 925) was studied in
                                                                           1950. When used, chromium-containing alloys were
corrosive environments, which included sweet well produced
fluids, sour well produced fluids, heavy brine packer fluids,              usually minor components of production strings. Con-
and acidizing fluids. Corrosion coupons of various geom-                   sequently, highly alloyed materials were not commonly
etries were used to measure corrosion rates and                            used in situations where they could provide large ca-
morphologies. Electrochemical measurements were per-                       thodic surface areas. Therefore, the frequency of
formed to determine potentials and current densities. The                  galvanic corrosion problems associated with coupling
experimental study found that the severity of galvanic attack              grossly dissimilar materials was low prior to the advent
is a strong function of the type of corrosion products that                of corrosion resistant alloy (CRA) completion technol-
form on metal surfaces. Galvanic interactions are mitigated                ogy.
in produced fluids where carbonate and/or sulfide scales
                                                                                The situation changed when higher alloy stainless
dominate the corrosion morphology. Carbonate scales tend
to block long-range galvanic currents and sulfide scales tend              steels and nickel-base alloys were used routinely for
to short-circuit them. As a result, coupling of dissimilar mate-           tubing strings and other subsurface equipment. CRA
rials in produced fluids may be less of a problem than                     liner and tubing strings are now prevalent as are
suspected. In more aggressive fluids, such as acidizing or                 highly alloyed, downhole equipment such as packers,
packer fluids where protective scales do not form, the sever-              valves, hangers, etc. Thus, the opportunities for gal-
ity of galvanic corrosion is much more pronounced. In these                vanic corrosion have increased dramatically due to the
situations, however, many chromium-containing materials                    proliferation of new oilfield metallurgy and the greater
actively corrode, and their chromium content provides short-               complexity of equipment. Figure 1 shows a schematic
range galvanic assistance to dissolution, thus reducing
                                                                           of typical bottomhole well completion equipment.
long-range effects provided by coupling to dissimilar materi-
als. A galvanic series was constructed based on coupon                          For well completion engineers, galvanic corrosion
data and electrochemical measurements for each of the four                 is an area of real concern because CRA completions
environments examined.                                                     are often designed for long, uninterrupted service. To
                                                                           attack this problem, engineering data that would assist
KEY WORDS: electrochemistry, galvanic corrosion, nickel-                   prediction of galvanic corrosion were required. The re-
base alloys, petroleum production, stainless steels
                                                                           ported study was conducted in an effort to provide an
                                                                           engineering database for prediction and remediation
                                                                           of galvanic corrosion.
✫
  Submitted for publication January 1992; in revised form, April 1992.          The data reported in this paper are a portion of
  Presented as paper no. 480 at CORROSION/92 in Nashville, Tennessee.
* Cortest Laboratories Inc., 11115 Mills Road, Suite 102, Cypress, TX
                                                                           the information generated in a joint industry research
  77429.                                                                   project sponsored by 14 companies (Table 2). The
                                                        0010-9312/92/000167/$3.00/0
CORROSION–Vol. 48, No. 8                      © 1992, National Association of Corrosion Engineers                               691
ENGINEERING
                                                          TABLE 1
                                     Alloy Steels Used in Oil and Gas roduction in 1950
                                                                Elemental %
Steel C Mn Si Ni Cr Mo Cu
TECHNICAL BACKGROUND
                                                               TABLE 3(a)
                                                    Materials for Coupon Experiments
                       Generic
                       Name C                Mn        S          Ni       Cr         Mo         Others
                                                             TABLE 3(b)
                                        Additional Materials for Electrochemical Experiments
                       Generic
                       Name                  C         Mn          S         Ni        Cr       Mo        Others
                                                               TABLE 4
                                                    Mechanical Properties of Materials
                                                              Yield        Tensile
                       Generic                              Strength      Strength              %         UNS
                       Name             Manufacturer        MPA/ (ksi)    MPA/(ksi)         Elongation    No.
environments that simulated fluids encountered in oil/                      and four times the specimen area. This resulted in
gas production. Coupon assemblies are depicted in                           specimen couple area ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:4, re-
Figure 2. A coupon assembly consisted of a “speci-                          spectively. Viewed conversely, the “couple” alloy in a
men” and a “couple” of variable dimension. The as-                          joined configuration can be treated as a “specimen”.
sembly was joined by tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) bolts,                       When rates are calculated in this fashion, the speci-
nuts and washers. Specimen materials were predomi-                          men couple area ratios are 4:1, 2:1, and 1:1,
nantly 4130, 9 Cr, or 420. Couple materials were pre-                       respectively. The bar graphs (Figures 3 through 15)
dominantly 9 Cr, 420, 2205, 718, or Beta-C Ti. This                         that provide galvanic corrosion data describe the area
distinction is useful in deciphering the data tables.                       ratios in this manner.
     The corrosion rates of 4130, 9 Cr, and 13 Cr were                           Coupons were weighed before and after exposure
measured using a specimen of dimension 3.81 by                              to obtain weight loss from which corrosion rates were
1.27 cm (Figure 1). Materials suspected to be cath-                         calculated. The equation used to calculate corrosion
odes were then connected, having areas equal, twice,                        rates was:
                                                            Electrochemical Experiments
                                                                 Electrochemical measurements of galvanic cur-
                                                            rent and freely corroding potential were measured in
                                                            an autoclave. The methods for constructing the envi-
                                                            ronments were identical to those described for coupon
                                                            experiments. The autoclave was 5-L total volume,
                                                            having electrically insulating feed through for eight
                                                            working electrodes and a centrally located reference
                                                            port. The reference electrode was a remotely situated
                                                            and pressure-balanced Ag/AgCl/0.1 M KCl that was
                                                            calibrated (daily) to calomel (SCE).
                                                                 Open-circuit potentials were measured over 24 to
                                                            48 h at temperature for each electrode until steady-
                                                            state readings were achieved.
                                                                 Current flow between pairs of electrodes was
                                                            measured using a zero-resistance ammeter. Thirty-six
                                                            individual measurements were required in each envi-
                                                            ronment. Currents were measured until steady state
                                                            (±5 percent over 1 h) was achieved. At the completion
                                                            of a galvanic measurement, electrodes were allowed
FIGURE 2. Coupon test assemblies.                           to return to their previously measured Ecorr prior to sub-
                                                            sequent testing. Currents reported in the tables are
                                                            not normalized to electrode area; however, electrode
                                                            areas were equal and are reported in the data tables.
                     mpy = 82.8W
                            DAT                             Cylindrical electrodes were employed, using shrink fit
                                                            tubing to mask the gas/solution interface.
where:                                                           The acidizing environment for electrochemical
W = weight loss (mg)                                        tests was reacted acid (approximately 1% HCl) as op-
D = density (g/cm3)                                         posed to the neat acid (15%) used in coupon
A = coupon surface area (cm2)                               exposures (Table 5).
T = test duration (h)
     The test environments for coupon experiments           RESULTS
are shown in Table 5 along with test durations. All
coupon exposure tests were conducted in 5-L (total          Coupon Experiments
volume) autoclaves. Duplicate coupon assemblies                  Corrosion rates were generated for the condition
were used for each specimen/couple combination.             of freely corroding metals. The coupon configuration
     The general procedures for conduction an auto-         for baseline experiments was identical to experiments
clave experiment were as follows:                           using coupled coupon assemblies. Data for freely cor-
—Coupon assemblies were fixed on a                          roding metals (each coupled to itself) are compiled in
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) “tree” that was placed       Table 6. Data, generated using coupon assemblies
in the autoclave along with the test solution (previously   coupled to dissimilar metals, were used to calculate
deaerated).                                                 the increase or decrease in baseline corrosion rate
—The autoclave was sealed and leak-tested with N2.          (∆R) caused by the galvanic couple.
—A soft vacuum was pulled on the test solution.                  The change in corrosion rate (∆R) as a percent-
—The solution was deaerated by bubbling N2 through          age of the baseline rate is a useful indicator of the
the solution for 1 h.                                       severity of galvanic interactions. Percentages greater
—The test gas (CO2 and/or H2S) was admitted to the          than 50 percent increase at 2:1 specimen-to-couple
autoclave by bubbling through a dip tube over an ex-        ratio constitute a rough line of demarcation between
tended period. The autoclave was then heated to test        moderate (or low) galvanic acceleration of corrosion
temperature.                                                and more severe attack.
                                                            TABLE 5
                                                          Environments
 Environment                                                Description
      A          Sweet Well Production Fluid - Aqueous brine (5% NaCl) in equilibrium with 1,200 psia CO2 at 150°C. Test duration 30
                 days.
      B          Sour Well Production Fluid - Aqueous brine (25 % NaCl) in equilibrium with 1 psi H2S and 1,200 psi CO2 at 200°C. Test
                 duration 30 days.
      C          Packer Fluid - Deaerated CaCl2 brine (12 lb/gal), 400 psi CO2 without inhibitor at 175 C. Test duration 30 days.
      D          Concentrated Acidizing Fluid - 15 % HCl + inhibitor, 120°C. Test duration 12 h.
      E          Reacted Acidizing Fluid - 1 % HCl + inhibitor, 120°C. Electrochemical test only.
                                                         TABLE 6
                                                 Baseline Corrosion Rates
                                      Area                                                     Localized
                 Specimen             Ratio           W(mg)               Rate (mpy)           Corrosion
                  S          C        S:C         S            C         S             C         S      C
                                      Area                                                      Localized
                 Specimen             Ratio           W(mg)               Rate (mpy)            Corrosion
                  S          C        S:C         S            C         S             C         S      C
                                      Area                                                     Localized
                 Specimen             Ratio           W(mg)               Rate (mpy)           Corrosion
                  S          C        S:C         S            C         S             C         S      C
                                      Area                                                     Localized
                 Specimen             Ratio           W(mg)              Rate (mpd)            Corrosion
                  S          C        S:C         S            C         S             C         S      C
Acidizing Fluid
      The acidizing fluid for coupon experiments con-
sisted of 15% HCl with a common acid inhibitor for
steel. Test temperature was 120°C. In strong acid at
elevated temperature, all of the materials tested cor-
roded actively. Referring to the baseline data compiled       FIGURE 8. Galvanic corrosion of 13 Cr in 25% NaCl, 1 psia
in Table 6, the corrosion rates ranged from 0.2 mpd           H2S, 1,200 psia CO2, 200°C.
for 718 (70 mpy) to 97 mpd for 2205 (36,000 mpy).
The inhibitor had little effect on corrosion of alloys that
contained chromium because it was formulated spe-
cifically for carbon and low-alloy steels.
      Corrosion rates for predominately iron chromium
alloys (9 Cr, 13 Cr, 2205) were proportional to chro-
mium content. On a microscopic scale, the chromium
atoms serve as cathodes and, thus, provide localized
galvanic acceleration. Similarly for 2205, there exists a
slight discrepancy in alloy content between the ferrite
and austenite grains; hence, a galvanic interaction on
a microstructural scale assisted dissolution of ferrite.
Postexposure examination of 2205 revealed that the
ferrite was preferentially attacked.
      Figure 12 illustrates the galvanic corrosion (∆R)
for 4130, which was largely unaffected by coupling to
other alloys. Because of the influence of the inhibitor,
it was difficult to draw definite conclusions on the mag-     FIGURE 9. Galvanic corrosion of 4130 in 12 ppg CaCl2, 400
nitude of galvanic influences to 4130. The galvanic           psia CO2, 200°C.
corrosion rates of 4130 were low compared to other
alloys.
      Nine Cr (Figure 13) was cathodic to 4130 (inhib-
ited) and 718, in spite of its (9 Cr) higher general cor-
rosion rate. On the other hand, 13 Cr (Figure 14) was
cathodic to both 4130 and 9 Cr on a macroscopic
scale but anodic to 2205 and 718. The macroscopic
galvanic interaction for 9 Cr, 13 Cr, and 2205 followed
a compositional prediction that did not coincide with
the magnitude of (baseline) corrosion rates exhibited
by each alloy.
      Alloy 2205 (Figure 15) exhibited accelerated cor-
rosion rates when coupled to 4130 and 13 Cr. The ef-
fect of couple area suggests 2205 was anodic to
(inhibited) 4130 and cathodic to 13 Cr; however, the
fact that the corrosion rates of both materials were
greater when coupled together may reflect factors
other than galvanic influence. The corrosion rate of ti-
tanium is not significantly affected by coupling to 4130      FIGURE 10. Galvanic corrosion of 9 Cr in 12 ppg CaCl2, 400
(Figure 16).                                                  psia CO2, 200°C.
                                                                Electrochemical Measurements
                                                                     Galvanic currents and potentials are compiled in
                                                                Tables 7 through 10 for the environments described in
                                                                Table 5. The data are arranged so that the most noble
                                                                potential is in the first (top) row and the most active
                                                                potential is in the bottom row. Potentials were mea-
                                                                sured in mV vs Ag/AgCl, 0.1 M KCl, 25°C. Galvanic
                                                                currents were recorded in mA and were not normal-
                                                                ized to the electrode area. The electrode areas for
                                                                each environment are indicated in the respective table
                                                                legends. In Tables 2 through 10, a negative value sig-
                                                                nifies that the material in the row was cathodic to the
                                                                material in the column. Likewise, a positive value indi-
                                                                cates the alloy in the corresponding row was anodic to
                                                                the material in the corresponding column.
FIGURE 11. Galvanic corrosion of 13 Cr in 12 ppg CaCl2, 400          The galvanic currents were measured after only a
psia CO2, 200°C.
                                                                few hours of environment exposure. For this reason,
                                                                they do not necessarily correlate with coupon experi-
                                                                ments that are essentially averages of over a 30-day
                                                                time period. It is suspected that iron carbonate or sul-
                                                                fide precipitation on passive alloys, acting as cathodes
                                                                in galvanic couples, served to reduce current flow over
                                                                time.
                                                                     In general, the sign and magnitude of galvanic
                                                                current clearly categorizes alloys as active or passive.
                                                                Typically, the current that flowed between two passive
                                                                alloys was very low. This means that substantial gal-
                                                                vanic interactions between dissimilar nickel-base
                                                                CRA’s or between austenitic stainless steels and
                                                                nickel-base alloys are not likely. The exception to this
                                                                observation was the acidizing solution in which fairly
                                                                large galvanic currents flowed between different CRA
                                                                materials. In these situations, the various alloys are all
                                                                active with complex galvanic interactions depending
FIGURE 12. Galvanic corrosion of 4130 in 15% HCI (inhib-        on subtle compositional differences.
ited), 120°C.                                                        The galvanic current and potential measurements
                                                                correlated well with the coupon experiments. In the
                                                                sweet well environment, galvanic measurements con-
                                                                firmed that 9 Cr and 13 Cr are anodic to 4130 when
                                                                they are not passivated. This also held true for the
                                                                sour well environment. The potentials of passive alloys
                                                                in both the sweet well fluid were essentially equal (ex-
                                                                cept titanium).
                                                                     Titanium exhibits noble potentials in all the envi-
                                                                ronments but serves as a poor cathode because of its
                                                                TiO2 surface film. This general statement holds even
                                                                for acid solutions in which the titanium corrodes
                                                                actively.
DISCUSSION
                                                  TABLE 7
                                       Galvanic Currents and Potentials
                                         Sweet Well Produced Brine
                                                       Galvanic Currents (mA/8 cm2)
           Couple/     Potential,
           Specimen        mV (2)   BC-Ti      N-42       718      28     2205        4130     13 Cr      9 Cr
                                                  TABLE 8
                                       Galvanic Currents and Potentials
                                          Sour Well Produced Brine
                                                            Galvanic Currents (mA/8 cm2)
           Couple/     Potential,
           Specimen        mV (2)   Alloy G    925      BC-Ti      28      718        2205     4130       9 Cr
                                                  TABLE 9
                                       Galvanic Currents and Potentials
                                          Heavy Brine Packer Fluid
                                                           Galvanic Currents(A) (mA/8 cm3)
           Couple/     Potential,
           Specimen        mV (2)   BC-Ti      718       N-42     N-32     2205     13 Cr       9 Cr      4130
                                                 TABLE 10
                                       Galvanic Currents and Potentials
                                                Acidizing Fluid
                                                           Galvanic Currents(A) (mA/4 cm2)
           Couple/     Potential,
           Specimen    mV (2)       BC-Ti     N-32       G-3     718      925      13 Cr      9 Cr      4130
are critical, and the distribution of current (and the re-            REFERENCES
sultant metal loss) can be highly localized. It was ob-                1. F.L. LaQue, Marine Corrosion, Causes and Prevention (New York, NY:
served in the packer fluid tests that corrosion of 4130                   John Wiley and Sons, 1975), chapter 6.
                                                                       2. R. Baboian, et al., “Galvanic and Pitting Corrosion—Field and Labora-
was limited to a few mm of distance from the metal                        tory Studies,” ASTM STP 576 (Philadelphia, PA: ASTM, 1976).
junction; hence, the localized rate was much greater in                3. F. Mansfeld, E.P. Parry, Corrosion Science 13 (1973): p. 605.
                                                                       4. F. Mansfeld, Corrosion 29, 10 (1973): p. 403.
magnitude that the reported normalized rate.                           5. M.C. Reboul, Corrosion 35, 9 (1979): p. 423.
      These factors become more complicated when                       6. D.A. Jones, Corrosion 40, 4 (1984): p. 181.
                                                                       7. J.R. Scully, H.P. Hack, CORROSION/84, paper no. 34 (Houston, TX:
pitting is observed, such as in the sour well environ-                    NACE, 1984).
ment. Galvanic interactions tended to aggravate pitting                8. F. Mansfeld, J.V. Kenkel, Corrosion 31, 8 (1985): p. 298.
                                                                       9. F. Mansfeld, Corrosion 27, 10 (1971): p. 436.
of 4130 in the sour-produced brine.                                   10. J.R. Crum, “Development of Galvanic Series in Various Acid and Water
                                                                          Environments,” Int. Conf. Corros. of Nickel Base Alloys (Metals Park,
                                                                          OH: ASM, 1984).
CONCLUSIONS                                                           11. G.O. Davis, J. Kolts, N. Sridhar, Corrosion 42, 6 (1986): p. 329.
                                                                      12. K.D. Efird, “Galvanic Corrosion in Oil and Gas Production,” Galvanic
                                                                          Corrosion, ASTM STP 978, H.P. Hack, ed. (Philadelphia, PA: ASTM,
❖ In coupon experiments conducted in produced flu-                        1988), pp. 260-282.
                                                                      13. S.M. Wilhelm, “Galvanic Corrosion Caused by Corrosion Products,”
ids (sweet well, sour well), it was observed that gal-                    Galvanic Corrosion, ASTM STP 978, H.P. Hack, ed. (Philadelphia, PA:
vanic weight losses were greatest when both alloys, in                    ASTM, 1988), pp. 260-282.