Basim O. Hasan and Marwa F. Abdul-Jabbar
Keywords: cathodic protection, steel, impressed current, flow, salt.
Abstract:
The effect of cathodic protection currents on carbon steel corrosion in 0.1N NaCl solution was investigated under flow conditions of rotation velocity range 0-0.262 m/s for a range of temperatures (35-55°C) using rotating cylinder electrode. The corrosion rate was determined using both weight loss method and electrochemical polarization technique (limiting current density). Various values of protection currents were applied to protect carbon steel from corrosion, these were Iapp.= Icorr., Iapp.=2Icorr., and Iapp.=2.4Icorr. under stationary and flow conditions. The variation of protection potential with time and rotation velocity at various applied currents was assessed. It was found that the corrosion rate of carbon steel increases with flow velocity and has unstable trend with temperature. The protection currents required vary with temperature and it increases considerably when the rotation velocity was increased. The protection potential decreases appreciably (shifts to more negative) with time and with increasing rotation velocity. Also it shifts to more positive with increasing temperature.
Because you are not logged-in to the journal, it is now our policy to display a 'text-only' version of the preprint. This version is obtained by extracting the text from the PDF or HTML file, and it is not guaranteed that the text will be a true image of the text of the paper. The text-only version is intended to act as a reference for search engines when they index the site, and it is not designed to be read by humans!
If you wish to view the human-readable version of the preprint, then please Register (if you have not already done so) and Login. Registration is completely free.
CATHODIC ISSN 1466-8858 PROTECTION OF CARBON STEEL Volume 14, Preprint 31 IN 0.1N NaCl SOLUTION submitted 16 July 2011 AND THE EFFECT OF FLOW VELOCITY Basim O. Hasan* and Marwa F. Abdul-Jabbar Chemical Engineering Department-Al-Nahrain University-Iraq ABSTRACT The effect of cathodic protection currents on carbon steel corrosion in 0.1N NaCl solution was investigated under flow conditions of rotation velocity range 0-0.262 m/s for a range of temperatures (35-55°C) using rotating cylinder electrode. The corrosion rate was determined using both weight loss method and electrochemical polarization technique (limiting current density). Various values of protection currents were applied to protect carbon steel from corrosion, these were Iapp.= Icorr., Iapp.=2Icorr., and Iapp.=2.4Icorr. under stationary and flow conditions. The variation of protection potential with time and rotation velocity at various applied currents was assessed. It was found that the corrosion rate of carbon steel increases with flow velocity and has unstable trend with temperature. The protection currents required vary with temperature and it increases considerably when the rotation velocity was increased. The protection potential decreases appreciably (shifts to more negative) with time and with increasing rotation velocity. Also it shifts to more positive with increasing temperature. Keywords: cathodic protection, steel, impressed current, flow, salt. NOMENCLATURE A: Area (m2) D: Diffusivity (m2/s) Ec: corrosion Potential (V) F: Faradays constant (96487 columb/equivalent) i: Current density (A/m2) Iapp.: Applied current (mA) Icorr: Corrosion current (mA) IL: Limiting current (mA) K: Mass transfer coefficient (m/s) M: Molecular weight (g/mole) N: Molar flux (mole/m.s) t: time of exposure (hours) V: Volts ∆w: weight loss (g) Subscript Corr: Corrosion L: Limiting Abbreviations C.R: Corrosion rate (g/m2.d) PP: Protection percent SCE: Standard calomel electrode Greek Letters δ: diffusion layer thickness *Corresponding author: Chemical Eng. Dept./Al-Nahrain University/Iraq, E- mail:basimoh99@yahoo.com. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 1 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 1. Introduction There are many methods for corrosion prevention, one mean of controlling is by the use of cathodic protection. Cathodic protection is one of the most common and effective methods for corrosion control of steel in neutral medium. It is an electrochemical technique in which a cathodic protective potential is applied to an engineering structure in order to prevent corrosion from taking place [1]. Cathodic protection can be applied in practice to protect metals such as steel, copper, lead and brass against corrosion in all soils and in almost all aqueous media. The principle of cathodic protection is in connecting an external anode to the material to be protected from corrosion and passing of an electrical DC current. So that all area of the metal surface becomes cathodic and therefore do not corrode. The external anode may be a galvanic (sacrifical) anode or it may be an impressed current anode where the current is impressed from external DC source [2]. Cooling systems suffer many forms of corrosion and failure [3]. Cooling water used removes heat from production processes. The open recirculating cooling water system is one of the most vital units of a petroleum refinery [4]. It often contains some salts that enhance the corrosion of metals. It is well known that the rate controlling step in most natural water corrosion process is the cathodic half reaction. The most important cathodic process in aerated waters is oxygen reduction. The rate of this half reaction is generally limited by the speed at which oxygen can reach the surface of the metal. This oxygen is transported from the bulk water to the surface across the boundary layer by diffusion. The oxygen concentration will vary from a minimum at the surface to bulk concentration at the outside edge of the boundary layer. This results in the concentration gradient and promotes the transport of oxygen [5]. If the corrosion process is under cathodic diffusion control then the flow increases the corrosion rate. This effect generally occurs when an oxidizer is present in small amounts, as is the case for dissolved oxygen in acids or water [6]. The flow of fluid past a structure to be protected, affects the cathodic protection currents and protection potentials, however, higher protection currents are required since the corrosion rate is higher as has been evidenced by numerous studies [7; 8;9; 6,10]. The mechanism of cathodic protection is simply understood by reference to the following reactions. 1 O2 + H2o + 2e → 2OH(cathode) (1) 2 Fe → Fe2+ + 2e (anode) (2) Making the surface more negative and increase the concentration of electrons which accelerates the rate of cathodic reaction and decreases the rate of the anodic reaction. (i.e the rate of the anodic reaction becomes zero and the whole surface of the metal becomes cathodic [11]. Temperature of the medium governs the solubilities of the corrosive species in the fluid, such as oxygen (O2), carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorides, and hydroxides. Temperature increases the rate of almost all the chemical reactions. When the rate determining step is the activation process, the temperature changes have the greatest effect [12]. In open systems, the effect of temperature is complex in that the diffusivity of oxygen increases, but solubility decreases with temperature increase [6, 12, 13]. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 2 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. Several ISSN 1466-8858 researches showed that the14,limiting density increases with the Volume Preprintcurrent 31 submitted 16 July 2011 increase in fluid velocity [8,9,10,20,21,22] . Konsowa and El-Shazly [14] found that the rate of zinc consumption used for cathodic protection of copper in saline water increases with increasing solution flow rate and temperature. Also the authors concluded that the cathodic protection is controlled by the rate of diffusion of dissolved oxygen towards the walls of the copper tube. Scantlebury [15] found that in marine environment, mild steel does not corrode under the protection potentials, viz., -780 and -1100 mV. Sami and Ghalib [16] noticed that cathodic protection current density increases with increasing temperature in sea water under stationary conditions. Experimental data concerning the effect of flow velocity on the cathodic protection are scarce in the open literature, therefore, this work is devoted to study the impressed current cathodic protection of steel structure in 0.1N NaCl solution under flow conditions at various temperatures using weight loss and electrochemical technique (limiting current density) to determine the cathodic protection currents and potentials required to obtain high protection percents. 2. Experimental work Fig. 1a shows the experimental apparatus that was used for performing the experimental work. + 1 - 2 5 4 13 3 11 8 7 10 6 12 9 10 Fig. 1a: Experimental apparatus 1) power supply, 2) ammeter, 3) resistance box, 4) voltmeter, 5) stirrer, 6) working electrode (structure), 7) graphite electrode (anode), 8) calomel electrode (reference electrode), 9) water bath, 10) stand, 11) brush, 12) Luggin capillary, 13) metal for electrical connection with specimen The experimental apparatus was composed of mechanical agitator to obtain different rotational velocities, water bath to obtain different solution temperatures, carbon steel specimen 30 mm long and 25 mm outside diameter (cathode) attached to the rode of agitator, power supply to apply the required protection potential, digital © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 3 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ammeter ISSN 1466-8858 to measure the current, Volume digital 14, voltmeter variable Preprint to 31 measure the potential, submitted 16 July 2011 resistance (rheostate) to control the current flow, graphite electrode as auxiliary electrode (anode) of area approximately 3 times the carbon steel specimen (structure) to ensure the limiting current occur on the cathode rather than anode [17,18], and saturated calomel electrode (SCE) as reference electrode. Digital balance of high accuracy (4 decimal places of gram) to measure the weight loss. The electrical connection between cathode (specimen) and the cell was attained using brush. In weight loss experiments, before each experimenrunthe specimen was abraded in a sequence of emery papers grades: 120, 200, 320, 400, and 600. It was washed by tap water followed by distilled water, dried with clean tissue, immersed in annular acetone for 5 minutes, rinsed with water and dried with clean tissue. The specimen then was stored in vacuum desiccator over high activity silica gel for 24 h before use. Then it was weighted to nearest 0.1 mg. The carbon steel specimen was immersed in the solution (0.1N NaCl ) at a particular temperature to corrode freely before applying the impressed current (cathodic protection) to measure the corrosion rate at stationary condition at different temperature (35, 45 and 55 °C). The corrosion rate was also measured at different speeds (25, 90, 120 and 200 rpm) at constant temperature of 45°C. After each test, the specimen was washed with tap water. Then it was brushed by smooth brush under running tap water to remove the corrosion products, immersed in acetone for 5 minute, washed with distilled water, then dried with paper tissue, and kept for 24 h in desiccator over high activity silica gel. Finally it was weighed using the digital balance. From the weight loss the corrosion rate (CR) was calculated as: CR ( gmd ) = weightloss ( g ) Area (m 2 ) ×Time (d ) (3) Where CR represents corrosion rate in g/m2.d. The protection percent (pp) was calculated as: PP % = CR 0 − CR × 100 CR 0 (4) CR0 and CR are the corrosion rate in absence and in presence of impressed current respectively. In polarization experiments, 12 liter of 0.1N NaCl solution was used. The specimen was connected to –ve terminal of power supply to serve as cathode and graphite to +ve terminal to serve as anode. When the bath reached the required temperature, the specimen was immersed and the electrical circuit was switched on. The power supply was set at 5 V (applied voltage). The specimen (working electrode) was cathodically polarized from a particular potentials (-1.3 to -1.5 V versus SCE) to the corrosion potential (where Iapp. = 0) by changing the applied current using rheostat. The current was recorded for step changes in potential. Two minutes were allowed for steady state to be reached after each potential increment [19]. The capillary tube was placed at distance 1-2 mm from cathode and connected to calomel electrode to measure the specimen potential. Thus polarization curve can be drawn and the limiting current can be obtained. In area of anode (graphite) immersed in water was 3 times the area of cathode (working electrode) to ensure the limiting current density occurs on cathode. For the case of flow conditions experiments, the specimen was attached to the agitator rod. A brush was used to ensure the electrical © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 4 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. connection ISSN 1466-8858 between cathode andVolume the –ve of power supply. Thesubmitted corrosion 14, terminal Preprint 31 16 July 2011 current (Icorr=Ife=IO2) was also obtained from weight loss measurement as follows: ……(5) NFe =( ∆w/M)/(A.t) where ∆w represents weight loss, M is the molecular weight of carbon steel (iron), A is the area in m2 and t is the time in second, NFe is the moles of Fe lost per unit area per unit time (gmole/m2.s). Since: ……(6) iFe = z F NFe where iFe is the corrosion current density in (A/m2), F is Faradays constant (96487 columb/equivelant), z is the number of electron freed by corrosion reaction (for iron z=2). Hence iFe = 2*96487* NFe IFe=iFe*A NO2= 0.5NFe (according to equations 1 and 2). Since No2= iO 2 zO2 ×F Hence IFe=IO2=Icorr.. Also IO2=IL. After measuring Icorr., different values of applied current were impressed to cathode at each temperature and velocity for 4 h to protect the metal and the potential was recorded at every 15 min to obtain the protection potential change with time. The values of applied current that were used to protect the metal at stationary and flow conditions at 45°C were Iapp=Icorr., Iapp=2Icorr. and Iapp= 2.4Icorr. to determine the protection percent for different values of rotation velocity at 45°C. The distance between anode and cathode was 300 mm. Each run was carried out twice. Potential e Ec d c E1 b E2 a i1 i2 Current Density Fig. 1b:Typical Polarization Curve on C. Steel in Water. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 5 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. Icorr. was ISSN 1466-8858 obtained from weight loss measurements for 4 h time of exposure. Since Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 Icorr. is lower than IL where the later is for clean surface while Icorr. for 4 h includes the corrosion product effect that reduces the corrosion rate [20, 21], so applying Icorr. is not expected to protect the clean surface completely and it is needed to apply higher values. The limiting current plateau is not well defined, thus the method given by Gabe and Makanjoula [34] was adopted to obtain the limiting current density values, i.e.: i +i iL = 1 2 2 where i1 and i2 are the currents associated with E1 and E2 (Fig. 1b). 3. Results and discussion Table 1 lists the experimental results for the stationary conditions. Table (1) protection percent at various temperatures and applied currents (Aspecimen = 2355 mm2). Temp. (°C) 35 Iapp. (mA) 0 Icorr.=1.99 2Icorr.=3.97 2.4Icorr.=4.76 C.R (g/m2.d) 22.549 6.543 2.786 0.805 %PP 69.88 86.70 96.38 0 25.270 Icorr.=2.41 5.636 78.22 45 2Icorr.=4.83 3.413 87.1 2.4Icorr.=5.79 99 0.249 0 24.49 Icorr.=2.29 4.341 82.3 55 2Icorr.=4.59 2.366 90.62 2.4Icorr.=5.51 100 0 and protection percent for different rotational velocities at 45°C. Table 2 lists the value s of corro sion rate . Table(2) Effect of rotation speed on the cathodic protection percent (Aspecimen=2355mm2). Speed (m/s) Iapp. (mA) C.R (g/m2.d) PP% 0.033 0.118 0.157 0.262 0 Icorr.=3.04 2Icorr.=6.08 31.310 11.301 2.689 64.56 99.2 0 Icorr.=5.65 2Icorr.=11.3 0 Icorr.=8.88 2Icorr.=17.76 0 Icorr.=14.76 2Icorr.=29.52 59.418 23.499 3.255 94.895 34.068 4.407 154.440 59.931 15.348 60.59 94.498 62.8 95.42 62.39 90.27 © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 6 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. 3.1. Corrosion ISSN 1466-8858 rate Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 The best indication for cathodic protection is by weight loss. Fig. 2 shows the effect of temperature on the corrosion rate as gmd and as A/m2 at stationary conditions. The results show that increasing temperature leads to unstable trend of corrosion rate and corrosion current. Unstable trend was also noticed by previous workers [20, 9, 21]. From this figure it can be seen that the corrosion rate at 45°C is higher than at 35°C and the corrosion rate at 55ºC is slightly lower than at 45ºC this can ascribed to the lower concentration of O2 at 55ºC than 45°C. Increasing the temperature will increase the rate of oxygen diffusion to the metal surface and decrease the viscosity of water which will aid the oxygen diffusion. All these factors enhance the corrosion rate. On the other hand, increasing temperature decreases the oxygen solubility the factor that restrains the corrosion [12] as shown in Table 3 in the appendix. 3.2. Polarization results Figures 3 to 6 show the polarization curves at 45°C and different speed. It can be seen that as the velocity increases IL is increased, i.e. at speed of 0.033,. 0.118, 0.157 and 0.262 m/s, IL is 4, 14.5, 19.5 and 22 mA respectively. This can be attributed to the increase in oxygen transport from the bulk of the solution to the metal surface leading to higher IL [20, 9, 21,20]. 3.2.1. Impressed current results A metal in an aqueous environment, can be protected by impressing an electric current at its surface, delivered by a DC generator to polarize the potential to a value more negative than the equilibrium potential. Fig.7 shows the corrosion rate versus temperature at different applied currents values. The results in this figure indicate that as the applied current increases, the corrosion rate decreases this means the metal is protected by impressed current. For example the CR at 35ºC is 22.549 g/m2.d before applying protection current. When the applied current equals to corrosion current (1.99 mA) the CR becomes 6.543 g/m2.d (71% protection), when the applied current is double the corrosion current (3.97 mA) the CR becomes 2.786 g/m2.d (88% protection) , and when the applied current is 2.4 Icorr the CR becomes 0.805 g/m2.d (97% protection). It is important to determine the amount of current or potential needed to be applied to protect a structure and to make sure that the anode can provide that current uniformly across the structure at a reasonable DC output voltage [Varmani and Clemena 1998]. The effect of applied current on the CR at different temperatures is shown in Fig. 8. It is clear that as the protection current for cathodic protection increases the corrosion rate decreases. The oxidation of iron releases electrons and ferrous ions, which dissolve in the solution surrounding the steel. The electrons are deposited on the steel surface, lowering the potential. In reduction current, electrons released by iron at the anode flow towards higher potential (cathodic) sites, where they combine with water and oxygen molecules to form hydroxyl ions. The corrosion reaction will only continue if there is cathodic reaction to accept released electrons, so these corrosion reactions can be stopped if oxygen and water are not available at the cathodic sites on the steel [23]. The protection percent at three temperatures (35ºC, 45ºC and 55ºC) with applied current is shown in Fig. 9. From this figure it can be seen that the protection increases as the temperature increases , for example when applying iapp= icorr the protection s are 69.88%, 78.22% and 82.3% for 35ºC, 45ºC and 55ºC respectively while when © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 7 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. applying ISSN 1466-8858 current density equal to Volume 2icorr.. the 87.1% and 14, protection Preprint 31 percent are 86.70%, submitted 16 July 2011 90.62% for 35°C, 45°C and 55°C respectively, and for higher current (Iapp.=2.4Icorr.) it is 96.38%, 99% and 100%. The protection percent increased with increasing impressed current (Iapp.) due to the increased reduction of O2 at the metal surface leading to decrease the corrosion of metal [11, 30]. Fig. 9 also reveals that the protection percent varies with temperature with unstable trend depending on O2 solubility and diffusivity [9,10]. 3.2.2 Protection potential Figure 10 shows effect of time on the protection potential of carbon steel pipe immersed in 0.1 N Nacl at different temperatures. The figure shows that the potential decreases with time, where the potential is recorded at each 15 min for an experiment time of four hour long. Precisely the potential becomes rapidly more negative in the first hour, and then the curve reaches asymptotic value at -990 mV, -990 mV and 1070 mV vs SCE which represent the protection potential for 55°C, 45°C and 35°C respectively. Numerous studies have demonstrated that Ec is generally influenced by the oxidizer concentration. Several investigators [22; 24,25,26] showed that decreasing oxygen concentration leads to shift Ec to more negative values. It is evident that Ec falls with increasing temperature this because Ec are affected by both anodic and cathodic process. The anodic (activation controlled) process is simulated by increasing bulk temperature to greater extent than that of cathodic (concentration controlled) process [11,27]. The corrosion potential become more negative with time, because the oxygen level at the steel interface can be depleted over time when subject to constant current density [28]. This figure indicates that at applied current of Iapp.=Icorr. the higher the temperature is the higher the protection potential. The decrease in the potential with time can be ascribed to the fact that at low temperature the depletion of O2 is higher due to its high reduction on the metal surface leading to decrease the protection potential. Figure 11 shows that the potential decreases with increasing time at different applied current values at temperature of 35°C. The corrosion potential become more negative with time, because the oxygen level at the steel interface can be depleted over time when subjected to constant current density [28]. It can be seen that as the current increases, the potential becomes more negative because high Iapp. leads to high O2 reduction, shifting the potential to more negative [22, 26]. The corrosion potentials for current applied and higher current is approximately similar while for lower current are less negative. The decrease in potential is steep during the 90min for Iapp.=1.99 mA while for Iapp.=3.97 mA and Iapp.=4.763 mA the decrease in potential is steep during 30 min. Fig.12 shows the effect of rotational velocity on the corrosion rate of carbon steel specimen for different applied currents. It is clear that the corrosion rate decreases with increasing applied current and increases with increasing velocity. The increase in the rate of carbon steel dissolution with increasing solution velocity can be attributed to the decrease in the thickness of the hydrodynamic boundary layer and diffusion layer across which dissolved O2 diffuses to the metal wall [29, 31] with a consequent increase in the rate of O2 transfer from bulk solution to the surface. It is to be noticed from Fig. 13 that at high applied current values the effect of velocity on the corrosion rate is lower, however, the corrosion rate increases considerably with velocity when Iapp.=0 while it increases little at Iapp.=Icorr. and Iapp.=2Icorr.. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 8 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. 4. Conclusion ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 The conclusions of this work are: 1- Under flow conditions, the required currents to protect steel structure are high. The higher the rotational speed is the higher the cathodic currents required for protection. 2- The corrosion rate of carbon steel specimen in 0.1N NaCl solution exhibits unstable trend with temperature. 3. Increasing rotational velocity (0-0.262 m/s) leads to increase the corrosion rate from 25.27 g/m2.d to 154.44 g/m2.d at 45°C. 4- The impressed current required for cathodic protection depends on temperature and rotational velocity. Applying I=2Icorr. give protection percent between 90 to 99% depending on temperature and velocity. 5- The higher the impressed cathodic protection currents is the lower the effect of velocity on the corrosion rate will be. 6- The protection potential shifts to more negative values with time where it decreases by 40-68% depending on temperature. Also it shifts to more –ve with increasing velocity. 7- The lower the temperature is the more negative protection potential will be. 40 1.2 CR with temp. Icorr. with temp. 0.8 25 0.6 20 0.4 15 0.2 2 30 Icorr.(A/m ) 1 2 CR (g/m .d) 35 10 0 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 0 Temperature ( C) Fig. 2: Corrosion rate and Icorr. vs. temperature at free corrosion at stationary conditions. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 9 to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 Fig.3: Polarization curve at velocity of 0.033 m/s at temperature=45°C. Fig. 4: Polarization curve at velocity of 0.118 m/s at temperature= 45°C. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 10to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 Fig.5: Polarization curve at velocity of 0.157m/s at temperature=45°C. Fig.6: Polarization curve at velocity of 0.262 m/s at temperature=45°C. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 11to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. 30 ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 25 C.R (g/m2.d) 20 Iappl.=0 (free corrosion) Iapp.=Icorr. Iapp.=2Icorr. 15 Iapp.=2.4Icorr. 10 5 0 20 30 40 Tem p.( 0C) 50 60 Fig. 7: CR vs. temperature at stationary conditions for different values of applied current. Fig.8: CR vs. iapplied at stationary conditions for various temperatures. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 12to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 Fig. 9: iapp. vs. protection percent at different temp. at stationary conditions Fig. 10: Potential Vs. time at Iapp=Icorr at stationary conditions. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 13to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 Fig.11 Protection potential vs. time at 35°C for different applied currents. 180 Iapp.-0 (free corrosion) Iapp.=Icorr. 150 Iapp.=2 Icorr. 2 C.R (g/m .d) 120 90 60 30 0 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 Velocity (m/s) Fig.12 Effect of applied current on the corrosion rate at 45°C. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 14to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. ISSN 1466-8858 Volume 14, Preprint 31 submitted 16 July 2011 Fig.13: iapp. vs. PP% at different speed and constant temp. 45°C Fig 14 Potential vs. time at Iapp.= 2Icorr. at temperature=45°C. References [1] P. Nestor "Electrochemistry and Corrosion Science", Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004. [2] K.T Rashid, "Effect of Mixing Speed and Solution Temperature on Cathodic Protection Current Density of Carbon Steel Using Magnesium as Sacrificial Anode", Eng. andTech. Journal, Vol. 27, No. 8, 2009. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 15to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. [3] P. R. ISSN 1466-8858 Roberge, "Corrosion Engineering Principles Volume 14, Preprint 31 and Practice", McGraw-Hall, submitted 16 July 2011 2008. [4] B. Barhai and P.K.Gogoi, "Corrosion Inhibition of Carbon Steel in Open Recirculation Cooling Water System of Petroleum Refinery by A multi-component Blend Containing Zinc (II) Diethyldithiocarbmate", Indian Journal of Chemical Technology, Vol. 17, PP. 291-295, July 2010. [5] S. W., K.M. McCabe, and D. W. Black 'Effect of Flow Parameters on the Cathodic Protection of A steel Plate in Natural Seawater", Corrosion, October 1989. [6] M.G. Fontana and N. D. Greene, " Corrosion Engineering", 3rd edition McGrawHall, 1986. [7] M. Stern, "Fundamentals Electrode Processes in Corrosion", Corrosion-NACE, 13, 97-104, 1957. [8] B. Poulson, "Electrochemical Measurements in Flowing Solutions, Corrosion Science J., 23, 391-430, 1983. [9] B. K. Mahato, , C. Y. Cha, and W. Shemlit, Corros. Sci., Unsteady State Mass Transfer Coefficients Controlling Steel Pipe Corrosion under Isothermal Flow Conditions Vol. 20, P. 421, 1980. [10] N. Nesic, B. F. M. Pots, J. Postelthwaaite, and N. Trevenot, J.Corrosion Science and Eng., Ph.D. Study, Vol. 1, Paper 3, 1995. [11] L.L. Shrier, Corrosion Handbook, 2nd edition, part 1, Newnes Butter, London, 2000. [12] S.D Henry and W.M. Scott " Corrosion in the Petrochemical Industry", 1st edition , ASM International, USA, 1999. [13] R. Uhlig, Herbert H. Winston Revie "Corrosion and Corrosion Control, An Introduction to Corrosion Science and Engineering", 4rd edition John Wiley &Sons, 2008. [14] A.H. Konsowa and A.H El-Shazly, " Rate of Zinc Consumption During Sacrifical Cathodic Protection of Pipelines Carrying Saline Water", Desalination Vol. 153, pp. 223-226, 2002 [15] J.D. Scantlebury, Dae Kyeong Kim, Srinivasan Muralidharan, Tae Hyun Ha, Jeong Hyo Bae, Yoon Cheol Ha and Hyun Geo Lee, " Electochemical Studies on the Alternating Current Corrosion of Mild Steel Uner Cathodic Protection Condition in Marine Environments", Electrochimica Acta, Vol 51. PP. 5259-5267, 2006. [16] A.A. Sami, and A. A. Ghalib, "Variable Conditions Effects on Polarization Parameters of Impreesed Current Cathodic Protection of Low Carbon Steel Pipes', Eng. Technol. J. Vol. 26, PP. 1-12, 2008. [17] D. W. Hubbard and E. N. Lightfoot, 1966 "Correlation of Heat and Mass Transfer Data for High Schmidt and Reynolds Numbers", Ind. Eng. Chem., 5, 370-379. [18] T. Mizushina, The Electrochemical Method in Transport Phenomena, Advances in Heat Transfer, Vol. 7, P. 87, 1971. [19] D. J Pickett and K. L. Ong, "The Influence of Hydrodynamic and Mass Transfer Entrance Effects on the Operation of a Parallel Plate Electrochemical Cell", Electchmica Acta, 19, 875-881, (1974) [20] B. K. Mahato, F. R. Stewrd, and L. W. Shimlit, Steel Pipe Corrosion under Flow Condition Corrs. Sci. Vol. 8, P. 737, 1968. [21] Q. J. M. Slaiman and B. O. Hasan, "Study on Corrosion Rate of Carbon Steel Pipe under Turbulent Flow Conditions", The Candian J. of Chem. Eng., Vol. 88, December, 2010. © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 16to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work. [22] Z. ISSN 1466-8858 A., Foroulis, "The Influence of Velocity and31Dissolved Oxygen onsubmitted the Initial Volume 14, Preprint 16 July 2011 Corrosion Behavior of Iron in High Purity Water", Corrosion, Vol. 35, P. 340344, 1979. [23] A. Bentur, S. Diamond, N. Berke, N. Steven. ," Steel Corrosion in Concrete", E and FN Spon., New York, NY. PP.201, 1997. [24] Y.J.Kim, GE Research and Development Centre, Technical Formation Series, 97CRD 202, Feb.1998. [25] T.K. Ross, G.C. Wood and I.J. Mahmud, “ The Anodic Behavior of Iron Carbon Alloy in Moving Acid Media”, Electrochem. Soc., Vol.113, P.334, 1996. [26] Q. J. M. Slaiman, B. O. Hasan “Effect of Temperature and Hydrodynamics on the Corrosion Rate under Turbulent Flow Conditions Using Electrochemical Technique”, 3rd International conference on Thermal Engineering Theory and Applications, ICTEA, Amman, Jordan, 2007 [27] R.F Steigerwald., Corrosion-NACE, P. 1, 1968. [28] D.G. Enos, Williams, A.J.Jr. and Scully, J.R., "Long-Term Effects of Cathodic Protection on Prestressed Concrete Structures: Hydrogen Embrittlement of Prestressing Steel", Corrosion, Vol 53, No. 11, PP. 891-908, Nov. 1997. [29] R. W., Fahien, , Fundamentals of Transport Phenomena, McGraw Hill, NY, 1983. [30] W. V., Baeckmann, W. Schwenk, W, Prinz, “Handbook of Cathodic Protection” 3rd edition, Gulf Professional Publishing, Huston, 1997. [31] R. S. Brodkey, and H. C. Hershey, Transport Phenonmena, 2nd Printing, Mc Graw Hill, New York, 1989. [32] A. Audin, and L.John, J. Chem. Eng. Data, Vol. 17, No.3, p.789, 1972. [33] F.Sense, Oxygen Solubility, North California State, 2001. [34] Gabe, D.R. and P.A. Makanjoula, EFCF Publication Series No. 15, Electrochemical Eng., AICHE Symposium Series, No. 98, P.309, 1986. APPENDIX Table 3: Values of Oxygen Diffusivity and solubility at different temperatures (32, 33) T(°C) 109 (m2/s)×D Solubility (mg/l) 30 2.374 7.5 40 3.010 4.389 50 3.562 5.399 60 4.834 4.49 © 2011 University of Manchester and the authors. This is a preprint of a paper that has been submitted for publication in the Journal of 17to the reviewers’ comments, be published online at Corrosion Science and Engineering. It will be reviewed and, subject http://www.jcse.org in due course. Until such time as it has been fully published it should not normally be referenced in published work.