Search

To address the challenge of climate change, future energy systems need to have reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased efficiencies. For solid fuel fired combustion plants, one route towards achieving this is to increase the system's steam temperatures and pressures. Another route is to co-fire renewable fuels (such as biomass) with coals. Fireside corrosion performance of two candidate superheater/reheater alloys has been characterised at higher heat exchanger surface temperature. Samples of the alloys (a stainless steel, Sanicro 25 and a nickel-based alloy, IN740) were exposed in fireside corrosion tests at 650 °C, 700 °C and 750 °C, in controlled atmosphere furnaces using the 'deposit recoat' test method to simulate superheater/reheater exposure for 1000 h. After exposure, the samples were analysed using dimensional metrology to determine the extent and distributions of corrosion damage in terms of surface recession and internal damage. At 650 °C, the stainless steel and nickel-based alloy performed similarly, while at 700 °C and above, the median damage to the steel was at least 3 times greater than for the nickel-based alloy. Optical and electronic microscopy studies were used to study samples' damage morphologies after exposure. Intergranular damage and pits were found in sample cross sections, while chromium depletion was found in areas with internal damage. For high-temperature applications, the higher cost of the nickel-based alloy could be offset by the longer life they would allow in plant with higher operating temperatures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hot corrosion causes significant problems for both aerospace and power generation industries, where the combination of high temperature, corrosive gases, and contaminants severely limits component operating lifetimes in gas turbine hot gas streams. Multiple laboratory testing methodologies exist to study this hot corrosion, and these can be affected by a range of variables. This paper investigated the impact of varying deposit recoat cycle length when using the 'deposit recoat' testing method. CMSX-4 samples were exposed to simulated type II (pitting) hot corrosion conditions, with the same overall deposit load (averaged across the total exposure run), but different deposit recoat cycles. Post-exposure, samples underwent dimensional metrology analysis to compare metal loss resulting from different deposit recoat cycle lengths. Results for CMSX-4 suggest very small differences in corrosion losses, indicating CMSX-4 hot corrosion datasets obtained from deposit recoat experiments with different deposit recoat cycle lengths can be compared with confidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]