AN INTEGRATED METHODOLOGY FOR PREDICTING MATERIAL WEAR RATES DUE TO EROSION-CORROSION

A. Gnanavelu, N. Kapur, A. Neville*, J. F. Flores Institute of Engineering Thermofluids, Surfaces and Interfaces, School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom, LS2 9JT. Corresponding author: a.neville@leeds.ac.uk

ABSTRACT Erosion-corrosion damage within pipelines and associated fluid handling equipment is prevalent in the oil and gas sector and other process industries where solid-laden flows, such as those involved in the processing of oil sands, are found. As a first step towards trying to understand the interactions between erosion and corrosion it is important to understand the erosion damage that occurs as a result of solid particle impact on a surface (usually metal). This paper addresses this in relation to transport of fluids in the oil-sands industry. A method for predicting erosion damage has been developed, using a combination of standard laboratory based experiments and Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) simulations. This involves two stages: (i) a universal wear map is generated for the material in question using a jet impingement test to generate a wear scar. The local wear rate from this is interpreted using a CFD simulation of the test to generate a map giving local wear as a function of particle impact velocity and angle; (ii) a CFD solution is calculated for the pipefitting of interest giving the particle impact data at each point on the surface. The wear map from the first stage is then used to give the local wear rate. The power of this method is that once a material specific map has been generated then wear on any pipe geometry can be calculated through the simulation of flow using CFD. In this paper a qualitative comparison is carried out of this method, and the general applicability is discussed.

Keywords: CFD, Solid particle erosion, erosion-corrosion prediction, particle tracking.

INTRODUCTION

The economic transportation of slurries plays a vital role in the production of oil in various industries. To maintain constant production levels, functioning of the hydro-transport equipment is of utmost importance since failure of the equipment (e.g. pipes, valves, pumps, etc.) leads to economic consequences and serious safety implications. The probability of failure of plant equipment is high in severe slurry transport conditions. Plant equipment can undergo severe damage due to a variety of mechanisms, with the most significant being through the mechanism of erosion-corrosion. For decades, efforts have been made to improve the service life of plant equipment by developing advanced materials which offer better resistance to material loss. Understanding the conditions in which this damage mechanism prevails offers a good starting point to develop a predictive tool which can be used as a guide for material selection. One of the main obstacles for good prediction has been the lack of understanding of the basic mechanisms, particularly at high solid loadings and in corrosive fluids. With the advances of technology and the experience gained from field testing, progress has been made in recent years towards understanding the synergistic effects between erosion and corrosion processes and this has significantly improved the ability to predict erosioncorrosion damage1. This paper presents an integrated methodology which couples standard laboratory tests with computational simulations to predict material wear rates due to erosioncorrosion damage in various equipment. This paper focuses on a qualitative comparison of erosion damage for a metal coupon in a standard jet impingement test and that for the modified geometry of an inclined coupon, with CFD used to identify those regions of consistent wear patterns. METHODOLOGY A range of standard laboratory tests, such as Coriolis2,3, Slurry Pot4,5, ASTM G65/755,6, Toroid Wheel7, Jet Impingement8,9 or Pipe Loop10,11 are used by researchers and industrialists to study the performance of different materials under various conditions of erosion-corrosion. Traditionally, these laboratory tests have been primarily used to rank material performance. Conversion of this ranking to provide information about erosion-corrosion mechanisms and to predict absolute wear rates in service has proven to be a challenge due to the differences in conditions between the testing and actual plant equipment12 and also due to uncertainties in the working conditions experienced in the field13. Usually lab tests are accelerated wear tests performed on a smaller scale to facilitate an economical and feasible material test programme. Scaling the results obtained to represent plant equipment has proven to be complicated since the damage mechanisms might vary with equipment size, in particular the hydrodynamic conditions which lead to particle impact12. To date, for good prediction of material wear due to erosion, the conditions simulated in the laboratory need to closely represent the plant conditions leading to damage due to erosion-corrosion. Slurry erosion is caused by the interaction of a fluid suspension of solid particles and a target surface which experiences loss of material by the repeated impact of the particles. The parts of the fluid transport system in which erosion is talking place are connected through the flow field which has a strong influence on the rate of material loss from the target surface. The problem of understanding erosion was summarized by Finnie14, the erosion of a surface by abrasive particles in an inert fluid (negligible corrosion) should depend on the number of particles striking the surface, their velocity and their direction relative to the surface. These quantities are largely determined by 2

the prevailing flow conditions15. Various studies has been conducted to study the effect of flow conditions on particle impact and it has been proven that the prevailing hydrodynamic condition has a major effect on the particle impact and hence material removal rates. Studying the prevailing flow regime provides an insight onto the forces acting on the particles which affect particle motion and this subsequently determines the conditions of particle impact onto the surface. It had been long considered that particle impact angle was the same as the angle at which the inlet flow is directed towards a test sample; however Benchaita et al. demonstrated that this was not the case16. With technological advances in terms of mathematical understanding, it is possible to determine the actual particle impact angles which are entirely different from the assumed angle, as shown in Figure 1. This is a vital step in developing a model to predict erosion-corrosion wear in plant equipment.

Impingement nozzle Fluid with solid particles

Section A

Path of Solid Particle

Nominal impact angle =900deg 9

Actual Impact Angle

Target material
Figure 1. Impact of solid particles in a fluid suspension on a material sample and the difference between the actual angle and nominal impingement angles.

The method inherent in this work involves two key stages to build a wear map using a combination of standard experimentation and CFD, before predicting actual wear in plant equipment using a combination of CFD with this wear map. Stage 1 generating a material specific wear map a. A set of tests (under standardised conditions) is carried out using a flat coupon of the test material orientated at 90 to the flow in the jet impingement apparatus. Following the test, the coupon is analysed to give the local wear rate as a function of radial position. b. A CFD simulation of the jet impingement test, incorporating the motion of the sand particles, is run under the exact conditions from part a, to give the local particle impact velocity and angle. c. The final part of stage 1 is to generate the universal wear map for the material under test. This gives the wear rate as a function of particle impact velocity and particle impact angle. Stage 2 predicting wear rates in specific geometries a. A CFD simulation is run for the specific geometry of interest in plant operation. This gives impact velocity and angle at each position within the geometry.

b. The wear map from stage 1 is then used to predict the local wear rate at each point. This allows the final scar depth and shape to be determined as a function of time, together with the overall wear of the component. In this paper, a qualitative comparison is made between the wear profile of a plate under a standard test orientated at 90 to the flow, and a plate orientated at 15 and 45 to the flow. The CFD modelling of both scenarios is used to interpret the results. This is a precursor to future work where quantitative predictions are made using additional data collected about the wear profile of the samples. EXPERIMENTATION A Jet Impingement Test (JIT) rig used to simulate erosion-corrosion conditions has been built at the University of Leeds, comprising a reciprocating slurry pump, a set of nozzles, sample holders and a holding tank, which works through impinging a suspension of particles within a liquid onto the test material9,16. Figure 2 shows a simple sketch of the experimental setup of the apparatus, together with the geometry of the nozzles, which is used to study the behaviour of various materials under the erosion/corrosion conditions. If desired, corrosion of the sample can be reduced to negligible values either by cathodic protection or by reducing oxygen levels in the system17. The facility enables the dependence of different input conditions such as the nominal impingement angle, sand concentration, temperature and flow velocity on the erosion rate to be studied and hence to assess the critical factors which contribute to material removal.

Flow Loop

Nozzle Sample
7 mm

5 mm

Water with Sand

25 mm

Pump

Figure 2. Schematic Diagram of the Slurry JIT used for simulating erosion-corrosion conditions and test the performance of various material under these conditions.

In the studies reported here, testing was carried out using stainless steel 316L (UNS S31603) and a non-saline fluid solution (mains water) at room temperature in order to minimise the effect of corrosion on the test samples. To ensure minimum effects of corrosion, test samples were 4

cathodically protected to prevent material loss due to corrosion. However, it was observed that the difference in material loss on test samples with and without cathodic protection were negligible in these conditions and hence further testing was conducted without cathodic protection but with the assurance of negligible wear due to corrosion in these conditions. All tests were conducted with AFS 50/70 sand which has a nominal size of 212-300m diameter1. The sand concentration was 1% by weight as measured out of the nozzle prior to impact. It should be noted that 1% does not represent the sand concentration in the reservoir whereas it represents the actual concentration of sand exiting the nozzle which was measured for every test. In many studies the sand concentration in the reservoir is normally quoted as the test condition and this can often be very different (either higher or lower depending on the configuration of the apparatus) to the actual concentration exiting the nozzle. Testing was performed for duration of 120 minutes and each test was repeated three times to ensure repeatability. The tests were conducted for three different nominal exit velocities. Figure 3 shows the variation of total weight loss of the material with nominal exit flow velocity. It was seen that the total weight loss of stainless steel 316L increased linearly with Vn (where V is the inlet flow velocity and n in this case was 3). This agreed very well with studies conducted in the past for steels1,18-20. This test was conducted to ensure the reliability of the experimental setup and also to provide data about the impact conditions to be used to develop a CFD model.
80 70

Total Mass Loss (mg)

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12

y = 0.0566x
2

3.105

R = 0.9943

Inlet Flow Velocity (m/s) Figure 3. Variation of total mass loss of Stainless 316L with different inlet flow velocities.

Following this preliminary work, sand based erosion tests were then carried out using flat 316L samples under similar conditions (1% sand concentration, room temperature and non-saline fluid) to the previous set but at different nominal impingement angles, namely 15 and 45 from the horizontal and an inlet velocity of 5m/s. In addition to this, CFD modelling was carried out under these conditions, as described in the following section.

COMPUTATIONAL MODELLING

CFD has been widely used in recent years to study and predict the rate of material removal due to solid particle impact21. The jet impingement test was simulated using CFD to study the motion of sand particles and the impact conditions prior to impact. As is common with CFD simulations, a set of assumptions were made whilst performing each simulation:1. The shape of the particles was considered to be spherical in order to develop a simple but robust method. 2. Particle size was assumed to be 300 m which was considered to be a good representation of the average size of the sand distribution used for testing. 3. Particle-particle interactions are negligible, which has been shown to be valid assumption while simulating erosion wear at low particle flux22. 4. The solid phase does not affect the prevailing flow field due to the impingement of the jet on the flat plate which is attributed to the low particle flux22. 5. For the configuration of 90 nominal impingement angle, symmetry conditions were used to generate a half model for the optimum use of computational resource. 6. Particles were released into the flow at zero velocity and at a distance of 10 times the diameter of the nozzle from the tip of the nozzle. Simulations were performed with various particles in a slurry jet and particle motions calculated within the flow field. Consistent with the sand used in testing, the density of the particles was set at 2206 kg/m3.

Figure 4. A half model of the JIT simulation showing the motion path of fluid and solid particles. Solid Particles (indicated by dotted lines) crossing the fluid streamlines (solid lines) and impacting the target plate. All simulations were carried out using water, 300 m solid particles of 2206 kg/m3 density, at 5m/s inlet flow velocity, with a 7mm nozzle and 5mm stand-off nozzle distance.

Figure 4 shows a typical set of results, in this case for a plate at 90 and at a velocity of 5 m/s. The solid lines show the streamlines (that an infinitesimally small particle of the same density as the water would follow), with the dotted lines showing the motion of the particles. Particles entering the inlet to the right of the dashed line do not impact the target and have been dragged away by the flow. Those particles entering to the left of the dashed line impact the plate, with particles near the

stagnation line impacting the plate at high angles whereas the other particles collided at glancing angles. The results from the simulations provided a whole range of data which included the motion of the particles, position of particles in the flow field and their local velocities. This data can be interpreted to give the impact velocities and impact angles of individual particles as shown in Figure 5. The variation of impact angles along the length of the sample was consistent with work of Benchaita et al.16.
0.2
Position along Y Axis ( in mm)

Particle Path

0.15 0.1 0.05 0 0.75 1 1.25 1.5

Distance on bottom Plate mm) Distance on Bottom plate (in (in mm)
V =0.7039m/s V = 1.26 m/s V =0.7039 m/s

44.230 44.230 50

Figure 5. Impact angle and Impact velocity of solid particle impacting the bottom plate extracted from a JIT simulation carried out at 90 nominal impingement angle at conditions stated in Figure 4.

Figures 6 and 7 show impact velocity and impact angles as function of position along the test plate and it can be observed that particles closer to the stagnation line (Y-axis) impact the target at low velocity due to the drag force exerted by the decelerating fluid and at high angles whereas particles away from the stagnation line impact at higher velocities as the fluid starts accelerating and at glancing angles23. This highlights the variation in impact velocity and angles across the plate. Finally, Figure 8 shows the variation of impact velocities against impact angles demonstrating that part of the wear map capable of being simulated with the JIT under these flow conditions.
6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Particle impact velocity (m/s)

Position on test plate away from the centre of plate (in mm)

Figure 6. Variation of particle impact velocities as a function of position obtained from a JIT simulation carried out at 90 nominal impingement angle at conditions stated in Figure 4.

70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Particle impact angles (in degrees)

Position on test plate away from the centre of plate (in mm)

Figure 7. Variation of particle impact angles as a function of position along the length of the specimen in a JIT simulation at conditions stated in Figure 4.

5.5

5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20

Particle impact velocity (in m/s)

Impingement rig simulation

30

40

50

60

70

Particle impact angles (in degrees)

Figure 8. Particle impact velocities and angles that can be simulated using this configuration of the JIT at conditions stated in Figure 4.

TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The samples from the impingement tests performed at 90, 45 and 15 were analysed using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) to study the nature of the complete wear scar and individual wear scars due to discrete particle impacts. The regions of scarring were characterised using the results from the CFD. CFD simulations of the jet impingement test provided data regarding the range of impact angles (shown in Figure 8), and this can be used to predict the type of local impact and wear patterns based on previous studies of erosion of a ductile material14,24-26. Based on the type of particle impact and local material wear removal, the entire wear scar can be divided into three main regions as a result of impact angle and velocity for a ductile material:

Region 1 is characterised on the basis of particles impacting the surface at high angles which lead to the formation of flakes due to plastic deformation and the removal of these flakes due to impact by approaching particles. This region in the jet impingement test is mainly concentrated around the stagnation point as shown in Figure 9. The stagnation point is the intersection of the symmetrical axis and the horizontal plate and is defined by high static pressures and very low flow velocities. Since the flow vector changes rapidly the viscosity effects of the fluid are low and hence the tendency for particles to cross fluid streamlines in this region due to particle inertia is high, which leads to high angle particle impacts23. Since the fluid in this region is decelerating, there is a drop in flow velocity which causes the oncoming particles to slow down and hence the particle impact velocities in this region are low23 (10% of the inlet flow velocity for this particular condition). Figure 10 shows a description of the mechanism by which material is removed due to plastic deformation caused by particles impacting at high angles.
Inlet flow pipe modelled in CFD

Line of symmetry Impinging inlet flow

Fluid flow regime

Particle motion Flow direction Test Surface

Reformed fluid jet

High turbulence region

Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Figure 9. Prevailing fluid regime around the test sample in a JIT as simulated using CFD, divided into three regions and motion of solid particles in the flow field.

Region 2 can be characterised by particles impacting at medium to low angles in the range of (40-10). Region 2, shown in Figure 9, is a region of high turbulence which is due to the increase in fluid momentum as the fluid moves away from the stagnation region. Increase in fluid momentum provides energy to the solid particles and the direction of the flow tends to deter the particle away from the sample. However, the inertia of particles tends to drive the particles towards the surface of the sample causing impact. Particle impacts in this region are of higher velocities but at impact angles lower than those experienced in region 1. The reduction in impact angles is due to the alignment of the flow into a jet that lies parallel to the plate. Fluid motion causes a drag on the particles in a stream wise direction and hence the tendency of the solid particles to cut across fluid streamlines is reduced compared to region 1. The mechanism in which material is removed in this region is due to ploughing action and micro cutting as noted by Hutchings24. The majority of the impacts are at medium to low angles which causes the flakes to be formed in a predominant direction; along the direction of fluid flow, as shown in Figure 10.

Plastic deformation due to High impact angles

High angle impact Flake formation

Plastic deformation due to medium-low impact angles

Flake formation towards flow direction

Medium -Low angle impact

Figure 10. Material removal mechanism due to impact of solid particles at high and medium to low impact angles for a ductile material14,24-26 in this case stainless steel 316L.

Region 3 is the area where the fluid flow dominates particles motion, i.e. particles almost completely follow the streamlines which leads to lesser impacts and hence has minor effect on the erosion rates of the target material. In this region, the flow jet increases and turbulence energy decays to the surroundings. The fluid flow represents a jet but in the radial direction. Solid particles align themselves in an orderly manner with the fluid streamlines and impacts are very minimal. Particles that do impact in this region glance or slide along the surface in a scratching motion. Local fluid velocities are quite high as the flow develops completely into a jet. This region has a minimum contribution to material loss due to wear caused by particle impact however the effects of flow induced corrosion might be high27. The effects of corrosion in this study has been minimised to negligible levels, however as a precursor to future studies, this region needs to be carefully studied for the effect of corrosion. The three regions can be characterised as: Region 1: Impact angle 90 to 40 Region 2: Impact angle 40 to 20 Region 3: Impact angle < 20 Now that three distinct regions based on the type of particle impact has been defined, the surface of the samples from three different tests (90, 45 and 15) were observed under a SEM to asses the actual nature of the local impacts and wear patterns. Figure 11 shows the top view of a 90 impingement test specimen. Three concentric regions were observed (as outlined in the Figure 11) and these were categorized as regions 1, 2 and 3 based upon the particle impact data obtained from CFD simulations.

10

Visual observation of 90 impingement test sample

Particles impacts simulated using CFD

3 1 2

25 mm

Figure 11. Top view of the test sample after testing viewed under the naked eye indicating three distinctive regions of wear and also the CFD predictions of particle motion in the JIT.

Figure 11 also shows a half computational model of the jet impingement test with the motion of particles indicated by line-arrows. The test surface is divided in four regions, three based on local particle impact angles as described earlier with an additional area, where the amount of particle impacts are minimum and hence material wear due to impact erosion, is also defined and is known as region 4. The SEM photos of the three regions are shown in Figures 12-14. Figure 12 indicates the local wear pattern very close to the stagnation point, in region 1. Area A in the picture indicates individual particle impact and B shows the flakes which are formed plastically due to particle impacts. The appearance of the flakes, which are spread out evenly around a impact region, indicates material damage due to high angle impacts as described in Figure 10.

Figure 12. SEM photo of a 90 impingement test sample very close to the stagnation point, in region 1 as shown in Figure 11. Area A indicates individual particle impact and B shows the material flakes generated due to plastic deformation induced by particle impacts.

11

Figure 13 shows a SEM photo of the post-test sample surface on region 2. CFD simulations predict particles to impact at medium-low angles. Area C shows the region of heavy indentation and it can be seen that flakes of material are formed around the impact region. This indicates that the region was impacted by particles at high angles. Area D, which is further away from the centre but still in region 2 shows flakes which were formed due to impact of particles. The deformation of the surface is along the direction of fluid flow indicating a removal mechanism where the material is been deformed towards one direction as shown in Figure 10. This is in close proximity to CFD simulations which predict impact of particles at medium-low angles in this region.

Flow Direction

Figure 13. SEM photo of a 90 impingement test sample of the local wear pattern in region 2. Area C indicates material flakes formed due to particle impacts and D shows the flakes of material aligned to flow direction.

Figure 14 shows a SEM picture of the local wear pattern in region 3, where the CFD simulations indicate impact by particles at low and glancing angles. Area E indicates particle impact and it could be clearly observed that the material has been deformed along the direction of the flow. Area F indicates an individual impact region, where the local impact scar is quite lengthy which indicates that particle impacts were at very low angles, as predicted by CFD simulations.

E F

Flow direction

Figure 14. SEM photo of a 90 impingement test sample of the local wear pattern in region 3. Area E indicates material flakes formed due to particle impacts and F shows a long shallow crater formed due to low angle impacts.

12

Similarly, the wear scar on the surface of a sample from a 15 impingement test was divided into three distinct regions, defined by particle impact angles predicted by CFD simulation as shown in Figure 15. These regions were then examined using SEM to observe the morphology of the impact regions and craters.

Visual observation of 15 impingement test sample

Particles impacts simulated using CFD

1 2 3
25 mm

Figure 15. Top view of a post-test sample viewed under the naked eye indicating three distinctive regions of wear and also the CFD predictions of particle motion in the JIT at 15 along the horizontal.

SEM pictures of the three regions of the wear scar are shown in Figures 16-18. Figure 16 shows the local wear pattern on region 1 on the post-test sample where plastic deformation and heavy indentations (shown by area A) due to high angle impacts are high.

Region 1

Flow direction

Figure 16. SEM picture of the wear pattern in region 1 where area A indicates surface indentation due to high angle impact and plastic deformation of material.

Figure 17 shows the local wear craters in region 2 observed under a SEM. Unlike the other regions, the direction on the flow is angled in this picture since this region was away from the centre line (where the flow is along the length of the sample) but the area covered was within region 2. This

13

picture clearly shows the deformed material aligned with the flow asserting the fact that particle impacts occurred at medium-low angles. Figure 18 shows the wear pattern in region 3 where the particles are predicted to impact by glancing or sliding angles from CFD simulations. On comparing Figure 17 and18, it can be seen that material damage is not as severe in region 3 as compared to region 2. Surface indentations are less compared to region 2 signifying sliding angle impacts leading to scratches on the surface.

Region 2 Flow direction

Figure 17. SEM picture of the wear pattern in region 2 showing surface indentations and crater along the direction of fluid flow.

Region 3

Flow direction

Figure 18. SEM picture of the wear pattern in region 3 showing surface indentations and crater along the direction of fluid flow.

Finally, CFD simulations were conducted for a JIT configuration having a specimen angled at 45. Under this condition the flow can be predominantly divided into two regions-region 2 and region 3, with the region of impacts close to 90 being relatively small in number.

14

Visual observation of 45 impingement test sample

Particles impacts simulated using CFD

2 3

2 3

25 mm

Figure 19. Top view of a post-test sample viewed under the naked eye indicating two distinctive regions of wear and also the CFD predictions of particle motion in the JIT at 45along the horizontal.

Observing region 2 of the surface using a SEM, shown in Figure 20 at two different positions for local wear pattern, it was seen that predominant flakes formed due to plastic deformation of material was aligned along the direction of fluid flow. Impacts leading to heavy indentation were hardly seen, emphasizing minimal particle impacts at high angles as predicted by CFD simulations.

Region 2 Position 1

Region 2 Position 2

Flow direction

Flow direction

Figure 20. SEM photos of the local wear pattern in region 2 (region defined by medium-low particle impact angles using CFD predictions) at two different positions.

Figure 21 shows SEM images of the surface of the test sample on region 3 at two different positions. CFD simulation data predicted particles to impact the surface at low-sliding angles and this can be see from long craters as indicated by H in Figure 21. The flakes formed by material deformation is well directed towards flow direction, which stresses the fact that particles in this region impacted at very low angles as predicted by CFD simulations.

15

Region 3 Position 1

Region 3 Position 2

Flow direction

Flow direction

Figure 21. SEM photos of the local wear pattern in region 3 (region defined by low-sliding particle impact angles by CFD predictions) at two different positions.

CONCLUSION CFD simulations of the JIT were used to define various regions on the wear scar depending upon the type of individual particle impacts (high, medium and low). Actual JIT were conducted at three different nominal impingement angles (90, 45 and 15) and the wear scar within was observed under a SEM for local indentations to study the type of local material degradation. It was observed that the mechanism leading to local material degradation was similar to those predicted by CFD simulations of particle impacts. The results show that the CFD model can be used to successfully interpret the results of the tests run under different angles, and that for a given test it is possible to define the local conditions that exist on the plate. The final stage of this work is to introduce wear rates based on local conditions, from experiment. This will then provide a method where, performing a small number of practical tests on the JIT, the wear rate on actual plant components can be predicted. Further development of this method are ongoing to include the effects of flow induced corrosion and to predict material wear due to erosion-corrosion in plant equipment.

16

REFERENCES 1. Reza, F., Corrosion and Erosion-Corrosion Behaviour of Materials Used for Oil sands Applications, PhD Thesis, Engineering and Physical Science (2005) Herriot-Watt University. 2. Tian, H.H., G.R. Addie, and K.V. Pagalthivarthi, Determination of wear coefficients for erosive wear prediction through Coriolis wear testing. Wear, 2005. 259(1-6): p. 160-170. 3. Tian, H.H., G.R. Addie, and E.P. Barsh, A new impact erosion testing setup through Coriolis approach. Wear, 2007. 263(1-6): p. 289-294. 4. Clark, H.M., On the impact rate and impact energy of particles in a slurry pot erosion tester. Wear, 1991. 147(1): p. 165-183. 5. Gandhi, B.K., S.N. Singh, and V. Seshadri, A study on the effect of surface orientation on erosion wear of flat specimens moving in a solid-liquid suspension. Wear, 2003. 254(12): p. 1233-1238. 6. Hawk, J.A., et al., Laboratory abrasive wear tests: investigation of test methods and alloy correlation. Wear, 1999. 225-229(Part 2): p. 1031-1042 7. Henday, G., A Comparison of Commercial Pipe Materials Intended for the Hydraulic Transport of Solids. 1988, BHRA. 8. Wood, R.J.K. and D.W. Wheeler, Design and performance of a high velocity air-sand jet impingement erosion facility. Wear, 1998. 220(2): p. 95-112. 9. Neville, A. and T. Hodgkiess, Characterisation of high-grade alloy behaviour in severe erosioncorrosion conditions. Wear, 1999. 233-235: p. 596-607. 10. Shook, C.A., et al., Relative Wear Rate Determinations for Slurry Pipelines. Journal of Pipelines, 1981. 1: p. 273-280. 11. Been, J., et al., Predicting Wear of Hydro Transport Pipelines in Oil Sand Slurries, Alberta Research Council / Coanada Research and Development Corporation. 12. Wood, R.J.K., et al., Comparison of predicted and experimental erosion estimates in slurry ducts. Wear, 2004. 256(9-10): p. 937-947. 13. Schaan, J., N. Cook, and R.S. Sanders, On-line wear measurements for commercial-scale, coarse-particle slurry pipelines, Syncrude Canada Ltd. 14. Finnie, I., Erosion of surfaces by solid particles. Wear, 1960. 3(2): p. 87-103. 15. Clark, H.M., The influence of the flow field in slurry erosion. Wear, 1992. 152(2): p. 223-240. 16. Benchaita M.T., Griffith P., Rabinowicz E., Erosion of Metallic Plate by Solid Particles Entrained in a Liquid Jet. ASME Vol. 105, No.3 (1983), 215-222.

17

17. Wang, Y. and D.O. Northwood, Effects of O2 and H2 on the corrosion of SS316L metallic bipolar plate materials in simulated anode and cathode environments of PEM fuel cells. Electrochimica Acta, 2007. 52(24): p. 6793-6798. 18. Bjordal, M., et al., Erosion and corrosion properties of WC coatings and duplex stainless steel in sand-containing synthetic sea water. Wear, 1995. 186-187(Part 2): p. 508-514. 19. Meng, H., X. Hu, and A. Neville, A systematic erosion-corrosion study of two stainless steels in marine conditions via experimental design. Wear, 2007. 263(1-6): p. 355-362. 20. Hu, X. and A. Neville, The electrochemical response of stainless steels in liquid-solid impingement. Wear, 2005. 258(1-4): p. 641-648. 21. Brown, G.J., Erosion prediction in slurry pipeline tee-junctions. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2002. 26(2): p. 155-170. 22. Wang, J. and S.A. Shirazi, A CFD Based Correlation for Erosion Factor for Long-Radius Elbows and Bends. ASME, 2003. 125: p. 26-34. 23. Clark, H.M., The influence of the flow field in slurry erosion. Wear, 1992. 152(2): p. 223-240. 24. Hutchings, I.M., Prediction of the resistance of metals to erosion by solid particles. Wear, 1975. 35(2): p. 371-374. 25. Dhar, S., et al., Erosion mechanisms due to impact of single angular particles. Wear, 2005. 258(1-4): p. 567-579. 26. Desale, G.R., B.K. Gandhi, and S.C. Jain, Slurry erosion of ductile materials under normal impact condition. Wear, 2008. 264(3-4): p. 322-330. 27. Efird, K.D., et al., Correlation of steel corrosion in pipe flow with jet impingement and rotating cylinder tests. Journal: Corrosion; Volume: 49; Issue: 12; Other Information: PBD: Dec 1993, 1993: p. Size: pp. 992-1003.

18