Coal Ash Corrosion Resistant Materials Testing

In April 1999, three identical superheater test sections were installed into the Niles Unit No.1 for the purpose of testing and ranking the coal ash corrosion resistance of candidate superheater alloys. The Niles boiler burns high sulfur coal (3% to 3.5%) that has a moderate alkali content (0.2% sodium equivalents), thus the constituents necessary for coal ash corrosion are present in the ash. The test sections were controlled to operate with an average surface metal temperature from approximately 1060 F to 1210 F which was within the temperature range over which coal ash corrosion occurs. Thus, this combination of aggressive environment and high temperature was appropriate for testing the performance of candidate corrosion-resistant tube materials. Analyses of the deposit and scale confirmed that aggressive alkali sulfate constituents were present at the metal surface and active in tube metal wastage. The test sections were constructed so that the response of twelve different candidate tube and/or coating materials could be studied. The plan was to remove and evaluate one of the three test sections at time intervals of 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years. This would permit an assessment of performance of the candidate materials as a function of time. Test Section A was removed in November 2001 after about 24 months of service at the desired steam temperature set point, with about 15.5 months of exposure at full temperature. A progress report, issued in October 2002, was written to document the performance of the candidate alloys in that test section. The evaluation described the condition of each tube sample after exposure. It involved a determination of the rate of wall thickness loss for these samples. In cases where there was more than one sample of a candidate material in the test section, an assessment was made of the performance of the alloy as a function of temperature. Test Sections B and C were examined during the November 2001 outage, and it was decided that, due to excessive wastage, certain tube samples needed to be removed and replaced in order to ensure that Test Sections B and C would have a chance of remaining in the boiler for their intended exposure period. These suspect tube samples were replaced and the two remaining test sections were put back into service. The tube samples that were removed from Test Sections B and C were set aside for later analysis at the end of the planned exposure period. Test Sections B and C were again examined approximately six months later. At that time, measured wall thickness losses raised concerns about additional tube samples. These suspect samples were also removed, set aside for later analysis, and replaced. The test sections then went back into service until the end of the second exposure period, which was concluded in May 2003 when, due to evidence of excessive wastage, the valves were opened increasing cooling steam flow and thereby effectively stopping corrosion. In August 2003, Test Sections B and C were removed for closer examination. Section C had experienced about 42 months of service at the desired team temperature set point with 28.5 months at temperature at full temperature. Additional suspect samples were removed from Test Section B, then, it was re-installed into the boiler (at the location originally occupied by Section C), where it remained in service until the end of the program. Due to this removal history, the samples from Test Section B had a total service duration that varied from a minimum of 15.5 months (for samples that performed poorly) to 37 months for samples the survived for the full intended service exposure for Section B. The figure below shows a schematic of Test Section B and indicates the length of service exposure for different locations. This report provides the results of the evaluation of Test Section B, including the samples that remained in the Test Section for the full exposure period as well as those that were removed early. This report also is intended to compare and summarize the results for all three test sections. The analysis of Test Section B followed much the same protocol that was employed in the assessment of the other two test sections. The focus was on determining and documenting the relative corrosion rates of the candidate materials; however, additional investigations were undertaken to better understand the wastage mechanism, and to characterize how selected candidate materials performed either well, or poorly, in the severe coal ash corrosion environment in the convection pass of Niles Unit No.1. The detailed results of the investigation are included in this report as a series of twelve appendices. Each appendix is devoted to the performance of one of the candidate alloys. The table below summarizes metal loss rate for the worst case sample of each of the candidate materials in all three test sections. The body of this report compares these for all of the samples in the test section