The Effect of Environment and Material Chemistry on Single-Effects Creep Testing of Austenitic Stainless Steels

  • L. B. O’BrienEmail author
  • B. D. Miller
Conference paper
Part of the The Minerals, Metals & Materials Series book series (MMMS)


Injected vacancy, enhanced creep is hypothesized to reduce crack growth rates (CGRs) in deaerated pressurized water (DPW) in austenitic stainless steels with high sulfur levels. CGR reduction is hypothesized to occur by corrosion generated vacancy/dislocation interactions that promote dislocation climb and disrupt planar slip bands. Creep tests using tensile specimens of varying sulfur content were performed in air and DPW at 288 °C. Testing began with a hold at the flow stress, followed by fatigue cycles at room temperature (RT), then holds at flow stress and 105% flow stress. Primary creep was exhibited in the high sulfur material in DPW, after the RT fatigue cycles, and resulted in 0.19 mm of extension. Characterization revealed a corrosion product and a deformed microstructure with extensive planar slip bands in the specimen that crept. Corrosion-generated vacancies are unlikely to be the source of the primary creep. Potential mechanisms for the observed creep behavior will be discussed.


Creep 304 stainless steel Sulfur Hydrogen 


  1. 1.
    W.J. Mills, Accelerated and retarded corrosion fatigue crack growth behavior of 304 stainless steel in an elevated temperature aqueous environment, in 16th International Conference on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Systems—Water Reactors, Asheville, NC (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    L.B. O’Brien et al., The effect of environment, chemistry, and microstructure on the corrosion fatigue behavior of austenitic stainless steel in high temperature water, in 17th International Conference on Environmental Degradation of Materials in Nuclear Power Systems—Water Reactors, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Oehlert, A. Atrens, Room temperature creep of high strength steels. Acta Mater. 42, 1493–1508 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. Vaillant, L. Tribouilloy, T. Couvant, Influence of cold work on crack growth rates of stainless steels in nominal primary environment. Workshop on Cold Work/SCC, 4–8 June 2007Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T.H. Alden, Strain hardening during low temperature creep of 304 stainless steel. Acta Mater. 35, 2621–2626 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M.E. Kassner, K. Smith, Low temperature creep plasticity. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 3, 280–288 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    S. Usami, T. Mori, Creep deformation of austenitic steels at medium and low temperatures. Cryogenics 40, 117–126 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Revie and Uhlig, Effect of applied potential and surface dissolution on the creep behavior of copper. Acta Metall. 22, 619–627 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    C.W. Tien, C.J. Altstetter, Hydrogen-enhanced plasticity of 310S stainless steel. Mater. Chem. Phys. 35, 58–63 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    K.A. Nibur, D.F. Bahr, B.P. Somerday, Hydrogen effects on dislocation activity in austenitic stainless steels. Acta Mater. 54, 2677–2684 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Hatano, M. Fujinami, K. Arai, H. Fujii, M. Nagumo, Hydrogen embrittlement of austenitic stainless steels revealed by deformation microstructures and strain-induced creation of vacancies. Acta Mater. 67, 342–353 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bechtel Marine Propulsion CorporationSchenectadyUSA
  2. 2.Bechtel Marine Propulsion CorporationWest MifflinUSA

Personalised recommendations