Technical forum: Review of sour service definitions. Part 1

Journal Article · Tue Apr 01 04:00:00 EST 1997 · Materials Performance

OSTI ID:460442

Smith, L M ^[1]; Crolet, J L ^[2]; Eliassen, S ^[3]; Kermani, B ^[4]; Nisbets, W ^[5]

---

1. European Federal of Corrosion Working Party, Brussels (Belgium)
2. Elf Aquitaine, Pau (France)
3. Statoil, Stavanger (Norway)
4. BP, Sunbury on Thames (United Kingdom)
5. Shell International Oil Products, Amsterdam (Netherlands)

This is a joint response to the publication in the August 1996 issue of MP of the article entitled ``Review of Sour Service Definitions`` by McIntyre and Boah. The article implied that the European Federation of Corrosion (EFC) publication No. 16 ``Guidelines on Materials Requirements for Carbon and Low Alloy Steel for H{sub 2}S-Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production`` contains various errors, omissions, or incorrect generalizations which were, apparently, enlightened in the published paper. Nevertheless, the fundamental validity of the basis of the EFC document was not undermined by the data presented, it merely served to prove the necessity for care when interpreting previously reported information. In support of this assertion, the cited literature references and field failures are reassessed in this reply in the light of current mechanistic understanding of sour service.

• OSTI ID: 460442
• Journal Information: Materials Performance, Journal Name: Materials Performance Journal Issue: 4 Vol. 36; ISSN 0094-1492; ISSN MTPFBI
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

02 PETROLEUM
03 NATURAL GAS
36 MATERIALS SCIENCE
CORROSION
CRACKS
ENVIRONMENT
FAILURES
HYDROGEN SULFIDES
NATURAL GAS WELLS
OIL WELLS
PH VALUE
RECOMMENDATIONS
STEELS
STRESSES