Paper 4e

Fitness-for-Service of CO2 Absorbers

in Ammonia Plants
Fitness-for-Service of CO2 Absorption systems is an ongoing concern in the Ammonia industry. CO2
Absorption systems are critical equipment items in terms of plant operating efficiency, throughput, and
safety risk to the facility. Increasing run lengths and throughput can result in more severe corrosion
environments in these systems. Shutdown and online inspection of CO2 Absorption equipment may
discover severe corrosion. Corrosion damage must be evaluated, monitored, and mitigated to operate the
equipment safely and reliably.

This paper discusses current industry experience with CO2 Absorption systems. The evaluation of the
corrosion damage using API 579 Fitness-for-Service methodology along with recent industry application
is presented. Several different mitigation techniques are discussed to evaluate the available repair
procedures for CO2 Absorption system equipment. Examples are provided which show the repair process
and the results of the repairs for the ongoing fitness-for–service of these critical equipment items.

James R. Widrig
Quest Integrity Group, Boulder, Colorado, USA

Donald H. Timbres
D. & E. Consulting Inc., Fort Saskatchewan, Alberta, Canada

Introduction has resulted in moderate to severe corrosion in the

vessel shell, internal components, and associated

T
he Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Absorption and
Stripping Systems in Ammonia Plants are
critical equipment items to the plant opera-
tion. The CO2 Absorption vessel is a vertic-
al pressure vessel and typically is one of the largest
pressure vessels in the Ammonia Plant processing
a mixture of hydrogen, nitrogen, and carbon oxide
gases [Figure1]. Many of these vessels are con-
structed of carbon steels. The carbon oxide gases
are removed using various commercially available
process solutions to produce a synthesis gas stream
and carbon dioxide product stream. The aqueous
carbon dioxide rich environment of the absorber
piping systems. Several papers on this subject have
been reported at previous AIChE Ammonia Sym-
posiums [1,2] Corrosion damage in this critical
equipment must be evaluated, monitored, and miti-
gated to safely and reliably operate this equipment.
Carbon Dioxide Corrosion
Carbon dioxide corrosion results when CO2 dis-
solves in water to form carbonic acid [H2CO3]. The
acid generally lowers the pH and in sufficient

2009 211 AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL

 quantities promotes general corrosion and/or pit-
ting corrosion of carbon steel.

There are several commercially available processes

for the removal of CO2 from synthesis gas. Com-
mon processes used in ammonia facilities include
Selexol (dimethyl ether polyethylene glycol), Cat-
acarb (hot potassium carbonate), Benfield (potas-
sium carbonate with diethanol amine), and organic
amine solutions including DEA (diethanolamine),
MEA (monoethanolamine), MDEA (methyldietha-
nolamine), activated-MDEA. Process designers
may consider factors of CO2 purity, the solution
loading and equipment size required for the
process, energy consumption, solution costs, as
well as system metallurgy and corrosion.

Corrosion in CO2 removal systems has been the

subject of ongoing investigation and research for
many years [some references are noted above]. The
discussions and examples contained in this review
are specific examples of corrosion in activated
MDEA (aMDEA) systems. These evaluations, mi-
tigation, and repair techniques may find general Figure 1 shows a picture of a typical absorber
application to additional processes. tower in aMDEA service.

Corrosion in aMDEA systems has been generally

found to occur in areas of high turbulence, changes Inspection of CO2 Absorbers
in the system pressure, and in areas where the
Generally due to equipment initial investment cost,
components experience wetting and drying; such
evolution of solution technology, and revamps,
as above the liquid level in the bottom of an ab-
much of the equipment used in aMDEA systems is
sorption column where CO2 rich gas enters the
constructed of carbon steel. Operated correctly,
vessel. Corrosion has also been observed in trayed
these systems should not be subject to severe cor-
or packed sections with poor liquid/gas distribu-
rosion or require the use of stainless steels or clad-
tion.
ding.

In practice, experience has shown that corrosion

can be expected to occur in these systems. Corro-
sion has also suddenly appeared in systems which
have been in operation for a long period of time
without any prior notable corrosion. Operational
changes are most often attributed to the onset of
accelerated corrosion. The operator should monitor
the performance of the absorption system using
routine laboratory testing of solution chemistry,
corrosion probes and process operating conditions.

AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL 212 2009

 Corrosion in CO2 absorption systems may be diffi-
cult to determine with the system in operation.
These pressure vessels are frequently quite large
and difficult to inspect due to size and in some cas-
es external insulation. The corrosion is typically
very localized and therefore will be difficult to
detect with spot ultrasonic inspection. Corrosion in
associated equipment (for example piping, pumps,
and heat exchangers) may provide an indication of
system issues which may prompt further investiga-
tion.
Visible internal inspection of the vessel during a
shutdown is the most reliable method for locating
corrosion. Internal inspection is often limited to the
areas easily observed from manways and limited
internal access. Removal of trays and structured
packing may be required to identify and fully un-
derstand the extent of corrosion in a system. This
inspection may become a critical path item for a
plant turnaround and is especially true when unex-
pected corrosion is discovered.
Examples of typical CO2 corrosion found during
shutdowns are shown in Figures 2, 6, 7 and 12.
Fitness-for-Service
Once corrosion is discovered, the operator/owner
is faced with a decision on what needs to be done
to ensure continued safe and reliable operation of
the vessel and system. Local pressure vessel au-
thorities may be involved as well. Immediate con-
cerns are whether the equipment will need to be
shut down for repair or replacement, if the equip-
ment can be operated in the present condition until
a future opportunity for repair, and what are the
options for repair.
Localized corrosion in these systems can be affec-
tively evaluated using API 579/ ASME FFS-1 Fit-
ness-for-Service criteria [3]. The results of this as-
sessment are used by the operator/owner to
determine the level of current risk and to determine
a course of action for mitigation.
2009
API 579 was adopted by API in 2001 as a Recom-
mended Practice based upon work performed by
subcommittee over a number of years. API 579
was revised in 2007 and is currently an API Stan-
dard. The standard has also been adopted by
ASME as FFS-1 2007 and is now generally re-
ferred to as API 579/ASME FFS-1. Fitness-for-
Service is used to evaluate several classifications
or types of flaws including general metal loss, lo-
calized metal loss, pitting corrosion, crack-like
flaws, creep, and brittle fracture.
Section 4 of API 579/ASME FFS-1 Fitness–For–
Service (FFS) applies to the assessment of pressu-
rized components subject to general metal loss re-
sulting from corrosion, erosion, or both corrosion
and erosion. The assessment procedures use a
thickness averaging (swimming pool profile) ap-
proach. When local thinned areas are found, the
procedures in Part 4 may produce conservative re-
sults. Part 5 assessment procedures (use a river
bottom profile) and can be used to reduce the level
of conservatism in the results. [Reference API
579/ASME FFS-1]. The details of performing an
API 579 / ASME FFS-1 assessment are provided
in these documents.
One example of the API 579/ ASME FFS-1 as-
sessment involves a Semi-Lean Absorption Tower
with the following design details.
Inside Diameter, inches 120 (3.05 m)
Overall Height, feet 120 (36.6 m)
Design Pressure, psig 323 (2227 kPa)
Max. Design Temperature, 650 (343oC)
o
F
Nom. Wall Thickness, inches 1.3125 (33.3 mm)
Maximum Allowable Stress, 17,500 (120 MPa)
psi
Shell Weld Joint Efficiency 1.0
Specified Corrosion Allow- 0.125 (3 mm)
ance, inches
Post Weld Heat Treatment Yes
Shell Material SA-516-70
Table 1 - Vessel Design Information
213 AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
 This vessel has been in service since 1985 using
aMDEA solution. An internal visual inspection at a
shutdown in August 2006 had shown localized in-
ternal corrosion in the lower section of the tower
where CO2 rich gas enters the tower and contacts
the lean aMDEA solution.

A follow-up external inspection survey by UT was

conducted to determine the extent of the corrosion
and to allow periodic monitoring of the corrosion
from the exterior of the tower. An 11-foot (3.4 me-
ter) high full circumference grid was established to
investigate and monitor the corrosion while the
vessel was in service.

External inspections performed in September 2006 Figure 2 – CO2 Corrosion, LTA.

and May 2007 using a 6” x 6” (152 mm x 152 mm)
grid identified nine regions or Local Thinned
Areas (LTA). Changes in wall thickness between
these two set of data identified active corrosion.

Shortly thereafter, in June 2007, another UT sur-

vey was conducted to provide more accurate pro-
files of the LTAs by measuring thickness on a 1” x
1” (25.4 mm x 25.4 mm) grid in the nine LTAs.
The results of the June 2007 survey found a de-
crease in wall thickness of 47-74% from the origi-
nal nominal wall thickness. Using Quest Reliabili-
ty’s Signal FFS™ engineering software [Figure 3],
the nine local thinned areas were assessed in ac-
cordance with API 579/ASME FFS-1, Section 5.

Figure 3 - Example of LTA Data in Quest Reliabil-

ity’s SignalTM FFS engineering software.

In the example discussed, all of the nine LTAs sa-

tisfied the API 579, Section 5, Level 2 assessment
criteria. This Fitness–for-Service Assessment al-
lowed the tower to continue to operate. The results
of the assessment are presented graphically as Rt
(Remaining thickness ratio) and a longitudinal or
circumferential flaw length parameter (Lambda).
Values above the curve pass the FFS assessment.

AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL 214 2009


Figure 4 - Example Results / Remaining Strength
Factor
A program for ongoing monitoring of the thinned
areas was established, and plans commenced for
repairs to the tower prior to or during the next
scheduled shutdown, 12 months in the future.
Process changes were also initiated to increase the
level of liquid in the tower. These changes were in-
itiated to cover the LTA’s with liquid and reduce
additional corrosion to the extent possible.
Additionally, in June 2007, the insulation was re-
moved from the packed section and a survey was
performed to investigate corrosion in the packed
section. One additional LTA was identified in this
area.
Figure 5 - Examples of Discontinuities [3]
2009
Had the LTAs not passed the Level 2 FFS assess-
ment, perhaps due to the extent of metal loss, use
of lower bound material properties, or the location
of the LTA in relationship to vessel discontinuities
[refer to Figure 5], the vessel could have been fur-
ther assessed using actual material properties, or
could have been assessed using Level 3 assessment
methodologies. A Level 3 assessment typically re-
quires a finite element analysis.
Evaluation of Repair Options
The Fitness-for-Service assessment provides an as-
sessment of the pressure vessel at a specific point
in the equipment life. To the extent possible, the
assessment will consider expected future damage
for a period of operation. In the case of CO2 corro-
sion, the rate at which the degradation will
progress can be difficult to predict and the point at
which the vessel will need to be repaired or rerated
also depends upon the manner or characteristic in
which the metal loss continues. In most cases, re-
mediation method(s) need to be further imple-
mented at the next opportunity.
API 579/ASME FFS-1 outlines 3 categories of re-
mediation for General and Local Metal Loss [3].
• Remediation Method 1 – Performing Phys-
ical Changes to the Process Stream
• Remediation Method 2 – Application of
solid barrier linings or coatings to keep the
environment isolated from the base metal
that has experienced previous damage.
• Remediation Method 3 – Injection of water
and/or chemicals on a continuous basis to
modify the environment on the surface of
the metal.
The Remediation/Repair Techniques discussed
generally fall into the second group which provides
a solid barrier from continuing corrosion/erosion.
Examples of remediation and repair techniques
commonly considered include organic coatings,
215 AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
 epoxy coatings, metal spray linings, strip linings,
and weld overlay [3].
Persistent corrosion in some CO2 Absorption sys-
tems has resulted in complete replacement of com-
ponents with stainless steel. In most systems, the
economics of repair versus replacement, favor par-
tial replacements and consideration of a long term
repair or alternative management of the corrosion.
Examples of Repairs Performed
Examples of recent repairs conducted on CO2 ab-
sorbers as well as CO2 strippers are presented to il-
lustrate the types of repairs being performed.
These examples include a tower which was weld
repaired and then strip lined with stainless steel, a
tower repaired using epoxy filler with a protective
coating, and a tower which was weld repaired and
over laid with stainless steel using automated
welding.
Tower Weld Repair and Strip Lining
The following section describes the options consi-
dered for a CO2 Absorption Tower repairs. The
owner was interested in the various options availa-
ble to perform emergency repairs, repairs during a
short shutdown, and repair options which could be
performed at the next scheduled shutdown. The
vessel was constructed of carbon steel and had un-
dergone PWHT.
In this specific example, repair alternatives that
were considered include:
Repairs with vessel in service:
• Perform a non-welded short term on line re-
pair. Commence repairs when a specified min-
imum remaining wall thickness is reached or
sooner.
• Based upon the tower configuration and the lo-
cation of the thinned area, a non-welded repair
reinforcement could be considered. Such a re-
pair would consider a steel band [three part
AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
“clam shell” bolted design] around the tower
over the severely corroded areas. This type of
repair does not mitigate the corrosion but rein-
forces the tower for continued service.
Repair options in the event of Short Duration
Outage:
• Repair the most severe locally thinned areas
[LTAs] by filling the LTAs with Belzona
epoxy. This will retard the localized corrosion
attack but may result in corrosion commencing
in adjacent areas to the LTAs due to dissimilar
materials. UT surveys can be used to continue
to monitor LTA locations.
• Repair only the most severe LTAs by filling
with similar weld metal. Perform UT surveys
to continue to monitor the LTA locations for
further repairs or until full repairs can be com-
pleted.
Repair options in the event of a longer term shut-
down or planned turnaround:
• Repair the entire tower LTAs by filling with
an epoxy material and applying a layer of
protective epoxy coating over the corroded
areas.
• Weld repair all of the corroded areas with
carbon steel [CS]. Perform weld repairs using
either PWHT or using non-PWHT repair op-
tions.
• Line the interior of the tower with stainless
steel liner plates.
• Apply stainless steel [SS] weld overlay in the
corroded section(s) of the tower.
• Replace a section of the tower with stainless
steel clad plate.
• Replace vessel entirely or alternatively the
corroded section of vessel, with a solid stain-
less steel.
• Combinations of the aforementioned repairs
to afford a more permanent repair.
216 2009
 After consideration of these options, the owner
elected to repair the tower by weld repairing the
defect areas in the tower using a non-PWHT weld-
ing technique to bring the corroded areas back up
to nominal thickness. Once the thinned areas were
weld repaired, solid stainless steel strip liner plates
straddling the corroded area in the vessel were in-
stalled to complete the repair.
Figure 6 - CO2 Absorber Internal Prior to Repairs
Figure 7 - CO2 Corrosion
Temper Bead Welding
The primary objectives of the weld procedure are:
• To produce a sound defect free weld with-
out significant surface defects or stress
concentrations
• To keep the hardness of the weld and adja-
cent heat affected zones at an acceptable
level
2009
• To minimize the level of residual stress
• To produce a fine grained weld exhibiting
good material properties
Producing a sound weld which meets the above
criteria in this vessel is not without difficulties.
The key is to ensure adequate control of the weld-
ing process to minimize the residual stresses and
ensure a fine grained weld structure is created.
The order of welding has to be closely followed.
When a new layer of weld bead is started (after the
root run) a weld bead shall be applied to one side
of the weld preparation. The next pass shall be at
the opposite side of the preparation. The final pass
in that layer shall be centrally located in the prepa-
ration without contacting either parent material.
Refer to the diagram included as Figure 9.
The finished weld cap should have an additional
two layers of weld metal deposited to temper the
underlying passes. These weld deposits should not
come in contact with the parent shell material; i.e.
should only contact the underlying weld metal.
These additional passes should then be removed by
grinding flush. All undercut shall be blended out.
Each weld bead should be inspected to ensure that:
• it is free of slag
• it is free of significant porosity
• has adequate penetration
• it is not cracked
Figure 8 - Temper Bead Repairs in Progress
217 AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL

1
4 Plate
5
Figure 9 - Temper Bead Diagram
(Drawings not to scale)
Strip Lining with Stainless Steel
The following points should be considered and in-
cluded in the repair procedures for the application
of the stainless steel strip lining in a CO2 Absorber:
• Placement of solid stainless steel strip liner
plates straddling the corroded area in the ves-
sel. Determine the appropriate size for the strip
lining.
• Strip lining shall be the butt welded design.
Lap welded strip lining is not recommended.
See Figure 10 below for a generic layout of the
butt welded lining concept.
AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
Spacing Between Cladding Plates = 0.25 – 0.3125”
(Drawing not to scale)
0.25-.3125”
Tie-in of cladding to base metal
A
Weld
Layers Clad
Welds represent complete layers
Section A-A consisting of more than one weld
pass
Figure 10 - Butt welded Strip Lining
• Determine the thickness and size of the strip
lining plates to be installed. The thickness and
size should be chosen based upon the size of
the entry, the diameter of the tower, and the
weight of the plates for handling within the
tower. For example a SA240-Grade 304L
plate, 3/16 inches [4.76 mm] thick, with a
width and length of 16 inches [0.4 m] by 94
inches [2.4 m], respectively will weight ap-
proximately 82 pounds [37 kg].
• The spacing between strip lining plates should
be specified to minimize the size of the weld
bead and gap between the plates.
• Following a layout of the cladding location and
individual band locations, it is imperative to
verify the existing gap between the cladding
and the base material. The gap at any location
between the clad plate and base material shall
be maximum 1/8 inch [3 mm].
• It is important that complete “tie-in” occur be-
tween the clad plate and base material around
the entire circumference of the each clad plate.
The “tie-in” of each clad plate is recommended
prior to completing the fill and cap weld layers
in the spacing between adjacent plates.
• A WPS/PQR meeting Section IX of the ASME
Pressure Vessel Code will be required for
218 2009
 welding the 304L SS clad plates to the base
carbon steel material.
• Once all the clad plates are welded in place, it
is recommended the gap between the cladding
and the base material be rechecked and results
recorded. If a hydro test is performed the
second gap check shall be done after the hydro
test and results recorded.
Figure 11 is an example of stainless steel cladding
installation.
Figure 11 - Strip Lining Installed
Upon completion of the cladding installation and
welding, the cladding welds should be 100% liquid
penetrant [LPI] inspected and defects corrected as
necessary.
In some strip cladding/lining vessels a leak detec-
tion system is mandatory. A proper leak detection
system would incorporate grooves on the back side
of the clad plate and two leak detection holes per
clad plate drilled through the base metal thickness.
Once the vessel has been returned to service, fol-
low-up internal inspections should be included in
subsequent shutdown planning. A full inspection
should be made of the cladding for plate buckling
and weld cracks during these outages to verify the
integrity of the repairs. If process fluid is found
behind the clad plate, then the subject plate(s)
should be removed totally to check for any corro-
sion on the shell material. Corrections should then
be made according to the weld procedures estab-
2009
lished for the base material repairs and the stainless
steel cladding material reinstalled.
It should also be noted that galvanic corrosion may
result in the base material adjacent to the clad loca-
tions. Coating such areas for a width of 8-10 inches
[203-254 mm] above and below the clad area with
a temperature resistance epoxy coating type ma-
terial can be made in an attempt to reduce galvanic
effects. The integrity of such coatings depends
largely on surface preparation and the applicator,
and coatings that fail may result in crevice corro-
sion.
Epoxy Filling and Protective Coating
Application
Another repair option that has been successfully
implemented is repair using an epoxy resin coat-
ing. The method does not restore the vessel shell to
the original strength and thickness but does prevent
the areas from further corrosive attack. It can be
used over weld repairs to provide an alternative to
stainless steel cladding or overlay.
Further advantages of the method are that the area
can be easily monitored by UT externally, the coat-
ing is visible and accessible for subsequent internal
inspection, and the repair process is less costly
than the cladding or weld overlay alternatives. Re-
coating may be required to extend the longevity of
the repair.
When selecting coatings for repair application, the
process conditions and the depth of the repairs
(coating thickness) need to be considered. Typical-
ly one material is used for filling pits or thinned
areas, and a second material is used as a topcoat to
provide general surface protection. Coatings may
also have limited application due to service tem-
peratures. The coating needs to be selected with
consideration of the operating conditions found in
different areas of the vessel or process as well as
the conditions which could be foreseen during
shutdown or start-up.
219 AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
 The following example shows a CO2 Stripper
Tower that had been previously inspected in 2005
and 2007. Repairs were made to the bottom packed
bed area in 2007 using an epoxy coating. The cor-
rosion pits were deeper than the corrosion allow-
ance (0.125 inches /3.2 mm) and were evaluated
using API 579 / ASME-FFS-1 criteria. Additional-
ly, API 579 was used to analyze several cases to
determine the range of conditions and corrosion in
which the vessel would be fit for service.
The CO2 Stripper was re-inspected in 2008 to de-
termine the condition of the coating previously in-
stalled. During the inspection, the coating was
found to be undamaged. Additional areas which
had not been previously coated had experienced
corrosion and required evaluation and repair prior
to returning the vessel to service.
Figure 12 - CO2 Corrosion in a Stripper Tower
General Design conditions of the CO2 Stripper
Tower are as follows:
Design Pressure, psig 43 (294 kPa)
Max. Design Temperature, 266 (130°C)
o greater than one year of operation. It is understood
F
Nom. Wall Thickness, inches 1.34 (34mm)
Specified Corrosion Allow- 0.125 (3.2mm
ance, inches
Post Weld Heat Treatment Yes
Shell Material ASTM A516
Grade 70
In the specific example shown in the photographs
[Figure 13], an alternative epoxy was being used
AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
by the owner as a result of supply difficulties. The
substitute material was suited for a lower operating
temperature when compared to the prior applica-
tion. The repair procedure required two coats to be
applied. The first coat 600-750 microns thick fol-
lowed by a 300-375 micron thick top coat.
Figure 13 - Typical condition of areas repaired in
2007 with epoxy coating and as seen in 2008 (bot-
tom photo).
During the repairs the area of the system that had
been previously repaired was inspected. The con-
dition of the 2007 applied coating in 2008 indicates
that the life of the epoxy coating is significantly
that the manufacturer also indicated that there
should be no need to carry out a repair to the coat-
ing applied within three years of operation. Based
upon the visual inspection of the area previously
coated, the epoxy coating has performed very well
and appears to be a suitable long term solution to
ensure fitness for service of the stripper column to
prevent CO2 corrosion pitting in the semi-lean
aMDEA.
220 2009

Automated Weld Overlay with Stainless Steels
Weld overlaying is commonly used to clad the sur-
faces of fabricated steel structures. Cost effective-
ness through localized application of high perfor-
mance materials is one of the major selling points.
The actual weld overlay process used depends on
many factors including access, welding position,
the alloy applied, and economics. In some alloy
combinations, dilution of the weld overlay material
by the steel requires that more than one weld pass
is required. Post weld heat treating to temper the
backing steel may be required in some cases.
The weld overlay repair method provides a prac-
tical technique for repairing degraded walls of
pressure vessel shells. The repair extends the life
of the pressure vessel by considering the underly-
ing flaw in the base material and the expected end-
of-life flaw extent, by considering the effects of
continued degradation (e.g., general corrosion in
the case of CO2 absorbers). With correct material
selection, the weld overlay provides improved and
in many cases total resistance to the degradation
mechanism itself. The technique of weld overlay is
an excellent method to impart properties to the sur-
face of a substrate that are not available from that
base metal, or to conserve expensive or difficult to
obtain materials by using only a relatively thin sur-
face layer on a less expensive or abundant base
material. The weld overlay concept is potentially
applicable to any metallic component that is sub-
ject to a degradation mechanism, including non-
pressure retaining components subject to wear
conditions. Additionally, half-bead and temper
bead approaches are particularly well suited for
weld repairs on carbon and low alloy steels, where
post weld heat treatment might otherwise be re-
quired.
In CO2 absorbers with a base structural retaining
material of carbon steel a single layer of stainless
steel weld overlay to a thickness of 3 to 3.5 mm is
more than sufficient to impart resistance to the car-
2009
bon dioxide corrosion mechanisms. The economics
of stainless steel weld overlay are dependant on
achieving the specific chemistry at the highest
practical deposition rate in a minimum number of
layers.
A qualified contractor or vendor will offer specific
welding processes for the application whereas the
owner/purchaser specifies the surface chemistry.
By mutual consent, the thickness of the deposit is
determined that which will have the desired alloy
chemistry. Dilution affects the composition of the
deposit but the metallurgical balance is likewise
important, and includes such factors as proper fer-
rite to minimize hot cracking, absence of marten-
site at the interface for bond integrity, and carbon
at a low level to ensure corrosion resistance.
For resistance to CO2 corrosion, it is generally ne-
cessary to have a stainless steel chemistry equal to
or greater than 304 stainless steel. To meet such
requirements with minimum deposit thickness and
number of passes, one can use several microstruc-
ture prediction diagrams having wide acceptance.
These include the Schaeffler diagram, the Delong
diagram, and the Welding Research Council dia-
grams. Each prediction method has some short
comings, it is important that the end user work
closely with a qualified contractor to obtain the ex-
pected dilution composition. Because of the dilu-
tion importance, each welding parameter must be
carefully evaluated, to control the final overlay
composition.
One application which has shown some promise is
to use a 317 stainless steel weld metal composition
applied at a thickness of ≥3.5 mm [≥1/8 inch] to a
carbon steel substrate to obtain an overlay compo-
sition of 316 stainless steel equivalent. A 316
stainless steel composition would offer high resis-
tance to CO2 corrosion. Figure 14 shows an exam-
ple of stainless overlay onto a carbon steel sub-
strate.
221 AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL
 References

1. Corrosion Damage in CO2 absorber: Innovative In-

situ Repair and then Replacement, N. Ahmed Am-
monia Technical Manual, Volume 48, 2007

2. Successful Repair of Absorber in Amine Service

with Organic Coating, J.C.R. Rico, Ammonia
Technical Manual, Volume 37, 1996.

3. American Petroleum Institute, API Standard 579-

1/ASME FFS-1 2007, Fitness-for-Service, June
Figure 14 - Example of stainless steel overlay on 2007.
carbon steel

Conclusion
The evaluation of the corrosion damage in CO2
Absorbers systems using API 579/ ASME FFS-1
Fitness-for-Service methodology has been success-
fully applied in recent industrial applications.
Quest Reliability’s SignalTM Fitness-for-Service, is
a software product for performing fitness-for-
service and fracture mechanics analyses on fixed
and rotating equipment. Signal FFSTM allows the
user to perform both Level 1 and Level 2 assess-
ments and includes an advanced fracture mechan-
ics module to allow the user to perform limited
Level 3 assessments.

Application of the API-579-1/ASME FFS-1 me-

thodology has allowed the subject absorbers to op-
erate within safe process parameters without loss
of production. Continuous operations in the short
term when degradation mechanisms have been dis-
covered, assessed, and monitored allow for a better
economic determination of the optimum remedia-
tion repair method to be planned and implemented.

Several different remediation repair technique, in-

cluding weld repair and strip lining, epoxy filling
and protective coating application, and automated
weld overlay, discussed in the paper have allowed
plant owners successful results in mitigation CO2
corrosion in CO2Absorption system equipment.

AMMONIA TECHNICAL MANUAL 222 2009