API API-571 Dumps

From API RP 571, brittle fracture prevention measures include:

“Postweld Heat Treatment (PWHT) reduces residual stresses in the heat affected zone and base metal, thus lowering susceptibility to brittle fracture.”

“PWHT is particularly effective when applied to pressure-containing components fabricated from carbon steel or low-alloy steel that will experience low-temperature service.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.2 – Brittle Fracture)

Therefore, while other measures may reduce stress or detect flaws, PWHT directly targets one of the root causes: residual stress. Thus, option D is the best prevention method.

From API RP 571, under Cooling Water Corrosion:

“If proper water treatment is not feasible or consistently maintained, upgrading the metallurgy of exchanger tubes to more corrosion-resistant materials such as stainless steel or titanium may be necessary.”

“This is especially important in seawater or brackish water cooling applications or in once-through systems.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.1.1 – Cooling Water Corrosion)

Thus, the most effective long-term solution in cases of uncontrolled water quality is to upgrade metallurgy, making option C correct.

From API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.1 and RP 941:

“High strength low alloy steels (HSLA) are more susceptible to hydrogen embrittlement, especially during cold work, forming, or welding. These materials, due to their higher tensile strengths, are more prone to cracking when exposed to hydrogen, particularly during fabrication or post-weld heat treatment operations.”

Therefore, Option A (High Strength Low Alloys) is the correct answer due to their known susceptibility during manufacturing and processing.

According to API RP 571 and API RP 583 (CUI-specific guidance):

“Neutron backscatter techniques are effective in detecting moisture within insulation systems, which can indicate areas of concern for corrosion under insulation (CUI).”

“This method provides non-invasive, quick identification of wet insulation without removing cladding.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.5.1 – Corrosion Under Insulation and API RP 583 – CUI Detection Techniques)

Thus, neutron backscatter is the preferred NDE method for moisture detection, making option B correct.

According to API RP 571, under the section "Corrosion in Aqueous Environments – Cooling Water Corrosion", one of the key contributors to corrosion in carbon steel and other materials used in heat exchangers is the presence of dissolved oxygen. API RP 571 states:

"Oxygen is a primary contributor to corrosion in cooling water systems. Systems open to the atmosphere are typically more corrosive than closed systems due to the continual replenishment of oxygen."

"Corrosion rates are highest where oxygen concentration is the greatest, especially in systems using untreated or poorly treated water."

"Carbon steel corrodes in the presence of oxygen and water, forming corrosion products that may or may not adhere to the surface."

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.1.1 – Cooling Water Corrosion)

Therefore, increasing oxygen content directly increases corrosion activity in exchanger tubes, making option C the correct and documented answer.

API RP 571 on Oxidation indicates:

“Oxidation is a surface loss phenomenon that generally results in uniform thinning. Ultrasonic thickness measurements are typically used to monitor metal loss in oxidizing environments.”

“Metallography may be used to confirm oxide scale structure but is not necessary for routine evaluation.”

Hence, option B is the most appropriate standard method.

API RP 571 explains under Condensate Corrosion (CO₂ Corrosion):

“In condensate systems, carbon dioxide dissolves in the water forming carbonic acid, which leads to localized corrosion, including grooving and under-deposit attack, especially at low points like the bottom of horizontal piping.”

“This is most commonly observed in steam condensate return lines, and the damage is localized due to stratification.”

This matches the scenario described, where internal grooving at the bottom of steam condensate piping is characteristic of CO₂-induced corrosion. Hence, option A is correct.

API RP 571, in its discussion on Wet H₂S Damage, including HIC, SOHIC, and SSC, consistently identifies a shared mechanism:

“All wet H₂S-related damage mechanisms involve the absorption of atomic hydrogen, formed at the steel surface by the corrosion reaction in the presence of H₂S.”

“The absorbed hydrogen may diffuse into the steel, accumulate at trap sites, and cause cracking or blistering.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.2.7 – Wet H₂S Damage Mechanisms)

Thus, hydrogen absorption and permeation is a unifying mechanism across all these damage modes. Therefore, option D is correct.

From API RP 571 Section 5.3.3.2 (Caustic Corrosion):

“Caustic corrosion, also known as caustic gouging, occurs in boiler systems when caustic concentrates in under-deposit areas or due to improper steam drum and boiler water design. Good design and water treatment practices are key preventive measures.”

Temperature control or acid injection are not practical or effective mitigation techniques. Design considerations—such as proper water flow, material selection, and minimizing deposits—are essential.

Hence, the correct answer is Option C.

API RP 571, Naphthenic Acid Corrosion:

“Molybdenum significantly improves resistance to naphthenic acid attack. Alloys such as 317, 316Mo, and Alloy 20 are used in severe NAC environments due to higher Mo content.”

“Chromium and nickel play secondary roles; molybdenum is the key element.”

Answer is A – Molybdenum.

Hydrogen Stress Cracking (HSC) is a subclass of environmental cracking that occurs in certain materials when hydrogen is present. According to API RP 571, HSC typically affects high-strength low alloy steels and carbon steels, particularly under tensile stress in a hydrogen-containing environment. This includes areas like weld-affected zones and hard spots in steels.

From API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.1 (Hydrogen-Induced Cracking):

"Hydrogen stress cracking (HSC) can occur in carbon steel and low alloy steels in environments containing hydrogen at ambient to moderately elevated temperatures (up to 200°F or 93°C)... Hardness is a critical factor for HSC. High hardness in welds and heat affected zones (HAZ) are most susceptible."

Additionally, API RP 939-C does not directly define HSC but reinforces the relationship between hydrogen exposure and metal integrity, particularly under conditions not exceeding 450 °F (230 °C) for hydrogen services.

Thus, option A is correct, as it directly reflects the metal types most susceptible to HSC in operational environments defined by API RP 571.

API RP 571 on Naphthenic Acid Corrosion (NAC):

“NAC results in thinning, especially in areas of high velocity and turbulence. Standard UT or radiographic inspection followed by UT thickness monitoring is typically used to detect wall loss.”

“Advanced techniques like angle-beam or eddy current are not typically required.”

So, option A correctly reflects the most effective and widely used method.

According to API RP 571, under the section on High Temperature Hydrogen Attack (HTHA) and Decarburization:

“Decarburization is typically confirmed by metallographic examination. This method reveals carbon loss and microstructural changes such as spheroidization or softening of pearlite.”

“Tensile or impact testing may not reveal early-stage decarburization, especially in partial layers.”

Therefore, metallographic testing is the standard and most direct method to confirm decarburization damage, making option D correct.

API RP 571 notes under Sour Water Corrosion:

“Localized thinning or under-deposit corrosion in sour water services is best detected by profile radiography, which provides a visual comparison of wall thickness over a length of pipe.”

“This technique is especially useful for assessing localized metal loss due to under-deposit attack or flow regime effects.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.2.3 – Sour Water Corrosion)

Hence, profile radiographic testing is most effective, making option B correct.

According to API RP 571, high-cycle fatigue (HCF) is characterized by very tight, narrow cracks that can escape detection using typical NDE methods due to their minimal opening displacement and fine geometry.

From API RP 571 Section 5.2.1 (Fatigue - High Cycle):

"The cracks are usually tight and may be difficult to detect using conventional NDE techniques such as PT or MT. UT and RT may also have difficulty identifying these small, tight flaws, especially in early stages of propagation."

The primary issue in NDE is not the geometry (such as 90° corners) or ID location, but rather the tightness and early-stage subtlety of the cracks which results in reduced detectability. Therefore, option B is correct as it aligns most accurately with API RP 571's detailed characterization of HCF detection challenges.

According to API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.1 – Sulfidation, and also echoed in API RP 939-C, the presence of certain compounds significantly increases sulfidic corrosion:

“Chlorides are known to accelerate sulfidation and other high-temperature corrosion mechanisms by forming low-melting eutectics and breaking down protective scales on alloy surfaces.”

“Chlorine-containing species also interfere with the formation of stable sulfide or oxide scales, leading to more aggressive metal loss.”

Therefore, chlorides are the most critical accelerant among the listed substances in high-temperature sulfur compound environments, making option C correct.

API RP 571 under Oxidation states:

“Resistance to oxidation is improved significantly by increasing chromium content, as it promotes the formation of a protective chromium oxide (Cr₂O₃) layer.”

“Nickel may aid in high-temperature strength but does not directly improve oxidation resistance like chromium does.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 5.1.1 – Oxidation)

Hence, option A is correct.

According to API RP 571, in the section on Boiler Water Condensate Corrosion:

“The major contributors to condensate corrosion are dissolved CO₂ and O₂. Carbon dioxide forms carbonic acid in the presence of water, lowering pH and causing generalized corrosion.”

“Oxygen causes pitting and localized corrosion unless chemically treated.”

Thus, option B (Carbon dioxide and oxygen) is the primary root cause and the correct answer.

According to API RP 571 and API RP 583:

“The most effective mitigation of CUI is the use of appropriate coatings underneath the insulation, which are resistant to moisture and chloride ingress.”

“Inspection and insulation selection are also important but are secondary controls.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.4 – Corrosion Under Insulation; API RP 583)

Hence, option D is correct.

According to API RP 571, under Oxidation:

“Austenitic stainless steels (300 Series) are generally used for oxidation resistance up to about 1500°F (815°C). At higher temperatures, scaling and loss of protective chromium oxide layers increase.”

“Above these temperatures, specialized high-temperature alloys may be required.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 5.1.1 – Oxidation)

Therefore, option C is the correct answer.

API RP 571, under "Caustic Corrosion" (also referred to as Caustic Stress Corrosion Cracking or Caustic Cracking), notes that this form of damage is:

“Most commonly associated with the injection points of caustic (e.g., NaOH) in crude units, particularly upstream of desalter vessels and heat exchanger circuits.”

“This damage occurs due to the combination of caustic environment and tensile stress, especially in carbon steel and low alloy steels.”

“Stress relief heat treatment of welds can mitigate susceptibility.”

(Reference: API RP 571, 3rd Edition, Section 4.2.2.3)

Thus, among the options, caustic injections in crude units are the most typical area of concern, making option C the correct answer.

From API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.1 (Creep and Stress Rupture):

“Short-term creep rupture is often associated with localized overheating and results in bulging and thinning, often with a characteristic ‘fish-mouth’ rupture appearance. These failures occur under sustained load in a short time (hours or days), typically in high-temperature service due to a sudden increase in temperature or poor heat distribution.”

Thus, Option B accurately describes the mechanism and visual indications of short-term stress rupture.

From API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.5 (Polythionic Acid Stress Corrosion Cracking):

“PTASCC typically occurs on the surface of stainless steels that have been sensitized. Since cracks are open to the surface, liquid penetrant testing (PT) is the most effective detection method.”

Magnetic particle testing is ineffective for non-magnetic materials like austenitic stainless steels.

UT is less effective for fine surface-connected cracks.

Hardness testing is unrelated to detecting cracking.

Thus, Option C (Liquid penetrant testing) is the correct and preferred method for detecting PTASCC.

According to API RP 571, under the section "4.2.1.2 Brittle Fracture", the following conditions are explicitly identified as most critical for brittle fracture risk:

"Most processes run at elevated temperature, so the main concern is for brittle fracture during startup, shutdown, hydrotest, or other situations where equipment may be exposed to low temperatures."

"Equipment fabricated from materials susceptible to brittle fracture (e.g., carbon steel) is most vulnerable when exposed to low temperatures combined with high stress or pressure."

"A brittle fracture is characterized by a sudden and rapid crack propagation with little or no plastic deformation."

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.2 – Brittle Fracture)

Thus, while other options represent stress events, the main concern specifically noted by the standard is during start-up and shutdown—especially due to cooling and repressurization at low temperatures—making option A the most accurate choice.

API RP 571 under Oxidation:

“Carbon steels and low alloy steels, such as 9 Cr, have poor oxidation resistance at temperatures above 1000°F (540°C), rapidly losing thickness.”

“Stainless steels with higher Cr and Ni content (like 310) have superior oxidation resistance.”

Thus, 9 Cr steel will corrode fastest at 1350°F, making option D correct.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.1 (Creep):

“Creep damage is exponentially dependent on temperature. A small increase in temperature (e.g., 25°F or 15°C) can reduce remaining life by more than half. This is because the creep rate increases rapidly with temperature, especially above design limits.”

Stress is a contributing factor, but the dominant and most sensitive variable is temperature.

Thus, Option C (increase in temperature of 25°F/15°C) is the correct answer.

From API RP 571 Section 5.1.1.3 (Amine Corrosion):

“Amine corrosion is a form of general or localized corrosion caused by the presence of amine solutions used to remove acid gases (H₂S and CO₂)... Corrosion is most severe in areas where acid gas loading is high.”

While temperature and concentration are contributing factors, the primary driver is dissolved acid gases such as CO₂ and H₂S.

Thus, the correct answer is Option C.

Erosion and erosion-corrosion are mechanical degradation mechanisms enhanced by fluid motion, and typically result in directional or flow-oriented metal loss patterns.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.4.2 (Erosion and Erosion/Corrosion):

“Erosion typically results in localized thinning, often described as grooves, gullies, or horseshoe-shaped patterns... The metal loss is directional and may occur in elbows, tees, reducers, and pumps.”

Hence, Option C (grooves and gullies) most accurately describes erosion and erosion-corrosion characteristics.

Same as above. Sigma phase formation is a microstructural phenomenon and not typically detected by NDE methods like magnetic particle or surface hardness testing.

Therefore, metallographic testing remains the definitive detection method, confirming option D again as the correct answer.

API RP 571 under Atmospheric Corrosion notes:

“The highest corrosion rates are typically observed between 80°F and 120°F (27°C–49°C), particularly when relative humidity is high and surfaces are wet from condensation or rain.”

“At higher temperatures, surface dryness generally reduces corrosion activity despite increased reaction kinetics.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.1.3 – Atmospheric Corrosion)

Thus, among the listed temperatures, 175°F is closest to the upper end of the most active corrosion window, making option A the most accurate answer.

Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC) is a serious form of corrosion primarily affecting austenitic stainless steels and some duplex stainless steels, particularly when exposed to chloride-containing environments at elevated temperatures.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.3 (Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking – Cl-SCC):

“Austenitic stainless steels (e.g., 300 series such as Types 304 and 316) are the most susceptible to Cl-SCC... Duplex stainless steels have greater resistance but are not immune, especially at temperatures >150°F (65°C)... Ferritic stainless steels (400 series) are generally not susceptible.”

Thus, Option A (400 Series Stainless Steel) is not susceptible to chloride SCC, making it the correct answer.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.3.4 (Naphthenic Acid Corrosion - NAC):

“Sulfur can act as an inhibitor to NAC. Where sulfur content in crude is high, a reduction in naphthenic acid corrosion is sometimes observed, especially in certain parts of vacuum and atmospheric units. However, this is not universally reliable, and corrosion can still occur based on local operating conditions and metal temperatures.”

Thus, Option C (Inhibition) is the correct choice, as sulfur can reduce NAC under some conditions.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.4.2 (Erosion and Erosion/Corrosion):

“Erosion can occur downstream of flow disturbances such as control valves, orifice plates, elbows... It is characterized by localized metal loss with a directional pattern such as grooves or sharp-edged pits in areas of high velocity or turbulence.”

Cavitation and flashing cause damage with different signatures like pitting and spongy surface texture, while sharp-edged pitting strongly indicates erosion, especially downstream of flow restriction devices.

Thus, the correct answer is Option C (Erosion).