Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Volume 10, Issue 03, March 2019, pp. 404-411. Article ID: IJMET_10_03_041
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=3
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
ABSTRACT
The present study investigated the biocorrosion behaviour of Stainless steel 316L
(SS 316L) and mild steel coupons exposed to a medium containing slime producing
bacteria, Escherichia coli (E.coli). Corrosion analysis was performed to observe the
progression of corrosion process on tested steels induced by E.coli and its metabolite
activity for 7 days. The findings revealed that both SS 316L and mild steel experienced
severe pitting corrosion. The colonization of E.coli and secretion of exopolymeric
substances or slime have accelerated corrosion process on mild steel surface and
damaged the passivation layer on SS 316L. As a result, the tested mild steel specimen
exhibited 25% higher corrosion rate compared to that of the SS 316L.
Keywords: Biocorrosion, SS 316L, Mild steel and E.coli.
Cite this Article: Wan Rafizah Wan Abdullah, Nur Alia Johari, Noradhiha Farahin
Ibrahim, Maishara Syazrinni Rooshde, Mohd Sabri Mohd Ghazali, Comparison of
Biocorrosion Behavior of Stainless Steel 316 L and Mild Steel Induced by Slime
Producing Bacteria, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and
Technology, 10(3), 2019, pp. 404-411.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=2
1. INTRODUCTION
Steels are one of the major class of engineering materials and they are widely applied in
multiple sectors including construction, transportation, energy as well as the manufacturing
industry. A steel is generally an iron-based alloy containing some amount of alloying
elements such as Ni, Cr, Mo, Mg, Co, Nb, B, C and many more. Different grades of steel
ranging from stainless steel to carbon steel are made with different selections of mechanical
strength, malleability and corrosion vulnerability.
Stainless steel 316L (SS 316L) is a Mo-bearing austenitic steel with excellent corrosion
resistant. Due to the presence of Cr in its alloying formulation, SS 316L is self-passivated by
layer of Cr oxides whenever it is exposed to corrosive and oxygen rich environment. Mild
steel on the other hand is a steel with approximately 0.05 – 0.25% carbon. It is easy to form
due to its high malleability and ductility. The mild steel has relatively lower mechanical
strength and lower tolerance to corrosion. Both types of steels have significant roles in the
development of marine structures. The SS 316 L is mostly selected for obtaining structures
with high tensile strength and must be used under direct exposure to chloride-containing
condition. Meanwhile, the mild steel is needed where the structure has to be deformed or
welded.
Biocorrosion of steels is a great challenge for numerous engineering applications. In this
process, the general metal corrosion process is accelerated by attachment and colonization of
microorganism on metal surfaces [1-3]. Metabolic activity of microorganisms adhering to the
surface of metal particularly the steels can damage the passivation layer, inhibit its
development or alter the rate of redox reaction at cathode or anode terminal [4-6]. Eventually,
the unintended event promotes the occurrence of localized corrosions such as pitting, crevice
or grain boundary corrosions [6,7]. For that reason, the biocorrosion can lead to costly
economic loss and give rise to many environmental issues [8,9].
Recent studies reported that slime producing bacteria is one type of corrosive bacterial
community that has great potential to influence the rate of steel corrosion [10-12]. This
bacteria adheres to steel walls and secretes gel-like exopolymeric substances which contain
polysaccharides, proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids [11]. The roles of this slimy layer of EPS
on biocorrosion behaviour of steels are still unclear. In certain condition, EPS layer increases
the corrosion rate of metals while in other conditions, the layer sometimes serves as additional
protective layer on top of metal surfaces, thus reducing the corrosion rate [4].
In order to identify the best strategy for corrosion prevention and control, an
understanding on the biocorrosion behavior of different types of steels is required. The
present study investigated the biocorrosion behaviour of Stainless steel 316L (SS 316L) and
mild steel coupons upon immersion in medium containing slime producing bacteria,
Escherichia coli (E.coli).
2.2. Methods
Table 2 Evolution of corrosion process on SS 316L and mild steel specimens induced by E.coli
Metal Specimens
Day
SS 316L Mild Steel
Day 1
Metal Specimens
Day
SS 316L Mild Steel
Day 3
Day 5
Day 7
Table 3 Scoring damage observed in SS 316L and mild steel specimens exposed to E.coli
Scoring Damage
Exposure day
SS 316L Mild steel
0 A A
1 D B
2 D B
3 D, E F
4 G E, F
5 G E, F
6 G G, H
7 G, I I, J
Scoring damage: A: no changes, B: Minor tarnish on surface, C: A transparent layer easily
removed on the surface, D: Tarnish cover 25% of surface, E: Surface at the back (adhere on
agar) become brownish rust, F: Black spot at the back of surface, G: Tarnish 50% on surface,
H: Black spot on surface become bigger, I: Corroded slimy surface, J: Back surface of metal
100% rusting.
Based on Figure 1, the surface of the immersed SS316L specimen was obviously affected
and the corrosion produced attacks in the form of spots or pits. The occurrence of pitting
corrosion implies that the passivation layer has weakened or damaged at specific points on the
SS 316L surface due to metabolite activity by E.coli. The corrosion impacts on the mild steel
surface were even more severe. After the 7th day of immersion in E.coli containing medium, a
combination of corrosion processes took place on the surface of the specimen. Figure 2
depicts that larger area are covered with corrosion products and the corrosion attacks at grain
boundary region and pits have been detected. SEM images in Figure 3 confirm that the
surfaces of both SS 316L and mild steel specimen were covered with dense layer of E.coli
cells. The appearance of exo-polymeric substances (EPS) can be clearly observed on the
surface of mild steel. In accordance to the data in Table 4, the SS 316L and mild steel
specimens lost 2.83 and 3.63% or its initial weight, respectively in just 7 days. In terms of
corrosion rate value, the mild steel specimen suffered slightly 25% more severe corrosion as
compared to the SS 316L.
Figure 1 The surface morphology of SS 316L (a) before exposure and (b) after 7 days of exposure to
E.coli containing medium
Figure 2 The surface morphology of mild steel (a) before exposure and (b) after 7 days of exposure to
E.coli containing medium
Figure 3 SEM images of E.coli adhesion on (a) stainless steel and (b) mild steel surfaces after 7 days
Table 4 Percentage of weight loss and the corrosion rate for stainless steel and mild steel after
exposure to E.coli containing medium
4. CONCLUSION
This study investigated the biocorrosion behavior of Stainless steel 316L (SS 316L) and mild
steel induced by slime producing bacteria, E.coli. The findings revealed that the corrosion
resistance of SS 316L deteriorated by E.coli and its metabolite activity. The SS 316L
subjected to medium containing E.coli has suffered from severe pitting corrosion due to
weakening or damaging of passivation layer at localized sites. Meanwhile, the results showed
the preferential colonization of E.coli on the mild steel surface. The subsequent corrosion
process has caused attacks on pits, grain boundary and larger surface area on mild steel. In
conclusion, microbially induced corrosion can occur rapidly on steels and self-passivation
alone could not fully protect steel from getting affected by the slime producing bacteria.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank for the financial support from research grant provided by
Ministry of Higher Education under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS), Grant No:
59436 and Universiti Malaysia Terengganu for providing the research facilities.
REFERENCES
[1] Kato, S. Microbial extracellular electron transfer and its relevance to iron corrosion.
Microbial Biotechnology, 9, 2016, pp. 141-148.
[2] Kryachko, Y. and Hemmingsen, S.M. The role of localized acidity generation in
microbially influenced corrosion. Current Microbiology, 74, pp.870-876.
[3] Jia, R., Yang, D., Xu, D. and Gu, T. Electron transfer mediators accelerated the
microbiologically influence corrosion against carbon steel by nitrate reducing
Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm. Bioelectrochemistry, 118, 2017, pp.38-46.
[4] Liu, H., Gu, T., Asif, M., Zhang, G. and Liu, H. The corrosion behavior and mechanism of
carbon steel induced by extracellular polymeric substances of iron-oxidizing bacteria.
Corrosion Science, 114, 2017. pp.102-111.
[5] Sun, D., Xu, D., Yang, C., Chen, J., Shahzad, M.B., Sun, Z., Zhao, J., Gu, T., Yang, K.
and Wang, G. Inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm by a copper-bearing 317L-Cu
stainless steel and its corrosion resistance. Materials Science and Engineering: C, 69,
2016. pp.744-750.
[6] Pratikno, H. and Titah, H.S. Bio-corrosion on steel structure (ASTM A106 and A53) in
marine environment. Asian Journal of Applied Sciences, 9, 2016. pp.120-125.
[7] Dec, W., Mosiałek, M., Socha, R.P., Jaworska-Kik, M., Simka, W. and Michalska, J. The
effect of sulphate-reducing bacteria biofilm on passivity and development of pitting on
2205 duplex stainless steel. Electrochimica Acta, 212, 2016. pp.225-236.
[8] Alcántara, J., Chico, B., Simancas, J., Díaz, I. and Morcillo, M., 2017. Marine
atmospheric corrosion of carbon steel: A review. Materials, 10, 2017. pp.406.
[9] Shahid, M. Corrosion protection with eco-friendly inhibitors. Advances in Natural
Sciences: Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, 2, 2011. pp. 043001
[10] Palaniappan, B. and Toleti, S.R. Characterization of microfouling and corrosive bacterial
community of a firewater distribution system. Journal of bioscience and bioengineering,
121, 2016. pp.435-441.
[11] Li, Y., Xu, D., Chen, C., Li, X., Jia, R., Zhang, D., Sand, W., Wang, F. and Gu, T., 2018.
Anaerobic microbiologically influenced corrosion mechanisms interpreted using
bioenergetics and bioelectrochemistry: A review. Journal Of Materials Science &
Technology, 34, 2018. pp.1713-1718.
[12] Javed, M.A., Neil, W.C., Stoddart, P.R. and Wade, S.A.. Influence of carbon steel grade
on the initial attachment of bacteria and microbiologically influenced corrosion.
Biofouling, 32, 2016. pp.109-122.
[13] Prescott, L.M., Harley, J.P. and Klein, D.A. Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology. 5th
Edition, New York: McGrawHill Co. 2002, pp.99-104.
[14] Kielemoes, J., Bultinck, I., Storms, H., Boon, N. and Verstraete, W. Occurrence of
manganese-oxidizing microorganisms and manganese deposition during biofilm formation
on stainless steel in a brackish surface water. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 39, 2002.
pp.41-55.
[15] Javed, M., McArthur, S., Stoddart, P. and Wade, S. Techniques for studying initial
bacterial attachment and subsequent corrosion of metals. Corrosion Prevention, 2, 2013.
pp.299-304.
[16] Smirnov, V. F., Belov, D. V., Sokolova, T. N., Kuzina, O. V., & Kartashov, V. R.
Microbiological corrosion of aluminium alloys. Applied Biochemistry and Microbiology
44, 2008. pp.192-196.