How significant can the effect of electrochemical corrosion be between 316 and 316L?
Thread Content
I often see foreigners mention parameters, and there is a clear distinction between 316 and 316L. I’d like to discuss whether it can be replaced. The difference between the two is the carbon content, which is 0.08% and 0.03% respectively ； In terms of yield strength and tensile strength, 316 is superior to 316L, though the difference is not significant ； So, given that 316L can meet the performance requirements, what impact does a carbon content of 0.05% have on electrochemical corrosion? In a certain field in China, 316L is generally used as a substitute. What is the meaning of foreigners being so detailed in their classifications? Note: For material use only; not for welding, so effects resulting from welding need not be considered.
With a low carbon content, it should be more corrosion-resistant.
In terms of the pitting resistance index, there is no difference between S31603 and S31608. Regarding mechanical properties: yield strength – S31608: 210 N/mm2, S31603: 180 N/mm2; tensile strength – S31608: 520 N/mm2, S31603: 480 N/mm2. In short, the main difference lies in the ultra-low carbon content of S31603 (316L). Therefore, during welding, carbon in S31603 does not easily combine with chromium to form chromium carbides, which helps to reduce corrosion in the welded areas~~~~~~~~~~~