Free and Premium API API-571 Dumps Questions Answers

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.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Grooving corrosion in cooling water systems is a well-documented damage mechanism in API RP 571, particularly associated with high-velocity flow conditions.

Flow-induced erosion (also referred to as erosion-corrosion or flow-assisted corrosion) occurs when:

High fluid velocity removes protective corrosion films

Local turbulence, elbows, or inlet zones focus mechanical wear

Soft metals or alloys are exposed to continuous impingement

This results in smooth, directional grooves or channels aligned with the flow direction, a classic signature described in API RP 571.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option A: ERW defects affect weld seams, not general grooving patterns.

Option B: MIC typically causes localized pitting, not uniform grooving.

Option D: Underdeposit corrosion produces irregular pitting beneath deposits, not flow-aligned grooves.

API RP 571 specifically identifies flow-induced erosion as a primary cause of grooving in cooling water heat exchanger tubes.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Erosion/Erosion-Corrosion

API Cooling Water System Corrosion Study Guide

======================

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 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.

API RP 571 on Thermal Fatigue:

“Mixing of hot and cold streams, particularly where hydrogen is present, can induce thermal cycling stresses, leading to thermal fatigue cracking, especially at fittings like tees.”

“Hydrogen embrittlement typically affects stressed zones, but this pattern strongly indicates thermal fatigue.”

So the correct answer is C – Thermal fatigue.

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.

As per API RP 571 Section 5.1.4.2 (Metal Dusting):

“Metal dusting is a type of carburization attack that typically occurs in high carbon activity environments, with temperatures generally between 900°F and 1200°F (480°C to 650°C), although damage has been reported as low as 600°F (315°C).”

Therefore, the commonly accepted operational range is best described by Option A: 600°F–1200°F (315°C–650°C).

API RP 571 explains that both Sulfide Stress Cracking (SSC) and SOHIC are:

“Strongly influenced by material hardness. Carbon and low alloy steels with hardness exceeding 22 HRC (248 Brinell) are most susceptible.”

“They occur in hardened steels under tensile stress, in the presence of wet H₂S environments.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Sections 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.7 – SSC and SOHIC)

Therefore, hardened steels are the common factor for both mechanisms, making option C the correct choice.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, amine stress corrosion cracking (Amine SCC) is a form of environmentally assisted cracking that occurs in alkanolamine systems (e.g., MEA, DEA, DGA) used for acid gas treating. The cracking mechanism requires the simultaneous presence of tensile stress, susceptible microstructure, and an amine environment.

API RP 571 clearly states that Amine SCC occurs primarily in the weld heat affected zone (HAZ) of carbon and low-alloy steels. The reasons include:

The HAZ contains high residual stresses from welding.

The microstructure in the HAZ is metallurgically altered, making it more susceptible than base metal.

Cracks often initiate adjacent to welds, not in the weld metal itself.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option A (Weld fusion line) is not the primary cracking location.

Option C (Weld metal) generally has different chemistry and lower susceptibility.

Option D (Base metal) typically has lower residual stress and is less prone.

API RP 571 specifically identifies the weld HAZ as the dominant cracking location for Amine SCC.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Amine Stress Corrosion Cracking

API Corrosion and Materials Study Guide

======================

API RP 571 identifies these parameters as critical to the corrosion rate of carbon and low alloy steels in sour water environments:

“The extent of corrosion in sour water is influenced by pH, H₂S content, temperature, liquid velocity, and oxygen contamination.”

“These factors control the formation and stability of protective iron sulfide layers.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.2.1 – Sour Water Corrosion)

Therefore, the correct answer is A.

API RP 571 states under Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC):

“Nickel contents above approximately 35% provide significant resistance to chloride stress corrosion cracking. Alloys such as Alloy 625 and Alloy 825 exhibit excellent resistance.”

“Austenitic stainless steels with lower nickel contents, such as 304 and 316, are more susceptible to Cl-SCC.”

Hence, option C (35%) is correct.

API RP 571 provides the following guidance regarding temper embrittlement:

“For materials that contain impurity levels which make them susceptible to temper embrittlement, the most effective preventive measure is to specify low FATT or Charpy impact energy requirements.”

“These requirements ensure the material retains adequate toughness even if embrittlement occurs.”

“While temper embrittlement itself cannot always be fully prevented during long-term exposure to temperatures between 650°F and 1070°F (343°C–577°C), its effects can be identified and mitigated through impact testing criteria.”

Therefore, option C is correct. Specification of Charpy V-notch testing ensures material selection accounts for embrittlement susceptibility and maintains service integrity.

According to API RP 571, in the section on "Chloride Stress Corrosion Cracking (Cl-SCC)", several critical factors are outlined that contribute to the initiation and propagation of this mechanism. The document states:

“Critical factors include the presence of chlorides (even at ppm levels), oxygen, elevated temperatures, tensile stress, and susceptible materials such as austenitic stainless steels and some nickel alloys.”

“Oxygen is an accelerant and promotes pitting that can lead to SCC initiation.”

(Reference: API RP 571, 3rd Edition, Section 4.2.2.2)

Therefore, the presence of oxygen is a well-documented critical factor in Cl-SCC. It acts in conjunction with chlorides to initiate localized pitting, which then progresses into cracking. Hence, option B is the correct choice.

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.

Dissimilar Metal Cracking (DMC) is a form of high-temperature cracking that frequently occurs in weld joints between carbon steel and austenitic stainless steel (such as Type 316 SS) due to differences in thermal expansion coefficients and mechanical properties.

From API RP 571 Section 5.2.3.1 (Dissimilar Metal Weld Cracking):

“Cracking frequently occurs in weld joints between ferritic and austenitic materials such as carbon steel to 300 series stainless steels due to thermal expansion mismatch during high temperature operation.”

Therefore, Option D (Carbon steel to 316 stainless steel) is the most susceptible combination and the correct answer.

As defined in API RP 571, under Hydrogen Blistering and HIC/SOHIC:

“SOHIC typically manifests as subsurface stepwise cracking, generally oriented perpendicular to the direction of stress.”

“This mechanism initiates below the surface, typically in weld heat-affected zones, and requires metallographic or advanced ultrasonic methods to detect.”

By contrast, SSC, caustic cracking, and amine SCC are primarily surface-initiated, stress-related cracking mechanisms.

Thus, SOHIC is the subsurface mechanism in this list, making option D correct.

API RP 571 under Cooling Water Corrosion and Scaling:

“Cooling water scaling tends to occur more rapidly as water temperature increases. To minimize scaling, inlet temperatures to exchangers should be kept below 140°F (60°C) where possible.”

“Above this temperature, calcium carbonate and other salts tend to precipitate more readily.”

Thus, option A 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.

According to API RP 571, under Naphthenic Acid Corrosion (NAC):

“The most severe corrosion is typically found in areas of high velocity and turbulence, such as at pump around nozzles, transfer lines, elbows, reducers, and orifices.”

“NAC is characterized by uniform thinning and can accelerate significantly where flow-induced erosion is present.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.4.1 – Naphthenic Acid Corrosion)

This clearly establishes that high velocity and turbulence increase NAC severity, making option D correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Carbolic acid corrosion (phenol corrosion) is described in API RP 571 as a process-specific corrosion mechanism that may not produce distinct or easily detectable wall-loss patterns using conventional NDE methods.

API RP 571 emphasizes that confirmation of carbolic acid corrosion often requires:

Chemical identification of corrosion products

Metallurgical examination

Verification of acid presence and metal interaction

A boat sample (also known as a coupon or scoop sample) removed from the affected area and analyzed in a laboratory allows:

Identification of corrosion morphology

Chemical analysis of deposits

Confirmation of phenol-related attack

Why the other options are incorrect:

UT and RT detect wall loss but cannot identify the corrosion mechanism.

Acoustic emission detects active cracking, not specific corrosion chemistry.

Angle beam UT is for crack detection, not corrosion identification.

Therefore, laboratory analysis of a removed sample is the most useful method.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Organic Acid Corrosion (Phenols)

API Corrosion Failure Analysis Study Guide

======================

As per API RP 571 and further clarified in API RP 939-C:

“An arbitrary threshold of 50 ppmw H₂S in the aqueous phase is often used to define when carbon and low alloy steels become susceptible to cracking damage in wet H₂S environments.”

“Below this level, the risk of SSC, HIC, and SOHIC is considered lower, although damage has still occurred at lower concentrations depending on stress and metallurgical conditions.”

Therefore, the correct answer is option D (50 ppmw).

API RP 571 – Polythionic Acid Stress Corrosion Cracking:

“Polythionic acid SCC may be mistaken for wet H₂S damage because both involve cracking in austenitic stainless steels under certain conditions.”

Thus, option D is 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.

According to API RP 571 and API RP 751 (HF Alkylation Units):

“HF acid corrosion rates increase with elevated temperature and higher water content. This is because water acts as an ionizing agent that facilitates the acid’s attack on steel.”

“Corrosion is minimized when water content is strictly controlled, usually between 0.5–1.5%.”

“Contrary to some assumptions, increasing HF acid concentration actually decreases corrosivity.”

Hence, option B is correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Naphthenic Acid Corrosion (NAC) occurs in high-temperature refinery streams (typically 450–750 °F / 230–400 °C) containing organic acids. According to API RP 571, NAC is particularly aggressive toward carbon steels and low-alloy steels, and resistance improves with increasing chromium and molybdenum content, but is best with titanium.

Titanium exhibits exceptional resistance to NAC due to the formation of a stable, protective oxide film that is not attacked by naphthenic acids. API RP 571 identifies titanium as one of the most resistant materials available for severe NAC environments.

Why the other options are less suitable:

Option B (9 Cr-1 Mo steel) has limited resistance and is still susceptible at higher TAN and velocities.

Option C (317 stainless steel) offers improved resistance but can still experience attack under severe NAC conditions.

Option D (321 stainless steel) has lower molybdenum content than 317 SS, making it less resistant.

API RP 571 explicitly notes that titanium provides superior resistance compared to stainless steels and Cr-Mo alloys in NAC service.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Naphthenic Acid Corrosion

API Corrosion and Materials Selection Study Guide

API RP 571 on Thermal Fatigue emphasizes:

“Thermal fatigue results from cyclic thermal stresses during startup, shutdown, or transient operations.”

“The best mitigation strategy is to control heating and cooling rates to reduce temperature differentials and resulting stress.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.5 – Thermal Fatigue)

Hence, option D correctly identifies the preventive action.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, temper embrittlement is a metallurgical condition that affects Cr-Mo low-alloy steels, including 1-1/4 Cr-1/2 Mo, when exposed to temperatures typically in the range of 650 °F to 1100 °F (345 °C to 595 °C) over extended periods. This damage mechanism results in a significant loss of fracture toughness and ductility, particularly at lower temperatures.

API RP 939-C further explains that temper embrittlement does not significantly reduce tensile strength, but it raises the ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (DBTT). As a result, equipment that appears structurally sound may fail catastrophically under sudden loading conditions.

Once ductility is reduced, the material becomes especially vulnerable to rapid temperature changes, which induce high thermal stresses. Thermal shock is therefore a critical secondary damage mechanism. Sudden quenching, cold feed introduction, startup, shutdown, or uneven heating can cause cracking because the embrittled material can no longer accommodate strain plastically.

Option A (Ductile rupture) is incorrect because temper embrittlement promotes brittle fracture, not ductile failure.

Option B (885 °F embrittlement) is incorrect because 885 °F (475 °C) embrittlement primarily affects carbon steels and some stainless steels, not Cr-Mo steels.

Option D (Graphitization) occurs at prolonged exposure above approximately 800 °F (425 °C) in carbon steels and is not the dominant concern for 1-1/4 Cr-1/2 Mo steel in this context.

API RP 571 explicitly emphasizes that embrittled Cr-Mo steels are highly susceptible to cracking during thermal transients, making thermal shock the most likely and dangerous subsequent damage mechanism.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Temper Embrittlement of Low-Alloy Steels

API RP 939-C – Metallurgical Effects and Service Risks of Temper Embrittlement

======================

API RP 571 notes that for detecting existing cracks or flaws that may lead to brittle fracture, especially those that initiate at welds or surface stress points:

“Wet fluorescent magnetic-particle inspection is highly effective for detecting surface-breaking flaws in ferromagnetic materials that are susceptible to brittle fracture.”

“It is sensitive to tight cracks and surface discontinuities that may serve as initiation sites for brittle fracture.”

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

Therefore, option A is correct as it is the most effective NDE technique for detecting early signs of brittle cracking.

As per API RP 945 (4th Edition, 2022):

“Post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) is the most effective method for reducing residual stresses that contribute to amine SCC. PWHT minimizes the stress intensity required for crack initiation and growth.”

Lowering temperature helps but is not always feasible.

Water content and amine concentration affect SCC but are not as impactful as PWHT.

Thus, Option A (Post-weld heat treatment) is the most effective mitigation.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.6 (Carbonate Stress Corrosion Cracking - CSCC):

“The cracking is usually intergranular and is most commonly detected using wet fluorescent magnetic-particle testing (WFMT) after surface cleaning. PT may not be sensitive enough to detect fine cracks formed by this mechanism.”

Because CSCC cracks are typically surface-connected and very fine, WFMT offers the best visibility, especially after proper surface prep.

Therefore, Option D is correct.

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).

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, surface decarburization is a metallurgical degradation mechanism that occurs when carbon is removed from the surface layers of steel due to exposure to oxidizing environments at elevated temperatures. This results in a carbon-depleted surface layer.

Carbon is a primary strengthening element in carbon and low-alloy steels. When carbon is lost from the surface:

Hardness and tensile strength are reduced

Creep resistance and load-carrying capability decrease

The component becomes more susceptible to plastic deformation and failure under stress

API RP 571 states that decarburization leads to loss of mechanical strength, especially critical in high-temperature service, where components already operate close to material limits.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Option A: Stress cracking is not the primary effect; loss of strength is.

Option C: Decarburization does not directly accelerate oxidation or sulfidation, although both may coexist.

Option D: This is incorrect; decarburization is considered detrimental in high-temperature applications.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Decarburization and Metal Dusting

API Corrosion and Materials Study Guide

======================

Under Thermal Fatigue and Shock, API RP 571 explains:

“Thermal shock damage often initiates at locations with sudden temperature changes, such as quench zones, cold/hot injection points, and areas subjected to rapid cycling.”

“These are critical inspection points for detecting cracking from thermal shock.”

Thus, option B best matches the described mechanism.

API RP 571 under Polythionic Acid Stress Corrosion Cracking (PTA SCC) specifies:

“Cracking is usually intergranular, and often localized, especially in sensitized austenitic stainless steels exposed to sulfur-containing environments during shutdown or cleaning.”

“It is not always visible on inspection and may only become evident when a leak occurs.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.2.5 – PTA SCC)

Hence, option C is correct as it best describes the detection difficulty and behavior of PTA SCC.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

According to API RP 571, carbon steel exhibits a minimum corrosion rate in sulfuric acid at concentrations around 65–70 wt% due to formation of a protective iron sulfate film.

When sulfuric acid concentration drops below approximately 65%, this protective film becomes unstable and corrosion rates increase dramatically.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Sulfuric Acid Corrosion

======================

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.

API RP 571 describes under Caustic Corrosion:

“One of the significant contributing factors is caustic accumulation in low-flow or stagnant areas, especially in heat-traced lines or around steam injection points.”

“Localized heating can concentrate caustic solutions, promoting corrosion even in carbon or stainless steels.”

Thus, option C (heat-traced equipment) is the correct and technically accurate choice.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, sulfidation corrosion rates are significantly accelerated by the presence of hydrogen. Hydrogen promotes:

Breakdown of protective sulfide scales

Increased diffusion of sulfur into the metal

Higher metal loss rates

This phenomenon is often referred to as hydrogen-assisted sulfidation and is commonly observed in refinery process units.

Moisture is more closely associated with oxidation mechanisms rather than high-temperature sulfidation.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Sulfidation and High-Temperature Corrosion

API RP 751 (referenced in RP 571) lists materials appropriate for HF acid alkylation service. It specifies:

“Chrome-moly steels such as ASTM A-193 B5 (5% Cr) bolts are preferred for their resistance to HF acid-induced cracking.”

“Standard low alloy steels (e.g., B7) are not considered adequately resistant.”

(Reference: API RP 571 summary & API RP 751, Section 5.6.3 – Bolting Materials)

Therefore, the correct and industry-approved answer is option A.

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.

API RP 578 (Material Verification Program), referenced in API RP 571, specifically calls out sulfidation failures as a major driver for Positive Material Identification (PMI):

“PMI programs are particularly important in services prone to sulfidation where incorrect alloying elements (e.g., carbon steel used in place of low Cr alloy) have led to catastrophic failures.”

“Many failures have occurred when carbon steel was mistakenly installed in place of specified Cr-alloys in sulfidation-prone environments.”

(Reference: API RP 578 and API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.1 – Sulfidation)

Thus, option C is the most appropriate answer.

According to API RP 571 Section 5.1.2.1 (Hydrogen-Induced Cracking) and Publ 939-A, blistering in carbon and low alloy steels exposed to wet H2S environments can be exacerbated by the presence of cyanides. These accelerate hydrogen entry into steel, increasing the chance of hydrogen blistering.

API RP 571 states:

“HIC and blistering are forms of hydrogen damage that occur in wet H2S environments. The presence of cyanides can significantly increase hydrogen entry and the risk of blistering.”

Publ 939-A (Research on Cracking in Wet H2S Service) also notes:

“Cyanides act as catalytic agents in hydrogen charging, which promotes internal pressure build-up and increases blistering.”

Thus, cyanides (Option B) are the most critical in enhancing blistering in H2S environments.

API RP 571 – Sulfidation:

“Sulfidation generally results in uniform thinning of iron-based alloys at temperatures above 500°F (260°C).”

“It is classified as a form of general corrosion, although it can be accelerated in turbulent flow areas.”

So, option A is correct.

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.