NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.

Contact ASTM International ([Link]) for the latest information

Designation: G1 – 03

Standard Practice for

Preparing, Cleaning, and Evaluating Corrosion Test
Specimens1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation G1; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of original
adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A superscript
epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

1. Scope G31 Practice for Laboratory Immersion Corrosion Testing

1.1 This practice covers suggested procedures for preparing of Metals
bare, solid metal specimens for tests, for removing corrosion G33 Practice for Recording Data from Atmospheric Corro-
products after the test has been completed, and for evaluating sion Tests of Metallic-Coated Steel Specimens
the corrosion damage that has occurred. Emphasis is placed on G46 Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting
procedures related to the evaluation of corrosion by mass loss Corrosion
and pitting measurements. (Warning—In many cases the G50 Practice for Conducting Atmospheric Corrosion Tests
corrosion product on the reactive metals titanium and zirco- on Metals
nium is a hard and tightly bonded oxide that defies removal by G78 Guide for Crevice Corrosion Testing of Iron-Base and
chemical or ordinary mechanical means. In many such cases, Nickel-Base Stainless Alloys in Seawater and Other
corrosion rates are established by mass gain rather than mass Chloride-Containing Aqueous Environments
loss.) 3. Terminology
iTeh Standards
1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of the
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the 3.1 See Terminology G15 for terms used in this practice.

([Link]
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
4. Significance and Use
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
4.1 The procedures given are designed to remove corrosion
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific
precautionary statements, see 1 and 7.2.
Document Preview
products without significant removal of base metal. This allows
an accurate determination of the mass loss of the metal or alloy
2. Referenced Documents that occurred during exposure to the corrosive environment.
2.1 ASTM Standards: 2 4.2 These procedures, in some cases, may apply to metal
A262 Practices for Detecting Susceptibility to Intergranular
ASTM G1-03
coatings. However, possible effects from the substrate must be
[Link]
Attack in Austenitic Stainless Steels considered.
D1193 Specification for Reagent Water 5. Reagents and Materials
D1384 Test Method for Corrosion Test for Engine Coolants
in Glassware 5.1 Purity of Reagents—Reagent grade chemicals shall be
D2776 Test Methods for Corrosivity of Water in the Ab- used in all tests. Unless otherwise indicated, it is intended that
sence of Heat Transfer (Electrical Methods) all reagents conform to the specifications of the Committee on
G15 Terminology Relating to Corrosion and Corrosion Analytical Reagents of the American Chemical Society where
Testing such specifications are available.3 Other grades may be used,
G16 Guide for Applying Statistics to Analysis of Corrosion provided it is first ascertained that the reagent is of sufficiently
Data high purity to permit its use without lessening the accuracy of
the determination.
5.2 Purity of Water—Unless otherwise indicated, references
1
This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee G01 on Corrosion to water shall be understood to mean reagent water as defined
of Metals and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee G01.05 on Laboratory by Type IV of Specification D1193.
Corrosion Tests.
Current edition approved October 1, 2003. Published October 2003. Originally
approved in 1967. Last previous edition approved in 1999 as G1 – 90 (1999)´1. DOI: 3
Reagent Chemicals, American Chemical Society Specifications, American
10.1520/G0001-03. Chemical Society, Washington, DC. For suggestions on the testing of reagents not
2
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, [Link], or listed by the American Chemical Society, see Analar Standards for Laboratory
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@[Link]. For Annual Book of ASTM Chemicals, BDH Ltd., Poole, Dorset, U.K., and the United States Pharmacopeia
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on and National Formulary, U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention, Inc. (USPC), Rockville,
the ASTM website. MD.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.

1
 G1 – 03
6. Methods for Preparing Specimens for Test D1384). The edges as well as the faces of the specimens should
6.1 For laboratory corrosion tests that simulate exposure to be abraded to remove burrs.
service environments, a commercial surface, closely resem- 6.3.4 Rinse thoroughly, hot air dry, and store in desiccator.
bling the one that would be used in service, will yield the most 6.4 When specimen preparation changes the metallurgical
meaningful results. condition of the metal, other methods should be chosen or the
6.2 It is desirable to mark specimens used in corrosion tests metallurgical condition must be corrected by subsequent treat-
with a unique designation during preparation. Several tech- ment. For example, shearing a specimen to size will cold work
niques may be used depending on the type of specimen and and may possibly fracture the edges. Edges should be ma-
test. chined.
6.5 The clean, dry specimens should be measured and
6.2.1 Stencil or Stamp—Most metallic specimens may be
weighed. Dimensions determined to the third significant figure
marked by stenciling, that is, imprinting the designation code
and mass determined to the fifth significant figure are sug-
into the metal surface using hardened steel stencil stamps hit
gested. When more significant figures are available on the
with a hammer. The resulting imprint will be visible even after
measuring instruments, they should be recorded.
substantial corrosion has occurred. However, this procedure
introduces localized strained regions and the possibility of 7. Methods for Cleaning After Testing
superficial iron contamination in the marked area.
6.2.2 Electric engraving by means of a vibratory marking 7.1 Corrosion product removal procedures can be divided
tool may be used when the extent of corrosion damage is into three general categories: mechanical, chemical, and elec-
known to be small. However, this approach to marking is much trolytic.
more susceptible to having the marks lost as a result of 7.1.1 An ideal procedure should remove only corrosion
corrosion damage during testing. products and not result in removal of any base metal. To
determine the mass loss of the base metal when removing
6.2.3 Edge notching is especially applicable when extensive
corrosion products, replicate uncorroded control specimens
corrosion and accumulation of corrosion products is antici-
should be cleaned by the same procedure being used on the test
pated. Long term atmospheric tests and sea water immersion
specimen. By weighing the control specimen before and after
iTeh Standards
tests on steel alloys are examples where this approach is
applicable. It is necessary to develop a code system when using
edge notches.
cleaning, the extent of metal loss resulting from cleaning can
be utilized to correct the corrosion mass loss.

([Link]
6.2.4 Drilled holes may also be used to identify specimens
when extensive metal loss, accumulation of corrosion products,
NOTE 4—It is desirable to scrape samples of corrosion products before
using any chemical techniques to remove them. These scrapings can then

Document Preview
be subjected to various forms of analyses, including perhaps X-ray
or heavy scaling is anticipated. Drilled holes may be simpler
diffraction to determine crystal forms as well as chemical analyses to look
and less costly than edge notching. A code system must be for specific corrodants, such as chlorides. All of the chemical techniques
developed when using drilled holes. Punched holes should not that are discussed in Section 7 tend to destroy the corrosion products and
be used as they introduce residual strain. thereby lose the information contained in these corrosion products. Care
6.2.5 When it is undesirable to deform the surface of
ASTM G1-03 may be required so that uncorroded metal is not removed with the
[Link]
specimens after preparation procedures, for example, when corrosion products.
testing coated surfaces, tags may be used for specimen identi- 7.1.2 The procedure given in 7.1.1 may not be reliable when
fication. A metal or plastic wire can be used to attach the tag to heavily corroded specimens are to be cleaned. The application
the specimen and the specimen identification can be stamped of replicate cleaning procedures to specimens with corroded
on the tag. It is important to ensure that neither the tag nor the surfaces will often, even in the absence of corrosion products,
wire will corrode or degrade in the test environment. It is also result in continuing mass losses. This is because a corroded
important to be sure that there are no galvanic interactions surface, particularly of a multiphase alloy, is often more
between the tag, wire, and specimen. susceptible than a freshly machined or polished surface to
6.3 For more searching tests of either the metal or the corrosion by the cleaning procedure. In such cases, the
environment, standard surface finishes may be preferred. A following method of determining the mass loss due to the
suitable procedure might be: cleaning procedure is preferred.
6.3.1 Degrease in an organic solvent or hot alkaline cleaner. [Link] The cleaning procedure should be repeated on speci-
(See also Practice G31.) mens several times. The mass loss should be determined after
each cleaning by weighing the specimen.
NOTE 1—Hot alkalies and chlorinated solvents may attack some metals.
[Link] The mass loss should be graphed as a function of the
NOTE 2—Ultrasonic cleaning may be beneficial in both pre-test and number of equal cleaning cycles as shown in Fig. 1. Two lines
post-test cleaning procedures.
will be obtained: AB and BC. The latter will correspond to
6.3.2 Pickle in an appropriate solution if oxides or tarnish corrosion of the metal after removal of corrosion products. The
are present. In some cases the chemical cleaners described in mass loss due to corrosion will correspond approximately to
Section 6 will suffice. point B.
[Link] To minimize uncertainty associated with corrosion
NOTE 3—Pickling may cause localized corrosion on some materials.
of the metal by the cleaning method, a method should be
6.3.3 Abrade with a slurry of an appropriate abrasive or with chosen to provide the lowest slope (near to horizontal) of line
an abrasive paper (see Practices A262 and Test Method BC.

2
 G1 – 03
7.4 Mechanical procedures can include scraping, scrubbing,
brushing, ultrasonic cleaning, mechanical shocking, and im-
pact blasting (for example, grit blasting, water-jet blasting, and
so forth). These methods are often utilized to remove heavily
encrusted corrosion products. Scrubbing with a nonmetallic
bristle brush and a mild abrasive-distilled water slurry can also
be used to remove corrosion products.
7.4.1 Vigorous mechanical cleaning may result in the re-
moval of some base metal; therefore, care should be exercised.
These should be used only when other methods fail to provide
adequate removal of corrosion products. As with other meth-
ods, correction for metal loss due to the cleaning method is
recommended. The mechanical forces used in cleaning should
be held as nearly constant as possible.

8. Assessment of Corrosion Damage

8.1 The initial total surface area of the specimen (making
corrections for the areas associated with mounting holes) and
FIG. 1 Mass Loss of Corroded Specimens Resulting from the mass lost during the test are determined. The average
Repetitive Cleaning Cycles
corrosion rate may then be obtained as follows:
Corrosion Rate 5 ~K 3 W!/~A 3 T 3 D! (1)
7.1.3 Repeated treatment may be required for complete
removal of corrosion products. Removal can often be con- where:
firmed by examination with a low power microscope (for K = a constant (see 8.1.2),
iTeh Standards
example, 73 to 303). This is particularly useful with pitted
surfaces when corrosion products may accumulate in pits. This
T = time of exposure in hours,
A = area in cm2,
W = mass loss in grams, and
([Link]
repeated treatment may also be necessary because of the
requirements of [Link]. Following the final treatment, the D = density in g/cm3 (see Appendix X1).
specimens should be thoroughly rinsed and immediately dried. 8.1.1 Corrosion rates are not necessarily constant with time

Document Preview
7.1.4 All cleaning solutions shall be prepared with water
and reagent grade chemicals.
of exposure. See Practice G31 for further guidance.
8.1.2 Many different units are used to express corrosion
7.2 Chemical procedures involve immersion of the corro- rates. Using the units in 7.1 for T, A, W, and D, the corrosion
sion test specimen in a specific solution that is designed to rate can be calculated in a variety of units with the following
ASTM G1-03
remove the corrosion products with minimal dissolution of any appropriate value of K:
[Link]
base metal. Several procedures are listed in Table A1.1. The Constant (K) in Corrosion
choice of chemical procedure to be used is partly a matter of Corrosion Rate Units Desired Rate Equation
mils per year (mpy) 3.45 3 106
trial and error to establish the most effective method for a inches per year (ipy) 3.45 3 103
specific metal and type of corrosion product scale. inches per month (ipm) 2.87 3 102
millimetres per year (mm/y) 8.76 3 104
(Warning—These methods may be hazardous to personnel).
micrometres per year (um/y) 8.76 3 107
7.2.1 Chemical cleaning is often preceded by light brushing picometres per second (pm/s) 2.78 3 106
(non metallic bristle) or ultrasonic cleaning of the test speci- grams per square meter per hour (g/m2·h) 1.00 3 104 3 D
milligrams per square decimeter per day (mdd) 2.40 3 106 3 D
men to remove loose, bulky corrosion products. micrograms per square meter per second (µg/m2·s) 2.78 3 106 3 D
7.2.2 Intermittent removal of specimens from the cleaning
solution for light brushing or ultrasonic cleaning can often NOTE 5—If desired, these constants may also be used to convert
corrosion rates from one set of units to another. To convert a corrosion rate
facilitate the removal of tightly adherent corrosion products.
in units X to a rate in units Y, multiply by KY/KX; for example:
7.2.3 Chemical cleaning is often followed by light brushing
or ultrasonic cleaning in reagent water to remove loose 15 mpy 5 15 3 ~2.78 3 106!/~3.45 3 106! pm/s (2)
products.
7.3 Electrolytic cleaning can also be utilized for removal of 8.1.3 In the case of sacrificial alloy coatings for which there
corrosion products. Several useful methods for corrosion test is preferential corrosion of a component whose density differs
specimens of iron, cast iron, or steel are given in Table A2.1. from that of the alloy, it is preferable to use the density of the
7.3.1 Electrolytic cleaning should be preceded by brushing corroded component (instead of the initial alloy density) for
or ultrasonic cleaning of the test specimen to remove loose, calculating average thickness loss rate by use of Eq 1. This is
bulky corrosion products. Brushing or ultrasonic cleaning done as follows: (1) cleaning to remove corrosion products
should also follow the electrolytic cleaning to remove any only and determine the mass loss of the corroded component;
loose slime or deposits. This will help to minimize any (2) stripping the remaining coating to determine the mass of the
redeposition of metal from reducible corrosion products that uncorroded component; (3) chemical analysis of the stripping
would reduce the apparent mass loss. solution to determine the composition of the uncorroded

3
 G1 – 03
component; (4) performing a mass balance to calculate the 9. Report
composition of the corroded component; (5) using the mass 9.1 The report should include the compositions and sizes of
and density of the corroded component to calculate the average specimens, their metallurgical conditions, surface preparations,
thickness loss rate by use of Eq 1. An example of this and cleaning methods as well as measures of corrosion
procedure is given in Appendix X2. damage, such as corrosion rates (calculated from mass losses),
The procedure described above gives an average penetration maximum depths of pitting, or losses in mechanical properties.
rate of the coating, but the maximum penetration for a
multiphase alloy may be larger when the corroded phase is not 10. Precision and Bias
uniformly distributed across the surface. In such cases, it is 10.1 The factors that can produce errors in mass loss
generally considered good practice to obtain a cross section measurement include improper balance calibration and stan-
through the corroded surface for microscopic examination. dardization. Generally, modern analytical balances can deter-
This examination will reveal the extent of selective corrosion mine mass values to 60.2 mg with ease and balances are
of particular phases in the coating, and help in understanding available that can obtain mass values to 60.02 mg. In general,
the mechanism of attack. mass measurements are not the limiting factor. However,
8.2 Corrosion rates calculated from mass losses can be inadequate corrosion product removal or overcleaning will
misleading when deterioration is highly localized, as in pitting affect precision.
or crevice corrosion. If corrosion is in the form of pitting, it 10.2 The determination of specimen area is usually the least
may be measured with a depth gage or micrometer calipers precise step in corrosion rate determinations. The precision of
with pointed anvils (see Guide G46). Microscopical methods calipers and other length measuring devices can vary widely.
will determine pit depth by focusing from top to bottom of the However, it generally is not necessary to achieve better than
pit when it is viewed from above (using a calibrated focusing 61 % for area measurements for corrosion rate purposes.
knob) or by examining a section that has been mounted and 10.3 The exposure time can usually be controlled to better
metallographically polished. The pitting factor is the ratio of than 61 % in most laboratory procedures. However, in field
the deepest metal penetration to the average metal penetration exposures, corrosive conditions can vary significantly and the
(as measured by mass loss).
iTeh Standards
estimation of how long corrosive conditions existed can
NOTE 6—See Guide G46 for guidance in evaluating depths of pitting. present significant opportunities for error. Furthermore, corro-
NOTE 7—See Guide G78 for guidance in evaluating crevice corrosion. sion processes are not necessarily linear with time, so that rate
([Link]
8.3 Other methods of assessing corrosion damage are:
8.3.1 Appearance—The degradation of appearance by rust-
values may not be predictive of the future deterioration, but
only are indications of the past exposure.

Document Preview
ing, tarnishing, or oxidation. (See Practice G33.)
8.3.2 Mechanical Properties—An apparent loss in tensile can
10.4 Regression analysis on results, as are shown in Fig. 1,
be used to obtain specific information on precision. See
Guide G16 for more information on statistical analysis.
strength will result if the cross-sectional area of the specimen
(measured before exposure to the corrosive environment) is 10.5 Bias can result from inadequate corrosion product
reduced by corrosion. (See Practice G50.) Loss in ASTM
tensileG1-03
removal or metal removal caused by overcleaning. The use of
[Link]
strength will result if a compositional change, such as dealloy- repetitive cleaning steps, as shown in Fig. 1, can minimize both
ing taking place. Loss in tensile strength and elongation will of these errors.
result from localized attack, such as cracking or intergranular 10.5.1 Corrosion penetration estimations based on mass loss
corrosion. can seriously underestimate the corrosion penetration caused
8.3.3 Electrical Properties—Loss in electrical conductivity by localized processes, such as pitting, cracking, crevice
can be measured when metal loss results from uniform corrosion, and so forth.
corrosion. (See Test Methods D2776.)
8.3.4 Microscopical Examination—Dealloying, exfoliation, 11. Keywords
cracking, or intergranular attack may be detected by metallo- 11.1 cleaning; corrosion product removal; evaluation; mass
graphic examination of suitably prepared sections. loss; metals; preparation; specimens