API-571 API Corrosion and Materials Professional Free Practice Exam Questions (2026 Updated)

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 on Organic Acid Corrosion in Overheads explains:

“Corrosion caused by organic acids (e.g., formic, acetic) in overhead systems is best mitigated by neutralization, usually via injection of alkaline neutralizing amines that raise pH and reduce acidity.”

“Water wash can be helpful but is often insufficient by itself.”

Therefore, the most effective approach is option C – injection of neutralizer.

API RP 571, under Organic Acid Corrosion, highlights:

“Corrosive organic acids in overhead systems are those that condense at temperatures above the water dew point. These acids condense independently of water and can form highly concentrated corrosive films.”

“When acids condense first, they aggressively corrode carbon steel prior to any water wash mitigation.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.9 – Organic Acid Corrosion)

Hence, option D correctly identifies the most aggressive corrosion scenario.

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 – Hydrogen Stress Cracking – HF Acid Service:

“HF acid environments can cause hydrogen stress cracking (HSC) in carbon steel, particularly in areas with high hardness or residual stress.”

“This is distinct from general corrosion and requires specific inspection focus.”

So, option A is correct.

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

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

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.

API RP 571 on HTHA states:

“Acoustic emission testing is not currently a proven or reliable method for identifying HTHA in refinery components.”

“HTHA typically occurs internally, not as surface blisters, and is not limited to welds. Austenitic (300 series) stainless steels are generally resistant at normal refinery conditions.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.1.3 – High Temperature Hydrogen Attack)

Thus, option A is the most accurate statement.

As per API RP 571 Section 5.3.2.2 (Sigma Phase Embrittlement):

“Sigma phase embrittlement occurs in austenitic stainless steels (like 300 series) and duplex stainless steels exposed to 1000°F to 1800°F (540°C to 980°C)... This embrittlement results in a significant loss of toughness and ductility.”

Sigma phase is not a concern in Monel (nickel-copper alloy) or 5Cr steels.

400 series are ferritic and not typically affected by sigma phase.

Hence, Option A (300 series stainless steel) is correct.

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.

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.

According to API RP 571, under Caustic Stress Corrosion Cracking (Caustic Embrittlement):

“Cracking occurs in stressed components exposed to caustic (e.g., sodium hydroxide).”

“The most effective mitigation strategy is postweld heat treatment (PWHT), which relieves residual stress that promotes cracking.”

“Upgrading materials or controlling concentration may help, but do not replace stress relief.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.2.2.3 – Caustic SCC)

Thus, PWHT is the most effective prevention technique, making option A correct.

According to API RP 571, under Sulfuric Acid Corrosion:

“The most aggressive corrosion typically occurs below 65% H₂SO₄, particularly between 20% to 50% concentration range.”

“Above 95% concentration, sulfuric acid becomes less corrosive to carbon steel due to its dehydrating nature.”

“Dilute sulfuric acid is highly ionized and conducts electricity well, increasing corrosion rates.”

(Reference: API RP 571, Section 4.3.3.2 – Sulfuric Acid Corrosion)

Hence, the most severe corrosion occurs below 65% concentration, making option B the accurate answer.

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 941, and also noted in RP 571:

“Nickel significantly improves resistance to HTHA (High Temperature Hydrogen Attack) by stabilizing austenitic phases and reducing carbide decomposition.”

Hence, option C is correct.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Polythionic acid stress corrosion cracking (PASCC) occurs when sulfide scales on stainless steel surfaces are exposed to oxygen and moisture, most commonly during shutdowns and outages.

Per API RP 571:

Polythionic acids form when iron sulfides react with air and water

Cracking occurs in austenitic stainless steels

Damage is most likely during shutdown, not normal operation

Therefore, PASCC is the damage mechanism directly associated with shutdown exposure conditions.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on Polythionic Acid Stress Corrosion Cracking

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

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

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

In API RP 571, Carbonate SCC and Alkaline SCC are both discussed under mechanisms that occur in basic (high pH) environments, often with similar contributing conditions and prevention methods. The document highlights:

“Carbonate SCC is considered a subcategory of alkaline stress corrosion cracking. It results from the concentration of alkaline carbonates under thermal insulation or deposits.”

“Both mechanisms involve the same key parameters: elevated temperatures, tensile stress, and high pH solutions.”

(Reference: API RP 571, 3rd Edition, Section 4.2.2.4 and 4.2.2.3)

Because these mechanisms share similar material susceptibility and operating conditions, they are indeed closely related—option B is therefore the accurate and supported answer.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

Per API RP 571, 885 °F (475 °C) embrittlement primarily affects carbon and low-alloy steels, causing a loss of toughness without obvious microstructural changes visible by routine metallography. Because the damage mechanism manifests as a shift in ductile-to-brittle transition temperature (DBTT), confirmation requires mechanical property testing, not surface or volumetric NDE.

Impact testing (Charpy V-notch) and bend testing are specifically cited as effective methods to demonstrate the loss of toughness and increased brittleness associated with 475 °C embrittlement.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Metallography often shows little or no visible change.

Magnetic particle testing only detects surface-breaking flaws.

Ductility testing alone is not as definitive as impact toughness testing.

Referenced Documents (Study Basis):

API RP 571 – Section on 885 °F (475 °C) Embrittlement

API Corrosion and Materials Study Guide

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