Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
Application of high strength steels may offer many advantages. Today, high strength steels are
increasingly applied in pipelines, cranes, offshore construction, bridges, minesweepers, etc. In order to
meet market requirements for a wider range of steel grades, consumables for applicable processes need
to be available, whether it is for manual or mechanized welding.
In this paper, an overview is given of criteria and results in the development process of FCAW,
SMAW, GMAW and SAW consumables for steel grades up to S690.
Initially, weldability is the feature to be met. Next, chemical composition and mechanical properties in
the as welded and/or post weld heat treated condition need to be demonstrated, followed by a
consumable classification according to AWS, EN or other. Influence of individual elements (like Mn,
Ni, Mo, Ti or B) on weld metal toughness and strength level is discussed.
An important issue for end-users is the working range of a consumable that still delivers required
properties. Restrictions in operability, heat input, welding position, joint configuration or heat
treatment, do limit the application of a specific consumable and should be minimized. Consistency in
obtained mechanical properties is an essential development criterion.
Finally, welding procedures will be discussed using consumables that demonstrated fitness for purpose.
Steel grades
In European Standards, construction steel grades are classified according to method of production.
· Normalized fine grain steel grades (EN 10113 part 2)
· TMCP fine grain steel grades (EN 10113 part 3)
· Q&T high strength steel grades (EN10137 part 2)
The application of these steel grades is in table 1, sub-divided in two main groups:
EN 10113 part 2 & 3, EN 10137 part 2
Steels in these groups are used in more severe constructions like offshore, bridges, cranes,
storage tanks, minesweepers, etc. Application can be at low temperatures.
In this paper, high strength steels are defined as structural steels from S420 up to S690 . High strength
steel grades, defined in EN 10137 part 2 are weldable, relatively low carbon, low-alloyed steel grades.
The excellent mechanical properties of these grades are obtained by a well-balanced chemical
composition in combination with a well-controlled heat treatment. Within one chemical composition, it
is possible to supply different strength levels. Depending on manufacturer, production method, and
plate thickness, one or more of the elements mentioned in table 2 can be present.
Most Q&T steels contain manganese, nickel, molybdenum, chromium, with additional hardening by
small amounts of boron. Normally some micro alloying elements are present also, to obtain a fine
martensite microstructure after quenching, however vanadium should be avoided when any heat
treatment is applied.
With quenched and tempered steel grades, the high tempered martensite will result in good ductility and
high yield and tensile strength. When welding these steel grades, the heat input needs to be such that
forming of ferrite and perlite is avoided, because of lower strength and toughness level.
At a particular plate thickness, the cooling time▲t800-500, is a function of heat input. When cooling too
fast, the presence of some alloying elements could result in high HAZ hardness. An optimal ▲t800-500
needs to be established (~10-15 seconds).
Development issues
Consumables
Recent advances in thermo-mechanical controlled processing of steel have resulted in low carbon
equivalent, higher strength pipe steel, with limited the risk of HAZ cracking. The predominant
strengthening mechanism in the weld metal, however, is through alloy additions. The weld metal thus
becomes the “weakest link" with increased susceptibility to hydrogen cracking. Consumables for
welding high strength steels have been developed parallel with base material. Optimization of these
consumables has been a continuous process. With this background, defining the limits of consumables
becomes relevant.
Empirical carbon equivalent expressions have been developed that weigh the relative effects of alloying
elements on material hardenability. One frequently used equation is the IIW carbon equivalent
Ceq = C + Mn/6 + (Cr + Mo + V)/5 + (Ni + Cu)/15
Based on the coefficients it is clear that Mn, Cr, Mo and V have a significant effect on the carbon
equivalent and thus the hardenability. The carbon content in the Ceq formula however, has the largest
influence. Most initial studies in the area of alloying effects concentrated on SMAW electrodes and the
above mentioned elements.
Hart1 looked at the effects of carbon, iron powder and basicity, molybdenum and nickel on the
properties of welds. He used basic electrodes to do gapped-bead-on-plate (GBOP) welds. This GBOP
test gives an evaluation of weld metal hydrogen cracking without involving influences of the base
metal.
Molybdenum up to 0.4% was seen to improve the crack resistance at intermediate levels (5ml/100g) of
hydrogen in deposited metal, and was deleterious at high levels (10ml/100g) of hydrogen in weld metal.
With basic electrodes, a preheat of 100°C was always adequate to prevent hydrogen cracking.
Evans2 pointed out that molybdenum was beneficial for toughness up to 0.25% when the manganese
content remained low in basic electrodes. The role of molybdenum was speculated to be the restriction
of pro-eutectoid ferrite formation at grain boundaries either due to pinning or dragging effects of
molybdenum carbides. The effect of chromium on C-Mn welds has also been studied. The toughness
was adversely affected, especially when chromium was increased beyond 1%.
There is very little literature available regarding the effect of vanadium on weld metal microstructure.
Vanadium, apparently has a very complex and unpredictable effect on transformation behavior.
Generally, vanadium is considered to reduce the development of ferrite side plates. It has been
suggested that this is due to the pinning effect of interphase precipitates of V4C3.
Studies on individual and some specific trace elements are mostly done by consumable manufacturers
and often treated as confidential information. Further in this document we will illustrate some more
effects.
Figure 1: Relation between 50% Shear Transition Temperature, GBOP results and Yield
-10.0 110
1.0 GBOP
50% Shear Transition temperature
-23.0 100
0.8
YS
0.6
-36.0 90
0.4
X-80 YS reference line
-49.0 80
0.2
0.0
-62.0 70
50% Shear
-0.2
-75.0 60
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
% Molybdenum
Here, the critical design is a yield strength of 80 ksi, while toughness and resistance to hydrogen
cracking are maximized. The 50% shear transition temperature is plotted in this figure to represent the
fracture appearance of the impact specimen. Apparent in this figure is that the optimal molybdenum
concentration for the GBOP testing coincides with the optimal point for 50% shear, both occurring at
just below 0.4% molybdenum. The strength of weld metal at that composition is also adequate for
welding X-80 pipe.
Any “optimal” point from a testing procedure is valid only for that welding condition. This point could
be altered dramatically with welding conditions resulting in different cooling rates or different base
formula compositions. On pipe, the effects of the cooling rate and weld composition resulting from the
pipe welding procedure and base metal dilution would control the optimal composition.
Weld metal behavior is ultimately dependent on the microstructure. The limits for using any sort of
consumable will be determined by the ability to consistently produce the desired microstructure.
The solution seems to be to minimize formation of any phase on prior austenite grain boundaries. This
directly or indirectly seems to provide the best resistance to hydrogen cracking.
It is apparent from earlier investigations that molybdenum hinders the grain boundary phase formation
until the driving force to form shear transformation products becomes overwhelming. This unique effect
of molybdenum seems to give it an advantage over other alloying elements studied, to produce high
strength welds with a relatively better hydrogen cracking resistance. It is the most effective element for
strengthening weld metal while incurring the smallest loss in impact toughness, simultaneously
minimizing the risk of hydrogen cracking. From the point of view of a manufacturer of electrodes, the
optimal designs can be utilized as a baseline for designing cellulosic electrodes for X-80 high strength
pipes. Certain limits/constraints, particularly hydrogen concerns, will eventually limit the use of these
electrodes.
The strength level can be obtained through several routes. Relatively low carbon in combination with
manganese and molybdenum additions for strength and nickel additions for toughness works best.
Additions of vanadium and chromium did not result in optimum toughness properties, although they
worked well for strength level. Other than with coated electrodes micro-alloying with boron works well
for strength and impact properties with rutile cored wires, provided the Ti/B ratio is optimized.
Titanium and boron containing wires do show a shift in the yield-to-tensile ratio and need to be well
balanced to avoid hydrogen cracking susceptibility. When no boron is present in the weld metal, the
yield-to-tensile ratio improves, but the strength level decreases. Looking at weldability, it is preferred
that a welding procedure is for instance not limited to stringer beads. Some wires available in the
market do not allow the use of a weaving technique, while maintaining the mechanical properties. Wires
presented in this report were specifically developed on this issue (See WPAR OS690.01).
Next there is an increased demand for wires that can be used when a post weld heat treatment needs to
be applied. This heat treatment depends of course on the manufacture procedure of the steel. Typically,
a post weld heat treatment should be at least 30°C below the actual tempering temperature of the plate.
Baring this in mind, a PWHT of max. 550°C is common for S690 where max. 600°C could be more
common for S420.
SAW: Flux and wire combinations
In welding high strength steel using the SAW process, neutral aluminate-basic or fluorid-basic fluxes
are the only option. With higher strength, the lowest diffusible hydrogen level is preferred. There are
patented sub-arc fluxes available that guarantee a diffusible hydrogen content of less than 2 ml/100g
deposited weld metal. This low level can be achieved due to the use of hydrogen scavengers.
Typically, solid wires are used when the SA process is applied. The chemical composition of these solid
wires is also on a Mn, Ni, Mo and in some cases Cr alloy basis (See WPAR P230.09). Today, more
often cored wires (m etal cored) are used for increased deposition. The most important issue from a
manufacturers point of view is the possibility of making any desired alloy. With this fine-tuning, no
complete heats need to be produced in a steel mill, but small quantities of 100 kg could be supplied.
Hydrogen cracking
The three well-known relevant factors in hydrogen induced cold cracking are:
Ø Sufficient amount of diffusible hydrogen
Ø Susceptible microstructure
Ø Stress
The microstructure of the weld metal is clearly a function of cooling rates, thermal history and chemical
composition. The weld procedure thus can change the microstructure drastically. A wide range of
microstructures is possible using the same electrode and machine parameters when changing from a
vertical up position weld to a vertical down position. The optimal formulation for an electrode is very
closely linked with a defined operating procedure, and changing either the formulation or the procedure
can alter the properties of the weld metal. For the root, it is often preferred to use a consumable that is
one grade lower than the base material. Due to dilution, the weld metal strength will increase anyway.
Unacceptable
Acceptable
5
Basic SMAW & FCAW-S
2
GMAW & FCAW-G
With increasing strength level, the risk for hydrogen induced cracking increases. A lower carbon
equivalent will help in minimizing the hydrogen induced cracking. Depending on diffusible hydrogen
level in the weld metal, microstructure after welding, strain level of the construction, chemistry and
plate thickness, preheating is often recommended in order to reduce the susceptibility for hydrogen
induced cracking.
Florian4 calculated the required preheat temperature (Tp) for weld metal, based on five different
concepts (Thyssen, Okuda, Nippon, Hart and Chakravarti). With the exception of the Okuda and
Nippon concept, which are based on Rm, they are all based on carbon equivalent. The formula for
calculating the necessary preheating temperature to avoid cold cracking in high strength weld metal (for
steel grades S450-S690) is:
Tp = 0.25Rm + 62HIIW0.35 - 154
Using this formula, the calculated preheat temperature is found to be appropriate for diffusible
hydrogen levels of around 5 ml/100g deposited weld metal.
High restraint cracking tests have been performed on fillet welds (t=30/15mm) using flux cored wires
up to 800MPa yield strength. An optimized micro-alloy system was used in order test the designs on
susceptibility to cracking at room temperature, as indicated in figure 3. Even at 6°C, no cracking
occurred in 2 of the 3 wires tested. At this strength level (700-800MPa) a minimum preheat of 100°C is
still recommended for base metal thickness over 10mm.
Figure 3: Cold cracking tests using high strength flux cored wires
4
230A, 24.5V
no cracking OS81K2-H
2
OS550-H
OS690-H
OS690-H cracked
Preheat temperature.°C
Mechanical Properties
Typical chemical composition and all weld metal mechanical properties of the processes / consumables
discussed are shown in tables 3 through 6.
Table 3: Typical results for optimal (high strength) cellulosic electrode for pipe
AWS C Mn Si Ni Cr Mo V Yield Tensile CVN (J)
% % % % % % % N/mm2 N/mm2
-29°C -46°C
E6010 0.15 0.50 0.25 --- --- --- --- 440 520 65 ---
E7010 0.12 0.35 0.12 --- --- 0.35 0.02 450 550 80 ---
E8010 0.12 0.90 0.20 0.85 0.10 --- 0.03 510 570 75 ---
E9010 0.13 0.60 0.15 0.70 --- 0.60 --- 550 640 50 45
E10010 0.18 0.85 0.20 0.75 0.02 0.40 0.003 630 720 75 57
Table 4: Typical results for basic vertical down electrodes for pipe welding
C Mn Si Ni Mo Yield Tensile CVN (J)
AWS % % % % % N/mm2 N/mm2
-29°C -46°C
E8018 0.06 1.30 0.45 0.02 --- 530 620 115 80
E9018 0.06 1.45 0.45 0.75 --- 610 675 110 75
E10018 0.06 1.65 0.55 0.80 0.2 680 730 100 70
Table 5: Typical results for basic (150% recovery) high strength electrodes
AWS C Mn Si Ni Cr Mo N Yield Tensile CVN (J)
% % % % % % ppm N/mm2 N/mm2
-40°C -50°C
E9018 0.06 1.00 0.35 1.60 0.01 0.30 80 600 670 100 75
E10018 0.06 1.40 0.40 1.00 0.02 0.40 80 650 730 95 70
E11018 0.06 1.50 0.30 2.20 0.20 0.40 80 710 785 90 80
E12018 0.06 1.70 0.30 1.90 0.40 0.40 90 790 850 80 60
E12028 0.05 1.50 0.40 2.50 --- 1.00 80 770 840 75 55
Table 6: Typical results for high strength flux cored wires
AWS C Mn Si Ni Mo Ti B Yield Tensile CVN (J)
% % % % % % % N/mm2 N/mm2
-40°C -50°C
E71T-1 0.04 1.40 0.55 --- --- 0.035 0.003 500 570 45 ---
E81T1Ni1 0.05 1.40 0.25 0.90 --- 0.040 0.004 530 600 90 60
E81T1K2 0.04 1.40 0.20 1.40 0.040 0.004 590 630 130 100
E101T1K3 0.04 1.40 0.20 2.00 0.30 0.035 0.025 700 730 60 ---
E111T1K3 0.06 1.50 0.20 2.00 0.50 0.035 0.025 800 830 60 50
In some applications, CTOD and wide plate tests are required. For a number of consumables, these are
available but is probably out of the scope of this paper.
Applications
In general, consumables are selected on strength and toughness, which is normally a "matching"
consumable. The yield strength of the deposited weld metal in that case is slightly higher than the
specified minimum yield strength of the steel applied. In some applications, an overmatching of 15-20%
is prescribed, which means a significant higher yield strength than the base metal. For instance steel
grade S500, with a minimum yield strength of 500MPa would require a minimum yield of the welded
joint of 580MPa.
With increasing yield strength, the elongation will decrease. In order to handle shrinkage and distortion,
this elongation is important. Preheat, in combination with a "softer" weld metal for the root, could be
beneficial. In table 7, an overview is given of recommended consumables for welding high strength
steels and pipes.
Welding procedures
In WPAR Conarc80.01, OS690.01 and P230.09, practical welding procedures for the SMAW, FCAW
and SAW processes are shown. These procedures list necessary information regarding weld
preparation, preheat and interpass temperature, heat input, bead sequence etc. in addition to chemical
composition and mechanical properties of the weld metal.
References
1 Hart P, Welding Journal 14s-22s, Jan 1986
2 Evans G, Welding Research Abroad, Volume XXXVII no 2/3, 42-69, 1991
3 Dallam C, Feb 2002, to be published
4 Florian W, Cold cracking in high strength weld metal, IIW doc IX-2006-01
Page 1 /
Welding Procedure WPAR : Conarc 80.01
Approval Record Rev. : 0
Ref. WPQ : test report doc. 00892 Welding Procedure Page 1 / 1
WPAR : OS 690.01
Procedure Specification Test Results Approval Record Rev. : 0
Ref. WPQ : -
Base material HRS 650M Radiographic, Magnetic Particle Examination: : Acceptable Procedure Specification Test Results
Welding processes A: SMAW (111) B:
Manual or machine Manual Reduced-section tension test Base material St 42 buttered with Conarc 80 Radiographic Examination: Acceptable
Tensile strength [MPa] Fracture location Welding processes A: FCAW B:
Welding position PA (1G) 2/3 Side 793 Base material Manual or machine Manual Reduced-section tension test
Filler metal (trade) 1: Conarc 80 2: 1/3 Side 787 Base material Tensile strength [MPa] Fracture location
Flux N.A. Welding position PF (3G up) Cap :
Filler metal classific. AWS A5.5: E 11018-M All-weld-metal tension test 2/3 Side 1/3 Side Filler metal (trade) 1: Outershield 690-H Root :
EN 757: E 69 5 Z B 3 2 H5 Yield point [MPa] : Rp0,2 747 - 753 794 - 792 Flux N.A.
Shielding gas [l/min] N.A. Flow Rp1,0 757 - 764 793 - 792 Filler metal classific.
AWS A5.29: E 111 T1-K3 MJ H4 All-weld-metal tension test
Backing (gas) [l/min] N.A. Flow Tensile strength [MPa] : Rm 815 - 810 833 - 836 EN 12535: T 69 4 Z P M 2 H5 Yield point [MPa] : Rp0,2 781
Gouge method Arc air + grinding Rp0,2/Rm 0,92 - 0,93 0,95 - 0,95 Shielding gas [l/min] 80Ar + 20% CO2 Flow ± 18 Tensile strength [MPa] : Rm 822
Elongation, A5 [%] : A4 20 - 20 20 - 23 Backing (gas) [l/min] Ceramic strip Flow - Elongation, A5 [%] : 17
Current / polarity DC + A5 17 - 16 17 - 20 Gouge method N.A. Reduction, Z [%] : 63
Preheat temp. [°C] 100 - 150 Reduction [%] : Z 62 - 62 62 - 59 Bend tests Former diameter:
Interpass temp. [°C] max. 150 Side bend tests Former diameter: D = 4d Current / polarity DC + Root
Postheat treatment N.A. 2/3 Side 180° No defects Preheat temp. [°C] RT Face
Welder's name Cees de Roij 1/3 Side 180° No defects Interpass temp. [°C] 150 ±15 Side
Postheat treatment N.A. Impact tests ISO-V [Joule] Test temp. [°C]: see table
Laboratory Test No. VE 54 Impact tests ISO-V [Joule] Test temp. [°C]: see table Welder's name Edwin Rebel Size of specimen: 10 * 10 * 55 mm, 2 mm sub surface
Remarks : Lot No.: ø 3,2 mm 646350 Size of specimen: 10 x 10 x 55 mm (2 mm sub-surface) Clw av. Root av.
ø 4,0 mm 842433 Clw 2/3 Side av. Lateral exp. [mm] av. Laboratory Test No. EX 72 - 20°C 71 77 80 76 0
- 20°C 106 107 100 104 1,28 1,10 1,19 1,19 Remarks : Lot No.: 6901213 - 30°C 73 82 77 77 0
Welding Procedure - 40°C 70 70 78 73 0,95 0,93 0,99 0,96 - 40°C 78 87 94 86 0
Pass Consumable Welding Current Speed H.I. - 51°C 66 - 55 - 64 - 65 - 65 63 0,82-0,61-0,75-0,80-0,78 0,75 0 0
No. index Ø [mm] Ampere Volts [mm/min] [kJ/mm] - 60°C 63 - 65 - 68 -37 58 0,86-0,72-0,80-0,46 0,71 Welding Procedure Chemical composition all weld metal test (V-45°)
Side 1 Pass Consumable Welding Current Speed H.I.
1 A1 3,2 75 23 - 24 46 2,29 No. index Ø [mm] Ampere Volts [mm/min] [kJ/mm] C 0,06
2 - 16 A1 5,0 220 24 - 26 ± 215 ± 1,5 Clw Root av. Lateral exp. [mm] av. 1 A1 1,2 160 22 89 2,37 Si 0,25
17 A1 3,2 125 23 - 24 122 1,45 - 20°C 84 83 81 83 0,94 0,95 1,04 0,98 2 A1 1,2 200 25 141 2,13 Mn 1,54
18-21 A1 5,0 220 24 - 26 ± 215 ± 1,5 - 40°C 65 65 46 59 0,77 0,61 0,45 0,61 3 A1 1,2 200 25 133 2,26 P 0,015
22 A1 5,0 220 24 - 26 261 1,26 - 51°C 48 - 36 - 67- 57- 50 52 0,57-0,47-0,80-0,65-0,56 0,61 4 A1 1,2 200 25 218 1,38 S 0,010
Side 2 - 60°C 50 - 52 - 44 - 39 46 0,48-0,56-0,46-0,52 0,51 5 A1 1,2 200 25 203 1,48 Cr 0,010
23 A1 3,2 125 23 - 24 122 1,45 6 A1 1,2 200 25 171 1,75 Ni 2,02
24-40 A1 5,0 220 24 - 26 ± 215 ± 1,5 7 A1 1,2 200 25 209 1,44 Mo 0,41
41 A1 5,0 220 24 - 26 246 1,34 Clw 1/3 Side av. Lateral exp. [mm] av. 8 A1 1,2 200 25 166 1,81 V 0,027
Joint Detail - 20°C 110 110 92 104 1,20 1,24 1,17 1,20 9 A1 1,2 200 25 209 1,44 Ti 0,044
50° - 40°C 90 88 91 90 0,88 1,04 1,04 0,99 Al 0,007
- 51°C 65 - 66 - 68 - 74 - 65 68 0,72-0,75-0,77-1,02-0,81 0,81 Joint Detail B 0,0043
- 60°C 72 - 56 - 64 - 43 59 0,83-0,60-0,60-0,60 0,66 N 0,0042
Hardness
Test type : Vickers Load: 5 kg
BM HAZ WM HAZ BM
2/3 Side 321 303 303 - 358 271 - 317 313 - 367 265 274
Root 268 274 227 - 229 286 - 303 306 - 332 271 271 Sketch
1/3 Side 271 268 362 - 367 274 - 325 321 - 371 274 274
We hereby, certify that the statements in this record are correct.
Project Sub Marine
Manufacturer or Contractor Lincoln Smitweld bv We certify that the data in this report are actual test results.
3 Authorized by Frans Spierings Project HSLA steels with min. 690 Yield
Issued by Fred Neessen Manufacturer or Contractor Lincoln Smitweld bv
Date 29 March 2001 Witnessed by QA Department
Issued by Fred Neessen
Date 7 May 2001
Welding Procedure WPAR : P 230.09
Approval Record Rev. : 0
Ref. WPQ : 95.098
Procedure Specification Test Results
Sketch