Proceedings of

ASME TURBO EXPO 2002

June 3-6, 2002, Amsterdam, GT-2002-30041
The Netherlands

GT-2002-30160

Laser Weld Repair Of Service Exposed IN738 and GTD 111 Buckets

November 25, 2001

Greg Frederick, EPRI-RRAC

David Gandy, EPRI-Materials and Repair
J.T. Stover, Consultant

Background
Repairs of gas turbine buckets (blades) are currently limited to the upper tip region of the airfoil
where operating stresses are commonly low. This limitation is predicated upon the use of low
strength welding filler materials and the use of high energy welding processes such as gas
tungsten arc welding (GTAW). When bucket damage is located within parts of the airfoil
subjected to higher stress levels, buckets are often scrapped or replaced, costing
utilities/independent power producers millions of dollars. Advanced repair techniques which
allow repairs at higher stress regions of the bucket airfoil will significantly reduce the need and
costs of scrapping buckets. Structural repairs to higher stress areas of the airfoil will require
the use of welding fillers with similar composition and strength to that of the bucket base alloy
and improvements in repair processing.
In late 1998, the EPRI Repair and Replacement Applications Center completed a comprehensive
review of the various welding technologies currently employed by industry to repair gas turbine
buckets (blades) [1]. The review cited low energy welding processes such as laser beam welding
(LBW) as having the most potential for advancing the state of the art for superalloy bucket
welding. Following the review, EPRI initiated a program to develop laser welding technologies
for superalloy bucket repair. The objective of the EPRI program is primarily directed at
extending the current limits of repair welding of IN738 and GTD111 superalloy gas turbine
buckets beyond the upper tip region to more highly stressed regions of the airfoil. To
accomplish this objective EPRI pursued partnerships with companies that are currently engaged
in the repair of superalloy components (i.e. commercial gas turbine or flight-related
components), thus enabling a smooth transition of the developed technology to the power
industry.
During 2001, EPRI has worked with two companies presently involved in repair of both
commercial airline and military flight engines to develop and optimize laser welding
technologies for superalloy bucket repairs. Additional research also targeted the development of
stronger filler alloys with improved high temperature tensile, yield, and creep strength
performance, approaching that of the IN738 and GTD111 base metals. Laser welding
development was separated by bucket alloy material with Flight Support, Inc. concentrating on

1 Copyright 2002 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 IN738 superalloy bucket materials and Honeywell International concentrating on GTD111
materials. Once laser welding methods were developed and optimized, mechanical test coupons
were developed by each organization. EPRI has also worked with Huffman Laser, a company
involved in developing automatic laser welding equipment, to develop laser welding methods
and test coupons. Evaluations of an alternative process, known as ReCastTM , was also pursued
during this time frame, for bucket repair. To substantiate the repair processes test coupons with
the laser welding and ReCastTM repair methods were exposed to various mechanical and
metallurgical testing.

Process Evaluations
For over 20 years, repairs to gas turbine buckets have been performed in much the same manner,
using conventional high energy welding processes such as gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW)
and plasma transferred arc welding (PTAW). Repairs are commonly limited to lower stress
regions of the airfoil including the airfoil tip, angel wings, and to some extent down the leading
and trailing edges of a bucket. Lower strength, solid solution strengthened filler metals are
employed to assure sufficient ductility is achieved and cracking or microfissuring during the
welding process and subsequent heat treatment is minimized.
Gas turbine buckets are fabricated from superalloy materials that develop their strength through
precipitation of in a matrix. It is this strengthening process which makes repairs to the
superalloys difficult with fillers of similar composition to that of the base material. As a result,
OEMs and repair vendors opt to use more weldable solid solution fillers and limit repairs to the
lower stress regions of the airfoil. The most commonly employed filler metal for repair of IN738
and GTD111 buckets is IN625.

Nickel-Based Superalloy Weldability

The precipitation strengthening elements that give superalloys their high temperature strength
are also fundamentally responsible for the difficulties experienced during weld repair. The two
types of cracking associated with these alloys, hot cracking and strain assisted cracking (SAC),
while different in scope and occasioned by different circumstances, are very much interrelated.
The more important influences affecting weldability of these alloys are summarized below:

Level of the precipitation strengthening elements. Aluminum and titanium are the primary
elements in precipitation strengthening. These alloys solidify in an austenitic, or gamma (),
structure commonly referred to as the matrix phase. Through solid state precipitation
mechanisms that occur during alloy heat treatment, aluminum and titanium produce a
secondary, gamma prime () phase (precipitate phase) throughout the matrix which
strengthens the overall alloy structure. When precipitation occurs, there is a net contraction
of the alloy matrix. Blade alloys containing a combined level of aluminum and titanium of 6
atomic percent and higher are most difficult to weld. Alloy IN 738 and GTD 111, the focus
of this program, contains approximately 6.8 and 7.9 percent combined aluminum and
titanium, respectively. Although to a much lesser extent, carbon produces some
strengthening in these alloys by the precipitation of carbide particles, particularly along grain
boundaries.

2 Copyright 2002 by ASME

2

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Precipitate morphology. The quantity, size, location, composition and structure of and
carbide precipitates within the alloy microstructure can have a significant effect on crack
sensitivity. Prior service exposure and the use pre-weld conditioning treatments have the
greatest influence on precipitate morphology prior to welding. These influences are
discussed separately below.

Weld filler material. The use of weaker, more ductile solid-solution strengthened fillers
results in less cracking because less overall strain is generated in the weld zone. In
addition, the relatively ductile fillers absorb strains preferentially so that less strain has to
be absorbed in the base alloy and especially in the crack-sensitive HAZ. The form (wire
or powder) of the filler may be a factor. Powder forms melt with less heat input than
wire forms and may tend to lower the overall heat input into the joint.

Welding procedure. Low-heat welding processes produce lower residual welding stresses
and minimize the size and degree of change in the critical heat affected zone (HAZ). They
result in less cracking during both welding and PWHT.

Prior service exposure. The length of service and the temperature levels encountered
combine to form an important influence. The blade temperature levels attained during
normal gas turbine operation are sufficient to cause solid state changes that increase crack
sensitivity. Longer service intervals produce greater changes. Carbides, almost negligible
in providing alloy strength when in their original structural forms, can degenerate
irreversibly during service to more brittle forms and dramatically increase crack
sensitivity. High temperature creep produces voids in the microstructure which can serve
as crack initiation sites during welding. In addition, prolonged exposure to corrosives in
the turbine hot gas stream can increase crack sensitivity by mechanisms such as surface
pitting and embrittlement along grain boundaries.

Pre and post-weld conditioning of the alloy. Preweld heat treatments can dissolve (more
often, partially dissolve) or age (enlarge) the strengthening phase. In either case, the
structure that results is generally weaker and more able to withstand the strains associated
with weld repair. Pre-weld hot isostatic pressing (HIP) can reduce the number of crack
initiation sites by closing voids produced during the blade casting process as well as those
resulting from high temperature creep during service. The use of localized, high
temperature preheat during the welding procedure has been reported to be beneficial in
some alloys.

Post-weld treatments are customized for each blade alloy. They must relieve the residual
welding stresses and age the precipitate phase to provide the best combination of
mechanical properties for the application. Proper execution of postweld treatments is
critical. Some of the more important variables are (1) precise control of contaminants in
the furnace inert gas or vacuum atmosphere, (2) maintaining low temperature gradients
during heating and cooling and (3) minimizing the time held at mid-range temperatures
(where the ductility of these alloys decreases to a minimum). HIP processing following

3 Copyright 2002 by ASME

3

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 welding is used occasionally by some repair organizations. It was also investigated
during the initial phase of this work.
Grain size. In alloys with conventionally cast (equiaxed) grain structures, such as IN 738,
finer grains are generally more crack resistant. The larger grain boundary areas associated
with finer grain structures are thought to capable of absorbing higher levels of strain.

Weld Strength
Weld metal cracking is the major factor limiting the use of matching, or near-matching, high
alloys as weld fillers. There are two primary reasons:

The tensile stresses encountered in the solidifying weld pool are compounded by the
shrinkage strain associated with the precipitation of when deposits are attempted with
precipitation strengthened fillers.

The low ductility inherent in high alloys permits very little plastic deformation before
cracking occurs.

The use of solid solution strengthened weld fillers made the arc-weld repair of high blade
alloys possible because both of these complications are addressed when they are employed:

Solid solution strengthened alloys contain only minimal levels of aluminum and titanium and
do not precipitate the phase when they solidify and cool. The shrinkage strains associated
with precipitation in the weld filler are thus eliminated.

Solid solution strengthened alloys are much more ductile than the high blade alloys. The
shrinkage strains produced in the blade alloy at the fusion line and HAZ during welding can
be accommodated in the relatively ductile filler deposit.

Unfortunately, the enhanced weldability inherent with solid solution strengthened fillers comes
at the expense of filler strength. Table 1 presents a comparison of tensile strength and elongation
(ductility) properties of several precipitation strengthened blade alloys versus some of the solid
solution strengthened filler alloys used for their repair. The differences are dramatic and it
should be noted that the differences are typically greater at the higher temperatures. Metal
temperatures in modern, air-cooled gas turbine blades commonly exceed 1600F where, for
example, blade alloy IN 738 and GTD 111 exhibits almost 3 times the ultimate tensile and twice
the yield strength of filler alloy IN 625. When compared to the other two solid solution weld
fillers listed, however, alloy IN 625 has higher yield strength; a factor that make this alloy the
most-used filler in current repair procedures.

4 Copyright 2002 by ASME

4

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 1. Comparison of Tensile Strength and Elongation of Selected Precipitation Strengthened
versus Solid Solution Strengthened Superalloys [2]
Precipitation Strengthened Alloys
(Blade Base Materials)
Alloy Ultimate Tensile 0.2% Yield Strength, Elongation in 2 in.
Strength, KSI KSI %
1200F 1400F 1600F 1200F 1400F 1600F 1200F 1400F 1600F
IN 738 153 140 112 132 115 80 7 6.5 11

U 520 170 105 75 115 105 75 7 15 20

U 500 128 124 96 102 102 87 18 9 9

IN 939 143 133 93 101 92 58 7 7 18

Rene 80 / 149 144 102 105 104 77 8 10 12

GTD 111*
Solid Solution Strengthened Alloys
(Blade Weld Filler Materials)
Alloy Ultimate Tensile 0.2% Yield Strength, Elongation in 2 in.
Strength, KSI KSI %
1200F 1400F 1600F 1200F 1400F 1600F 1200F 1400F 1600F
IN 625 121 80 40 61 60 40 34 45 125

IN 617 82 64 40 25 26 28 75 84 118

Haynes 98 84 56 38 38 39 55 48 64
230
*GTD 111 is a proprietary material of General Electric; very little property data on the alloy has been published.
Data shown is for the equiaxed form of Rene 80 which is virtually identical to GTD 111 in composition. Blades in
DS form are also manufactured using both alloys.

The high temperature creep properties of solid solution strengthened filler alloys are also
considerably lower than those of the high strength blade alloys. Figure 1 compares the creep
rupture temperature of filler alloy IN 625 with several of the precipitation strengthened blade
alloys. Since the vast majority of gas turbines placed in electric utility service twenty years ago
were strictly for peaking power, the long-term creep strength of blade repairs was of little
importance to many operators: most machines were used for only a few hundred hours per year.
The recent increase in base load, combined cycle gas turbine applications has reversed this view
and is one of the important forces driving the need for advanced weld repair processes and
stronger, creep-resistant weld fillers.

5 Copyright 2002 by ASME

5

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 1. Comparative Creep Strength of Common Blade Alloys versus a Common Solid Solution
Weld Filler Alloy (IN 625).

The recent increase in base load, combined cycle gas turbine applications is one of the important
forces driving the need for advanced weld repair processes and stronger, more creep-resistant
weld fillers.

Allowable Locations and Limits of Current Blade Repairs [3]

The service life of weld repairs made on gas turbine blading is dictated by two primary factors:
(1) the stress field in the area where the repair weld is located and (2) the mechanical properties
(tensile, fatigue and creep strength, ductility, etc.) of the weldment. The current use of low
strength weld fillers dictates that weld repairs be made only in areas where stresses are very low.
Figures 2 and 3 show the generalized steady-state stress and temperature profiles over the lengths
of free-standing and shrouded blade designs respectively. For free standing blades, the average
stress varies radially from a maximum at the platform to zero at the tip. Due to shroud-to-shroud
contact forces, the stress level in shrouded blades remains relatively high out to the underside of
the shroud. Therefore, the level of weld repair allowed is different for these two types of blades.

For free standing blades, current practice typically limits weld repair as follows:

In the airfoil, repairs can only be made in locations at or just below the blade tip. Some
notable examples: Airfoil repairs on the row 1 blades (buckets) for GE Frame 7B units are
restricted to no more than 1/2 inch below the tip. The corresponding limit for Westinghouse
W501 row 1 blades is 3/4 inch.

6 Copyright 2002 by ASME

6

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Repair of the seals below the airfoil that protrude axially from the blade platform area and
serve to isolate the blade-to-disk attachment area from the high temperatures of the hot gas
path (commonly referred to as blade wing seals or angel wings).

Due to the stress profile in shrouded blades, the limits are more stringent. Welding is typically
not permitted in any location on the airfoil. The only locations, which may be repaired by
welding, are typically as follows:

Weld repair is normally allowed on the radial seals above the shroud platform.

The hardfacing deposit at shroud contact surfaces may be repaired. The surfaces are
typically ground as required to square the surfaces and remove areas where the original
deposit remains. The hardsurfacing may then be replaced by weld build-up and the
dimensions restored by finish machining/precision grinding.

Damage such as nicks, dents and cracking outside of the areas outlined above may be blended in
some cases. Gas turbine manufactures normally supply blending limits for the blades in each
turbine stage. However, the removal of material by blending, if performed on a significant
percentage of blades in one stage, will lead to stage inefficiency and loss of power. The rules for
blending, similar to weld repair limits, are typically quite restrictive. Damage outside of the
weld repair and blending limits requires blade replacement.
Stress or Temperature

Allowable stress
Metal
temperature

Blade peak
stress

0 20 40 60 80 100
Base Tip
Percent of blade height

Figure 2. Stress and Temperature Distribution in a Free Standing Blade

7 Copyright 2002 by ASME

7

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 3. Stress and Temperature Distribution in a Shrouded Blade

Laser Welding Process Description

The laser welding process was selected to provide a low heat input process, which promotes
shallow penetration, low distortion and minimal residual stresses, compared to conventional arc
welding processes. Powder filler materials are typically used with the laser process due to the
small weld profile (bead width) and product availability in other forms (i.e. small diameter solid
wire). The equipment utilized for the laser welding applications includes a CO2 or Nd:Yag laser
system, laser beam delivery (hard optics or fiber optic cable), laser welding head to redirect and
focus laser beam, and a powder feed system. Figure 4, illustrates a Huffman Corporation,
automated CO2 laser vision system with powder feed capabilities. The powder feed system
delivers powder, with the assistance of a carrier gas, directly through the weld head and into the
path of the laser beam. This configuration allows the powder to be pre-melted before it is
introduced into the molten puddle created on the surface of the substrate by the laser beam. The
powder alloy utilized in the EPRI evaluations were precipitation-strengthened, Rene80 and
IN738 which matches the substrate alloy composition. Praxair Surface Technologies in
accordance with their laser cut specifications (i.e. mesh size between 100 and 270) supplied the
all powders for the weld trials. The powder mesh size is selected to assure complete melting and
consistent powder flow rates through the feed tubes and weld head.

8 Copyright 2002 by ASME

8

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 4. Automated Laser System (Courtesy of Huffman Corporation)

Welding Evaluation [5]

Various welding techniques and parameters were evaluated to provide sound weld deposits prior
to the fabrication of mechanical test specimens. For material consistency and control of test
results the weld coupons were pre-weld conditioned (HIP and solution annealed). The initial
evaluation included a test matrix of typical welding parameters such as travel speed, powder feed
rates, shielding and laser power level. Multi-layer welds were completed with each iteration of
weld parameters evaluated. The weld deposits were screened for lack of fusion (LOF), porosity
and hot cracking (weld metal and underbead cracking) via metallographical evaluation. Weld
parameters were adjusted with each weld trial to minimize or eliminate the weld defects and
reevaluated. This process is time consuming but necessary to minimize the number of weld
coupons that are subjected to the entire postweld heat treatment and coupon fabrication.
Examples of typical weld defects experienced with laser welding of superalloys are illustrated in
Figures 5 and 6.

Figure 5. Weld Metal Porosity and Hot Cracks.

9 Copyright 2002 by ASME

9

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 6. Underbead Cracking.

The main variable, after the typical welding parameters were established, was welding pattern
and bead placement to accommodate various joint configurations. Three joint configurations
were designed and evaluated to produce a miniature test specimen in accordance with ASTM
E139. The joint configurations allowed for the weld metal to substrate interface to be
appropriately centered within the gage length. The joint configurations included a modified V-
groove, overlay buildup and a 45-degree cavity. The joint configuration utilized for coupon
fabrication was based on the laser vendors preference and capabilities.

The weld coupons utilized a section of substrate with a minimum thickness, width and length
(1.0-inch) to accommodate one half the mechanical test specimen. The other one half of the test
coupon is made up entirely of weld metal. The coupons were sectioned from IN738 and GTD
111 blades, with various service time and operating conditions, and preconditioned (solution
annealed) prior to welding. The welds consisted of multiple layers of weld metal applied in pre-
established welding patterns. Each layer was approximately .015-.020-inch thick, with a overall
build up targeted at approximately 1.0-inch for the overlay configuration (Figure 7), 0.25-inch
for the 45-degree specimens and v-groove configuration (figure 8 and 9, respectively). The
coupons were held stationery in the flat position while the laser weld head was manipulated in
the x-y plane to reproduce the weld pattern. After each layer was completed the weld head was
retracted in the z-direction (up) to maintain the appropriate standoff distance. To eliminate bead
stacking and the potential for LOF, each time the weld head was retracted for successive layers,
the weld pattern was offset a set distance. Weld parameters were also adjusted as the height of
the overlay increased (laser power, dwell and travel speed) to maintain a consistent buildup, edge
quality and interpass temperature.
After the completion of the weld buildups, a seal weld was applied to all surfaces of the buildup
to cover micro cracks that may be open to the surface. Two methods were considered for seal
welding, the first was an additional layer with a solid solution welding material, and the second
was to utilize precipitation strengthened material applied with the ReCast process described
below. The seal layer consisted of continuous layer applied over the surface of the weld. The
seal weld is to assure all defects open to the surface are sealed prior to post weld heat treatment

10 Copyright 2002 by ASME

10

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 (PWHT) of the coupon, which includes a Hot Isostatic Pressing (HIP). Test coupons were next
exposed to the typical PWHT, to optimize the material properties.
The HIP process is to assure microcracks and small porosity in the weld metal are healed or
reduced to a level that will not sufficiently reduce the mechanical properties of the test coupons.
The coupons are sectioned into individual test specimens using wire EDM process for stress
rupture tests and high temperature tensile tests. The test specimens are removed from the
overlay so that the weld fusion line is approximately at the center of the gage length. Test
specimens are machined to ASTM E139 specifications for a miniature tensile coupon.

Figure 7. Overlay Weld Configuration (Courtesy of Flight Support, Inc.)

Figure 8. 45-degree Weld Configuration (Courtesy of Honeywell).

11 Copyright 2002 by ASME

11

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Figure 9. V-groove Configurations (Courtesy of Huffman Corporation).

ReCastTM Process Description

As discussed in the previous section, EPRI and Flight Support Inc. have teamed to develop laser
welding technologies for IN738 materials. While working together, another repair technology
was identified which may prove important for the repair or restoration of gas turbine buckets.
The patented technology is referred to as ReCastTM and is currently being used by Flight Support
Inc. to repair IN713C blades for flight engines. [6,7]
The ReCastTM process involves several steps including: 1) an initial hot isostatic process (HIP)
step to condition the bucket (blade) for restoration, 2) application of a similar filler metal (in
powder form) using a HVOF (high velocity oxy-fuel) or a D-Gun thermal spray to restore bucket
thickness, 3) sintering of the bucket a high temperature to densify the spray build-up, and 4) a
second HIP at the solution anneal temperature. Following these four steps the bucket must be re-
ground to final dimensions and sent through final aging heat treatment.
ReCastTM has been used to restore blade wall thickness, to repair foreign object damage (FOD),
to repair tip rubs, and to repair leading/trailing edge damage for smaller flight engine blades.
The concept was developed and patented in 1999 and has yet to reach its potential in terms of
application. Flight Support Inc. reports 100% of tensile properties can be restored and large
buildups of greater than 0.25-inch have been demonstrated to date.[8] Based upon test data
supplied to EPRI for evaluation of IN713C buildups, high quality, consistent bonds can be
achieved with the process.
EPRI approached Flight Support Inc. with the concept that EPRI would provide coupons, Flight
Support Inc. would perform the ReCastTM process buildup on multiple coupons, and EPRI would
perform mechanical and metallurgical testing. The testing would be performed sequentially
beginning first with tensile tests and metallography. If the results were acceptable, then stress
rupture testing would be initiated. If these results were acceptable, thermal mechanical fatigue
and low cycle fatigue testing would be performed.

ReCastTM Coupon Development

In a similar fashion to the test coupons developed for laser welding, additional coupons were
machined and forwarded to Flight Support Inc. for repair using the ReCastTM process. Coupon

12 Copyright 2002 by ASME

12

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 blanks were developed from service-removed IN738 buckets exposed to a HIP heat treatment to
regenerate properties. Blanks were removed from the shank region of several IN738 buckets and
45-degree angles were machined into the coupons.

The ReCastTM process was applied using a combination of HVOF, sintering at high temperature,
and HIP. To apply the filler metal, an identical filler (IN738 laser-cut powder) to that used for
the laser welding, was acquired and applied using the HVOF process (JP5000 torch). Initial
HVOF trials on several setup coupons resulted in too much porosity in the applied filler. A
second torch (Jet Kote) was purchased which produced a more dense, consistent deposit. An
HVOF cut powder was also incorporated to reduce porosity and oxide inclusions. Following
buildup, actual coupons were exposed to a high temperature (>19000F) sintering step to further
densify the deposit and then the entire coupon was exposed to a final HIP treatment at 22000F for
4 hours @ 15ksi. Test coupons were next exposed to the typical IN738 heat treatment, to
optimize the material properties.

Mechanical Test Results

Limited mechanical test data was available at the printing of this document. Table 2 compares
room temperature test data for two weldments versus reference test data for two GTD 111EA
base metal specimens (removed from the root area of a turbine bucket). As can be seen, similar
strength and ductility values were obtained for the two weldments to that of the reference base
metal.
Table 2. Room Temperature Tensile Test Results Obtained For Two GTD 111 Laser Welded
Coupons.

Specimen Tensile 0.2% offset % % Reduction Rupture

Strength Yield Elongation in Area Location
(ksi) Strength
(ksi)
Weldment 1 155.2 127.3 7.1 10.3 Base Metal
Weldment 2 136.2 130.7 5.3 9.7 Base Metal

GTD 111 EA 143.6 116.7 7.9 10.6 NA

(Reference 9 137.3 115.7 7.9 10.9 NA

Stress rupture tests were also initiated for the two laser welded coupons. Four specimens were
tested at 1600F and 45ksi and are reported in Table 3. Based upon the results obtained thus far,
the selected test conditions appear overly aggressive. It is anticipated that for the second round
of testing, a lower test stress will be employed to assure rupture lives on the order of 100-200
hours.

13 Copyright 2002 by ASME

13

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Table 3. Stress Rupture Test Results For 4 Specimens Removed From The Same Laser Welded
Coupons Shown Shown In Table 2. Test Conditions: 1600F, 45ksi.

Specimen Rupture Life % Elongation % Reduction Rupture

in Area Location
SR-A1 49.7 1.4 2.9 Weld Metal
SR-A2 36.5 1.8 2.2 Weld Metal
SR-B1 44.7 2.1 1.9 Weld Metal
SR-B2 37.7 1.2 5.7 Weld Metal

Conclusions

Laser welding parameters have been established for performing repairs on IN738 and
GTD111 bucket materials using IN738 and Rene 80 filler metals. Parameters have been
optimized to eliminate weld porosity and hot cracking, to minimize underbead cracking, and
to eliminate lack-of-fusion.
EPRI is currently working with two repair organizations (Flight Support Inc. and Honeywell
International) as well as one laser equipment manufacturer (Huffman Laser) to develop laser
welding methods for repairing gas turbine blades.
Repair coupons have been prepared on IN738 and GTD111 blade substrate materials.
Mechanical testing (tensile and stress rupture) are in-progress.
A second repair technology known as RecastTM (developed by Flight Support) is also being
evaluated under this program. RecastTM utilizes hot isostatic processing (HIP) to recondition
the blade, application of a similar filler metal using high velocity oxy-fuel or a D-Gun
thermal spray to restore blade thickness, sintering of the bucket at high temperature to
densify the spray build-up, and a second HIP at the solution anneal temperature.
A successful method for repairing gas turbine blades has been identified by EPRI and a
patent has been applied for. The method involves: 1) use of the HIP process to condition the
blade, 2) welding the blade with a precipitation strengthened filler metal of similar
composition to the blade, 3) sealing the weld buildup with a lower strength solid solution
strengthened filler such as IN625, 4) performing a second HIP to seal an micro-voids or
micro-fissuring beneath the surface, and then 5) performing a final aging heat treatment
consistent with the blade base alloy. Recontouring of the bucket via grinding is also
required.

14 Copyright 2002 by ASME

14

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 References

1. Gandy, D.W., J.T. Stover, Status of Weld Repair Technology for Nickel-Based
Superalloy Gas Turbine Blading, EPRI TR-108272, (Electric Power Research Institute,
Palo Alto, CA, April 1998).
2. Sims, C.T., N.S. Stoloff and W.C. Hagel, eds., Superalloys II (John Wiley & Sons, New
York, NY, 1987).
3. Gandy, D.W., G.J. Frederick, A.G. Peterson, J.T. Stover, Assessment of the Laser
Welding Process for Superalloy Gas Turbine Blade Welding, EPRI TR-113748,
(Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, October 1999).
4. US Patent Application No. 09/487,931 Apparatus and Method of Repairing Turbine
Blades, D. Gandy, G. Frederick, A. Peterson, R. Viswanathan Inventor, EPRI --
Assignee, November 27, 2001.
5. Gandy, D.W., J.T. Stover and G.J. Frederick, Laser Weld Repair Of IN738 and GTD111
Buckets, EPRI TR-1003982 (Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA,
December 2001).
6. US Patent No. 5,956,845 Method of Repairing a Turbine Engine Airfoil Part, J. Arnold--
Inventor, ReCast Airfoil Group--Assignee, December 18, 1997.
7. US Patent No. 6,049,978 Methods For Repairing and Reclassifying Gas Turbine Engine
Airfoil Parts, J. ArnoldInventor, ReCast Airfoil Group--Assignee, September 3, 1998.
8. Anthony, Kenneth C., Selected Mechanical Properties of Recast IN 713C Composites,
Flight SupportInternal Document, May 18, 1998.
9. EPRI Gas Turbine Blade Superalloy Material Property Handbook, November 2001.

15 Copyright 2002 by ASME

15

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 01/29/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use