APRIL 2010 34

pup pieces of similar or even interme-

diate strength alloys is popular for miti-
gating such challenges.
The designer, fabricator, installer, and
owner-operator all normally assume that
the material is as it is marked or stamped
and will perform as shown on the material
test report(s). However, many instances
have surfaced where soft spots (not de-
carburized surface material) or even en-
tire components (fittings) have been iden-
tified where the material was degraded and
not P(T)91 or other CSEF steels anymore.
This issue was originally discovered in the
course of checking (using hardness tests)
to see that welds received PWHT. Now it
is routine to check new base material be-
fore it is used or installed. Where this con-
dition is discovered, two options normally
exist: scrap the material or perform a nor-
malize and temper heat treatment on the
entire component.
Hardness is the means normally used
to initially evaluate material. Most base
material and components have code cri-
teria for the maximum hardness. New cri-
teria are being considered for P(T)91 and
92 to impose a 190 HBW minimum hard-
ness level. A similar thought process may
be extended to other CSEF steels. When
values are discovered that are slightly less
or much less than acceptable, it must be
determined that measurements are not
being taken in carburized surface mate-
rial. Sometimes only a metallurgical ex-
amination of the microstructure will pro-
vide enough accurate information to make
a proper determination (Refs. 1, 3).
Heat Treatment
By the very definition of a CSEF (see
boxed item), these steels obtain their me-
chanical properties by exhibiting a spe-
cific microstructure. Assuming that the
chemical composition is satisfactory, the
enhanced properties or microstructure
can only be achieved by proper heat treat-
ment of components and product forms,
including welds. These materials can be
significantly altered by improper heat
treatment to the point that they may per-
form significantly different than intended.
For example, if P(T)91 is heated close to
or above its lower critical transformation
temperature, it can actually be turned into
an alloy more closely resembling the sig-
nificantly less strong Grade 9. Most prob-
lems are related to either not achieving
adequate temperatures or exceeding per-
missible temperatures.
Those performing and monitoring pre-
heat and PWHT activities must be trained,
experienced, and follow formal proce-
dures. The CSEF steels demand that heat-
ing-related tasks become a primary func-
tion and not be considered a secondary or
unimportant activity. Use of AWS D10.10,
Recommended Practices for Local Heating
of Welds in Piping and Tubing, is becom-
ing more common as a guide to better per-
form local PWHTs.
The base metals typically respond to
tempering and at broader and lower tem-
perature ranges than the weld metal. This
is particularly true when P(T)91 is joined
with the matching E/ER90XX-B9 compo-
sitions. The matching -B9 filler metals
do not temper as well. This is due, in part,
to the fact that a narrow range exists be-
tween the minimum temperature required
for tempering and the maximum permit-
ted. This range may be as narrow as 50
to 75F (1024C). The upper limit is dic-
tated by the composition, especially the
nickel plus manganese (Ni+Mn) content,
which affects and depresses the lower crit-
ical transformation temperature as the
sum of their weight-percent content in-
crease. A maximum Ni+Mn content of
1.5 wt-% has been established in many do-
mestic codes of construction. If the actual
composition is unknown, the user is re-
stricted to a tempering temperature range
of 1350 to 1425F (730 to 775C). A
Ni+Mn of less than 1.0 wt-% permits the
Fig. 1 Temperature gradient in heavy-wall pipe PWHT without in-
creased heated band. Minimum ID temperature required to be 1350F
(730C) (Ref. 5).
Fig. 2 Temperature gradient in heavy-wall pipe PWHT with in-
creased heated band. Entire ID is greater than 1350F (730C) min-
imum (Ref. 5).
Table 1 Nominal Compositions of CSEF Steels
Grade Cr Mo V W Other
91 9 1 0.2 Nb, N
911 9 1 0.2 1.0 Nb, N
92 9 0.5 0.2 1.75 B
23 2.25 0.25 0.25 1.5 B, Nb, N
24 2.25 1 0.25 B, N, Ti
Newell Feature April 2010:Layout 1 3/9/10 11:19 AM Page 34