You are on page 1of 19

The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 1

METALLURGICAL AND WELDABILITY ASPECTS


OF THE NEW-GENERATION MARTENSITIC
STAINLESS STEELS: A CASE STUDY

Marcello Mandina IIS Service Genoa


Marco Magnasco GE Oil & Gas Nuovo Pignone Massa
Luca Moracchioli GE Oil & Gas Nuovo Pignone Massa
Luca Giorgini GE Oil & Gas Nuovo Pignone Massa

Abstract
In addition to brief accounts on the metallurgy and
weldability of 13%Cr-4%Ni steel, the results of
experimental welding tests aimed at supporting repair,
by means of a coated electrode process and the use of
homologous welding material, of possible forging
defects and/or defects from mechanical machining, on
stator parts and cases of centrifugal compressors, as
allowed by the reference standard ASTM A182, are
provided in this document. In particular, the effects of
the chemical composition of the base material, of the
welding material, as well as the post-welding heat
treatment (PWHT) on the mechanical properties of the
welded samples have been investigated from the
perspective of searching for the best conditions to
minimize the hardness levels in fused zones and heat
affected zones.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 2

1. INTRODUCTION
For several years, the petrochemical industry has been using 13%Cr-4%Ni -type martensitic
stainless-steel materials for the manufacture of valves, pump casings, cases, and stator parts of
centrifugal compressors, both as castings (for example, ASTM A487 Grade CA6NM) and as
forgings (for example ASTM A182 Grade F6NM). For steels of this type/grade, the combination, in
terms of chemical composition, of a low carbon content, together with the addition of nickel at a
percentage between 3.5 and 4.5%, inclusive, allows fine and acicular martensite structures to be
produced with fine dispersion of stable austenite that, after tempering heat treatment, can
guarantee mechanical properties superior to those typical of martensitic steels at just 13%Cr,
which they have replaced in all those applications intended to process fluids containing CO 2 and
H2S. It is a well-known fact that 13%Cr-4%Ni steel is potentially susceptible to Sulfide Stress
Corrosion Cracking (SSCC) in environments containing H2S, specifically in the presence of welds
and, therefore, of structures with greater hardness. In fact, the sensitivity of F6NM steel to SSCC
can be correlated with high levels of hardness that standard NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009)
limits to a maximum of 23 HRC for applications intended for the production of oil and gas in
environments containing H2S [1].

In addition to brief accounts on the metallurgy and weldability of 13%Cr-4%Ni steel, the results of
experimental welding tests aimed at supporting repair, by means of a coated electrode process
(SMAW/111) and the use of homologous welding material, of possible forging defects and/or
defects from mechanical machining, on stator parts and cases of centrifugal compressors, as
allowed by the reference standard ASTM A182, are provided in this document. In particular, the
effects of the chemical composition of the base material, of the welding material, as well as the
post-welding heat treatment (PWHT) on the mechanical properties of the samples welded have
been investigated from the perspective of searching for the best conditions to minimize the
hardness levels in fused zones and heat affected zones.

2. BRIEF ACCOUNTS ON THE METALLURGY AND WELDABILITY OF 13%Cr-4%Ni STEEL

13%Cr-4%Ni steel is associated with the family of the 13%Cr martensitic stainless steels and, with
the sub-group of steels defined as Soft Martensitics. In the steels of this sub-group, the austenite-
martensite transformation is achieved by the addition of nickel with a minimum percentage of 3% to
balance the reduction of carbon content to values less than 0.05% with respect to the martensitic
steels at just 13%Cr. The resulting low-carbon acicular martensite (called soft lath-type
martensite), together with a fine dispersion of stable austenite, guarantees a combination of
excellent tenacity, high tensile characteristics, and good ductility. Furthermore, these steels can
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 3

offer a weldability level, as well as mechanical properties in welding, decidedly better than the
martensitic steels at just 13%Cr.

In the Soft Martensitics sub-group, the mechanical properties of the various grades of steel
depend on the chemical composition and on quality heat treatment. With specific reference to the
13%Cr-4%Ni grade, the chemical composition and strength and hardness requirements for F6NM
forgings in accordance with the standard ASTM A182 are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively;
although not specified by the standard, the material F6NM typically displays KV impact strength
values greater than 80 J even at test temperatures below -50C.

Table 1 - Chemical composition requirements in accordance with ASTM A182


Grade UNS C, % Mn, % P, % S, % Si, % Ni, % Cr, % Mo, %
F6NM S41500 0.05 0.50 0.030 0.030 0.60 3.5 11.5 0.50
max - max max max - - -
1.00 5.5 14.0 1.00

Table 2 - Strength and hardness requirements in accordance with ASTM A182


Ultimate strength Yield Point Ultimate Ultimate necking Brinell
Grade [MPa] elongation hardness
[MPa] [%] [%] [HB]
F6NM 790 min. 620 min. 15 min. 45 min. 295 max

The presence of nickel up to a maximum near 6% reduces Ac1 temperature (the start of the
transformation of the austenitic phase into the ferritic phase ) of the 13%Cr-4%Ni material, as
shown in the phase diagram in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 The influence of nickel on the position of the Ac1 curve in the Fe-Cr phase diagram [8].
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 4

It follows that its martensitic structure, obtainable from a quenching treatment at a temperature
between 950 and 1050C and subsequent cooling in air or oil, may undergo partial re-austenitizing
subsequent to tempering heat treatments conducted at temperatures even considerably lower (for
example, 620C) than those at which steels with just 13%Cr are tempered (for example. 720C)
and the resulting subsequent hardening to form untempered martensite (called fresh martensite)
during final cooling to ambient temperature [4]. The percentage of austenite transformed during the
tempering process can be correlated not only with the chemical composition of the material (more
specifically with its nickel content), but also with the maximum temperature attained, as the graph
in Fig. 2 [3] shows, for example.
Percent volume of austenite

Temperature (C]

Fig. 2 Percent volume of austenite retransformed as a function of maximum tempering


temperature [3].

The nickel content of the 13%Cr-4%Ni steel is greater and the Ms (where the austenite-martensite
transformation starts) and Mf (where the austenite-martensite transformation finishes), which may
lie in the interval 245-325C (Ms) and 30-100C (Mf), respectively, will be lower. For nickel contents
very close to the limit of 6%, the lowering of the Mf temperature is such that some non-transformed
austenite (called unstable austenite), able to be transformed into stable martensite (hard and
fragile) during the subsequent quenching treatment, may remain after quenching. To this, we can
add the portion of austenite deriving from the partial re-austenitizing of the quenched martensite
during tempering that will grow appreciably as the nickel content grows and which is capable of
being transformed into fresh martensite during final cooling at room temperature. Therefore, the
13%Cr-4%Ni material subject to single quality-type treatments (quenching at 950-1050C +
tempering at 590-650C) is susceptible to considerable hardening, with hardness not greater than
the limit of 295 HB prescribed by standard ASTM A182 for the forgings.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 5

In the presence of particular restrictions on the maximum hardness as specified by the standard
NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009) for applications intended for the production of oil and gas in
environments containing H2S, the limit of 23 HRC can be obtained only with carbon percentages
less than 0.03%, which implies an ultimate strength and yield point below the values specified by
the product standards (for example, ASTM A182 for the forgings and ASTM A487 for the 13%Cr-
4%Ni castings). The improvement of its resistance to SSCC, with resulting full observance of the
hardness limit of 23 HRC, may be achieved by subjecting the 13%Cr-4%Ni material to double
tempering after quenching (at 950-1050C). Initial tempering is conducted at temperatures in the
region of 670C (greater than Ac1) that allows softening of the untempered martensite, but, at the
same time, results in a partial re-austenitizing of it into austenite; during the subsequent cooling
process, the unstable austenite is transformed into fresh martensite, therefore resulting in a
mixed structure of tempered martensite and untempered martensite. The second heat treatment is
conducted instead at lower temperatures (typically in the interval 590-620C), in any case high
enough to induce suitable tempering of the fresh martensite, but such as to produce a definite
percentage (typically equal to 15-20%) of retransformed austenite that remains more or less stable
(i.e. it cannot yet be converted into fresh martensite, with the exception of a minimum part) down
to ambient temperature (see Fig. 3) [1.4].

Fig. 3 Examples of metallographic examination on ASTM A182 F6NM base material: structure of
tempered martensite.

Soft Martensitic steels are generally welded with homologous, low carbon content welding
material (in the region of 0.04%, even though the reference standards limit their content to a
maximum of 0.06%), employing the most common welding processes (for example, GTAW/141,
SMAW/111, GMAW/135, and FCAW/136). Although the weldability of these materials is better than
that of the martensitic steels of just 13%Cr, thanks to the formation of low-carbon martensite in the
fused zone (FZ) and in the heat affected zone (HAZ), which reduces the susceptibility to hydrogen
cracking, and with low-ferrite content martensite, that reduces the tendency for coarsening, it is
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 6

however necessary/expedient to adopt the normal precautions to reduce the risk of hydrogen
cracking in the HAZ and/or FZ: Therefore, low hydrogen-content electrodes (< 5ml/100g of
deposited weld) must be employed and the pre-heating and interpass temperatures must be kept
at 100-200C (especially in the presence of thicknesses greater than 20 mm and of highly stiffened
structures) so as to remain within the Ms Mf martensite transformation range (typically 100-
250C); interpass temperatures greater than Ms lead, in general, to the formation of columnar
dendritic microstructures with coarsened grains, having inferior mechanical characteristics after
transformation [2].

In the majority of practical applications, such as the repair of castings and/or forgings with welding,
the manufacture of forged bodies, etc., the post-welding heat treatment (PWHT) is conducted at
temperatures between 580 and 620C, inclusive, and with holding times up to 20 hours, although
satisfactory ductility and/or toughness requirements can also be obtained with much shorter
treatment times. Before PWHT, it is important that the weld be cooled below 100C to allow its
complete transformation in martensite.

In the presence of restrictions on the maximum hardness levels, as specified by the standard
NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009), the limit of 23 HRC can be obtained, as with the base
material, with double PWHT in combination with low carbon percentages (<0.035%). It is common
practice that the double PWHT be conducted at 675C x 10 hours and at
605C x 10 hours, with intermediate cooling in air to ambient temperature. In the bibliography,
however, there are references to double PWHT conducted with different parameterization (always
observing the temperature limits established by NACE MR0175), such as, for example, at
temperatures of 650C and 620C, with intermediate cooling to room temperature or to 0C, to
allow, as far as possible, the transformation in martensite.

The conversion between the hardness obtained with the Vickers method (for example, HV10),
more frequently adopted in the process of qualification procedures and the corresponding values in
accordance with the Rockwell C scale (HRC), with respect to which the maximum limit allowable
by standard NACE MR0175 (max 23 HRC) is expressed, is a very important aspect from a
practical perspective. Concerning this, it has been clearly demonstrated that the conversion
according to standards ASTM E140:97 and EN ISO 18265:2003 (23HRC = 254HV), is not
applicable on 13%Cr-4%Ni steels for hardness tests and in base material or in welds. For
hardness up to approximately 30 HRC, the most appropriate correlation between the Vickers scale
and the Rockwell C for this grade of martensitic steels is that proposed by Hays-Patrick, according
to which the hardness limit of 23HRC equals 275HV, consequentially with better prospects for
satisfying the standards NACE MR0175 [1.2].
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 7

3. EXPERIMENTAL WELDING TESTS


The welding tests were conducted on two test coupons of steel ASTM A182 F6NM identified as
BM1 and BM2 in Table 3, the chemical analyses of which differ from each other essentially due to
the carbon content and quality heat treatment. Material BM1 has a carbon content of 0.038% and
was supplied with single-type quality heat treatment (air hardening at 1020C + tempering at
580C). BM2 presents a carbon content of 0.024% (less than the value of 0.03%, typically
necessary to respect the limit of 23 HRC of standard NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 and supplied
with double-type quality treatment (air hardening at 1020C + 1 tempering at 675C + 2
tempering at 620C).

Table 3 Chemical analysis of welded base materials [%] %Fe remaining


Identi C Si Mn P S Cr Mo Ni Cu Sn Al Ti V Nb N
fier
code
BM1 0.038 0.36 0.66 0.024 0.004 13.45 0.52 3.89 0.2 0.007 0.01 0.002 0.04 0.009 0.009
BM2 0.024 0.33 0.59 0.019 0.005 13.60 0.49 3.86 0.11 0.006 0.007 0.002 0.017 0.008 0.013

The results of the mechanical (tensile and hardness) tests conducted on the two base materials
BM1 and BM2, as supplied, are summarized in Table 4. The low carbon content (<0.03%) of the
base material BM2, that allows the hardness limit of 23 HRC to be met, entails however a
reduction of the ultimate and yield point below the values specified by the reference standard
ASTM A182, as seen in Table 4 (boldface values).

Table 4 Tensile and hardness test results (in accordance with ASTM A182 - As supplied
Grade Ultimate Yield Point Ultimate Ultimate Brinell Rockwell
strength [MPa] elongation necking hardness Hardness
F6NM
[%] [HB] [HRC]
[MPa] [%]
(1)
Identifier code 790 min. 620 min. 15 min. 45 min. 295 max 23 max
BM1 807 670 19 71.4 255 -
BM2 701 590 25 75.4 - 20
(1)
According to NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009).

The deposited welds subject to experimentation were made with the coated electrode process
(SMAW/111), employing 3 different welding materials (homologous with the base material), the
chemical analysis of which on deposit of non-diluted welding material are reported as FM1, FM2,
and FM3 in Table 5. The FM1 and FM2 coated electrodes have low carbon content (< 0.03%),
whereas the FM3 coated electrodes have a carbon content near the maximum allowable limit of
the reference standard AWS A5.4 (0.06%).
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 8

Table 5 Chemical analysis of material used %] %Fe remaining On non-diluted deposited weld
Identi C Si Mn P S Cr Mo Ni Cu Sn Al Ti V Nb N
fier
code
FM1 0.023 0.42 0.67 0.09 0.016 11.26 0.52 4.07 0.04 0.005 0.006 0.008 0.022 0.011 0.06
FM2 0.023 0.29 0.46 0.006 0.005 12.49 0.48 4.4 0.01 0.004 0.008 0.009 0.019 0.010 0.03
FM3 0.058 0.51 0.84 0.01 0.005 11.52 0.54 4.38 0.06 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.018 0.007 0.017

The test-coupon thickness (equal to 40mm) and the deposited weld thickness (equal to 15mm)
were chosen in accordance with the criteria of Code ASME IX, QW-451.1, so as to support the
repair welds of typical depth (up to 30mm) on base material up to 200mm thick (also see Fig. 4).

(b)

(a)

Fig. 4 Test coupons: dimensions and preparation of the caulking (a), diagram of the deposited
welds and corresponding sequence of the beads (b).

The deposited welds were carried out in accordance with the procedure summarized below in
Table 5, using, as mentioned previously, the base materials BM1 and BM2 and the welding
materials FM1, FM2, and FM3, experimenting with two post welding heat treatment conditions (HT
and HT1), simulated in the laboratory (in an oven).

The heat treatment HT was selected observing the holding temperature interval (580 - 621C)
prescribed by the standard NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009) for PWHT with single tempering
heat cycle on low-carbon martensitic stainless steels such as those under consideration. Similarly,
heat treatment HT1 was selected observing the temperature holding interval (671 - 691C for the
first tempering, cooling cycle down to ambient temperature and 580 - 621C for the second cycle
prescribed by the standard NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009) for PWHT with double- tempering
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 9

heat cycle. The duration of the respective holding times was chosen based on preliminary tests
and data available in the bibliography, with the goal of satisfying the hardness limit of 23 HRC in
welding (in FZ and HAZ).

Table 6 - Welding procedure


Welding process SMAW (111)

Preparation of ends See Fig. 4

ASTM A182 F6NM (for BM1 and BM2)


Base material
Thickness 40 mm

AWS A5.4: E410NiMo-16 (for FM1 and FM2)

Welding material AWS A5.4: E410NiMo-15 (for FM3)

electrode diameter = 4.0 mm

Welding position PA / 1G (Plane)

min. 200C

Pre-heating / max 350C

Post-heating
Post-heating: none

Final cooling (below insulation) until ambient T

Welding technique narrow and tight beads

Specific heat added 10.5 -11.5 kJ/cm

SINGLE heat treatment 615 5C 20 hours (heating rate 100C/h)


after welding
(HT) Cooling down to ambient T in calm air (from 615C)

1st Treatment:
675 5C 10 hours (heating rate 100C/h)
DOUBLE heat treatment
after welding in accordance Cooling down to ambient T in calm air (from 675C)
with NACE
MR0175-ISO 15156-3 2nd Treatment:
(HT1) 615 5C 20 hours (heating rate 100C/h)

Cooling down to ambient T in calm air (from 615C)

3.1 Mechanical tests conducted and results obtained


The mechanical tests summarized in Table 7 were conducted on the two test coupons made from
the base materials already identified as BM1 and BM2. For further details on the test sampling
points, see the diagrams in Fig. 5.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 10

Table 7 Mechanical test on the test coupons (BM1 and/or BM2)


Test Welding material Sampling Test-piece Treatment condition Reference standards
position dimensions simulated (*)
[mm]
Longitudinal FM1 + FM3 FZ 6.25 HT1 ASTM A370
tension
@+20C
KV @ -46C FM1 + FM3 FZ 10 10 55 HT1 ASTM A370
Macro FM1 + FM2 + FM3 Transversal - HT + HT1 ASTM E340
HRC FM1 + FM2 + FM3 FZ + HAZ - HT + HT1 ASTM E18
Hardness
UNI EN ISO 15156-2
NACE MR 0175
HV10 FM1 + FM2 + FM3 FZ + HAZ - HT + HT1 ASTM E92
Hardness
UNI EN ISO 15156-2
NACE MR 0175
(*) HT = 615 5C 20 hours
HT1 = 675 5C 10 hours + 615 5C 20 hours

Longitudinal
tension and
impact strength
KV

Macro Sections with HRC and HV10


Macro Sections
and hardness Hardness in accordance with NACE
MR0175-ISO 15156-3

=
= =

Impact strength KV @ -46C in FZ Longitudinal tension in FZ and BM (in


accordance with ASTM A370 (diameter
6.25 mm)
Fig. 5 Test coupons: positioning of the mechanical test: tensions at ambient T, impact strength
KV@-46C, macro sections with HRC and HV10 Hardness.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 11

Furthermore, regarding the base materials BM1 and BM2, the mechanical tests summarized in
Table 8 were conducted.
Test Base material Test-piece Treatment condition Reference standards
dimensions simulated (*)
[mm]

Tension @+20C BM1 + BM2 12.5 As-supplied + HT1 ASTM A370


KV @ -46C BM2 10 10 55 As-supplied + HT1 ASTM A370
HRC Hardness BM1 + BM2 - As-supplied + HT1 ASTM E18
HV10 Hardness BM1 + BM2 - As-supplied + HT1 ASTM E92
(*) HT = 615 5C 20 hours
HT1 = 675 5C 10 hours + 615 5C 20 hours

The results obtained from the mechanical tests conducted were charted as a function of the heat
treatment conditions simulated, in order to demonstrate the effect of the single- and double-heat
treatment in welding, with particular reference to the hardness levels obtained in the FZ and HAZ
for the various base-material and welding-material combinations.

Figures 6 and 7 show the results of the tensile strength characterization for base materials and
welding materials as supplied and after tempering heat treatment HT1, noting an expected
improvement in the zones mentioned whenever the relative percentage of carbon is greater. With
reference, in fact, to the relevant minimum requirements imposed by ASTM standard A182 F6NM,
applicable only to grade BM1 in conformity with the supply heat treatment conditions (minimum
ultimate strength of 790MPa, minimum yield point of 620MPa), it only complies with said standard.
It must, however, be emphasized that the effect of the double-cycle tempering heat treatment HT1
results in a significant decline in the tensile characteristics also rendering material BM1, albeit with
a greater carbon content (0.038%), non-compliant with the ASTM requirements.

Similar considerations apply to the behavior of welding materials although the greater carbon
content of the welded zone FM3 (0.02% greater also than the percentage of the base material
BM1) results in a mechanical response compliant with the ASTM requirements, even after heat
treatment HT1.

The material's toughness, measured by resilience tests on base material, HAZ and FZ, is not a
critical factor always presenting energy absorption values greater than 27J even at low
temperatures (-46C). The fused zone and heat affected zone nevertheless show more fragile
behavior with values in the interval 50-80J, inclusive, versus the values in the 145-155J range for
base material at -46C under the heat treatment conditions HT1 (also see Fig. 8).
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 12

Fig. 6 Comparison between the values of the ultimate strength [in MPa] observed in the base
material (BM1, BM2) and FZ (FM1, FM3), under the various heat treatment conditions (As
supplied, HT1).

Minimum load in accordance with ASTM A182


Yield point [MPa]

Heat treatment conditions

Fig. 7 Comparison between the values of the yield point [in MPa] recorded in base material
(BM1, BM2) and FZ (FM1, FM3), under the various heat treatment conditions (As supplied, HT1).
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 13

Minimum value of BM2 as supplied


Absorbed Energy [J]

Sampling position

Fig. 8 Comparison between the absorbed energy values [in Joules] during KV resilience tests at -
46C measured in the base material (BM2), HAZ and FZ (FM1, FM3), under tempering heat
treatment HT1 conditions.

Analyzing in Fig. 9 and 10, and Fig. 11 and 12, the trend of the HRC and HV10 hardness values as
a function of tempering heat treatment conditions after welding, HT and HT1, as the carbon content
varies (expressed by the respective percentage of base materials BM1 and BM2 and of the
welding materials FM1, FM2, and FM3 as shown in Table 3 and 5), it can be observed that the
hardness values in the HAZ have a higher carbon content, subsequent to greater material
hardenability.

Nevertheless, even limited values of the carbon concentration, like for the material BM2, do not
suffice to reliably determine hardness in compliance with the maximum requirement of
23 HRC set down by the standard NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009), not even under the
condition of heat treatment with double cycle HT1. The latter tempering heat treatment condition
proves to be more effective in achieving greater softening of the material with respect to the single
heat cycle (HT). The fused zone instead displays contrary behavior with respect to that observed
for the base material and the respective HAZ.

In the case in point, it was found that a greater carbon content in the welded area is favorable for
obtaining lower hardness values. The explanation for this phenomenon has not yet been clarified;
however, it is assumed that the greater carbon content may produce greater formation of the
austenitic phase during the first heat treatment cycle at 675C, consistent with the trend described
in Fig. 1.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 14

Carbon, just like nickel and nitrogen, is in fact an austenitizing element that can promote the
formation of a larger austenitic phase more stable during the first tempering cycle that, therefore,
cannot be transformed in greater quantities into martensite during cooling to ambient temperature.
Proving this point, however, would require further microstructural analysis of the zone welded using
transmission electronic microscopy (TEM) which in this phase of the study was not conducted.

Fig. 9 Comparison between the HRC hardness values recorded in HAZ (BM1, BM2), under the
tempering heat treatment conditions HT and HT1.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 15

Hardness HRC

Maximum hardness in
accordance with
MR0175-ISO 15156-3
(2009)

Heat treatment conditions

Fig. 10 Comparison between the HRC hardness values recorded in FZ (FM1, FM2, FM3), under
tempering heat treatment conditions HT and HT1.

Fig. 11 Comparison between the HV10 hardness values recorded in HAZ (BM1, BM2), under
tempering heat treatment conditions HT and HT1.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 16

Fig. 12 Comparison between the HV10 hardness values recorded in FZ (FM1, FM2, FM3), under
tempering heat treatment conditions HT and HT1.

The HRC (Rockwell C) hardness values and the corresponding HV10 (Vickers) hardness values
obtained on the test coupon in correspondence with the three characteristic welding zones are
reported in the graph in Fig. 13: fused zone (FZ), heat affected zone (HAZ), and base material
(BM). The graph also shows the correlation between the HRC/HV10 hardness values proposed by
Hays-Patrick for the 13%Cr-4%Ni material, and the conversion of the hardness in accordance with
the standards ASTM E140:97 and EN ISO 18265:2003.

With reference to the population of data available, it can be observed that the conversion of
hardness in accordance with the standards ASTM E140:97 and EN ISO 18265:2003 are
inappropriate for the 13%Cr-4%Ni material, in agreement with that specified by the bibliography on
the matter [1]. Even the correlation proposed by Hays-Patrick seems less appropriate for the
hardness measurements in the fused zone with respect to those in the HAZ.

Most of the hardness data generated by this study exceed 254 HV10 which represents the value
equivalent to the limit of 23HRC in accordance with standards ASTM E 140:97 and
EN ISO 18265:2003, with specific reference to the FZ and to the HAZ of the coupons after PWHT
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 17

(HT and HT1), bearing witness to the difficulties the industry often experiences in satisfying the 23
HRC hardness limitation such as the conversion of Vicker hardness measurements.

Fig. 13 Comparison between HRC Hardness (Rockwell) and HV10 Hardness (Vickers) in FZ,
HAZ, and the base material (BM).

4. CONCLUDING CONSIDERATIONS
The experimental welding tests conducted within the scope of this study focused on supporting the
repair, by means of a coated electrode process (SMAW/111) and the use of homologous welding
material, of any possible forging defects and/or defects from mechanical machining, on cases and
stator parts of centrifugal compressors, investigating the effects of the chemical composition of the
base material and welding material, as well as the post-welding heat treatment (PWHT) on the
mechanical properties of the welded test pieces, from the perspective of searching for the best
conditions to bring the hardness levels, in the fused zone and the heat affected zone, within the
limit of 23HRC prescribed by the standard NACE MR0175-ISO 15156-3 (2009), for applications
intended for the production of oil and gas in environments containing H 2S. The final considerations,
based on the results obtained, are given below.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 18

For both base materials tested (BM1 and BM2), the ultimate strength and the yield point are
less than the respective minimum requirements prescribed by ASTM A182 for grade F6NM, in
the condition of double PWHT (HT1), demonstrating a drop with respect to the as-supplied
state and lower values for the low-carbon (<0.03%) BM2 material. The tensile characteristics
measured in the FZ under the double PWHT (HT1) condition, comply with the minimum
requirements of the ASTM reference itself, only for the higher carbon-content welding material
FM3 (0.02% greater than percentage of the base material BM1).

The impact strength values in the HAZ and in the FZ are satisfactory (>27J) even at low
temperature
(-46C) under the condition of double PWHT (HT1), although less than those offered by the
base material.

The tests confirm the practical difficulty in satisfying the hardness limitation of 254HV10,
assumed to be equivalent to the NACE limit of 23HRC in accordance with the standards
ASTM E140:97 and EN ISO 18265:2003, while the limitation of 275HV10, as an equivalent to
23HRC in accordance with the correlation proposed by Hays-Patrick, may be satisfied through
a suitable PWHT sequence, in combination with an appropriate chemical analysis for the base
material and the welding material.

The HRC hardness levels measured in the FZ and the HAZ after single PWHT (615 5C
20 hours) are essentially greater than the NACE 23HRC limit. Similarly, the hardness HV10
measured in the same zones complies with neither the 254HV10 limit nor the 275HV10 limit.

A significant reduction of the hardness levels can be obtained in the FZ and the HAZ with
double PWHT (675 5C 10 hours + cooling to ambient temperature in calm air +
615 5C 20 hours), without being able, in any case, to respect the 254HV10 limit. The
limits of 23HRC (for the HRC hardness measurements) and 275HV10 (for the HV10 hardness
measurements) were respected, though with an insufficient degree of regularity/repeatability.
The minimum HRC and HV10 hardness values in the HAZ were measured on the lower
carbon content base material BM2 (0.03%). In a different way, the minimum HRC and HV10
hardness values in the FZ were obtained for the higher carbon content (>0.03%) welding
material FM3; the possible metallurgical justifications for this were not subject to in-depth
analysis in this study.

For greater confidence regarding the obtainable results, it is preferable to perform the welding
hardness tests (in the FZ and the HAZ), both with the Rockwell (HRC) method and with the
Vickers (HV10) method, to be able to make a double comparison between homologous
acceptability limits and dimensions.
The welding of stainless steels: experiences and innovations 19

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. T. Gooch, Heat Treatment of Welded 13%Cr-4%Ni Martensitic Stainless Steels for Sour
Service, Welding Research, Welding Journal, July 1995.
2. A. Marshall, J. Farrar, T. Gooch, Welding of Ferritic and Martensitic 11-14%Cr Steels, Welding
in the World, Vol.45, n5/6, 2001.
3. J. Crawford, CA-6NM An Update, Climax Molybdenum Company, 1995
4. Materials Facts Sheet Section C 13%Cr4% Ni Steel, The Castings Development Centre,
1991
5. J. Svoboda, Literature Review of Martensitic Stainless Steels, Steel Founders Society of
America, 1982

You might also like