Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Re: [MW:5809] P1 to P8 group metal joining

In welding Type 304 to mild steel for instance, the choice of filler metal is a key point. If you use Type E308 filler metal, the diluted weld metal with the formation of martensite (a brittle structure) may contain cracking, because the filler metal cannot tolerate dilution by both base metals. A proper filler metal, in this case, is Type E309 (typically contains 24% Cr and 13% Ni.), for applications below 315 deg C in general. The procedure of estimating the micro structure of the E309-type diluted weld metal can be done by using a Schaeffler diagram ; the diluted weld metal will contain about 4% of ferrite and no martensite in the austenitic matrix, which is resistible to cracking

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 6:57 PM, limesh M <limesh78@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear All

What would be the problem if we use E 308L electrode instead of E 309L
to join P1 to P8 dissimilar material joining in oilfield sour service?
On what basis we are selecting E 309 L over E 308 L in P1 to P8
dissimilar metal joining?

Thanks and Regards

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[MW:5808] Jacket TKY tack welds

Dear All
 
In Jacket TKY joint fabrication which types of tack welds are commonly used and where I can get tack welding details  
 

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Re: [MW:5807] MPI vs DPI

Hi all,
         I have to clarify regarding the MPI that can detect sub-surface. I can't see any code or std mention abt how much depth(6mm) can it detect the defects. Please inform me which std mention may i refer?
 
Thanks & regards,
P.Mahendran

--- On Wed, 30/6/10, manoj john <manojacgnr@gmail.com> wrote:

From: manoj john <manojacgnr@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [MW:5796] MPI vs DPI
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Date: Wednesday, 30 June, 2010, 8:48 AM

Mpi  can be used only on ferromagnetic materials.  It can detect subsurface defects.
 
DPI can be used on any material.  It can detect only the defects which are open to the surface.

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 5:35 PM, mohammed helal <eng_hilal79@yahoo.com> wrote:
The major difference  is the DPI is only for the defects that open to the surface and the MPI  for the subsurface defect ( 6 mm deep).

Eng.MOHAMMED ABD EL-AZIM HILAL
        MECHANICAL ENGINEER
     CSWIP 3.1 - NDT (RT- MT - PT)
OTISHAN CONSULTANT ENGINEER
 00966-502612218  -  0020103124557


--- On Tue, 6/29/10, george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com> wrote:

From: george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com>
Subject: Re: [MW:5791] MPI vs DPI
To: "materials-welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 7:06 PM


Mpi  can be used only on ferromagnetic materials


----- Original Message -----
From: Amir Zakee Adnal [amirzakee@gmail.com]
Sent: 29/06/2010 16:52 ZE5
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:5787] MPI vs DPI



Dear all
What is/are major difference between MPI and DPI? Can MPI be
substitute with DPI? Is there any code or standard that allow such
substitution?

Regards,
Amir Zakee

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[MW:5806] P1 to P8 group metal joining

Dear All

What would be the problem if we use E 308L electrode instead of E 309L
to join P1 to P8 dissimilar material joining in oilfield sour service?
On what basis we are selecting E 309 L over E 308 L in P1 to P8
dissimilar metal joining?

Thanks and Regards

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Re: [MW:5805] MPI vs DPI

Declan
We are doing some fabrication on normal carbon steel but we don't have
the MPI set at this moment. My client would like to have some NDT
tested. I need to convince my client that DPI is good enough to get
the fabrication tested.

Regards,
Amir Zakee

On 6/30/10, Declan Foley <declan1foley@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>
> MPI is for ferromagnetic materials only. It is supposedly useful for
> defects of depth 6mm, but ask anyone who performs the tests and they
> will tell you it is not!
>
> DPI can be conducted on any material. It is not recommended on materials
> that have porous surfaces such as castings and the like.
>
> Strictly speaking they are both considered surface tests. As regards
> substituting one for the other, I have never come across any situation
> where you couldn't. What are you testing?
>
> Declan
>
> On 29/06/2010 17:35, mohammed helal wrote:
>> The major difference is the DPI is only for the defects that open to
>> the surface and the MPI for the subsurface defect ( 6 mm deep).
>>
>> Eng.MOHAMMED ABD EL-AZIM HILAL
>> MECHANICAL ENGINEER
>> CSWIP 3.1 - NDT (RT- MT - PT)
>> OTISHAN CONSULTANT ENGINEER
>> 00966-502612218 - 0020103124557
>>
>>
>> --- On *Tue, 6/29/10, george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com
>> /<george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com>/* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com
>> <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com>
>> Subject: Re: [MW:5791] MPI vs DPI
>> To: "materials-welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
>> Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 7:06 PM
>>
>> Mpi can be used only on ferromagnetic materials
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Amir Zakee Adnal [amirzakee@gmail.com
>> <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=amirzakee@gmail.com>]
>> Sent: 29/06/2010 16:52 ZE5
>> To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
>>
>> <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
>> Subject: [MW:5787] MPI vs DPI
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear all
>> What is/are major difference between MPI and DPI? Can MPI be
>> substitute with DPI? Is there any code or standard that allow such
>> substitution?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Amir Zakee
>>
>> --
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> materials-welding@googlegroups.com
>>
>> <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>>
>> <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
>> For more options, visit this group's bolg at
>> http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
>> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel
>> views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take
>> their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract
>> documents.
>>
>> --
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> materials-welding@googlegroups.com
>>
>> <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>>
>> <http://us.mc1138.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
>> For more options, visit this group's bolg at
>> http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
>> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel
>> views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take
>> their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract
>> documents.
>>
>>
>> --
>> To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>> For more options, visit this group's bolg at
>> http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
>> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views
>> and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own
>> decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
>
> --
> To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group's bolg at
> http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and
> meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions
> w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
>

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[MW:5804] API 650 requirements guidance

Dear all,
I need some guidance about the tolerances, critical aspects of
inspections as per requirements of API 650.
Kindly guide with relevant material and references.
Regards
Rajneesh gaur

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Re: [MW:5803] MPI vs DPI


basically both are superior visual testing ie indications are get magnified that can detect by naked eye easily.pt is ment for non porus metals mt is ment for ferrromagnetic(strongly attracted towords magetic field) materials.In mpi we can be used for surface and subsurface but pt is only for surface indications.In mt  get result  as fast (within min) compared pt(min 30 min.) In mt skill is necessory to perform mt compared to pt.
---

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[MW:5801] NPC Approved Stainless Steels Castings


Can some one Help me on...
  • (A) ASME Section 3NC-2573, ASME Section 2SA-613
  • (B) Soundness is to be 51mm Severity level 2 as per ASTM E446 / E186 Delta ferrite %5 for Stainless Steels


Regards
P

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Re: [MW:5802] MPI vs DPI


Friends,

- Magnetic Particles Testing is USED on Metals  can take Magnetic Field, like all Steel and Iron Except for Gamma Iron and Austenitic Steel be it Stainless Ni-Cr or Manganese Steel - Parts.
- It basically a surface discontinuity test.


- I would like to correct as DPI can also be tested on Castings of any metal and or its process of production by which such castings produced, to check the Cracks etc, it works on the Principle of Capillary action of Liquid.
- The Die is poured on test piece, to be checked, after its proper surface cleaning, some local grinding etc, then Colored die is applied.
- After that the DIEs poured/spread allowed to go in all crevices and possible discontinuities, we intend to check.
- Then after reasonably 5 to 15 minutes the same part/test PC/surface is cleaned with dry cloth of cotton and then surface is cleaned by WET rinsed Cloth/cotton.
- This removes the apparent surface color, once then the Developer the Chalk powder is sprayed over the entire surface.
- The Chalk powder acts as sets on the surface and tried to catch the hidden and deep die went in to deep, shallow cracks and discontinuities.
- On such places where defects observed as above described, we get surface COLORED, same as die color, other places remains White same as developer Chalk spread remains white.
- Colored area than dressed suitably and welded or repaired as per various needs after V notch by fiber/dics-DC Wheel on Flexible chain Grinders, for such welded repair subject to pre and post welding heat treatment, to comply metal integrity.


- In depth test can be other tests, like (A) Ultrasonic testing (B) Radio Graphic Testing for detailed defect analysis etc.
- Hope these meets with your needs to address your issues at this point of time.

PCP Rawal
Manager Material Development-Life Cycle Services

METSO  Minerals (India) Pvt Ltd.
Foundry unit, Plot no. 611-612.
Odhav road, Opp. Vallabhnagar, Odhav,
AHMEDABAD 382415
Gujarat India

Phone Lines:+91-79-30260400-441
Fax:+91-79-22976621

Direct Line:+91-79-30260410
Cell No:+91-98980-72916
 

From: Declan Foley <declan1foley@eircom.net>
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Cc: mohammed helal <eng_hilal79@yahoo.com>
Date: 06/30/2010 02:21 PM
Subject: Re: [MW:5800] MPI vs DPI
Sent by: materials-welding@googlegroups.com






MPI is for ferromagnetic materials only. It is supposedly useful for defects of depth 6mm, but ask anyone who performs the tests and they will tell you it is not!

DPI can be conducted on any material. It is not recommended on materials that have porous surfaces such as castings and the like.

Strictly speaking they are both considered surface tests. As regards substituting one for the other, I have never come across any situation where you couldn't. What are you testing?

Declan

On 29/06/2010 17:35, mohammed helal wrote:
The major difference  is the DPI is only for the defects that open to the surface and the MPI  for the subsurface defect ( 6 mm deep).

Eng.MOHAMMED ABD EL-AZIM HILAL
        MECHANICAL ENGINEER
     CSWIP 3.1 - NDT (RT- MT - PT)
OTISHAN CONSULTANT ENGINEER
 00966-502612218  -  0020103124557


--- On Tue, 6/29/10, george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com> wrote:

From: george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com>
Subject: Re: [MW:5791] MPI vs DPI
To: "materials-welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 7:06 PM

Mpi  can be used only on ferromagnetic materials


----- Original Message -----
From: Amir Zakee Adnal [amirzakee@gmail.com]
Sent: 29/06/2010 16:52 ZE5
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:5787] MPI vs DPI



Dear all
What is/are major difference between MPI and DPI? Can MPI be
substitute with DPI? Is there any code or standard that allow such
substitution?

Regards,
Amir Zakee

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.


--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Re: [MW:5800] MPI vs DPI



MPI is for ferromagnetic materials only. It is supposedly useful for defects of depth 6mm, but ask anyone who performs the tests and they will tell you it is not!

DPI can be conducted on any material. It is not recommended on materials that have porous surfaces such as castings and the like.

Strictly speaking they are both considered surface tests. As regards substituting one for the other, I have never come across any situation where you couldn't. What are you testing?

Declan

On 29/06/2010 17:35, mohammed helal wrote:
The major difference  is the DPI is only for the defects that open to the surface and the MPI  for the subsurface defect ( 6 mm deep).

Eng.MOHAMMED ABD EL-AZIM HILAL
        MECHANICAL ENGINEER
     CSWIP 3.1 - NDT (RT- MT - PT)
OTISHAN CONSULTANT ENGINEER
 00966-502612218  -  0020103124557


--- On Tue, 6/29/10, george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com> wrote:

From: george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com <george.dilintas@gr.bureauveritas.com>
Subject: Re: [MW:5791] MPI vs DPI
To: "materials-welding" <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, June 29, 2010, 7:06 PM

Mpi  can be used only on ferromagnetic materials


----- Original Message -----
From: Amir Zakee Adnal [amirzakee@gmail.com]
Sent: 29/06/2010 16:52 ZE5
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:5787] MPI vs DPI



Dear all
What is/are major difference between MPI and DPI? Can MPI be
substitute with DPI? Is there any code or standard that allow such
substitution?

Regards,
Amir Zakee

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

RE: [MW:5799] RE: 5792] FW: 5772- ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

Dear Sudhakar,

 

The welding parameters are ok including heat input. Pickling is not necessary for DSS welds unless you notice discoloration of welds and moreover it is not required for welding procedure coupons. Hence, pickling and passivation shall not be required for PQR coupons.

 

Confirm the following before you test for G48.

 

  • PRE for filler metal shall have 40-45, minimum shall be 40
  • Check ferrite content in the deposited weld metal (35-65)
  • Minimize root gap to 2 mm (to avoid Ni dilution)

 

In order to achieve better corrosion resistance, follow “Cold Pass” technique for second layer/ pass for SDSS welding. In general for CS and LAS, the second layer/pass is called hot pass, where as in DSS it is called cold pass. It means that the welding current for second layer shall be 75% of root pass in order to achieve better phase balance (austenite+ferrite) and also to have better corrosion resistance in root, which is more critical (wetted part). Cold pass shall be with single bead like root pass in order to avoid dilution and related microstructure changes.

 

See attached article would explain more detail on cold pass technique. In case of cold pass, the dilution will be minimized and also alteration of microstructure in the previously deposited weld metal. Also lower heat input ends with higher % of austenite in the weld which is essential.

 

Follow all other parameters as mentioned in the trailing mail. Hope it would be helpful.

 

Regards,

 

L. Prabhu kumar,


From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sudhakar
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 10:46 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Cc: <materials-welding@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [MW:5798] RE: 5792] FW: 5772- ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

 

Dear Mr.Goswami and Mr.Prabhu,

 

Thanks a lot for the inputs.

 

10 days before i have taken a trail to check this test. 

The details are as follows

Material: A 790 UNS 32750 

Size: 2"/160 (8.56mm thk) 

Position: 6G 

Interpass temp: 100 deg max

Heat input maintained: 0.7 to 1.21 kj/mm

Filler wire: ER 2594, (1.6 mm for root, rest 2.4mm)

Shielding gas and purging gas: Argon(98%)+N2(2%)

Flow rate: shielding 10 to 15 LPM

Purging: 8 to 12 LPM

 

For the joint preparation we have used the SS discs and after welding we did the pickling.

 

Susprisingly in the result the weight loss observed was 41.67 gm/m2 and there were pits observed on the root side. I was shocked to see the result and I'm not understanding why it happened. 

Before sending to Lab we did not check the ferrite count.

Thanks again..

 



Sent from my iPhone


On 30-Jun-2010, at 12:35 PM, "Prabhu Kumar L" <l.prabhukumar@saipem-india.com> wrote:

Dear Sudhakar,

 

In addition to the restriction mentioned in the trailing mail, control on heat input is more critical in Super DSS materials such as UNS S32750. Based on my previous experience on these materials, I would suggest heat input limit should be 1- 1.5 Kj/mm for smaller thickness and 2 Kj/mm max for thicker sections.

 

As Mr. Goswami suggested, the ferrite to austenite ratio also critical for G 48 testing. Heat input increases, the rate of cooling would be reduced, and in tern more % of ferrite formation in the final weld. It means that we are allowing more time to transform austenite to ferrite when we use increased heat input. In general the % of ferrite in the weld should be 35 – 65%.

 

Using lower heat input would minimize the formation of ferrite which is more important for SDSS welds.

 

Regards,

 

L. Prabhu kumar,


From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of pgoswami
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 6:42 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:5792] FW: 5772- ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

 

 

Dear Sudhakar,

 

ASTM G48A(72 hrs), or and modified versions(24 hrs) is the most common specified corrosion test for duplex or super duplex S.S. This test is considered to be a check of the metallurgical condition of the steel rather than  its performance in any service environment.  The ferric chloride solution is very aggressive and resembles actual industrial service environments.

 

For base metals specified test temperatures vary considerably and are 22.5–30°C for 22Cr duplex and 35–60°C for 25Cr duplex(A790, S32750). In ASTM G48A, 72hour test period is stipulated, however shorter version  24hour  exposure is also used  in the industry.

 

For 22Cr duplex, the experience from service as well as from testing according to various specifications is extensive and shows that a test temperature of 22.5–25°C is suitable to ensure that materials properties after welding and heat treatment operations are within the limits expected for 22Cr duplex.

 

For 25Cr duplex, a combination of laboratory test results and service experience, although not as extensive as for 22Cr duplex, strongly indicate that   50°C is a suitable test temperature for solution annealed base metal products.

 

For welded coupons of 32750 typical recommendations of testing temperature of 400C , and either 24 or 72 hrs of exposure time, with no pitting  be present  20X magnification.

 

From my past experiences in such materials I could advise you on these aspects:-

 

·         Choose the base metal and weld filler metal with ASTM G48A  or G48 C (determination of CPT)  test done typically @ 50°C

·         Monitor welding parameters closely, and stick to the welding heat input of 2-3 KJ/mm criteria. Super Duplex 32750 have a tendency to form excess ferrite, which may to turn to sigma phase, for thick section welding. Composition of shielding and backing gas(Argon+ Nitrogen) would be critical.

·         I presume that  ASTM G-48A test is not the only test you’re going to perform. If not look out for the test results of Ferrite count test, a good ferrite to austenite ratio  and relative absence of sigma phase could be a good way to start for corrosion test.

·         Surface preparation of samples could affect the test results. Generally after cutting the samples,  the serrations and undercuts should   be  ground  and the specimen should be ground to a 120-grit finish. Under all circumstances use new blades and avoid mix up with blades cutting C.S or LAS.

 

 

The  test for welded coupons  is  required to be done in as welded conditions, thus the above guidelines would be of help. I have a attached an article on  G-48 test and it’s implications.

 

Thanks.

 

 

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.

Welding & Metallurgical Engineer/Specialist

Ontario Power Generation Inc.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com

[mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sudhakar

Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 8:43 PM

To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com

Subject: [MW:5772] ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

 

Dear members,

 

What are the extra special precautions that need to be taken for conducting ASTM G48 Method A test @ 40 deg C for A 790 UNS 32750 material.

 

Rgds

Sudhakar

 

Sent from my iPhone

 

--

To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group's bolg at

http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/

The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and

meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions

w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

 

 

 


THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Ontario Power Generation Inc.

 

 

 

 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the use of the individual or 
entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution 
or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If 
you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then 
delete it from your system. Saipem India Projects Limited (SIPL) is neither liable for the proper and complete 
transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

 

 

 




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the use of the individual or 
entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution 
or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If 
you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then 
delete it from your system. Saipem India Projects Limited (SIPL) is neither liable for the proper and complete 
transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: [MW:5798] RE: 5792] FW: 5772- ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

Dear Mr.Goswami and Mr.Prabhu,

Thanks a lot for the inputs.

10 days before i have taken a trail to check this test. 
The details are as follows
Material: A 790 UNS 32750 
Size: 2"/160 (8.56mm thk) 
Position: 6G 
Interpass temp: 100 deg max
Heat input maintained: 0.7 to 1.21 kj/mm
Filler wire: ER 2594, (1.6 mm for root, rest 2.4mm)
Shielding gas and purging gas: Argon(98%)+N2(2%)
Flow rate: shielding 10 to 15 LPM
Purging: 8 to 12 LPM

For the joint preparation we have used the SS discs and after welding we did the pickling.

Susprisingly in the result the weight loss observed was 41.67 gm/m2 and there were pits observed on the root side. I was shocked to see the result and I'm not understanding why it happened. 
Before sending to Lab we did not check the ferrite count.
Thanks again..



Sent from my iPhone

On 30-Jun-2010, at 12:35 PM, "Prabhu Kumar L" <l.prabhukumar@saipem-india.com> wrote:

Dear Sudhakar,

 

In addition to the restriction mentioned in the trailing mail, control on heat input is more critical in Super DSS materials such as UNS S32750. Based on my previous experience on these materials, I would suggest heat input limit should be 1- 1.5 Kj/mm for smaller thickness and 2 Kj/mm max for thicker sections.

 

As Mr. Goswami suggested, the ferrite to austenite ratio also critical for G 48 testing. Heat input increases, the rate of cooling would be reduced, and in tern more % of ferrite formation in the final weld. It means that we are allowing more time to transform austenite to ferrite when we use increased heat input. In general the % of ferrite in the weld should be 35 – 65%.

 

Using lower heat input would minimize the formation of ferrite which is more important for SDSS welds.

 

Regards,

 

L. Prabhu kumar,


From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com [mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of pgoswami
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 6:42 AM
To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:5792] FW: 5772- ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

 

 

Dear Sudhakar,

 

ASTM G48A(72 hrs), or and modified versions(24 hrs) is the most common specified corrosion test for duplex or super duplex S.S. This test is considered to be a check of the metallurgical condition of the steel rather than  its performance in any service environment.  The ferric chloride solution is very aggressive and resembles actual industrial service environments.

 

For base metals specified test temperatures vary considerably and are 22.5–30°C for 22Cr duplex and 35–60°C for 25Cr duplex(A790, S32750). In ASTM G48A, 72hour test period is stipulated, however shorter version  24hour  exposure is also used  in the industry.

 

For 22Cr duplex, the experience from service as well as from testing according to various specifications is extensive and shows that a test temperature of 22.5–25°C is suitable to ensure that materials properties after welding and heat treatment operations are within the limits expected for 22Cr duplex.

 

For 25Cr duplex, a combination of laboratory test results and service experience, although not as extensive as for 22Cr duplex, strongly indicate that   50°C is a suitable test temperature for solution annealed base metal products.

 

For welded coupons of 32750 typical recommendations of testing temperature of 400C , and either 24 or 72 hrs of exposure time, with no pitting  be present  20X magnification.

 

From my past experiences in such materials I could advise you on these aspects:-

 

·         Choose the base metal and weld filler metal with ASTM G48A  or G48 C (determination of CPT)  test done typically @ 50°C

·         Monitor welding parameters closely, and stick to the welding heat input of 2-3 KJ/mm criteria. Super Duplex 32750 have a tendency to form excess ferrite, which may to turn to sigma phase, for thick section welding. Composition of shielding and backing gas(Argon+ Nitrogen) would be critical.

·         I presume that  ASTM G-48A test is not the only test you're going to perform. If not look out for the test results of Ferrite count test, a good ferrite to austenite ratio  and relative absence of sigma phase could be a good way to start for corrosion test.

·         Surface preparation of samples could affect the test results. Generally after cutting the samples,  the serrations and undercuts should   be  ground  and the specimen should be ground to a 120-grit finish. Under all circumstances use new blades and avoid mix up with blades cutting C.S or LAS.

 

 

The  test for welded coupons  is  required to be done in as welded conditions, thus the above guidelines would be of help. I have a attached an article on  G-48 test and it's implications.

 

Thanks.

 

 

Pradip Goswami,P.Eng.

Welding & Metallurgical Engineer/Specialist

Ontario Power Generation Inc.

Email-pgoswami@sympatico.ca,

pgoswami@quickclic.net

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com

[mailto:materials-welding@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Sudhakar

Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 8:43 PM

To: materials-welding@googlegroups.com

Subject: [MW:5772] ASTM G 48 testing for SDSS

 

Dear members,

 

What are the extra special precautions that need to be taken for conducting ASTM G48 Method A test @ 40 deg C for A 790 UNS 32750 material.

 

Rgds

Sudhakar

 

Sent from my iPhone

 

--

To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

For more options, visit this group's bolg at

http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/

The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and

meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions

w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

 

 

 


THIS MESSAGE IS ONLY INTENDED FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY AND/OR CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Ontario Power Generation Inc.

 

 

 




-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this communication is intended solely for the use of the individual or 
entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution 
or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If 
you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by responding to this email and then 
delete it from your system. Saipem India Projects Limited (SIPL) is neither liable for the proper and complete 
transmission of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in its receipt. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
To post to this group, send email to materials-welding@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-welding-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[MW:34820] RE: 34813] Clarification in Rate of heating and cooling.

Hello,   Please see the response below.   Regards.   P. Goswami, P. Eng, IWE.   From: materials-welding@googlegroups.com <materials-weld...