Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / E-NiCrMo-3 to Mild Carbon steel
- - By boilermaker (**) Date 11-21-2001 03:16
We've come across an interesting situation where I work. We've repaired a high pressure feedwater heater twice with the same result...Leaking. The heads used to bolt up to the flanges, but over time they've warped and we have to gouge them out when we plug tubes. The heads are then overlayed to "original thickness" and then smoothed with a grinder.
After the inital leak, we did a PT to determine the root source of the leaks, ground out and then repaired. After the repair
we did a final PT to ensure that we did, in fact have solid weld metal with no undercutting, LOF or any detectable
defects. The company mettalurgy guy witnessed the final PT which by the way, was good, and now the heater is leaking again...Any answers?
Parent - By burikg (*) Date 11-22-2001 14:29
Dear Boilermaker,

The E-NiCrMo-3 is an AWS A5.11-92 class nickel based covered electrode mainly for mild steel and austenitic nickel based base metal joints. Try Cromarod 625 from ELGA, Sweden. Call them for advice.

Regards Geza

Parent - - By - Date 11-23-2001 20:40
Maybe it's just me, but I am struggling to understand where the problem lies.

I understand the following: (Help me out if I am wrong.)

1)That it is on a shell and tube heat exchanger where the problem is occuring.
2)That it has something to do with the chanel sections.
3)That the heat exchanger is used on a boiler to heat the feed water.

What I do not understand is:

1)What is warping.
2)What the whole gouging story is.
3)Where the leaks are occurring. (On the flanges, or is it through the channel section.?)
4)Where the overlaying is being done. (On the flange faces or in the channel section?)

Maybe somebody can shed some light once these questions are answered.

Thanks
Niekie
Parent - - By boilermaker (**) Date 11-26-2001 01:02
o.k....
First...the heads are about 50 years old. and they're warped from thermal expansion and contraction. The heads have to be
gouged off in order to plug tubes. once we have the heads off, we grind the rest of the old weld out, and surface the head
in order to have a uniform surface for welding them back on.
The leaks are occuring on the flanges. But what's getting me is the PT was good, so we have sound weld metal, correct?
The metalugist said that they (the plant) decided on the Inconel because of the expansion coeficcient as opposed to 309 stainless. Initially we were having trouble with hot cracking the root pass due to the large amount of heat absorbtion in the base metal...So we went up in preheat temperature with 350 as our preheat, and that solved the hot cracking problem.
But, is it possible even after PWHT that the weld metal has formed a tensile boundry with the parent metal, allowing it to leak when the PT shows good?
Parent - - By - Date 11-26-2001 18:39
I must admit that I still do not quite get the picture. Are you welding around the circumference of the flanges of the head and tubesheet, instead of bolting up the flanges? (This is not good engineering practice.)

Also, what materials are being welded together? If you were using 309, it would suggest that you are welding C/Steel to S/Steel. Is this correct?

Without having the full picture, here are a couple of comments:

1)If the cracking problem that you were describing in the root was indeed "hot cracking", then you have a contamination problem. Hot cracking can be seen by the fact that it forms while the weld is still hot. Typically the welder will see the crack forming while he is still welding. It also occurs along the centreline of the weld. (Also sometimes referred to as centreline cracking.)
2)Hot cracking is not as a result of heat absorption by the base metal. It is caused by contamination of low melting point constituents, typically S or P or Pb.
3)Hot cracking is a typical problem in austenitic weld metals.
4)To prevent this, you can either get rid of the contamination, or us a filler that will result in at least 5% ferrite. Your 29/9 fillers (E312) are very good at eliminating hot cracking. (It gives around 40% ferrite)
5)Some dye penetrants contain sulphur, and could be the source of your contamination. When performing DPI, it must be removed completely before welding again.
6)Pre-heating may remove some volatile contaminants, but appart from this, pre-heating of austenitic materials is not normally of any great benefit. It may reduce residual stresses if you can ensure a very even heat distribution, otherwise, it does not even give you this benefit.
7)Pre-heating austenitic materials will typically result in excessive grain growth of the weld metal and heat affected zones of the austenitic parent metal. This results in reduced toughness and strength. It can also result in sensitization of the HAZ if the parent metals are austenitic stainless steels.

I assume that what you mean by "tensile boundary" is some residual stress forming between the weld metal and parent metal. From your description, it sounds as though the weldment was subjected to a post weld heat treatment. (PWHT) Again, this is a problem for austenitic materials. Your typical austenitic stainless steels will sensitize if this is not done correctly. If the one material in the joint is a ferritic material (e.g. C/Steel) and the other is an austenitic material, then the PWHT will not typically result in a great reduction in residual stresses because of the difference in co-efficients of thermal expansion.

From my experience with hot cracking problems, it can be very insiduous. Sometimes the problem is seen in the root of the weld and the offending weld metal is removed by grinding and re-welded. Following this rewelding, it looks like the cracking has been eliminated, but there is still some cracking deeper in the weld. The following passes tend to propogate these cracks through the thickness of the weld due to the great thermal stresses experienced during the welding.

Personally, I would suggest that you perform weld build-ups on the flange faces to compensate for the distortion that you described. Then machine the flange faces down to the required thicknesses and bolt up the joint as it was designed originally.

Let us have some more info regarding the materials used in the joint, and the PWHT cycle that you used. It may give us further clues as to what may be wrong.

Hope this helps

Regards
Niekie Jooste
Parent - - By boilermaker (**) Date 12-01-2001 15:34
We are welding the inner heads to the seating surface....they don't touch the tubesheet.
We are welding CS/CS.
Unfortunately, we didn't have the luxury of a resistance heating company like Superheat or Cooperheat, all the pre heating was done with a rosebud and thermal blankets to hold the heat somewhat, so this preheat and postheat as you said was probably to no advantage.
As you also said, we did surface the heads to approximate original thicknesses, but the plant did not want to bolt up for the seal, they still wanted it welded.
this hasn't been a headache for me since I'm off that job now, but I wanted more or less where we went wrong, other than the fact that we welded a bolted head....
Thanks for everyones' replies.
John
Parent - By - Date 12-01-2001 19:18
I think I am starting to get the picture here. I gather that the heat exchanger that you are talking about is a floating head shell and tube heat exchanger. The head that you are busy welding on and gouging off is the inner (Tube side) channel section.

The fact that you are welding C/S to C/S also makes other things clearer. Just a couple of thought again:

1)When welding thick sections of C/S, you have to be carefull of hydrogen cracking.
2)Pre-heat would help to reduce or eliminate H cracking.
3)Even if everything looks OK, you can still pick up H cracking up to 72 hours following the completion of the weld.
4)If the joint area was contamiated in any way, the austenitic filler used would tend to hot crack.

Possibly, the cracking that you initially saw (That you called hot cracking) was H cracking. This dissapeared when pre-heating, but possibly raised its head again even after they performed the DPI.

How soon after completion of the weld did they perform the DPI that showed no defects? Was it withing the 72 hour time frame?

Regards
Niekie Jooste
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / E-NiCrMo-3 to Mild Carbon steel

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill